Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
En som deg (2012)
Utterly boring portrait of at least two cardboard personalities. Nice cinematography though...
Wow! What the point of this movie was about - absolutely eludes me? Sure the basics are that a man and his friends meet a woman in a foreign land but then it would *almost* be giving the whole movie away to say - that pretty much nothing of any consequence happened afterwards: move along now please, there's nothing much for you to see.
And there isn't! To put things into context, my nym might suggest that I'm some some 90-ish IQ "Trashformers/Die Hard 4" fan who just happened to be trapped into seeing this movie, by someone near infinitely smarter. But, if you thought that, then you'd be absolutely wrong: For I'm a great fan of many of Eric Rohmer's movies. What's more, I rate many independent and foreign movies among my favourites. So, I've no issues with waiting for a wonderful movie to develop. It's just that 'Must Have Been Love' could just as easily have been titled "Must Have Been Love, But... We're Not Sure". Yes, it *is* that pretentiously banal!
Love amidst foreign climes is supposed to be rooted in intrigue, mysterious doubts & heady romance. Yet The people depicted in this movie have about as much personality as a pair of bus tickets to nowhere. In all honesty, its screenplay writer could not have written a more boring movie if he tried.
I give it 3/10 because it is well filmed, directed and scored. Apart from the aforesaid, the movie left my wondering aloud: 'what on earth was the point of that movie!?'
Simon Killer (2012)
Masterly and All Too Rare: An Utterly Realistic Portrayal of a Sociopath.
Within its first 5 minutes I could already sense that I was about to watch a masterful movie. For this is a most brilliant study of, and glimpse into, the life of a sociopath. At times, it is so 'fly on the wall', and so brilliantly acted, that I almost had to remind myself that this was fiction I was witnessing.
It's written and directed by Antonio Campos, who is admittedly not so well known as a screenwriter, having written only one other feature length movie back in 2008; A fact which is moreover, and to my belief, a tragedy for Campos - because he has most certainly proved himself with this movie, to be an exceptional screenwriter. Simon Killer is, in other words, extremely underrated. Nonetheless, as for its direction, production, acting, screenplay and musical score - all come together in an all too rare, & near perfect, unison.
But why is it underrated? Basically, people cannot and just won't 'like' this movie, precisely because sociopaths are nasty people who callously make the lives of everyone they contact, worse for knowing them. Accordingly, watching a movie about such a person, even one that is as interesting and accurate as Simon Killer, is not therefore a fun or enjoyable experience for any typical audience - at least in the sense that 'enjoyable' should bring a smile onto one's face. For this movie won't endear smiles at any point.
Whereas DeNero's studied psychopath, in Taxi Driver, occasionally brought a wry smile to one's face, and was popularly received as a bit of a misunderstood 'anti-hero', Brady Corbet's Simon is not only always engaging as a character study, but he's always, also, all too steely manipulating, and disgustingly self absorbed. Frankly, of the many movies I've seen, I can think of no other movie, before this, which so realistically portrays how a sociopath engages with other people who pass through his life. And, as such, I cannot recommend this movie highly enough, particularly for those of you, who are analytically minded enough, so as to appreciate its utter brilliance. Again, I'm not promising that anyone will, or could possibly 'like' this movie. Rather, I believe a minority of others will deeply appreciate its very excellence.
My Amityville Horror (2012)
A Very Interesting Movie, BUT ONLY IF You Are Open To The Belief That Hauntings Could Happen
People like to dismiss the Amytiville horror as a hoax: "oh, didn't you know it was all made up to make money" they all too assuredly declaim. However, look closer at the evidence and you'll find that, at best, a case was made that it was hoaxed; And the more you examine that 'case', the more you'll find that its arguments are greatly based on conjecture & hypothesis than on any hard evidence of its being hoaxed. Well, I've spent hours looking at the evidence, and I could not now argue that it was definitely hoaxed. Or at least I couldn't - without ignoring the great deal of documented evidence, which compellingly suggests that there was more reality to the Amytiville haunting than most people are prepared comfortably to accept. So, please research the evidence yourself, and examine *both* sides of the arguments surrounding the events presented. What's more, you could do a lot worse than watch this documentary...
Please watch this documentary or not, solely depending on what your views are on the 'Amityville Horror'. If you believe it was a hoax, concocted to generate publicity. then just stop reading my review now, and please just find some other movie which in your opinion would be a better use of your time. Seriously, if you've also no belief in hauntings then you're really wasting your time trying to watch this. Seriously! It's not even the type of documentary which you might laugh at! Nonetheless, if and only *IF* you are open to the possibility that it was no hoax, and that hauntings could possibly happen, then and only then, watch this documentary. If you believe that hauntings could occur and the Amityville case was real, then definitely watch this documentary which tells what happened from, what was at the time, a child's point of view.
Daniel Lutz does not endear himself to most people. He is an angry, expletive loaded, blue eyed person, who's not at all in his teens - he's even beyond mid life crisis years - as he is in his fifties, yet happens to play guitar the way most guitar beginners dream of. He also, through no choice of his own, lived for a month, as a child, in what was once the most reputedly haunted household in America. At best, he calls the fact that he experienced such a bizarre haunting, 'a gift' - one which he definitely didn't ask to receive & experience. But he did.
This documentary tells his story in his words. As such, I found it fascinating. But again - unless you are open to the belief that hauntings may occur, trust me - you won't find it interesting in the slightest. Most people do NOT believe that houses could become haunted, which is partly why this documentary has such an undeservedly low rating. Most folk simply view this guy as a half crazed, formerly abused man, seeking publicity.
Regardless, I am pretty good at seeing through life's 'BS artists', and believe me, if I could put money on it, I would certainly bet that Daniel Lutz has told the very chilling truth in this documentary. The fact that I can tell he is not lying, greatly added to my enjoyment of this documentary; yet (sorry for drumming home this point, just I don't want you to waste your time watching this if you just aren't the type of person who could find it interesting) for most others who don't find it so easy to tell a BS master from... e.g., a respected doctor, then believe me, this documentary will be a reasonably frustrating waste of time.
So I say - watch this documentary ONLY IF (1) you are open to the possibility that the Amityville Horror was no hoax; and/or (2) you are one of the few people in this world who can easily sense who is speaking the truth and who is not. Now that I have outlined what type of viewer should avoid this documentary and who should watch it, I rest my case, by saying I hope those few who might just enjoy it, for the reasons I've given, do get to watch it.
Hardcore Pawn: Chicago (2013)
So, here's why you see a ridiculously low rating...
This is really no worse than Pawn stars, and in some ways it's better. This series concentrates more on either of the following dimensions: (1) the pawn aspect of the business; or (2), the petty squabbling between the leading brothers - each trying (sometimes irritatingly) to prove he's the better/smarter hustler. Whereas Pawn Stars is a loosely bound mix of lighthearted pawn (in which, as most realise, gullible fools take far less money for valuable items than they'd get on the auction site), family squabbles and the occasional extra curricular outing.
I feel the low rating for Hardcore Pawn Chicago is more to do with the fact that both of the leading hustler brothers (and they don't try to hide the fact that they're hustling) in this show, are the type of person that most people would find detestable. The low rating has therefore nothing to do with poor production, lack of anything interesting etc. What's more, there's no 'chummy' dumbo in this programme (as opposed to 'you know who' in Pawn Stars) to make almost anyone feel like they're far smarter "...than that idiot!!". Here you're watching smart folk who make an honest living off the majority of less smart folk; which is also the all too real reason this reviewer argues that it suffers in its ratings.
The program should really be entitled "Pawn Sharks Chicago", and again, its rating is ridiculously low, due to the above reality, and not because its uninteresting in any way: Most folk simply despise watching not particularly nice, 'clued up' brothers, making a crafty living from ordinary folk, who've nonetheless clearly taken their dislike of this pair of sharks by rating it far lower than it deserves. Meanwhile, for the few people who can still appreciate that there is an element of skill in doing what they do, please do watch this show only if you can stomach the reality of the pawn business.
The Millionaire Matchmaker (2008)
Alas, reality offends for the majority of people here. Open minded people may well enjoy this show,
I am outraged. Not by this show but by the sheer number of closed minded people who just don't get it.
"This show portrays woman as gold-diggers" No! This show portrays SOME women as gold diggers. ...SOME...! Which is absolutely true. Some women, yes... some women, that is to say, a minority are so cash poor that it actually starts to make sense that they could, by meeting a man with more means than sense, infinitely improve on their situation. And besides, people should realise that a woman who is very pretty, single and waitressing can either continue waitressing or... take a chance on meeting a millionaire - AND NOT all of the aforesaid are awful, fat old men either.
"...This show just milks the stereotype of a rich old man seeking a young beautiful woman for a lifelong bed partner" Firstly not everyone on this show is a poor woman seeking a rich man. Many of the female seekers are not waitresses or students but engaged in worthwhile occupations! Some are also poor gay men seeking a rich gay man too! And some are rich women seeking a rich (there's that word again!) good looking male! However the majority of people would prefer to believe that it is either immoral or particularly "stupid" to be poor and deliberately seek a richer partner in this appallingly awful economy. Of course, none of whom take the time to explain exactly why it is a sign of stupidity to be a poor beautiful woman who would prefer to better her life. But perhaps that says far more about the reviewer...
Sigh, it's very obvious that those who rated the whole series of shows at one star barely watched a whole episode - let alone the whole series before reviewing! Please try watching more than one episode before reviewing the whole series on it! So, having watched three series of this show I can tell you angry one shot, one star reviewers that: it's not just about cash poor bimbos hoping to solve their life problems with male millionaires. In some episodes (that you didn't bother to view) it's a rich, single older woman, cougar who is seeking a young playboy. Why then are there so many scathing reviews here? Well, it's not because the show is poorly produced, or uninteresting. Fact is: Most people just can't handle the truth that for a minority of beautiful, but cash poor people (regardless of their assumed intellect, or lack thereof)there is a potential easy way out - meet and marry a person with means, and bye bye money problems! That that solution is only open to a very few people makes it an unpopular one and, by definition, an unpopular show.
Meanwhile, the very real reason that Millionaire Matchmaker is rated so lowly is this: People want to believe that the only MORAL way to success is to slave away for years on end and hopefully be one day promoted. They hate to think that for a very few - there is a short cut to success which is not available to them. And this show is based on that indigestible reality which pains so many people who have taken out their anger at the unfairness of such near instant, luck blessed success - by repeatedly rating this show at a just as unfairly low one out of ten. In other words, sure - life sucks for most of us, but at least this reviewer very much enjoyed watching many episodes of this most interesting show, simply by - keeping my mind open.
The fact that this show rubs instant success in the faces of so many who are unqualified for the fantasy within - because most male AND!! female millionaires on the show really are seeking an unusually attractive partner with which to settle down. Also if people bothered watching more than one episode they might find it interesting that quite a few of the so called millionaires are more dumb than the women they are seeking to date, which is very amusing to watch. Anyway, please blame nature for the unfairness of the reality within this show. Thankfully it's also the nature of a few which makes this show so interesting.
Take the show with a pinch of salt and you should enjoy it far more than the majority of closed minded, 'morally superior' folk. BUT please don't blame this show - at least without giving the reason for your blame some cold+hard+truth analysis!
1991: The Year Punk Broke (1992)
This One's Strictly of Any Interest for Sonic Youth and Die-hard Nirvana Fans Only
First of all, this movie's production must be commented on. It's very home movie-ish. That is to say, expect lots of randomly edited, disjointed, shaky clips which all add up to a collage of cinematic noise - perfectly complemented by the many clips of noise inspired (if... 'noise' could be of inspiration to anyone...) music, which permeates this film.
Sure, I like quite a few Nirvana songs, but not much Sonic Youth. Albeit in her day, I'll safely say that their bass playing girl was extremely cute. Her cuteness does not, however, eclipse the fact that their noise bound music was not exactly what one whistles on the way to work.
Yes, I was very disappointed by this, in spite of its high rating; mainly for the reasons stated in 1st para above. However, if you adore Sonic Youth then you'll probably like this enough to rate it highly, in spite of its many productive shortcomings. Just don't expect any great story, revelatory insights, or any thing remotely meaningful to be found lurking behind all the disjointed clips plus occasional cameos from Kurt and friends.
All in all, this is a very average experience and you could safely live your life, and say you've lived without needing to watch this first. 5/5 at best for most folk, and 7+/10 for lovers of Sonic Youth's sound.
The Way (2010)
The Way is a perfectly average movie which soon loses its way in banality.
I completed the first half of this movie, and here's why I struggled to watch even another minute of its second half.
This movie's problem is thus: it's boringly pseudo-profound (cue movie's theme: every journey must have a meaning, which leads onto self discovery... as opposed to most journeys in the real world which are merely to get from place A to place B, as quickly as possible) while being smothered in plodding layers of screenplay inanity. Then, throw in nice rural European scenery, the occasional stereotype, a sad undercurrent for a story, plus at least one man who needs to find himself on (once again) a long (yawn) journey. Let's face it: When you have a Frenchman with a roll of garlic around his neck, or a Dutchman who dabbles in more than just 'ambien' to get him off to sleep, then you may be unquestionably assured that your brain is about to be patronised.
Lazy screenplays contain such stereotypes. The direction, acting and musical score were all professionally competent, by the way.
Nonetheless, by the time this movie's first half completed, I neither cared nor was in the slightest bit interested in what was to happen next to any of its mounting array of sometimes irritating, albeit always forgettable, characters. The screenplay is just that: dis-engagingly vapid. Period.
What would be more boring than this movie? A sequel - whereupon our ageing protagonist had to redo every step in reverse, just to find his lost wallet, or a missing airline ticket etc., and all the while just to get back to humdrum reality while (wait for it...) re-discovering himself. Oh puhleeeeaaase....
As for those who praised it - I'd really not be surprised if such persons found epiphanies in discarded cardboard. Otherwise if your life is simply too exciting, this movie "The Way" is your perfectly banal antidote.
Men's Group (2008)
Boring. Disjointed, Structureless. Effortlessly random screenplay. Plus no Steadycam.
Here is the truth. I give you nothing but the simple truth about this movie:
The other people writing the positive reviews here must, undoubtedly, find dish-washing machine manuals to be the greatest works of literature, in the entire history of humanity, ever produced. I can think of no other reason why they found any single aspect of this rottenly dull movie to be interesting in any possible way. Period.
You know how it feels to sit at a restaurant table and overhear the mind numbingly boring conversation wafting over from the adjoining table as you await your girlfriend's late arrival!? You do? Well this is a movie which perfectly captures what it's like to overhear the most typically boring, structureless, banal conversation. The scriptwriter could not have written a more boring script if he tried. In fact - no one could write a more boring script and screenplay if the tried their very hardest to do so. Dull as dishwater is the phrase which perfectly captures the very essence of this movie. This production is almost tortuously boring. I could repeat any two minutes of the script here and you'd have the antidote to insomnia in words. Some writing here, have even claimed that the acting was "great"!?? Well how difficult is it to recant near endlessly boring conversations? Need more, I say?
And lest I forget... did I mention the hand-held lack of steady-cam? Need I really, really say more?
Awful. Awful. Awful in the dullest sense of the word. I give it 3/10 probably because my finger fell asleep on the "2" button as the credits (most thankfully) rolled, and accidentally hit the "3". If anyone, in your company, happens to "like" this movie then I would strongly advise you to give them a cup of hot cocoa, as you defensively insert your wax earplugs (to prevent yourself from hearing another dull word from their lips...) and prepare your bed for sleep - the only escape from the countless legions of thoroughly uninteresting people.
Hellowoo goseuteu (2010)
Falls between two stools - this forgettably average movie neither scares as a horror nor humors much as a comedy.
Sorry, but... to date "0/17" liked my review!? I am amazed that there are so many who disagree with my saying that "Hello Ghost" a very average and overrated movie. Regardless, even if seventeen people condemn my review to their popcorn bins, I still believe that there is intelligent life in the universe - somewhere, and just in case such comes across this page someday, I leave the following review:
A very average, forgettable and overrated movie is Hello Ghost. Why? Well, it just doesn't work as a scary movie - which given that we know that he is supposed ghosts it could've/should have been; and it certainly falls flat as a comedy. Instead, the movie gently meanders along - the cinematic equivalent of a department store elevator. Ultimately, such is the muted development of character and story that we care little about its protagonist (who's really just in the movie as a 'stooge' for the sfx dept to stage mundane gags/scenes etc. with the said ghosts appearing on cue - JUST when you... least expect them to appear: zzz ZZZ zzz). What's more, it neither thrills to extreme nor humours to any memorable extreme. Instead, 'Hello Ghost' enjoys the middle, safe ground of unadulterated mediocrity. This is one of those all too common 'switch your brain off as the movie starts and turn it back on when the credits roll'. Otherwise you'd have wasted all 15 watts of your cerebral thinking processes: which is quite frankly, and absolutely, unnecessary to enjoy it. The great majority of folk may well revel in it - and, more power to them! But I prefer more daring, thoughtful, avant garde film making - which this was not. Period.
Wasted on the Young (2010)
Vapid Screenplay. Vacuous Structure. Meaningless & Confused Drivel Dressed With Style
Here is an absolutely useless, waste of a time type of movie that starts off trying to be too cool for school and ends up being so disengagingly meaningless that just getting from one minute to the next, in this movie, was a struggle. This is a lesson in how not to make a film if ever there was one. It's as if they took the theme of "wasted" and did their best to make every element of its production wasteful. What a mess. absolutely everything about this movie is simply banal, meaningless drivel, with the occasional pretty girl thrown in for good measure.
Frankly it's so lacking in anything equating to engaging development of plot & structure that just writing a review about it is tiresome in itself. Watch this movie if only to know what it means to waste money on a production which should never have seen the light of day. I'm left wondering why I even gave it as much as 2/10...?