Reviews written by registered user
|18 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
How was Peter's father able to act normal and type perfectly while in a
broken plane going down over 100+ mile per hour? Why are there always
spectators in close range of all the dangerous battle scenes and no law
enforcement telling them to leave? How was Peter able to talk and break
an important meeting that Harry was in? Was there no secretary that
could say "oh sorry Mr. Osborne is an important meeting, come back
later?",especially not seeing him after 10 years? How could electricity
create music by hitting power pole lines? Wouldn't Spider-Man, even
with his strong vulnerability, still be fried to pieces with a million
volts of electricity going through his body by Electro? How could Peter
be able to find a secret underground train lab station just by finding
a few train coins hidden in his father's calculator? How did Gwen not
notice Harry inside the elevator when she was in there for like about a
minute? Since when did Harry develop the strength to take down to armed
guards when he was sick and weak? Why did the Oscorp not just erase the
records of Max Dillon before someone else could conveniently want to
find him in the Oscorp records, especially when they wanted his
information erased to the public eye? When the Oscorp board got rid of
Harry, why did they let him go free when they knew that Harry knows
about all the dangerous experiments Oscorp has been doing for years?
Weren't they mad at the fact they got demoted? With Spider-Man talking
and swinging around with Gwen with the entire movie, wouldn't someone
suspect that she's a love interest? Why did they show an X-Men preview
after the credits than an old fashioned teaser Easter egg??
I can go on and on. This movie had much more cliché's than the first one. Some parts were mildly entertaining. However, with the plot holes and confusing unrealistic climaxes, I felt empty inside after the movie.
First off I'm just writing this review as a Movie. I'm not here to talk
about if the way they portrayed Cesar Chavez historically accurate with
it's shining spotlight on an Mexican hero with biased display. No
rather just the Movie itself. I just though it would be interesting to
see the biopic of the man who helped farm workers and the people around
Well I thought it was satisfying. Didn't get out of the theater to excited. The movie gives us a glimpse of Cesar Chavez humble origins. With flashback recounts and the "spark" that led him to become the person we know him today. I come to wonder though if some of the stuff presented WAS actually accurate. It seems like most movies that deal with one man had to make him the most heroic, most problem-convenient solver that helped the people and was able to stick it to the Man. Then again this is Hollywood.
I thought the performance by Pena was really good. Though I wasn't even born when Cesar was around, I cant really say that he was the perfect actor for him, since you know I never met the real guy. But overall he delivers a realistic performance (maybe a bit too brave in my opinion) that I couldn't really complain about. This will surely bump his career. Heck I just saw him listed in Ant-Man.
John Malkovich was good. He displayed the angry white guy well. Enough to say "yes this is how someone would act if they were trying to stomp out those 'darn' Mexicans". Having him as one of the lead roles made the movie memorable. Did his character really exist?
As far the story, it was easy to follow. It wasn't confusing. I think this director has good potential for future films.
My only problems that I have was some things just came in to convenient, too clichéd for me to say "oh yeah, I'm sure that really happened". Some things fell into place right on time. Like the fact that there was no negativity towards the movement at all. I could have sworn that this "non-violent" movement did have some violence (not saying that Cesar Chavez was violent, but that EVERY SINGLE person that supported this movement was not violent? eh idk lets look at some history records).
But if you like Cesar Chavez as the historical figure, I think this film balances well as a biopic. Nothing too great to be praiseworthy about as far as being Oscar material, other than we finally get a movie about a Mexican hero. Overall I enjoyed watching it.
whoa IMDb 8.7 serious??
OK I will admit most shots were virtually stunning. In fact this is the first time in a 3D movie were I actually flinched. but regardless that doesn't compensate for bad dialogue with the characters. I was really bored in the scenes involving Bullock imagining dead people come to life. too many "what-if"'s.
The near-death scenes were also unrealistic. 2012 was at least entertaining. but it seems for every shot it was always a "almost close", "nearly hit me", "almost drowned" experience. but through constant near-death scenes, I rolled my eyes away because it had too many that it got me mad. really mad.
Please dear reader, imagine that the actors weren't Sandra Bullock and Mr. Handsome Clooney, would the movie still be praised the same? NO! Believe me when I say I wanted to like this movie. I really did. I only saw it because of the "great" reviews. But this is in no way a masterpiece. Heck even Apollo 18 was more real...
call it an old high school crush, but sometimes we watch a movie based
on one actor. well I probably wont do that again, with Selena Gomez. In
fact she hasn't made any good (mature) movies at all.
Case in point this Getaway is very clichéd. Here we have Hawke forced to drive a car and follow the orders of a "mysterious" man in order to save his wife. He has limited timing if you will, so obviously there will be suspense build up, but falls flat through its poorly executed plot and obvious foretelling of events. The car chase scenes were dumb. It was way too fast, I WANTED to see the outer chase, but instead all I got was close ups. There was just lots of noise and no good shots of the driving. Heck even Fast and Furious delivers it better, and Im not a fan of car movies. I was bored. very bored.
Selena Gomez character was completely unnecessary and unrealistic. I mean seriously, why the heck would you help this stranger you never met before. The meeting between the two is sooooooo stupid. We have of course Selena playing the curious cat and helping the protagonist. It comes off as expected as "ill follow you everywhere you go" chain.
Bottom line: not worth the money. not worth seeing for Gomez. clichéd. badly directed. I would rather have seen The Butler, at least that looks promising and has meaning
Doesn't seem weird that all the people that review a flick early than
the released date usually give a high praise for the movie? Seems fake.
But today (Friday 5/31) I actually watched Now You See Me. When I saw
this trailer about a month ago, this was a movie I wanted to see. It
had a few actors that I enjoy watching on screen (Jesse Eisenberg,
great in the Soical Network! and Woody Harrelson). I wasn't TOO
thrilled when I saw Michael Cain and Morgan Freeman. Not that I don't
like them, no they are GREAT actors. My main concern though is if this
movie is substituting a good story with good actors. Id rather have a
not well-known actors and a good story. It seems movies lately have
been just showing eye candy actors thinking that the audience wont care
for the quality of the movie. But regardless I saw this anyway cuz it
looked interesting and original.
The Good: The magic scenes they showed were decent in its presentation. I know some of the stunts they pulled off would have wowed me if I was in the audience. This movie also had quirky funny moments that were on time.
The Bad: Oh boy were to begin. OK I wont spoil anything but here's whats the main problem: this movie was too clichéd. A lot of the material was recycled and overused. For instance, we have one investigator (Ruffalo) who is in charge of solving the case of how the 4 magicians robbed a bank. Once hes on the case, he goes to his office and finds a convenient pretty foreign investigator (Laurent) "hired" by some corporate legal identity not fully explained in the movie. Don't you want to check first who this girl is? Her background? Rather than just "ok you'll work with me just cuz you said you were hired". SPOILER, it was very evident that she was going to be a love interest in the beginning. STUPID
another problem with this movie there were scenes that did not need to be there. TOO many subplots and talking. If you seen the Dark Knight Rises, it kinda is similar. When there wasn't enough Batman, we just waited waited and got bored. Here were waiting for the entertaining magic. LACKING. Morgan Freeman's character was boring too. He's this "mysterious" debunker magician that really was only there just because he was Morgan Freeman. They could have put a lot more into his character. Michael Cain was similar too, at first he seems like a main character were going to develop to understand, but in the end is just viewed as some random rich greedy funder.
There's a "twist" in the end that wasn't even satisfying at all. It lacked characterization that made me didn't care. Overall I was disappointed. I wasn't expecting a masterpiece, but Jesus it could have been a LOT better. I recommend watching this on Blu-Ray, it was really a waste of a ticket money.
im Mexican, so I usually like a variety of comedies from different race
genres. I watched this with little biased because honestly when it
comes to black comedies... well its a black comedy. sometimes they
portray black people waaaaay to stereotypical. In Peeples, there was
definitely lots of stereotypical. it kind of takes away the joy of
watching a movie without going "do they really need to put a loud
annoying black guy in this movie" feeling. Don't get me wrong I
looooved the Boondocks, the Waynes brothers and Dave Chapel just to
name few. They often portray black comedy in a light way because
well... its a comedy. Here I was hoping for a slightly serious movie.
Instead I was a bit let down. Don't get me wrong I had my laughs and
chuckles... but this is kind of a hit and miss movie.
Overall its a good movie. But if your very picky like me, you'd probably notice these common flaws. This is really hard to grade. If you ignore the flaws, this can be an 8, but due to giving an honest review, i have to say a 6
Let me put it it this way, if you got or understood Inception 100% the
first time viewing it, then you will have little to no problem piecing
The Dark Knight Rises together. It started off slow, with much, much
talking. To many scenes that went off topic from previous scenes, in
other words trying to give a lot of information real quick without much
time for us to try to understand all of them and try to put them
together. It had me lost. A lot of flashbacks as well , fortunately I
watched the first recently before I watched the third, YOU NEED TO
REMEMBER THE References, TRUST ME WATCH At LEAST PART 1 AGAIN. But
Nevertheless, acting and story was great, it wasn't as clichéd as I
expected. I just wish I could have understood everything the first
time. Trust me when you see the movie you will see what I mean. I would
give this a higher rating, but I hate leaving the theater confused with
so many questions to ask the will probably never get answered. I need
to see this again, but probably will be angry for the fact that I need
Batman Begin was a solid 7.5/10 Dark Knight was an 8/10 Dark Knight Rises 7/10
Im sorry I love Christopher Nolans past films, but this didn't do it for me as the others. Though I will finally say this, the fight with Batman and Bane kicked major @$$.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Andrew Garfield was a good spider-man. Rhys Ifans did a fantastic Dr.
Curt Conners. Plot was decent. Was directed towards all audience with a
little darkness to it.
But why did this movie flopped for me? You would think that with a reboot we would see a Hit Blockbuster movie with great character development, realistic CGI, and realistic scenes. Unfortunately we didn't. It started off with a good start but just ended up being to much talking with no explanation of why or how, rather than "I got to stop him". And i just love how Dr. Conner's just Instantly hates Parker when he finds out hes spider-man. Hey bro he helped get your formula to help regrow your arm.
Im not even going to mention the corny scenes with: the football bending the goal pole and everyone thinks its normal, convenient girlfriend that works and has all access to Conners lab, the confusing hate and love between Flash the bully and Peter, the guy Peter helps save his son from a car fire and we have the guy work in construction and is able to help Peter at the most convenient time and the most convenient place later in the movie.
I loved The Avengers... but Not hating on Spider-man, I enjoyed the flicks, just thought this was going to be better.
there's really nothing else to say regarding this movie in that it was
well done and well put together. The actors, plot, CGI. All well
balanced. Had my laughs, had my "gasp"'s, had my surprises. You name
it. Not really a fan of action movies such as the Transformers series
which I thought was pretty bad. So its safe to say that Im not the
ignorant movie goer that gives 10's to every big budget CGI movie that
It was intriguing to see all the heroes from the movies we have come (or try to love). seeing the heroes we grew up with finally coming together just sounded like a fantasy that couldn't happen. Well it just did, and got to say did a fantastic job of teasing us at it after each Marvel movie. Overall I left THIS Marvel movie satisfied and happy.
The reason why this movie cannot possibly be a 10 is because it does have its faults... of course. Cliché's, some over the top drama, scenes were heroes are talking amongst each other normally when they have hundreds of missiles aiming at them as if no danger at all (perticularly Black Widow and Hawkeye), and the villain plot could have been a tad bit better ( Tom Hiddleston did an amazing job as Loki).
I recommend people that gave this a 10 or even a 9 to just relax and realize that they are in an Avengers high. They should look at the microscopic details of the movie, which would mean to look at it more than once, and analyze everything before rating it. I still remember walking out of the Dark Knight and thought this was the best movie and with a perfect 10. Boy was I wrong when I realized how much cliché'd faults and unexplainable and unrealistic scenes and minor questionable plots it had. It no way deserved a 10 that people gave it right when it came out.
This is an update from my previous review.
Well I took my sister to watch Beauty and the Beast on 3D and I got to say, I was very satisfied. Beauty and the Beast has been one of my all times favorite movies, but Ill try not to be biased. I have never been a fan of 3D movies, I've yet to see a movie where it Really is 3D (hand sticking out and you flinching etc). This movie was no different in that it was nothing special as far as that affect. However, what I was really amazed was for a 3D effect was the stain glass windows in the beginning and the end of the movie. IT did look like I was looking at a real glass popping. Other than that, the movie was crystal clear in picture. I was able to see more definition that I would at home on blu-ray at home.
They kept the original features as well. For instance, they did Not put the extra additive song "Human Again" which could be optionally watched in your DVD/Blu-ray. They also have kept the skulls in Gastons eyes when it showed a close up when he was falling of his death (apparently has something to do with the secret society of the Skull and Bones society, but the theories vary).
Other than that whatever makes you feel good and makes you love this movie, its worth a watch. Even if you have it purchased at home, it would be good to see it in the big screen. Its a moment you will not forget.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |