Reviews written by registered user

Page 3 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
149 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Sicario (2015)
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Rarely good movie, a true pleasure to watch, 23 December 2015

This movie reminds me of what True Detective should have been in the second season, since the first season is still unsurpassed. If this story has been converted into the second season, it would be fantastic, on the level and consistent. However, this did not happen and here we have a truly exceptional movie in its place, masterfully directed and with master performances by Benicio Del Toro and Emily Blunt, although Josh Brolin also stands out as an actor that never had the chance to realize his great potential. Until now. This is a truly dark movie that shows some real aspects of "life on the border of Americas", where there are no advanced judgment of what's right or wrong and decisions are made on the move - the goal justifying the means. I really like this movie and recommend it to any movie/crime lover, as well as the ones disappointed by True Detective, season 2 (as I am).

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A nice light comedy, 20 December 2015

Let me start with: this is not Gravity. Although comparable (basically one actor carries the movie, trying to survive), Gravity is much better. This one is just OK. Not better or worse than that. Matt Damon is excellent as usual (as well as Chivetel Eijofor) but there is no obvious signature for Mr. Scott here (dark atmosphere, long shots and so on). It seems he was again just doing his job with not so much personal involvement. There are also some purely scientific flaws (too much light during the "day", for starters), but this is a movie, right? Anything passes. What this movie obviously lacks is both story and character development. Although predictable, everything happens too quickly leaving almost no space for "digestion" or "surprises" or explanations. It should probably last more than three hours or so. And it still would be fun to watch. Go for it, but don't ask yourself too many questions.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Mr. Ritchie truly knows how to make movies, 20 December 2015

This is an almost excellent movie. For a perfect 10 it should be rounded, without a cliffhanger, but I'm certainly looking for sequels. Given Mr. Ritchie's movie-making background, one probably has high expectations before watching this one. Well, it's justified. This is a highly entertaining movie, with excellent cast radiating mutual chemistry, masterfully directed and put together. Almost no flaws (a few explanations would be nice, for instance: what's a camera doing on a taxi and why, or: why are false eyelashes so obvious, but ...), with apparent mixture of many similar movies and themes, action and comedy, but done as it should be. I hope Mr. Ritchie continues to make sequels to this one and keep the level high as set by himself here. Highly recommended. Have fun as I did! :)

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Another bullseye from Norway, 1 November 2015

Being from Europe and watching too many American movies, one develops the appreciation for the ones we make on this side of the ocean. It is so different from the American approach. Here, the story is the brunt and everything else revolves around it. Add proficient direction, excellent performances of the cast (especially Mr. Hennie), "familiar" camera angles and shots, fine choice of music and everything else that makes a really good movie to watch, and you'll get something like this one. And it comes from Norway, the country that really knows how to produce an excellent movie (comedies, dramas, crime ... anything).

This movie does start rather slow but very soon catches up speed and with all of the twists and turns keeps your attention every second, sort of drowning you into the story, characters, taking sides and expectations. It leaves you with a certain satisfaction that you've just watched it and that is what makes a movie good. Highly recommended.

48 out of 72 people found the following review useful:
Unfortunately, only an action movie, 28 October 2015

Despite good casting, very good performances, more than a correct direction, camera work, sfx, editing and music, this movie is not excellent. It has no soul, as previous version (with Timothy Olyphant, 2007) did. Comparison is inevitable. This is only an action movie: a good bunch of action scenes and essentially a mindless fun. However, no character development or an explanation who, why, where, when and so on. Previous version had it all and if someone planned sequels (or a franchise), they should have done it eight years ago. Then it would make sense. Don't get me wrong here. This movie is not a bad one and the cast gave it all to make it entertaining. But for me that is just not enough, considering the template (video game) and possibilities to develop a good idea into a more complex and challenging story. This movie returns all to the level of the video game (maybe even below that). I think that these characters deserve more. So do we. Recommended for "set-brains-to-off" fun on a weekend afternoon.

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
At last, a good MI, 8 October 2015

The last movie was a disaster in any possible aspect. This one is quite the opposite. More down to earth, fun, good casting, very good direction, right pace, good sense of measure ... everything except some too obvious (a poke in the eye) sponsors. Tom Cruise gets better with every next movie he makes so one can temporary overlook his Scientology bull. I still do not understand why he had to do The Ghost Protocol, a meaningless childish showoff, or maybe that was the plan to make this movie so good. Think of it as an American James Bond (or the American answer to it), although Bond (with Mr. Craig is still much better). However, I recommend it. Just for fun, if not anything else. Good stuff this time.

Child 44 (2015)
4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Good movie, despite many flaws, 5 September 2015

I'm quite fascinated by the Hollywood's efforts to destroy a good story. And fails, in this case. Good direction, exquisite performances by the cast, more than a correct editing and choice of music and so on on one side. On the other side, during SSSR, no one ever said to anyone "Yes, sir". There were no "sirs". Just "comrades". If you place movie in Russia, let it at least look like Russia at that period. Not so many cars on the streets, not so nice buildings (as in Prague, where the filming took place). Let actors speak plain English (or Russian) and, for God's sake!, DO NOT spoil everything with some fake Russian accent. This is not the first time that Hollywood uses English with some foreign accent (Book Thief?). Why? What's the message? You do not have any idea how irritating this is. Also, in one scene, when Leo and Raisa change clothes, Tom Hardy is clearly seen wearing jeans. Jesus! So many stupid (producers'?) acts and yet the movie is very good, well told. And I recommend it as a crime story, but very far from historic facts.

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
At last, some Australian trash, 2 September 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First hour of the movie nothing happens. After that, also nothing worth mentioning happens. And then it abruptly ends. That's a summary.

There are some impulsive nonsense murders. Nothing imaginative or scary. Acting is horrible. Clichés fly around like flies around corpses. Director is trying but cannot make any cake from such a crap of a story. In fact, the only thing good in this lousy excuse for a movie is photography, which is masterful and a total overkill, considering everything else. Therefore two stars. Otherwise it would be just another Orphan Killer, compared to which Ed Wood was brilliant.

Australia tends to make extreme movies: either excellent or total garbage. Guess to which group this movie belongs and pull out the subsequent recommendation.

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Really not that bad., 30 August 2015

This potential series just needs money for better FX (in line with Voyager or DS9 or Enterprise). Everything else is about the same (except for the most of the cast, of course). Good story, usual (or shall we put it - appropriate) acting, correct direction ... All you've seen before in other Star Trek shows. However (as Tuvok would put it), this is slightly more promising. I've always wondered why nobody ever filmed a series with the Maki as a central plot carrier. This goes in that direction and as such is quite good. There is so much "space" for creative writing here and the series will surely gather its fan base (Star Trek fans mostly). Also, create jobs for some good but "forgotten" actors. But first of all it should gather investors willing to revive the Star Trek franchise.

Second season: Not nearly as good as the first one, 23 August 2015

Don't get me wrong here. People involved in the production (including cast) did this extremely professional but this season's quality never reached near the first one. First season was (and still is) a masterpiece in all aspects. Second season fails in maybe the most important thing: story/writing. The cast, directors, camera men, etc. (and soundtrack, of course) did their best and maybe the best in all their careers so far, but it just was not enough. Story is extremely and unnecessarily confusing, with no beginning and a cliffhanger at the end. Not something you would expect from a format that enables storytelling in round 9 hours or so in total. The distribution of the parts of the story among episodes also fails, since most of it happens in the last one. Maybe the first season had set the standards too high, who knows. Seven stars for trying to pull all everything they could from a mess that supposed to be a template for the story. First season is worth watching several times. Second one - only soundtrack worth hearing again.

Page 3 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]