Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]
55 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

17 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Not Clarkson, but not Evans, 5 March 2017

Some actually funny bits, a nice new studio, the classic track is back, the Top Gear visuals are still front and centre and this is clear and distinct from the Clarkson era rather than just trying to make a copy.

The guest spots seemed a bit staged and some of the scripted sections still need to be a bit more relaxed but that was maybe just the first one and having McAvoy as the guest.

Definitely an improvement on last years disaster.

"Legion" (2017)
15 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
Just too weird, 5 March 2017

I dragged myself as far as episode 4 but it is just too weird. It makes Twin Peaks seem like CSI. The psychedelic bits are too far off the wall for me to relate to, the characters are generally unlikable and I can't keep up with any plot that is meant to exist.

Much like Annie Wilkes from Misery, I have never been a particular fan of stories that are told with an untrusted narrative and then revert to changing set facts, and that seems to be the entire premise here.

If you really want to know what happens when you take an X-men powered superhero and give them a mental health problem, just skip this and go and watch Logan.

5 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Saving Private Ryan plus Full Metal Jacket = Hacksaw Ridge, 27 January 2017

Seen Full Metal Jacket? Then you have seen the first half hour of this movie, just imagine Vince Vaughn doing a bad impression of the drill sergeant and you are there already.

Seen the trailer? Then you have seen all the story bits of this movie. They aren't particularly deep or clever and while they provide a narrative for the story, you have seen it all in the trailer!

Seen the first 30 minutes of Saving Private Ryan? Then you have seen the rest of this movie. Lots of gory violence, fire stunts, bits of people being blown apart, and general graphic carnage.

For all that Andrew Garfield is very good. The mass of Australian actors that make up the rest of the cast generally mask their accents well enough. The racist portrayal of the Japanese is almost forgivable given the context of the film.

Shouldn't be on the Oscar shortlist, but no surprise that a bit of Americanised propaganda got so many votes in the current climate of world politics.

23 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
Back on form, 25 January 2017

I have struggled with this season of NCIS. I miss Tony and a lot of time is being spent on the new characters (I still include Ellie as new) I don't have any history with and don't really care about (yet). Bearing in mind we are 14 seasons in, this is no longer just a procedural show but has a major element of soap opera to it. Character progression is more important than the crimes, especially when there doesn't seem to be a season-arc in the background to move the show forward.

This is the first episode of the series which has really focused on one of the core cast members and in such a way as to move that character, and that character's relationships, forward. I have always liked Palmer as a foil for Ducky but he has deserved to have a larger role for while and hopefully this is the start of something more for Jimmy and for Brian Dietzen.

102 out of 191 people found the following review useful:
What went wrong?, 15 January 2017

The previous episode was a great 90 minutes of television. Probably the best episode of Sherlock there has been. Then this happens? I don't understand. How can you write such fantastic script one week and turn out this turgid mess the next.

It is nonsense from start to finish. It wasn't that it was too smart, or had a cunning twist, or was rushing to tie off loose ends. It was just an utter shambles from the start right through to a completely unfulfilling end.

How can the same team produce two such different episodes of the same show consecutively?

Survival Code (2013) (TV)
Not a movie!, 29 October 2016

I watched this 'movie' on a Saturday evening when nothing else was on, and I was pleasantly surprised with the quality. The script is good, the characters develop well, the complexity of the story starts moves along at a nice pace without rushing ... and then suddenly with absolutely no warning it just stops!

This was clearly made, and made well, as either a TV series pilot or as the first in a TV movie series (think Jesse Stone in a slightly sci-fi futuristic Canadian wilderness). But not having that warning going in left me hugely disappointed at the total lack of a conclusion. Obviously this wasn't picked up for some reason, but then it makes no real sense to have released it in its incomplete format.

31 out of 57 people found the following review useful:
Last episode for me, 24 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Utter rubbish. Unworthy of the complex narrative and development of the early seasons. This episode was just about how much violence could the special effects team put on the screen and who the writer thought was expendable (or alternately the producers thought was contractually expensive).

Killing Abraham, annoying, but fine. Killing Glenn as well, pointless and much too damaging to the series. Since the early episodes he has been the most relatable character and removing him from the cast removes my interest in their survival.

Negan is a total waste of screen time as a character. He and his gang make utterly no sense. Rick failing to kill him with any of the 4 or 5 opportunities he is given is completely out of character, and not just a sign of the newly broken-Rick. Negan's own gang failing to kill him at any time makes no sense at all.

It is such a shame to me as a viewer that this is how I leave the series after 7 years.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Better than expected, 22 October 2016

I wasn't hoping for much when Stephen Fry left the show, and the first few minutes gave me cause for concern.

The scripted opening to the show had Toksvig doing a poor impression of Fry and the first couple of questions were stagnant and the jokes and laughter seemed a bit forced.

But the show did get back into its usual stride by mid way through and by the end the quality was almost indistinguishable from the previous versions.

Hopefully the series continues at this level for the remainder of the alphabet.

"MacGyver" (2016)
6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Why? Why? WHY?!, 6 October 2016

OK. I gave it a shot but this is truly terrible. Within the first 10 minutes he kills 4 people (2 more near the end of episode 1). I like the two main actors but the script they were reading sounded like it came from the George Lucas reject pile.

Just using the same character names, a tiny snatch of the theme tune, a bad haircut and a bit of science does not make MacGyver.

The IT nonsense was completely unnecessary and was so stupid that one of the characters actually says that it is impossible.

The Vinnie Jones cameo was a total waste of space.

Surviving a 40ft fall into the sea with a bullet wound to the chest? Chasing a plane on foot as it takes off? Making a parachute in under 40 seconds? Bomb disposal expert cutting the wrong wire? I can do a bit of suspension of disbelief and with old MacGyver I was willing to go along with some of the silly antics but this took itself much too seriously and reminded me too much of the Knight Rider reboots.

36 out of 40 people found the following review useful:
Flop Gear, 29 May 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Whatever that was it has no place masquerading under the title of Top Gear.

Evans shouting his way through the episode with an audience full of his friends making it like a rip- off of TFI Fridays. Then reading scripts that were clearly written for Clarkson and May to read.

Sabine Schmidt appearing for 2 minutes and not getting to add anything relevant.

Changing all the features they could have kept the same was a mark of inspirational stupidity.

Trying to retain the challenges but with Matt and Chris instead of the original trio was another master stroke in flawed planning.

Announcing that the show will have 7 presenters and using 2 and a half of them was the funniest bit of the entire show. It was like waiting for a Stan Lee cameo and then realising that you were watch Fant4stic.

Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]