Reviews written by registered user

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
15 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Thor (2011)
134 out of 246 people found the following review useful:
Utter, utter tripe, 9 May 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Sorry, to all that have given this "movie" more than 1 out of 10. This has to be one of the most sorry excuses for a movie I've ever seen. Actually less interesting and more poorly written than Pokemon the movie and even that was a new low for me... It cost me £10.00 to see this (I had my own 3d glasses)!!! I'm considering asking for a refund.

What was the point of Natalie Portman or the other mortals presence and the 5 minutes we spent in their company?

This movie is nothing but a 2 and bit hour long trailer for the undoubted THOR 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 which will have all the drama and normally good content that Marvel based movies have (I can only hope).

More time is spent (nearly half) developing characters and giving us background information on how we've got to where we've got...rather than telling the story that we paid to see....

There's no depth of character, (Anthony Hopkins was the best actor in it and he spent most of his time in a coma, I'm guessing after he read the script !), there's no plot other than arrogant son, exiled to earth. He spends 5 minutes (yes 5 !) not understanding anything that's going on or how society works (despite him and his people being deified for at least 2,000 years) and then gets sucked back to his own "realm", there's little in the way of good dialogue, the special effects are Dr Who'esq and the 3D is forgettable.

There's no menace from any of the baddies, his "bad" half / non brother seems so nice that you think "ah it's all an act and something terrible is going to happen"... but no, he is quite a nice guy only really dabbles with naughtiness.....

This film was supposed to be in 3D yet I completely forgot that it was after the first 5 minutes and only at the end when I realised that I was wearing the stupid glasses did I remember!!

In a time where we have transformers, X-Men and the like, the special effects were weak and pretty poor. There's no humour no camping it up to rescue it either.

My worry is that if this is the best movie of the undoubted quadruology that we're about to be subjected to, then God help us.

I warn you we may have another Iron Man 2 (a movie I still haven't been able to stay awake all the way through yet!!) or Spiderman (anything other than 1) on our hands and can I bring myself to part with another £10 on the strength of that?... almost certainly not.

This could and should have been great, it wasn't and I'm left feeling cheated !


2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Good but not great, 6 April 2010

I went to see this last night at my Odeon cinema, in 3D with my Real D glasses on, I expected to be entertained.

I wasn't disappointed, Real D 3D technology is something to behold at the moment a novelty, but fast becoming the norm. I'm not 100% sure the effect works in all situations especially in this movie, but I can forgive it's imperfections.

This film should have been great, the original film starring Lawrence Olivier won awards and that was nearly 30 years ago ! The fact that is was good but not great is testament I think to the lack of depth that is given to the movie.

At 1 hour and 45 minutes long, the film follows a very simple plot that you're not left in any doubt will be fulfilled by the hero...So like the film Titanic, you know ultimately what will happen, but as with Titanic there's scope to build in sub plots, a love affair, a troubled hero and some really nasty villains... well, in clash the last one only survives. It's a real shame that the visually stunning effects of the 3D genre weren't put to more use and a more grown up film perhaps lasting 2 - 2 1/2 hours wasn't put out.

It's almost like the script was re-written by a five year old.

The cast are excellent and believable, if a little hamstrung by the limited script.

The CGI elements work quite well, but again, once you've seen one giant scorpion, frankly you've seen them all.

There's being faithful to a story and there's being faithful to a story, this one doesn't deviate, so what you end up with is a plot that you know, an outcome that's not in doubt and some big monsters in between.

Chuck in some slow motion stuff (frankly the only point to showing wizzy flight scenes in 3D is in slow motion) and you've got the basis of a good movie...It certainly isn't going to win any awards.

I would just aim a little criticism at both Zeus and Hades (though if I do they might smite me !!;-)), The ultra too shiny armour that Zeus wears, I'm sure is relevant to something, I seem to remember seeing it in the original, but really is that beard necessary too !!? Hades, well the voice, sounding like you've eaten one too many strepsils, again really isn't necessary and belies Ralph Fiennes actual ability to act a menacing character.

All in all worth seeing but don't beat yourself up if you don't get to see it until it comes out on DVD.

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Laugh out loud funny, then wonder what it's all about, 12 March 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The only reason I didn't give this a 10 (my first I think), was simply because of the lack of a certain, Je Ne Sais Pas. When I looked at the cast list for this movie, I simply was compelled to watch it. The performances did not let me down... not even once.

Ewan McGreggor turns in a gorgeous bumbling, slightly nervous, performance as the journalist, though I wish he'd refrained from doing the American simply wasn't necessary.

George Clooney, at his imperious, mental best, offering the slightly deranged never quite sure where he's going, that's been missing in some of his more recent "blockbusters"

Kevin Spacey, frankly this guy just gets better and better...ever since 7, every movie I've since watched him in I've been waiting for the pure underplayed evil to resurface...there were hints of it in American Beauty, but here he adds some comic timing and genius to the attribute list.

This film is simply bonkers, it rolls around and you're never quite sure where it's going. The plot if you can call it that, is more an idea than a plot... you can virtually see the screenplay writer sitting down in a bar with some mates and a beer mat and writing it on that...

The pure genius of this movie is that it doesn't really need a plot, there are some truly stand out laugh out loud moments, and I think I nearly wet myself when Jeff Bridges asks Ewan Macgreggor if he's every noticed the inner Jedi in him !!!

This perhaps isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I think it will have cult appeal, and given sheer quality of the cast it's an absolute must see.

You will come out not really knowing what the point of the movie was, but you will have laughed through great swathes of it...!!!

Great Movie, terrible ending, 20 January 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is fantastic......apart from the last 10 minutes! There's a real sense of injustice followed menace from Gerard Butler and it's one of the performances of his career, totally believable.

Jamie fox is excellent as the career minded self obsessed chief prosecutor and the plot is laid out for us all to see...

The initial court case against the "bad guys" isn't given enough time to develop but that can be forgiven for what follows.

The movie has an earthy quality about it and a realism that I personally last saw in Silence Of The Lambs, a real Hollywood picture without the Hollywood gloss and over production that is ever present these days in it's output.

It's therefore a shame that this movie with such potential should fail so utterly and almost literally fall apart 10 - 15 minutes from the end.

There was an opportunity here to push off the "has to have a happy ending / the bad guy never wins" mentality present in so much Hollywood pap, but no, true to form... the bad guy gets it.

The real bad guy should have been Jamie Fox willing to take a bargain to progress his career and Gerard Butler should have been the wronged good guy, the guy we all sympathised with but no, the movie bosses probably in a fit of panic to ensure there weren't any copy-cat problems reduce the end of the movie to something very predictable.

At the very least I wanted the last laugh to be with our villain / hero Butler, why couldn't Fox's family get a bomb up them as a final parting shot even if he loses in the end ?

The plot and story seemed to just run out of steam, and I knew exactly how it was going to end.

For a character (our hero) to be so clever as to kill his cell mate just to "move a pawn off the board" and as we're reminded by an ex-colleague spy, that "..everything he does he does for a reason" , for him to not spot the ending as easily as I did, is frankly ridiculous.

why is there this obsession with justice prevailing, when the reality is that as in real life justice often doesn't deliver and deals are done with murders. This is surely the message this film was trying to convey so it's ironic that in the end we dissolve back in to Hollywood fantasy.

This was so very nearly a great film unfortunately because of the ending good is about as a good as I can give it.

I'm hoping the directors cut sorts out the ending.

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Curtis at his best, 22 October 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I began watching this movie with a sense of "here we go again" another soppy Richard Curtis romantic comedy.... After 15 minutes I was seeing the signs of another underwhelming movie (there've been far too many this month). After this though, it began to turn in to a wonderfully rich and brilliantly scripted story, of the pirate radio stations of the 1960's. No character was dwelt on too much, no hidden meanings and I didn't "learn" anything about myself from the movie.

There were some stunning laugh out loud moments and the characters camped up the whole late 60's peace and love movement thing...

The "stag" night scenes were some of the funniest I've watched in some considerable time.

I'm not going to go into detail about the composition of the excellent cast and the lighting or directing, safe to say the movie speeds along without you quite realising it and before long this excellent example of Richard Curtis' work is over.

If you want something deep watch Titanic, if you want something to spend a pleasant best part of 2 hours doing you wont go too far wrong with this.


1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Nearly but not quite, 16 October 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was really looking forward to this movie. Johnny Depp for me is one of those once in a life time actors like Erol Flynn, Clarke Gabel, John Wayne etc. The sort of actor you just go to watch no matter what the film is.....

Public Enemies is set in the 1930's and details the end of one the biggest crime waves in American History, adding historical references such as the formation of the FBI and the introduction of the concept of a federal i.e. cross state line crime.

Halfway in to the movie, I found myself wondering if it was actually going to get started, there's a lot meaningless scenes, jail breakouts and guns firing without actually hitting anyone.

The second half of the movie is where things really get going and the menace shown by Depp is only bettered by that of his leading "gal" Marion Cotillard, in under played, performance with a sense of the femme fat-ale about her. This coupled with the menace that Christian Bale, tries but ultimate fails to bring to the Agent Purvis in charge of tracking down Dillinger and his gang, all add to a movie with promise.

This unfortunately is where things don't quite work...I felt as though the movie didn't explain the plot to me, perhaps as a non American not knowing the story of Dillinger etc put me at a disadvantage, but the tag line of the movie talks about a crime wave, but the viewer isn't shown in any real way (apart from a couple of bank jobs) anything like a crime wave. The FBI seem to know where to find Dillinger at every turn and there's a real sense of inevitability about the brutal ending.

To that end I was disappointed not because this is a bad movie with a bad plot badly acted with bad direction in 99.9% of it in fact the reverse is true... I guess I hate feeling like I wanted to see more, know more and for the film to never end, I guess that makes it a success, but I have a feeling there won't be a Public Enemies 2, so I'm left not really knowing any more than when I started.

The caption at the end says that Purvis killed himself a year later but doesn't really explain why and like wise the film pays little attention to character definition and I think it suffers because of it. I'm giving it 7 out of 10 only because a movie with Johnny Depp in it deserves 7 out of 10 just because of that fact...It could have been better.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Same old Same old, 13 October 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was eagerly waiting to see this movie as I'd seen all the other five, and I had to resort to begging my children now teenagers to go to the cinema with me...

Having been stunned and enthralled by the first 2 or 3 potter movies, I was left slightly let down by four and I couldn't wait for 5 to end so I was hoping that the latest instalment 6 would bring us back to the edge of our seats again. I have to admit at this point that I've not read any of the books that these films are made from so I literally don't know what to expect when I go to see them.

I have to say I was again bitterly disappointed... the plot was terribly weak and the film neither at the beginning (where I actually had to watch again the last 10 minutes of HP 5) nor the end where presumably 7 will carry on, explains what the point of it's being is, other than simply a filler between 5 and 7.

The acting by the once brilliant children is now becoming samey, under developed and the only real beacon amongst them is Emma Watson who plays the unrequited love card very well, not to mention that she's not bad to look at either... Danielle Radcliffe struggles to play the pubescent teen that he so clearly isn't and if Rupert Grints biceps get any bigger they'll be re-casting the part of Hagrid, if the "kids" aren't working anymore then surely the heavy weights can pull this from the fire...the one exception to an entire cast of people who simply now seem to turn up for the pay checks, is Helena Bonham Carter who is mischievous and at least keeps you interested.

Where once the special effects were a wow factor they're now a bit tired and get in the way of an all too over complicated plot.

I simply don't care about Harry Potter any more, I wasn't in the least bit sad when Dumbledore "Dies", and I find myself willing the dark lord to take over once and for all and for the plot to twist in HP7 to find that Harry is actually a really bad guy and that Voldemort is in fact the good guy....

Robbie Coltrane must have wondered why he bothered turning up, he had about 3 words to say and 5 scenes in the entire movie... Again a bit like The Matrix 2, somewhere between here and no where, a money making exercise and like the movie, I just can't wait for this series to end.

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
OK but won't set the world on fire - Just Egypt ! - Meeeegaaan Fox, 4 October 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Hi, I've just seen this and with the executive producer being one Mr Spielberg, I was hopeful that the bad habits Hollywood have got into of blitzing the poor viewer with far too fast action that they haven't got a hope of being able to keep track of, would be sorted out and some order would return to the chaos...

I was wrong. All to often I was left not knowing which robot had just pulled the arm off which other robot and I got a headache trying to watch the fight scenes which is such a shame...Guys slow it down, make it viewable and you're on to a winner.

The plot itself is a very childish and lends little to the imagination. The cgi and the robots themselves sprinkled imho with all to limited humour work well and it's worth watching the movie for the all too infrequent shots of a scantily clad Megan Fox and the other female colleagues alone...

As far as sequels go, they generally suffer from the lack of novelty that their predecessors have, and T2 is no different. If I've seen a car turn in to a robot and turn back in to a car once, I've seen it a thousand times and it becomes all too samey.

At best I'd have to say the movie is mediocre and at worst some of the shots in the final Egypt location scenes are more reminiscent of Power Rangers than a Hollywood blockbuster.

Some of the editing imho is a little strange, the role of the guy who takes over command on the orders of the president isn't fully explained and you start to think he has some sinister involvement, especially as he gives away some vital information to the decepticons, but he's quickly forgotten about and you can't help thinking there was a cut made somewhere....

All in all an OK movie that lacks depth and credible storyline, aimed at a slightly older teenage audience, it's far too childish in nature so I'd probably have to advise potential viewers to wait for the DVD release rather than pay over the odds to see it at the cinema.

Year One (2009)
0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Utter Utter Utter Utter Utter Utter Garbage, 24 September 2009

When I see a movie has the combination of Jack Black and Michael Cera, I immediately think this has got to be a good fun laugh out loud type of movie. With Year one this simply isn't the case and I was utterly disappointed. The movie tries I think to be a mixture of Mel Brooks' History of the World (Part 1) and some mishmash of Monty Python's Life of Brian, but fails on every level. The script was written by a 3 year old but in fact that's probably doing 3 year olds a dis-service.

The plot is boring and predictable and even the gags of Black and the dead pan Cera cannot save this deplorable excuse of a movie.

I am annoyed (you might tell) that a. I wasted 2 hours watching this drivel and b. because there are so many better more worthwhile things someone could have spent the undoubted millions this movie cost to make on.

I can honestly say I laughed 4 times throughout the whole movie and that was when the credits were rolling and the outtakes were being played.

Avoid this movie at all costs.

Fighting (2009)
1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Fighting for more than money, 20 September 2009

I'm not really a fan of movies where some sort of organised fighting is involved. All to often including the excellent Rocky movies of the late 70's and early 80's an excellent film and script and actors is badly let down by really poor unrealistic fight scenes.

Whilst the purist fight fans will undoubtedly spot that the fight scenes in Fighting aren't 100% realistic, they look real enough and are in frequent enough to not overshadow what is a gritty, earthy, well performed piece. The acting is inter-woven with obvious but very well done improvisation, the characters are real and the title of Fighting is more to do with each of the main characters "fight" to survive in a hostile unforgiving world.

There's some genuine menace from the "scene's" aristocrats, bookmakers etc and some very believable romantic chemistry between Channing Tatum and Zulay Henao, which is steamy and sensual but underplayed and never takes over the story. Altagracia Guzman frankly steals the show as the tempestuous, unforgiving grandmother her performance is so natural, you begin to wonder if she is in fact acting at all ! All in all this isn't a feel good movie, it's dark in places, it doesn't feel the need to over explain why our characters are where they are and we're told just enough to maintain the interest in them. It's a story of hope and of how people can bind together and become friends in adversity, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, it's well worth seeing.

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]