Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Surprinsingly good - definitely must see
I'm still under the influence of this movie, so my comment is likely to be superlative! I went to this movie, knowing that one of the writers and the director were both French, and since I've seen some not-so-impressive movies (almost fell asleep), i was really skeptical.
BUT this one proved to be a great action movie. The best movie to compare with Taken is Hit-man. The idea is somewhat the same (lots of action, shots, flying bullets etc) - though the motive for the actions are not money. But the level of realism, the motivation of the character, the cold blood which moves him on makes this flick a good option to choose when selecting a movie.
Liam Neeson does a great performance, perfectly interpreting his role of a former spy. As he says in one of his lines, he's "retired, but not dead", having an opportunity to show everyone what he knows to do best.
The movie covers a hot topic too, kidnapping young women to force them to prostitute, and all the business this involves. You get to see the kind of people are supporting these arrangements and what it takes for the victims to be there.
Of course, the movie has (very small, almost invisible) drawbacks, like some lines in a wrong language (english instead of french) and some Rambo - stuff, but the overall impression is simple: a strong recommendation!
The Killing Floor (2007)
Quite intense, the ending reveals all
A success and very busy literary agent (David) who has just bought a great penthouse apartment, runs into a strange scenario: someone is stalking him and that really drives him crazy! As the action goes on, he discovers that someone documented his moves quite precisely and that he's rather exposed to the attacker's will.
David is a sporty, strong, determined guy, who unfortunately has to let go his emotional part... In his conception, if you're not straight-forward you can't "make him care". But this determination is his very downfall.
The movie has some interesting twists, the male character is quite dynamic, surprising and rather intelligent. All his interactions are thrilling to watch, so you'll get attracted to the story. All his dialogs with women will at least make you smile.
The actual pulse of this movie is not that high. I sometimes felt that we learn some things that aren't important to the plot. Things get worse as the story advances. Strangely, I think the best part of this movie is the ending. Like in most modern movies, the last 5 minutes reveal everything that you couldn't put together during the story. And get ready for something really surprising.
Another thing to mention in this movie is the soundtrack. Not very spectacular, but perfectly fitting the action.
Gave the movie 8/10 and I definitely consider this one a good way to spend 1h and a half. Try it, it might make you think about people you tend to overlook :)
88 Minutes (2007)
I almost pity Al Pacino for accepting this role :-/
The title is intriguing and the movie stars Al Pacino, I thought it must me something interesting. So I put up hopes for a great movie night and took a seat.
Well, from that point, the whole movie started 'defusing' my interest, my enthusiasm, my desire to watch it. First of all, the start is WAY too slow. You watch about 45 minutes of this movie and start wondering "ok, when will the action start, when will the pace put me on the edge of my seat?"
Al Pacino does great roles, and as a fan of his I must say I quite like everything he does. I've always wanted to see more of him, but this time... I almost feel sorry I've seen him playing a role like this one. I think that this role doesn't suit him... In 'The Recruit', being an intelligence officer he did a great performance, but now, 4 years later when he goes 'on the field' ... you should watch this to see what I mean when I say that he isn't the guy to pursuit somebody with a gun or whatsoever.
Back to the movie, I must warn you that the action literally doesn't start until the last 45 seconds, so don't expect some thrills. Not even some mental challenges, though the premises were good. Only in the end we get a little burst of neural activity, when the last pieces of the 'self-solving puzzle' go into the right places and we understand everything. And that is the problem, we see everything, nothing left for us to figure out alone. Not to mention that at this point we are already sleepy and willing to end faster, so you might actually miss this part.
I think I should end this saying nothing more, as I could keep this attitude for over an hour. The only things I like, though, in this movie, are the 2 lines Al Pacino delivers in the end, as a summary for all the action:
"When do Justice and Truth intersect ?" and "Time does not heal the wound.It will though, in its most merciful way, blunt the edge ever so slightly".
But they come at a point where you will think 'nice, but come to an end, PLEASE!!!' Perhaps after you've read my comment you'll think about them a little and understand their true meaning...
I've indulgently given this movie a 7, for having Al Pacino in the cast, and for the final twist which eventually proves to be a good idea, it partially covers your pity for the 100 minutes you've just lost.
The Butterfly Effect 2 (2006)
no no no ... what is this, some kind of a joke ?!
First of all, let me put down some parts I did like: most of all, the effect in which the movie name appears (especially the '2' from Butterfly Effect 2) won some points for this movie. I somewhat liked the characters and though some (sadly) unexploited relationships (Nick - Bristol, for example)
BUT! I'm kind of having the feeling I have only seen just a part of the movie! Every twist Nick caused in his reality ... wasn't well argued... we didn't see some explanation, some feeling of his character adapting to that reality... Secondly... I definitely think that he gave up too easily. Remember the first part... how Kutcher tries every possibility before he gives up ? Well, this time he tried 2 or 3 ways and that's it... Not to mention that every time he goes in some parallel reality, the story lasts too much... without necessarily adding something really important to the story. The plot is too superficial this time. Now, that we've accustomed to those time-twists, we have nothing to get stunned from. And with that, there goes the pleasure of seeing a movie!
How about the orange-colored (and not dark-reddish) blood Nick wipes out of his face every time? Or why didn't they try harder on the effect of 'transportation' ? It's simply some minor twist/blur to the setting and that it.. poof, we're somewhere else!
What the ****? I started moving in my chair 15 minutes before the movie was over, I could barely resist not closing it. It's like the whole movie is a set for a great ending that doesn't appear.
Anyway, the ending I personally find ridiculous. The whole movie we see him going back in time, and that is HIS time, but the rest's too. What is wrong with the last time ? WHY did the director / editor feel it would be such a great idea to end the movie as him being his lover's baby?! Or, accepting this, why there is no emotional burst in the end, to make us feel that he had really sacrificed himself for the others, as he claims he would ?
To summarize, I'd say that this movie accomplishes in some way to impress his viewers, in the way that you will probably get flabbergasted when rewinding it for analysis. The actors play quite well, I guess it's not their fault the story is mediocre... Indeed, this movie is mediocre, gave it 6/10 given the basic idea... and the beginning. But it's quite much. Perhaps got me in a great mood for that mark
The Holiday (2006)
Surprising good movie, actually
I should start by saying the title for this movie isn't the best option they've got... I mean, I went to this movie basically because there wasn't running a better one at the time I got to the multiplex. But I was in for a great surprise! Cameron Diaz and Jude Law are simply good at what they're doing, but I'd mention Jack Black (the Shallow Hall guy) and Kate Winslet too. The movie has a great pace, there are many funny lines and most of all, the perspective of a 'holiday' far from everyday life makes you think... and that's what good movies do: make you THINK. Back to the subject, I recommend this if you're alone, trying to get over someone, if you're with someone (best effect if you're looking together) or if you simply want to have a good time with some friends... I gave this movie a 9 because it isn't something exceptionally great, but I'd rent it for a nice evening ... and definitely think it's worth the ticket .
it's not the video version of the book!
I see that most of you guys complain that the filmmakers took some parts of the book and mixed them, but changed most of the details... well, I must say that the movie isn't the video version of the book. It starts from the book's story but it expresses the director's point of view over this story. You would have known and even more, appreciate this, if you were paying attention in the school when learning about artists and what move them to building an expression of their ideas (poems, novels, movies etc). On the other hand, it's true this movie has some scenes that are not the best possible, but all in all it's a funny, interesting movie, that catches your attention on a playful level: when u get out from the movie hall you'll be in a good mood, making fun of some scenes. I recommend you watch this movie, the mark is not fair. The movie is worth the price of the ticket!
The Guardian (2006)
Smart , wow-factor guaranteed. It's worth seeing it.
I've skimmed a few of other users' comments before i went to see this movie, and because they were all saying it's a decent, but not great one,I didn't expect too much. Well, I was in for a great surprise! It's true that the story evolves quite slow, it's true that it's quite cheesy in a few scenes, but trust me... you'll get over this even if you're a 'realistic fan' as I am. The action, when gets theatrical, is only to emphasize something. It's true it misses the 'masterpiece' factor, but it's more than 'recommendable to see'.
Especially in the 2nd half, you'll keep breathing faster, biting your lips or whatever you do when you're anxious to see more, 'cause it will get you! It's smart, it has great special effects, it underlines some points that will definitely make you recall them from time to time. Go see this, it's worth it. ("So that others may live!")
AND FOR SURE it's worthy for more than the average 6,5 I can see now. I've rated it 10 to balance this, but I think the real mark should be around 8 - 8.5 -
Prison Break (2005)
best TV series ever!!
Well, the first logical reason should be the average mark (at the moment i've made this comment, there was a slightly difference in the demographic breakdown for the votes: females were giving a slightly higher note - perhaps thanks to Michael - and non-us viewers were more delighted by this show than us audience). I simply love the way every episode turns out always differently than i've imagined. Every scene brings something new, it's not stretching the same idea over many seasons. I must say, i would like to see as much as possible about this movie, as long as it's still reasonable and not just a time-filling show. But, until now, it has been intelligent, worth seeing. I've already recommended this movie to all of my friends and we all love it! Great job they're doing there!
Nothing impressive, but quite pleasant
First time I visited this page, the average mark was 7.9, which definitely is too much. As I am writing, the movie got a more reasonable 6.1 (I voted 6). Let me tell you why:
First of all, I might not be at the proper age to watch this one, as I found rather exaggerated many scenes.Personally, I think the fact that every gadget displayed in the beginning gets to be used isn't something the producers did well.
...SPOILERS AHEAD... I definitely don't think that in a fortnight a 14 years old kiddo finishes a K-unit special training, like carrying logs or similar stuff, even if his whole life was sporty. Or, if he had this training, at least show the audience that he had gun-firing training, or delete the final scene, where he shoots a clip without hurting anyone AND DAMAGING A 2 inches button from 15-20 meters... while hanging from a parachute :)
I think someone should have come up with the idea to insist on his training and/or that he had a proper leader in the organization, other than 'the boss'. I also think that the actor playing Alex wasn't the best choice, as he doesn't look that able to fight real, armed soldiers.
Overall, the movie is a soft-weekend movie... you can watch it, and your kid (under 15-16) might even enjoy it. Otherwise, you might not enjoy all the stuff displayed... It doesn't have any downfalls (I mean, there is a fluency in the action), except the old idea a frustrated individual willing to destroy the whole world with a diabolic plan. But nothing to make this movie a must see...
The Sentinel (2006)
Nice ideas, but poorly developed => Resonable. Not sensational
This movie resembles to the ones you would watch at mid-day, just to pass the time. It surely has some good ideas and intrigues, but I think the potential isn't exploited at its true value.
Douglas makes a good play, Longoria adds some feminine spice to the action, there are some gun shots and several Secret Service actions displayed, featuring code names and standard procedures.
Besides the element that sparks the action ( I won't tell you more, you might want to watch the movie), the whole display lacks sensational... even the special effects are moderate and there is almost no psychological pressure.
Overall, I think a '6 stars' is reasonable mark: the movie could have gone straight to the TV (as some other users say). There's not so much difference between this film and the ones you might see at home, in the evening