Reviews written by registered user
bmradux

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

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

"Delete" (2012)
My opinion + technical insights, 6 August 2014
8/10

My Vote: I would have actually aimed for a 7, but since I find it so underrated, here comes the 8. Given the general low IMDb rating I was pleasantly surprised by the first shots, and the first dialogues that were.. more than decent. And it got better- negligible amount of cheesy, just 4 moments of "wtf- no one would do that in real life". There were some familiar actors, and some new to me, and they all played their parts well. Suspense, there was. Emotion there was not. It's not a must for a sci-fi to bring a tear to my eye, but maybe if you kill some characters or put sentimental music on the soundtrack, make sure I get to care about the moment? Just saying... All in all a very, very decent sci-fi. Maybe a bit too long. I confess, I watched it all in one piece, while it was meant as a miniseries, but I believe that in the end, after 2:40 h, I actually accumulated a total of some 40 minutes of watching fancy camera shots and coloured lines and dots swooshing by, the visual representation of the AI in action. While I initially enjoyed the innovative shots they got to be over-exploited and story-diluting. The length allowed for quite a few twists and turns, while the film did not fall into the trap of useless sub-plots (although, again, they could have told the story of the titanic, had they removed the useless AI animations). Scientifically feasible? I would say yes. I guess a Spontaneous Technological Singularity would not really be spontaneous. But if You put a good enough AI together with a virus able to create a botnet, You will at least get an AI with unlimited computing power. At this point, let me remind You that the Turner Test has been finally passed by an AI in 2014, and that in the last 7 years, some 60.000.000 PCs have been unknowingly been part of DISCOVERED botnets, and that any new smartphone has more speed and storage than the best supercomputer of 1990. So slowly, You can start adapting the question "Are there aliens among us?"

Wrong in one crucial aspect - GOLD, 18 June 2014
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Truly impacting statements from people who have been in, or close to, positions of power, +great thinkers,denouncing the way things work up-top and the deficits and unsustainability of our global financial and political constructs. BUT - I certainly frowned at about 10% of the movie. Yes, fiat money is baaad. But do these reborn visionaries really suggest, we should go back to the gold standard? Because of the predictable grow mining of gold? REALLY? WTF? Civil society in my country just dodged a bullet, stopping big-money corporate interests, political corruption, etc that comes with opening up "the biggest gold mine in Europe". Vast landscapes destroyed, a cyanide lake for centuries to come, broken up communities, increased health risk in the area is what gold mining leaves behind. I invite the readers, and "visionaries" in this film to google the images of a few gold mines. Does his f*** up planet need more goldmines just to store yellow metal in vaults? Is this the forward-thinking way you suggest? An e-currency like Bitcoin, if regulated, can achieve exactly the same predictable economical stability effect like mined gold. So really, dig on that a bit, and welcome my rating of 3, that would otherwise have been a nine. This aspect is simply unforgivable.

Her (2013)
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
This is not comedy, this is not drama, nor sci-fi. This is classical music, 28 May 2014
10/10

So there are 400+ reviews for this movie, but I will share my thoughts as a thank You, to who may have been involved in making this movie. I really thought out of the trailer this is some mellow romance-comedy sci-fi. Not really my style. The lack of something better suiting my tastes and the 8.2 IMDb rating made me start watching it. The truth is, it is a great movie! And it is a great sci-fi even. Not bothering with too many technical explanations, but just enough to give you a hint that the facts might be reasonable. The story holds, and although I caught myself being afraid the movie will let me down, it did not. And the twists and turns, although seen before individually, were not predictable. This was a movie of sentences, words and details. I only know one more movie that made great sci-fi just by telling stories: the man from earth. To tell a story with the camera following almost just one actor is a great achievement. To make something that counts as sci-fi with zero gimmicks is awesome too. So.. hey, thanks! Love.

Eva (2011/I)
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Sci-fi You can take Your girlfriend, mother, aunt, grandma to, 26 April 2014
10/10

This one was like a soft wine, or a good book. As an entry-level sci-fi, it was balanced in all aspects. The logic is sturdy, the special effects are amazing, but not opulent, the dialog and acting are just so natural. If You've seen a few dramas, and love stories, it will probably not make You weep, and if You've seen a bit of sci-fi, it will not blow Your mind with mindfokk concepts. It will not keep You on the edge of the seat all the time either, but it has pleasant pacing and fluctuations appropriate for the concept. In the end, like a story well told, it will leave You with an induced state of thoughtful emotion. And I think, that is what art is all about.

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
This should have the rating of John Carter, 26 April 2014
7/10

I've seen much, much worse lines and logic in bigger budget sci-fis that hit the screens. I've seen equal quality acting in blockbusters like Transformers, Battleship, etc. I mean - come on - it's Jurassic Park with a twist of smart. It's a film for kids that can be enjoyed by adults. What it lacks are ripe special effects, because I hear they went bankrupt during the final production stages. So really - this movie should have the same rating as John Carter or Jurassic Park. Since I have been thrown so many stupid special effects and 3D gimmicks lately, I learned to disregard them, and weigh in a film more by it's story than by the bling. If You read light sci-fi, you don't get 3D bling there either. So I say, if the acting was OK, and the story was OK, then the movie was OK. Decent sci-fi with decent entertainment value.

The Machine (2013/I)
71 out of 106 people found the following review useful:
Let's begin with the bad sides, 9 April 2014
10/10

I met an old lady on Sunday in the vegetable market. She was smart, friendly, smiling, tastefully dressed, but when she walked by, she smelled a bit like pee, so I smacked her in the face! ...NO. It does not work like that. So yes, there are flaws in the scripting, and they are perfectly and amusingly laid down in the longer 1-star reviews here. But if you are not suffering from over-infatuation with your own intellect, or from the professional deformations of a self-proclaimed art critic, it's certainly a great sci-fi. Alone the fact that people compare it to so many other movies, or liked so many divergent aspects about it, should tell you that it's not simple, not predictable, and well executed. So if you crave for one of those, oh so rare, good scifis with a bit of everything, you certainly want to watch it. And if you start watching it, you may want to enjoy it. So do yourself a favor - switch off a few neural connections, if you suspect you own many, let the fear go, lay back and enjoy it. It will be a warm, dark, comfy ride into some future.(!The plot summaries for this movie on IMDb are a failure)

1 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it is a twisteeer!, 26 March 2014
5/10

It was a nice movie. Can't hate it, can't love it, even though, according to the extreme reviews I saw here, one of those was to be expected. The logic does not hold up very well most of the time, so you try to enjoy it as some kind of strange riot action-movie. Then, you get some dark humor, and you try to view it as comedy. When you think you can sit back and use that watching glass for the rest of the movie, it suddenly gets deep, and all psychological on you. And you say "Hey! I know, it's a drama! I see Greek mythology here!", but then... it's the Matrix all over again. And then some older characters pop back into the storyline, focus on them, just to tell me utterly nothing at all. And then, it's the ending scenes... - what to make of them, I really could not understand. But then I remembered - Yeees! It started out as a "POSTAPOCALIPTIC TRAIN movie"! Acting is good, directing is good, CGI is good, pacing is good. It's OK entertainment. And if we all had Alzheimer's or ADHD, it would be a superb blockbuster!

8 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
No, no, no, and NO, 14 February 2014
1/10

NO, the "actors" did not play well at all. None of them. Any B-movie still has some guy that has charisma, or a guy that at least remembers his lines. This movie has nobody. Anger, fear, trivial discussions - it all feels like hesitantly chewing on plastic. NO, the script was not good. I know, the place exists and it had some of the occurrences portraited here allegedly going on. To line up all those strange events, and throw in some of your own strange ideas, would take up some skill to be glued together in a coherent story. There was no glue. It felt like parody paranormal youtube movies mashed together. Dialogues? Neah! Just a farmer that "wants his kid back" and long, useless selfie monologues. NO, the "paranormal" part was not right. It was not suspenseful and classy, it was not blockbuster glitter, and had nothing to do with "classic" paranormal encounters. NO, do not watch this movie, unless you want to agree with me, and up this review afterwards. NO, you did not count right. :)

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Here is a thought..., 29 January 2014
1/10

One reviewer stated "Eye candy that reflects the emptiness of American culture". What if the director wanted us to feel disgusted about the movie...like Toby's character did. Like a dark joke. It's the only way I can understand why such movie was created. No. I'm not in shock. In trance - maybe. I just FINISHED watching the movie, but I'm still waiting for it to begin. Really, the characters and scenes were so shallow, that I caught myself laughing in disbelief at a few scenes. Like the one when Gatsby was contemplating the happy moments with Daisy. Wtf. Contemplating what? -You throwing clothes at her from the balcony? There is no connection, no depth. Just ADHD. I don't know... take some medicine, or drill a hole in your skull to rewire it before watching this movie. It might help you make sense of it, or feel some empathy for the characters.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Not for the Russians it seems..., 30 November 2013
10/10

I can't wait to see the first part. I saw this one with my girlfriend on the hint from an arts professor that the movie is being shown on TV. No time to read any reviews in advance. We think it was absolutely grandious. It's like a freakin' Russian painting. REAL. I really don't give squat about historical precision. I would read 20 books, or watch 20 documentaries if I wanted historical precision right now. In this movie every moment IS natural and real. Every moment is complex and unpredictable. Like in real life a situation or discussion involving more characters can find an infinite variety of endings. Now and then a sheet of grotesque improbable circumstancial humor is layered upon ...not unlike life. I was shocked by the 4.1 general IMDb rating. Relieved, when browsing through the reviews. It seems the rating is held down by the people of the former USSR mostly. "Not historically accurate" is the argument I found. So.. if you want to see a perfect movie about some strange situations and thoughts that MOST probably might have been lived and thought on Russian soil during WW2, see this! If you want "historically accurate", watch a few documentaries(again), or find some of those nice, dusty propaganda movies from that time! It will all be lean, clean and will match your current knowledge!


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