Reviews written by registered user
|64 reviews in total|
I would not want to spoil the fun but my review is in fact dealing with
plot holes. I watched season 1 and 2 and while the acting is good, the
whole plot really is a problem.
I like the set design, the special effects. It is also good to see that we don't really get too much lizard skin and that the show is around what a small group of resistants know (the V's are lizards who are invading us the soft way) but that this is no more a spoiler than say, knowing that Darth Vador is Luke's father. You didn't know about Vador? Sorry mate ;o)
The issue is that characters make illogical or hurried choices, there is no follow up of many threads, and ultimately what happens is just a big incoherent story where many other options were discarded for any given situation.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
3 That's for the CGI and actors' voices.
SPOILERS BEGIN The issue I see is that if 9 had not done anything and gotten rid of the beast, then what? The machine does not wake up, and then?
What about the end when the machine is gone? OK, a few rag dolls own the earth, and what? They are objects, they can't reproduce.
With the too obvious reuse of Matrix / Terminator imagery, this is not for kids below 11. But after 11 they can't get the references to Frankenstein and fascism. So push it to 16, and then they're no longer interested in rag dolls. Later then? Then adults are finding the story silly. So this story tried to walk on both sides of the road and ended up ran over.
The set design is nice, very Tim Burton-esque, steam-punk, and presents an alternate 1940's earth, fair enough.
But again what would have happened if the machine had never woken up? Well in fact then, we wonder why the inventor said his doll would save the world, there was after all at that point only one cat sized beast he could have destroyed himself.
As for the coin sized device which is the central plot item, we are left wondering how he (the inventor) managed to get hold of it if it used to be on the machine (as the machine used to be operational and no longer is, we need to assume it used to be there).
Whatever. Don't watch this, watch the trailer on the internet and skip.
I'm a bit sorry there's so many negative reviews about this film. I do
agree that there's nothing really original there. I smiled at a few
places in the film and alright this movie will not change my life,
won't watch it against something else.
I certainly was more willing to watch it because it was on TV and did not cost me a thing. No, I will not buy the Collector DVD, the "Special Edition" BluRay gift box and I admit I would not have paid for it - and spending a few Euro to see it in the theatre would have been out of the question.
Main photography was decent, but I am now worried (maybe I shouldn't) about SJP ever finding a part outside her SATC bucket.... maybe she can't. Dialogue was not exceptional, but I used to think films should be life changing.... OK this one isn't but I did not suggest switching the TV off, and it was relaxing to watch once.
I'm not into hate comments, but this time I had to. I mean I even
watched Megalodon till the end to be sure my rating would be based on
the whole film. At first I thought 2 would be okay because the lead
actress is hot and the song during the credits is fine, but then the
film is too weak to deserve a 2 (even a 1 to be honest).
This film officially ranks as one (THE ONE) of the worst films I have ever seen, from dreadful acting, abysmal plot... of course the most dreadful of all this is Edgar's abilities, I mean the premises of a lot of science fiction films are easier to believe than that.
Don't watch, don't rent, don't allow anyone to watch it, even if you hate them.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Major spoiler here: we are having a dramatic impact on the climate, and
the climate change will have a dramatic impact on us.
Some years ago still, managing the interests of all sorts of industrial groups was causing censorship of key material. Not any more. This documentary is nicely done: scientific data, little computer imagery, no time fillers, less 100% US trivia, and no careful, tactful, industrially-correct comments. The documentary points the blame to those who deserve it: in the North for our individual excesses in energy consumption and materialism, in the South for out of control population growth, and everywhere for an economic and industrial model which is short sighted.
6 degrees will basically endanger animal life, cause famine, war, and also the odd flooding and hurricane. Big spoiler, in fact this does not happen during the documentary, this will only happen to our kids.
Life after people is a ripoff of Alan Weisman "World without us" (first
of all by using a title structure in three words, but whatever).
The basic thought experiment of Alan Weisman is aimed not so much at looking at how nature would recover after we have left, and how buildings etc deteriorate but in fact analysing to what extent our actions on the environment are permanent.
Life after people (the main program) hardly mentions our use of plastics, our pollution of the planet with PCBs, how permanent nuclear waste will be and focuses on the mild, innocent traces of us that will be erased easily: wood, paper, iron, cement. Overall both the program and the series remain a list of crumbling buildings, repeated over and over again, with the same engineering viewpoint.
The series (which I lazily address with this comment too) do mention this a bit more, along with our impact on fauna (eg bison population), or the recovery of fish population due to our current overfishing. Too little still.
The documentary is reasonably good, padded with special effects that are shown over and over again, and with a shift of focus to American landmarks, which is understandable as it was made for US TV.
The content presents a somewhat idealistic and benign-ized vision of our impact on the planet, which really misses the point of actually addressing what are the harmful things we are doing right now and which our descendants will curse us for.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Citizen Kane is one of these films that one feels obliged to watch in
order to be able to discuss it with other film fans.
I found that as sound take is still 1941 technology the low quality of the sound makes the dialogue nearly impossible to follow. Am I unfair? Possibly, but when Orson Wells rejoices in background noise over spoken dialogue, not so much
Actors are awfully static, and they do not convey emotions, they do not raise empathy, I found it impossible to connect with them.
The shooting is sometimes innovative, fairly modern, but I do not judge the merits of a film for the impact it had on other films, nor how good or how new it was when it came out, I judge it for what it produces on me now.
As for the story, the "mystery" of Rosebud being the sort of philosophical thought that a man always longs for his childhood happiness, sorry about that, but it does not justify 90 minutes.
I resent the lack of clues towards that mystery too. It seems that Orson Wells thought "I'm going to do the biography of a media tycoon, what could I do to pretend there is a story?" and then came up with some sort of vague philosophical idea about the meaning of life, et voila!
If you disagree with this opinion and think "He did not get the true meaning of the film", just remember this one thing: I judge a film for what it brings to me now, not for what it brought others a long time ago.
By today's standards, Citizen Kane has fallen into the "old boring film" category.
I watched this yesterday - it's not every day you get to watch
something that mythical. So what was all the hype about? Dr Strangelove
has a reputation, but that's about it. The plot itself is the weak
point of the film: it's irrelevant to us today.
Was it more relevant for people during the cold war? Probably. But for a film to be a classic, it cannot age if the politics have changed.
The treatment of the topic is funny, but only at times (about 3 times during the whole film). I found it long, tedious to watch, and it's not a long film. Peter Sellers is good, but it takes more than his individual talent to lift it up. It was like a story I can't relate to.
It's directed by Stanley Kubrick? So what? I don't rate a film according to who directed it, even if the director is considered a god by some. After all I disliked Eyes wide shut and found 2001 boring too.
So I guess it's probably because I'm not a Kurbick fan in the first place.
If you have watched T3 and T4 with the opinion that you did not quite
get your money's worth, SCC will probably be decent enough.
Consider that managing to take over Linda Hamilton was not easy, but Lena Headey pulls it elegantly. Thomas Dekker does not have such a challenge, but he needs to fill a character full of contradictions and whose psyche is evolving into JOHN CONNOR.
Gareth Dillahunt as Cromartie is a believable Terminator, and assimilated the spirit of his kind really well, with excellent body language. Summer Glau manages her challenge too. At some times she shows the cold machine logic of the Terminators, with subtle hints at Schwartzy's performance (eg the dialogue about diamonds are a girl's best friend).
At all times, though, where the series excel is in the photography and dialogues, which recall specific moments of T and T2.
The series as a whole tends to create a lot of story lines, and leaves some plot holes as well as incoherences with the canon (eg the skull at the end of the pilot).
Nonetheless there is a great fan work here in the dialogues, shooting style and character work, decent special effects for a series (budget taken into consideration), and IMHO something in that vein (reduced in scope) would have been a better T3 than what we got, a better sequel taking into account that finishing the franchise would also imply working without the Gov of California at some point (T3 with an ageing Arnold was somewhat odd).
I watched this with my wife and even she had to acknowledge the
shortcomings of this run-of-the-mill romantic comedy.
Pros first: - Hollywood does worse romantic comedies that make more money - Location choice is OK, and cast somewhat convincing - some good quid-pro-quo situations - cheeky pokes at Poland and the Poles, as seen by a foreigner in Poland
Cons... Now where do I start? - Continuity errors. They call a taxi, it's afternoon, it's pitch black in the car ; better: it's night by the window, they leave the building it's daylight, guy goes for takeaway more than 2 miles from his hotel, - Non believable events such as: person recently had surgery moves around in the hospital bed like a puppy, pregnant girl jumps over fences and rides a bicycle
As for the rest of the story, which I cannot describe in too much details, it basically tells the story of a wealth US superficial yuppie who got a Polish girl pregnant and comes to Poland to be with her (instead of getting rid of the matter).
Could have been better written, but shooting is nice, although even in the category 'romantic comedies' it certainly does not deserve (talking for you ladies there) more than half your attention, and would be a complete waste of money buying it on DVD or paying for a seat. Background TV for very busy audiences only.
|Page 1 of 7:||      |