Reviews written by registered user
|10 reviews in total|
When I first saw the preview for this film, it looked like a trippy
indie film with a great soundtrack. I decided to give it a chance and
bought it. It just came in today and I have to say, it is not what I
expected, but better.
This film is not about some rebel girl who runs away from home and has insane adventures. This is a movie about a girl who is desperately trying to become a part of something and the mother who follows her into a dangerous cult. It has so much more depth than I expected. The movie's hero is clearly Bat from beginning to end. However, other characters who the viewer does not expect become heroes as well. The movie shows a very scary and a very real descent into the lifestyle of a cult. The characters are unique and are uniquely duped into this life.
The acting in it is phenomenal. Ellen Page, who we now know as Juno, shows another side of herself as the resilient Bat. The character shows real strength in the face of confusion.
This movie entices and rattles the viewer. It dares to ask the question, What is a perfect world?
I went with my mom and sis, and we were all looking forward to a good,
fun, cute movie. First of all, I have nothing against Hilary Duff. I
used to be a big Lizzie Mcguire fan (I was a tween when it began), but
let's be serious. She's, how old now? The awkward cutesy teen thing doesn't work as well as it used to. I expected her performance, but I did not expect this movie to be so bad.
The acting was lackluster. I was really let down by Locklear's performance. Also the story was dumb and creepy. What type of daughter has a fake relationship with their mom like that? It's creepy. AVOID THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS!!!!!!
Never has a title been so fantastically misleading. This movie gave the
promise of more action than it gave, disappointing audiences. The
comedy was forced and awkward making it seem like more of a sitcom than
a movie. The cast seemed more like the cast of "Friends" mutated into
superheroes. The only remotely entertaining actor was Michael Chiklis
as the Thing. Chris Evans also made an effort to bring life into this
dying story. McMahon played Doom like Donald trump having a mood swing.
He added nothing to the character and basically walked through the
movie, only trying to get his paycheck. As for Alba and Gruffudd(sry if
i spelled that wrong) had boring chemistry and were wet blankets
throughout the movie. So much that i basically tuned out whenever they
had a scene.
The story was slow and unsatisfying. The acting was flat and the plot twists cliché. Instead of a thrilling action movie, this turned out to be another version of "The Real World: Mutated" Boring.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Alright, this movie was pretty good, funny, and mildly awkward (kidman
and Broderick are to blame), but it is an insult to the book. I
understand that it was supposed to be a comedy, but it completely
missed the point of the story.
First of all, the casting was awful. Kidman and Broderick were awkwardly cast as Joanna and Walter. Kidman came off as some controlling jerk, when in the book, she is somewhat controlling, but a good and involved mother and wife. Broderick's portrayal of Walter was lazy and off target, making him unlikeable and weak. Walter is basically portrayed as weak and easily swayed, when in the book he and his wife are a pretty equal team until he is slowly seduced into the idea of a perfect spouse. Kidman is awkward in her part and lost in this movie. Don't get me wrong, she's an excellent actress, but weak in comedy. The only characters that really hit a chord with the book were Bobbi and Mike(who wasn't used enough at ALL)
Secondly, the story is inconsistent. At the beginning, it makes it appear as though the wives are robots. For example, Bobbi (Midler) puts her hand on a stove burner while talking to Joanna, and feels nothing. Somehow in the middle of the story, it changes pace and it turns out that the women's brains were altered. The director tried to pull a fast one on the audience, and it didn't work out.
Thirdly, most of the characters were either altered or pushed to the side in this adaptation of the Stepford Wives. It did a decent job of modernizing the film, but in making it a comedy, lost the magic of the original. This story was meant to be serious and meaningful. My advice is to watch the movie to enjoy it, and not pay any attention to the name.
okey, so many people say that the movie either rocked or sucked and then act like they're ready to fight to the death for it! i'll tell you what i think, it's a good try, but in the end you can't shake the feeling that these are three type-casted actors who have taken on this movie as a way to say "see, i'm a real actor". i'm not going to say that every aspect of this movie is bad, but it did feel fake. the emotions of the characters and seriousness of the story is forced on the audience.also, it's trying way too hard to be "real" or "artsy" or "compelling", that it ends up being, well, boring. not the story, but the characters. movies like "the hours", "taxi driver", or "me, you, and everyone we know" would have come off the same way if it hadn't been for the depth and honesty of the characters and the relationships between them. this just wasn't there in this movie. i know other people think i'm either snobby (i'm not) or not movie smart (i'm very movie smart) but i'm just sick of people acting like the movie was either completely bad or completely good. there IS a middle ground. there were good things about this movie, and also missing elements.
I loved this movie so much. At first, it seemed boring and confusing, but i decided to give it another 30 minutes. I'm so glad i did. The movie showcases two social outcasts. One is Joel(Carrey) who is reclusive, safe, and somewhat alienating. The other is Clementine(Winslet) who is impulsive, too outgoing, and borderline alcoholic. Both, in a series of coincidences during one day, meet and fall in love over time. When Joel fights with Clementine, she goes to a place to erase him from her memory. He hears of this and does the same thing. The movie travels through his thoughts and memories of their lost relationship and show that their relationship is a similar dynamic to most. Both actors did a great job of portraying these characters. Winslet showed a sort of impulsiveness and sadness in Clementine that help the audience better understand her actions. Each portrayal makes you feel attached to them. You can't miss a beat in this movie, but won't regret keeping up with it. This movie is sad, sweet, beautiful, unforgettable and surprisingly the most honestly romantic movie of the year that will stay close to your heart and mind.
I really liked this movie! The performances of Jeff Daniels and Cicely Tyson were obviously good. AnnaSophia Robb did a very good job of keeping up with their performances. I was glad to see that this movie did not just concentrate on the dog, but it was about how lonely being a kid can be. It successfully showed Opal's, the little girl, fears and concerns about her father. The gap between father and daughter, due to the mother's leaving, was also shown. Sure, it was a Hollywood ending, but it respected the audience's intelligence. It was very sweet and more realistic than most other children's films. The only real disappointment was Tyson's performance. She seemed to walk through it with no real effort. Oh well, it was a very good and touching movie that will respect children's intelligence.
I really enjoyed this movie. Will Smith, easily lovable, was very funny as Hitch, a "date doctor". the other performances were very funny. This movie has great comic timing and a very funny storyline. I loved the fact that it had many new twists on old story lines. There was nothing funnier that seeing Will Smith fumbling his words as a dork in college. You've seen it in Fresh Prince, but this is a whole other level of dorkiness. If you don't like romantic comedies, just see it for that one part. The dance moves were hilarious and unforgettable, and there is a great romantic scene that involves an inhaler(no joke). Sure, this is no Oscar winner, but it's a great feel-good movie. This movie was funny and incredibly sweet. And no, it's not another "How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days" don't worry. Guys, this is a great first date movie. 8/10
At first, i was a little skeptical of this movie at first. i had seen other movies like it that try too hard. I thought "Oh great, another movie about horrible people doing horrible things to nice people". When i DID see it, i was pleasantly surprised to find that the "horrible" people were great characters, the type that resemble real people. It also was hysterically funny in some parts, and very touching in others. I found myself not only relating with some characters, but feeling for them in their highs and lows. Don't look for characters who can be strictly classified as "good" or "bad" because this movie captures some people who are good people trying to stumble through life the best they can. The two male leads were very convincing and i was especially pleased by Virginia Madison's performance. She portrayed her character beautifully. Madison's character showed amazing depth with just one conversation about wine. Sideways is an unexpected movie gem and had great actors who were overlooked in the business for long enough. Wonderful. 9/10
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
When I first saw the preview for Hide and Seek, i thought that it was
just another creepy kid movie. but after going to see it with a clear
mind, i was pleasantly surprised. The movie was well-crafted and
suspenseful with incredible performances from the cast. Dakota Fanning
played a scarred young girl who develops a dangerous "imaginary" friend
named Charlie. Her father(Dinero) moves with her to a remote place out
of the city for a new start after his wife's suicide.
I loved the first hour of this movie. The characters showed true depth and the effects of what Fanning's character had seen were wonderfully shown. The neighbors were introduced and seemed very creepy.
Okey, now to the second hour...Why? Why? The writers had so many ways to go, why did they do the second personality ending? For those who hadn't seen it, the Dad was Charlie. It's not even the lazy routine ending that bothered me, it's that they had so many other choices! one, the couple who lost their child. The father saw him speaking to his daughter. When he went over to their house, he talked to the neighbor's wife who broke down, saying that her husband did something bad. What was that about? Also, the neighbor who was returning a key at 3am who seemed very suspicious. With any of these endings, they could have scared audiences with the modern fear of kidnapping and child abduction. But no, they went with the alternate personality.
This movie leaves the audience wanting their money back and wondering why they didn't see "Earnest goes to the Beach" instead. The writing is inconsistent, leaving loose ends with the neighbor's stories. I suggest watching the first hour and then leave or change the channel (if you're watching it on TV).