Reviews written by registered user
|29 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Spielberg is a problem. Apart from The holocaust film i do not recall
anything worthy of cinematic praise. I mean ET if you are 6 years old.
But he is not a talented director; just a famous director that makes
films from cookie cutter molds.
I mean the acting is horrendous, maybe because the script is horrendous. the score is rubbish, so cliché. Is there any surprises in this film? the minute it started you already knew the ending. A lot of dead end characters one after the other, in a very disjointed narrative which has zero glue or arch to push it into the film genre of quality material. I felt nothing for any character, when they died it was like --Oh well.
Someone said he was ticking Oscar boxes, if that is true he must have missed some of the relevant ones. Like good script and good directing. And let us not talk about mismatch cinematography. What is up with that sunset at the end? Looks richer than the view from Venus. Out of the blue (or red) comes this over dramatic scene of clichés at the end. What a tired non-creative piece of utter garbage. And it tells you something about the sincerity of reviewers and the Hollywood industry. What serious critique looks at this contrived, poorly written drivel and says it is good. Steven is over rated and the price for being overrated is that whatever he does wins Oscars. That has happened so often now, if there was any challenge to him to get better--well it is gone. Next time i see his name I will avoid. This is a lesson for those who betray the arts and accept accolades they do not deserve. they have sold out their art for the little trinkets their dishonest peers give them.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
As part of an experiment I once watched a film called Two headed Shark
attack (or something like that) but what I learned was even the worse B
film can master tension and follow some sort of believable plot. This
film failed so bad I cannot believe Ridley Scot did it. 15 minutes into
the film the first issue was the dialog and the jumping from theme to
theme. It didn't flow, it didn't transition. It didn't sit to explain
the universe in which the film was to be born into.
Now unlike most people I did a few course in script writing. And i would love for someone to tell me this script was good. There is no tension, none. I actually stopped caring why the aliens want to destroy Earth Maybe to destroy Hollywood from making anymore films like this.
Please tell me you invested in those empty unrealistic characters, apart from The robot and Theron I really cant remember one person. have no idea who did the casting. Compare the African American to the original African American in Alien. Compare Weavers role in 1-4 (and I complained about 4). You see where I am going. The film has in too many unresolved unexplained, unrealistic themes. Two many aliens, mismatch of boring parts from far too many places, too many motives. Then the last 14 minutes they reveal some silly motive which makes no sense whats so ever. And the film rushes to deal with the threat, what do they do? Get a 1/2 interested captain to grow some deep spirituality (not previous developed in the character) and...Well See independence Day collision for the 20th time in Sci-Fi history.
Someone noted that there was a scientist who didn't behave or speak like a scientist there were too many stretches. Boring love affairs, alien implantation, late term abortions, crazy Giant Alien, Father- Daughter inheritance theme, the black oil from X-Files, Captain and Boss booty call, Catholic religious themes, redundant details, redundant scenes and focus (which did not develop) random.com theme, Waste my time theme Help me * "The alien air is breathable so I will take of my helmet" * I will get drunk 2nd day of the mission, alcohol available on a mission Tell NASA * They took off their helmets, where did they put them * A glitch, but the captain wants to get laid * They camp/sleep in a nest full of suspicious egg bombs * For no reason Robot poisons guy, wants alien baby, but also wants woman hero to be safe *Post operation she is fitter than Serena Wiliams.
Visuals are good, 3D not needed (took off my glasses 1/2 way)
Now lets deal with the dead dialog. Who seriously wrote those lines? It pops out of the script and makes no sense 1/2 the time. "I am not here to be your friend I am here for the money"-- how does this fit the theme. How is that continued (as in the case of Alien 1 with the money issue for shares (which is properly introduced to add motive to the film?). Strange bunch of disjointed people who look mostly like heroin addicts. Too much things not quiet right to have to have faith with. Aliens create humans who want them to come to there WMD site to knock of their heads? Sorry maybe my Mother wasted her money on my education but I don't follow. non sequitur.
It is possible the greatest disappointment in recent memory. What a waste of an opportunity.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
What Jaws did for sharks I hope this film doesn't do for wolves. Yes,
wolves don't 100% behave like that. I am sure those Aliens Signoney
Weaver was fighting also do not behave like that outside the cinema
either. I am sure the Terminator, outside of the screenplay is a pretty
okay guy just making his way in the world. You know what I am trying to
say ---It is a film. I.e. in this case a fictional action Hollywood
film. Had you seen it at a film festival or an art film quirky joint I
would understand the critique. But you know how people are one expert
complains about "wolves do not behave like that" now every other
reviewer must remind us about the little David Attenborough inside of
him. But if you read into the subject you will see that wolves do kill
100s of people a year and it was worst in Ancient times look up the
record by T. R. Mader, Research Director. In France alone, historical
records indicate that between the years 1580-1830, 3,069 people were
killed by wolves, 1,857 of which were non-rabid. So please don't use
your localized encounters to generalize "how wolves behave" Now I will
not get into a fist fight defending this film, I liked it in the
cinema, might not buy the DVD but another person I went with did not
Its an cheap action film which is suspense driven, far from anything which resembles reality. And do not deny the suspense. I have only seen wolves in a zoo and would be shocked if they behaved like that true. Now beyond that can we enjoy the suspense? Don't tell me with all the junk Hollywood makes that one little issue spoiled it for you. And lets deal with the ending, do all films have to end with an air rescue and a hero flying back tired but savage (like Predator)? Talk about not being realistic. Yet all those crying for realism are all crying about the sudden ending. What did you think was going to happen? I did like the touch with his wife dying because that was creative. I also like how the script developed the characters amidst the dying. Far worst films have been made so I am happy to at least get a few moments of anxiety as I am drawn into a very fictional film.
And yes Liam was good also. and to pull off such a unrealistic impractical film does deserve an extra point so from 6- 7/10
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
It is hard to know what is more sickening, a film about beautiful
children killing one another, or a film which is a terrible spin on the
Running Man, or the fact that so many people missed these two major
issues when they rated it so high. It must be a sign of our time when
we have moved beyond the already excessive violence of man vs. man to
now target our children and involve them as part of that horrible
violence. It must be a first because the worse of the worse, the most
violent Rambo IV still have some basic boundaries about children. This
film slashes all of that.
Now between the direct copy of running man, didn't read the book so cant comment on that, the bad timing (taking how long to arch into a story?),only to find no story, no characters, weak unbelievable people hunting one another, the utter predictability, the false and contrived Romeo and Juliet scene, (that cute African American was inserted for one purpose only, to generate empathy, It didn't because by then I was disconnected because of the excessive violence) what was good? Did could have at least let Lenny Kravitz do the theme song. no luck there. So even without my primary complaint the film is utter garbage in the script and directing department. It is also horrible in the music department. And the lowest score is in the morality department, excessively violent cruel and unusually. Listening to a young boy be ripped apart by CGI dogs. And what was the message? They "surprisingly" thwarted the system-- Like Running Man. The difference is nothing changed; it just had some awkward pointless ending that was almost like the script writers ran out of stem and just were trying to figure out how to bring up the end credits.
South Africa says it is a rainbow nation, where is the Rainbow in this
film. Where are the Africans? It is Africa and they represent 80% of
the population, not even 50%. Oh yeah some Africans made it into the
film, guess what they were doing? Helping the White racist immigration
argument (xenophobia) that Nigerians and foreigners (who the aliens
represent if you didn't get it by now) are bad for SA. You watching the
film and you didn't get that did you? The white mans burden, solved by
an white man with ethics?
This film is dirty, messy and cheap. Over rated, is a mild world. Vulgarly racist in a country that goes on 24/7 about harmony their most successful film looks like it was made pre-94 flat bam in the middle of apartheid. Tells you a lot about those in power who let a racist film speak for SA.
For the record because you might not know this 98% of the films out of SA that the world sees are exclusively made by white people, for their white agenda. Inside of SA Africans are only really used for alcohol adverts. This film fits right in with the image of apartheid-- All white.
It is not even a good film by any standard.
Had it not been for all the awards and excessive hype i may have
enjoyed it a little more. When you see so many awards you open the DVD
with a rush expecting to see the kind of film that demarks an era, a
generation and an epoch (ideally at least, cant recall the last time
What can I saw, what was so good about it? A man walking around defusing bombs-- That is it! yeah pretty much. A cock sure guy defusing bombs. Well my mom filmed me pulling the wings off of insects once, maybe i should submit that for the nu-vogue cinema nonsense that seems to be fashionable . I mean is story necessary--no. And lets talk about "suspense" some writers create suspense by writing suspense. Now tell me how much skill does it take a scriptwriter or a director to get suspense from filming a man defusing a bomb? Maybe it might blow up maybe it would not. Defusing a bomb is in itself tense, we know that. So the top talent of Hollywood films a guy defusing a bomb- and get accolades from every quarter of that self-praising incestuous club. Was it not Mr. Fahrenheit 9/11 that also made this comment? What a joke. I don't mind it as some kind of alternative cinema. But the real issue is the hype.
First problem Zachary Quinto, with such a weird face you should stick to roles that involve Aliens. I find his look distracting. If any writer wanted to learn how to stretch a 5 page script into a feature this is a good example. Random.com , like watching someone brush their teeth. You get all these profile actors and some get fooled because some gave good performance that it means the film is good. Good DP work, Good audio, Good score =/= good film. film is not just a killer performance or look how ugly Demi Moore looked in that scene. Take apart the film, what was the objective? Did you care 30 minutes into the film? Topics and conversations come in from the top the side, celebrity faces have their two moments in the toilet to maybe get nominated for "Best Supporting role". Now you watch a real film like Syriana or Swimming with Sharks or if you like Wall street the classic The Firm. These films grip you and don't let go. So no the genre doesn't have to be so dry and boring. What about that film with Ewan when he lost all those peoples money, (forgot the name) that was Wall street and I was sweating with him. I wish there was a rating below zero. This is not a film, this is that aspect of Hollywood that says "lets throw great actors together" make it all "arty" and empty and hope some sucker will mistake it for the new standard of 21st century cinema. It is not, it is crap from the first 5 minutes to 40 minutes in when I got up and walked out! What happened at the end? I actually do not care, all i am thinking is why did I buy two tickets for.
Lets be honest you do not go into a cinema billing "Underworld:
Awakening" expecting "Silence of the Lamb" or "Elegy" this is fast food
cinema. The rules of critique that might apply to Spike Lee are
therefore not applicable here. So understand my rating of 7/10 is
factoring in that. It is 6/10 for fast food cinema.
The action was tight, the objectives of the film were clear. Certain "chosen one" themes i found boring and the film really must find other incentives for Werewolves to hunt vamps. There is something cool about Kate, I don't know what cuz she just looks like a normal Brit, but she is def the kick ass chick of this era. I mean would you pick her or Ms. Weaver to protect you. Well Ms. Weaver cant bounce off walls so I am sticking with Kate.
Some parts could have been better but that is always the case. I was happy not to see certain actors but I miss that old dude, Man he was evil. I mean he was really the best. I don't know the future of the franchise and I hope it doesn't turn into the Dark Knight Cop villain relationship.
From the first 10 minutes you knew it was utter junk. A series of
random actions which are poorly scripted with sub-standard humor and
Jack at his worst. Part 1 was banging with action, and so was part 2.
Part 3 started to meander into a plot so complex and unrewarding that
it lost the viewer.
Good films are anchored in good objectives. i.e. What is the major objective of the antagonist. (Jack) what does he want. And this was very unresolved even 40 minutes into the film. But you keep bring up the old news - he doesn't have a ship. And over and over again the same tricks but poorly executed. The same capture and escape. Try something new. What worked for part 1 and 2 was because they were new. It is part 4 now, we want to see something different. And in both 1 and 2 the objectives and the mission was tight sequence after sequence, joke after joke.
Jack seems tired and less bouncy in 4, why? Maybe because the script is so weak and the objectives so forced. And even in fiction you need realism within the boundaries of the world the script makers cast. You cant just have people show up unexplained , undeveloped. Did the film truly explain the cast and their passion? No. Keira and Orlando made a very good choice to stay away - so should the audience. Had it been so good you would see them. Knowing when to quit is critical
I hope this will be the last and that money will not squeeze out another story from a franchise which needs to be buried.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Did professionals write this film? Did Antony really read the script or
did he just see the figures in the contract? I think Nat and Tony need
new agents, because you do not go from Silence of lamb and Black Swan
*respectively* to this utter junk.
I do not know what other people saw but there is nothing good or unique in this film. The special effects actually made me tired. And lets talk about the story? My Lord, where was it and when did it begin. I got the feeling that the script was written after the action sequences were planned. They therefore said we want this effect and this effect now lets write a film around that. We need to use up Nat so lets force a romance into the script. We want jokes, so lets force a few of those in there. So much dead space in the film that doesn't arch into anything.scenes seem random and disconnected, like writing in junk to get it to a feature length time. drifting focus, drifting priorities. And no great moments that saved the film.
Also it is an overnight transformation from utter arrgoance to humility. Does anyone identify with any characters here? Did you understand the brothers motives? Makes no real sense in the real world. Did the film introduce anything for anyone to attach themselves to emotionally? No. Characters appear in odd order without any development. Actually while I am here typing I just realized something : This film is below the dignity of critique. It is so poor, so badly directed and written that to even point out the weak character development or random script turns give too much credit to it. I will therefore cease to add speak about it for fear of giving someone the illusion that there is anything to actually speak about in terms of artistic critique.
|Page 1 of 3:||  |