Reviews

18 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
All emotion, no real science, hit-job on the nuclear industry.
29 April 2024
As usual with Netflix, sensationalism wins over facts. Why? Because otherwise this relatively boring story about the nuclear accident that never was wouldn't be able to be used to justify a 4 hour series.

As a lifelong resident of PA, everyone knows about TMI, and not to discount the experiences of those who lived nearby, it WAS scary. Lake Barrett is actually the most reputable out of all of the interviewees who primarily consisted of two housewives who took up the anti-nuclear cause, a woman who was a child at the time, and a man who's reputation is highly suspect and this is even according to his own son who went on social media to dispel the story he told.

Rick Parks was NOT on-site at the time of the incident and only showed up years later. The first two episodes focus on the immediate incident and the response. The media played on people's fears back then just as they do now. No surprise. There was a lack of clear communication between MetEd, the NRC and the PA government. There was NEVER any deaths attributable to the small amount of radiation released. The dead fish were more likely caused by a temperature difference in circulated wate, which was pumped directly from the Susquehanna River the plant was located on. The type of burns shown on the "bike riding victim" were not the type you'd observe with radiation.

The last two episodes focus on Rick Parks and his fight to keep them from using a polar crane located within the reactor building to remove the fuel. The debate was never about the actual safety of the crane, it was about the procedures used. His affidavit even confirms this. The super-criticality theory he concocts has no basis in reality as the reactor had been shut down and cooled for YEARS before the cleanup began. Post-accident reports even confirm there was no possible way for the core to go critical in the state it was in after the shutdown. Where he really goes off the rails is when he insists they tried sabotaging him by planting pot in his toolbox.

One of their so-called experts is a well-known leader of anti-nuclear groups, Eric Epstein. That name alone should cause alarm among anyone actually looking for even an even-sided debate about nuclear.

The series also fails to address the fact that no incidents have taken place since, or any of the safety changes that were implemented industry-wide due to it.

What the director wanted was to make a series about an "American Chernobyl." In terms of nuclear accidents, this may have been the worst in U. S. history but that's simply due to the fact that not many have taken place, and most of the ones that did occur were during the Manhattan Project, during nuclear infancy.

It's well-shot, emotional, but leaves out a LOT of factual information and clearly serves as more of an anti-nuclear piece of propaganda than anything.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Was good until the last 2 episodes.
14 April 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Ever since I was young, I had an intense interest in the Cold War and the events surrounding the collapse of the USSR. When this documentary came out, I was excited because it's 9 hours of unmitigated truths, right?

Well...kinda. The problem with this series is that they interview people and "experts" who have information now that people did not have when these events were happening. This matters in context because this series does a great job at twisting the narrative, and that the USSR was this meek and misunderstood adversary, and the U. S. essentially was the root of all of the problems. It also lacks any context into why the bomb was dropped, and lays blame for the devastation at the foot of the U. S. and even its citizens. We're portrayed as essentially a genocidal bunch who wanted to annihilate the Japanese. No mention of their many war crimes including their massacres of millions in China. No mention of their intention to fight until the last man has taken his last breath. No mention of the death cult that was the Imperial Army. Were the effects of the bomb horrific? Absolutely. Nobody is denying that. But it's easy in retrospect to look back and say that it was a cruel thing to do, meanwhile thousands of men on both sides were dying daily.

It also portrays nuclear weapons as being the direct cause of the Cold War which is completely false. There were many factors, nuclear weapons only being one.

Beyond those few things, everything was good up until the last two episodes. The last two episodes delve into the 1990s onwards, specifically after the collapse of the USSR. Of course, it's hinted at the U. S. being behind it, and that poor old Ukraine was basically left to be a perpetual victim of Russia because they signed an oddly worded disarmament treaty, giving up their nuclear weapons which they're convinced would've acted as a deterrent from Russian aggression. No mention of how insanely corrupt Ukraine's government was and still is. It's also hinted that the direct cause of Russia's attack on Ukraine is, of course, the U. S. Each of the 9 episodes has a cold open involving modern day footage of the war, along with commentary. It lays the ground work for the last episode which essentially a film students visual essay on why we should continue to funnel billions of dollars into the war effort, with no accountability on how those funds are actually being used. If you ask, you must be a Russian apologist / supporter. The last episode specifically is so heavily angled towards leftist policy, it's almost hard to even finish.

Overall it's not a terrible series, there's a lot of interesting information presented specifically in the first 7 episodes, but take the last two episodes with a grain of salt.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Blatantly liberal, dysfunctional cousin to "Olympus has Fallen"
21 February 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Where does one begin with this? First, the highly improbable way that the bad guys gain access / take over. While I admit it was a nice detail of using fallen agents guns to equip your people, plus the 6+ armories the Whitehouse apparently has, the actual process is completely nonsensical. Using a bomb at the Capitol to create a distraction? What ever became of that? Nobody knows.

Then comes the typical "use facial recognition" scene to figure out the backstories of the bad guys. Surprise, surprise. They're right wing. Headed by literal right wing supporter James Woods. Included in the hostages are your usual civilians, but also a Rush Limbaugh-esque pundit. Of course he's depicted as emotional and cowardly. Even when he steps up to defend a young girl, he gets shot in the leg and immediately gives up the fight and goes back to sobbing on the floor.

In one of the most convoluted and glossed over parts of the movie, NORAD is hacked and a missile is launched at the plane carrying the vice president and the rest of the cabinet. This puts Richard Jenkins' character as the next in the line of succession. He immediately sends James Woods the codes for the nuclear football that was conveniently just laying around the Whitehouse. The whole motive for all of this nonsense? Keep the war raging in the Middle East so the "military industrial complex" continues to make money. Mind you, this is one of the biggest claims of the left, and is largely unfounded because we have plenty of countries to buy our weapons without having to go to war.

I'll give in, I had a good time watching it. Mostly because of the absurdity of it all, but at the same time the blatant politics of the whole thing (including their in-movie president being a direct copy of "President Unity" Obama) had my eyes rolling.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Campaign (2012)
6/10
Meh.
19 August 2012
As much as I like Will Ferrell, he doesn't ever really do middle ground. In this movie he manages to play the same random blurb outrageous character we know all too well. It's time he start thinking about a new comedy routine, because once you've seen one of his movies you have seen them all. The Campaign is no exception. The real star of this movie was Zach Galifianakis. It's amazing that he is able to provide solid comedy without even having to use a single swear word.

While The Campaign has good intentions, the writing focuses more on poorly executed jokes than serious politics. While this is good for a crowd that doesn't care about politics, for those who take interest it is a big let-down. There isn't any real deep political humor, nor is there any kind of attempt at a serious point. The only noticeable thing it takes a jab at is how we outsource labor to China and how we let money run politics. Other than that there is little to be desired.

It did offer some great laughs, but it's easily forgettable.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Avengers (2012)
7/10
Good, But Not Great.
15 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
There seems to be a lot of hype about this movie, so I went with a friend when it first came out. Sure, it packed theaters, but after seeing it two additional times with two other friends, I come to the conclusion that it's just an "okay" movie.

I understand a lot of people are going to say, "Oh you're stupid this movie is great!" but at least hear me out.

Let's get started with the special effects. Hands down some of the best I've ever seen in film. Giant aliens ripping apart buildings was pure awesome. However, I saw this movie only ONCE in 3D. Why only 1/3 in 3D? Because the 3D was godawful. It gave me a headache, and being as it was done post-processing, it didn't look convincing, not that 3D ever really does.

Where the movie falls short is the random times of corny, clichéd dialog, and just downright bad acting at some points. Cobie Smulders, as much as I love her in How I Met Your Mother, was terrible. Her lines sounded scripted, and she simply existed to try to add a more surreal element to the film. Basically over-emphasizing how dangerous things were.

The movie was far too long in my opinion. I noticed kids in the theater starting to get fussy toward the middle of the movie because of how long it takes to setup the plot. A lot of people were confused as to how the Tesseract really worked and how it played a substantial part of the plot. Too much terminology for people to remember, to be quite honest. They should have skipped more scientific discussion in place of better character development.

There really was little character development. Yes, the team fought, then they made up, then they fought again, only to come back and win. That's as far as the character development goes. If you watched ALL of the Marvel movies, the first hour is rather pointless simply because all it does is establish the background of the characters.

The action scenes occurred right toward the last 40 minutes, and were well directed. You felt at true sense of teamwork. The biggest problem was, no character except for Ironman was in any "real" danger. The characters felt like they were just non-stop combat machines and you never really feel a "on the edge of your seat" moment except for when Stark disposes of the nuke.

The balance of drama and comic relief is nearly PERFECT. Tony Stark of course was the majority of the comedy.

All in all, the movie was fun to watch, but I certainly wouldn't say it's a cinematic masterpiece. While the special effects and great cast of characters bring this movie to life, it suffers with a dull plot that can leave you dozing off at a few points.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Toy Story 3 (2010)
10/10
An Excellent Use Of 3D, As Well With A Great Story Line
22 June 2010
I noticed that most films in 3D today, wow audiences by usage of superb 3D effects. Here's the problem, movies are now so much based on fancy 3D, they loose focus of storyline and character personality / development.

In Toy Story, I noticed the focus on 3D was minimal, as they focused more on the story, and telling the story in a way that it will be special.

Essentially, the whole gang (with the exception of a few) is there, and you've got the classic scenario we all go through as kids, and that is that you eventually have to put away your toys, and face the fact that you are growing up. There is a special connection between Andy and his toys, namely Woody. A connection that many kids have with at least one toy.

The story has some jokes that adults understand, as well as ones kids understand. When you can have that in a story, you're obviously going to have a well put together plot with plenty of good jokes.

The balance of 3D and story was PERFECT. It had some nice 3D moments, but generally it's a movie you can enjoy equally as much in normal 2D view.

Toy Story is the only series I can say that I liked equally the same for ALL of the films. Each has superb writing, and each has a good cast as well as likable characters.

Sadly, all good things must end, way to go out with a bang.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Ignore The Others, This One Deserves It.
10 May 2010
I noticed a lot of people angry at this film over the simple fact that Avatar did not take the award. It's an understandable thing, a multi-million dollar film compared to a lower budget film, it just seems to not make sense.

However, don't let the low budget fool you, this film delivers. The camera angles are perfect, the story fits well with the characters, and I found myself on the edge of my seat more than one time. Don't get me wrong, it's a very disturbing film if you think about all the ways people do sick things, but it's a masterpiece in its own right.

Unlike other war movies, there isn't a squad that eventually learns to cope, as there is always the tension between the squad in the film, and the fact that it isn't two hours of "glorified" patriotism and shooting, makes it all the more better.

If you like action films, but yet like something a bit more emotional and slow paced, perfect movie. If you're looking for a shooter movie, watch elsewhere.
6 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Avatar (2009)
7/10
Great Theater Film, But Suffers At Home.
7 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
When I first saw this in theaters, I thought it was one of the most pleasing visual experiences I've ever encountered. While it is amazing visually, story-wise it lacks. A lot of people are giving this movie 10/10 ratings over the simple fact that the visual work looks nice. Problem was, this movie was made for the sole intention of being 3D, and seen in 3D.

So naturally, since I enjoyed it in theaters, I thought I would purchase the DVD for enjoyment at home. I took some time tonight to watch it, and realized that I wasn't as wowed as I was when I first saw it. Perhaps it's because I don't have a $6000 3DTV, but rather I watched it on a 50 inch plasma.

Here's some of the problems with this film: First, the storyline is unoriginal. It was very well written and put together, but the base concept was about acceptance, and respecting that other people are different than you, that doesn't mean you can take what's theirs. This storyline has been done 300 other times before. Maybe it would have seemed more original if the script wasn't shelved for 9 years.

Second, too much was crammed into a film. It started slow, didn't get to the point fast enough, and much of the story from the beginning is easily forgettable. Let's face it, the battle scenes where the awesome, but that's about it. The rest of the movie is easily forgettable. I'm not one for sappy love stories, but there could have been more character development within the relationship of the two.

Third, much of the storyline was filled with plot holes. Jake "died" within 40 seconds of lacking oxygen, yet the Colonel was able to fire a whole clip of ammunition and fire a pistol at the chopper. Makes no sense.

Fourth, some of the story was poorly acted. I'm convinced that it was the story itself, and not the actors. You can easily tell that some of the lines were rather cheesy, and being that Jake really thought he was part of their world, it felt awkward when he was trying to talk like them about spirits and whatnot.

I suppose it's not a huge turn-off, but the story could have been easily compressed down into 1 hour and 40 minutes or so. To me, there was too much, the story didn't make sense at times due to plot holes, and there was virtually limited character development, and I feel like it was far too long. When you are getting sore from sitting in the same place too long, that's when a film is too long.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Family Guy: Family Goy (2009)
Season 8, Episode 2
3/10
Another Failure Episode.
4 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Not 2 episodes into Family Guy, and they are already insulting religion, making fun of cancer, and so on. Normally I wouldn't mind, but it seems like the same old recycled writing as the other 7 seasons. Season 7 was a failure, and this one is turning out to be the same.

Basically it attacks Jews, Catholics, etc. They have the Jesus character show up, and then Peter asks what type of religion his family should be, in which Jesus replies "Stick with none, they're all a load of crap." Strong words for regular TV.

This season is going to be equally as bad to 7. Let's just hope they either get better writers, less opinionated bits, and back to the old, random Family Guy we all know and love. Otherwise, I can't see this series lasting for another season.
8 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Cleveland Show (2009–2013)
8/10
Not A Bad Start.
27 September 2009
Though it seemed to move a bit fast for the first episode surprisingly, this show has something to offer more than Family Guy. Family Guy is fun to watch for all of the shenanigans, but sometimes you need something funny AND with a storyline. This show offers just that.

In essence it's the same thing as family guy, an intelligent but foul mouth baby, a fat son like his father, and a misunderstood teenage daughter. There are some odd things, such as a bear who lives next door, a racist redneck neighbor (they are in Virginia) who is still funny and caring nonetheless, and the like.

They still have a few reference clips, but not nearly as many as say, Family Guy. All in all, I found it funnier than American Dad, but not nearly as humorous as Family Guy.

Give it time, give it time.
35 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Majorly Underrated.
12 September 2009
When I first went to watch this film, I thought it looked rather stupid. However, being a fan of Martin Lawrence for a long time lead me to watch it.

When it started out, it was a bit bumpy, but soon mellowed out to something more. The cast is great, the jokes are funny, and it just reminds you of a regular family. Also known as, observational comedy.

Ignore the low ratings, people expected some kind Academy Award masterpiece, but the fact is it lives up to its genre, a comedy. Everyone seems to forget that comedies are generally never rated real high, simply because people go in expecting some kind of serious performance.
15 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Family Guy: 420 (2009)
Season 7, Episode 12
2/10
A Pot-Smoker's Dream, A Normal Person's Mediocre Comedy.
3 August 2009
Can't say I really cared for this episode. Season 7 isn't exactly their best, there is a few episodes, but this one really, like the Atheism one, overboard with political viewpoints. I miss the days when Family Guy wasn't so political based. Brian is just Seth in character, voicing opinions that nobody really cares to hear. Family Guy always has mocked religion and such, but lately it's been a little overboard.

Basically in this episode, Bryan crusades to get pot legalized. An intellectual such as himself should have seen the dangers in having it, but the idea is that behind the character is an idiot who wants his political viewpoints heard.

The ending was a bit crappy, because it's just a way of closing out the deal and having everything return to normal.

The only reason people really cared for this episode, was because the song and most pot users tend to love something that sticks up for something they like though the rest of us look and think it's stupid.
14 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
People Clearly Don't Know Good Entertainment.
2 July 2009
The first Transformers was amazing, but to my surprise, this one was equally amazing.

I will admit that the action scenes were too close together, but that's a simple mistake that is easily made.

The visual effects were just plain AMAZING for this film, can't wait until it comes out on BluRay.

This movie was a bit more serious than the last one (but still funny nonetheless), and to me really was underrated.

I did feel a lack of character personality with the bots, but other than that superb acting by nearly all he characters.

Job well done.
6 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cop & ½ (1993)
10/10
Great For Kids.
24 May 2009
This was one of my all time favorite movies as a kid.

People seem to forget this film was intended to be aimed for kids, not for adults.

While this story plot is just like all the others, kid can do impossible things, it's great for kids who are into action films, but are nowhere near ready to watch such films as Saving Private Ryan. The violence was kept to a minimum, and the comedic value was kept as high as it could be for an appropriate child's film. If you are going to rate this low, you've got some issues, especially if you're watching a child's film when your about 30.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pirates of Silicon Valley (1999 TV Movie)
10/10
A Good Movie, More Favors Apple Though
11 May 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This film was one of those ones, that tries to remain unbiased, but you can clearly see it is, in a small way.

First of all, this film often depicts Microsoft as some kind of ruthless company, that didn't have any ethics or morals, despite them even paying the creator of QDOS a large sum of cash, without even knowing if the general public would be interested. While both companies took that risk, Apple simply took apart an old computer, inserted a MOS 6502 chip, and called their own. Not to mention, they originally ran on Microsoft's software, in which they were literally begging Microsoft not to cut their support after they refused to pay the licensing fee.

Also, Microsoft never stole anything from Apple. In the movie, Jobs get's angry with Gates, claiming they took their software, changed a few things, and called it their own. But yet currently, their OS is built on FreeBSD, something they didn't even make. The fact is the idea for a GUI (Graphical User Interface for those non-tech savvy people) had been floating around for ages, Apple made it first, but Gates was working on something similar at the same time. You can't copyright ideas, if so, Apple wouldn't be able to use it either.

Also comes the fact that Xerox never showed particular interest in either company, they simply wanted the best.

This movie is fun to watch, 10/10 for that, but if I was to get real critical, the biased ways of this film are a bit in favor of Apple.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
American Idol (2002– )
1/10
A Good Fixed Competition.
21 April 2009
I am happy to say this show was good. I watched 2 full seasons (1st season and 2nd season), and after that I noticed a pattern.

The pattern is it's all the same. There are some curve balls thrown in a few times here and there, but else it's stayed the same for years.

I'm a man of conspiracies to be honest, and I can truly say this show is rigged. It's funny how last season Paula made reference to the outcome of a vote result that had not even taken place yet, ironic eh? Perhaps she is a fortune teller now? Also, notice how some of the best people loved by everyone you asked somehow get booted off, yet people who lack talent go near the top.

If you ask me, this show has gone down to the lowest of the low. Simon's insults are no longer funny or even insulting, crazy people with gimmicks are getting old, and so on. America's Got Talent is even better than this in my eyes.

I've tuned into a bit of each season, this season (2009) has been going rather good, and there have been some newer changes, so this is one I'm actually paying attention to, but still not all it used to be.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
All The Old Ideas Thrown Into One.
20 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
When I first saw this advertised I figured it looks pretty good. The cast is filled with loads of comedians, but something about it just wasn't that funny.

It nearly steals the "wacky antics" from Family Guy, the political mockery from The Simpson's, and so on.

It uses nearly every cliché found in most comedies today. It features a man going after a women, but she doesn't seem to notice, it features a assistant principal who grows breasts, features an environmental psychopath, a bisexual male who charms every women and has a high ego, and so on. Some of these are twisted to the setting (a school) of course, but it's all been seen before.

I feel as if this is going to become another program that could have had potential, but will be canceled from Fox within a year, if it's even that lucky.

3/10, simply because Henry Winkler is in it. Else it would be 0/10.
11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Possibly The Best WWII Movie Ever Made!
13 February 2009
From the word "go", I felt immersed in the scene of the D-Day landings. These scenes were indeed frightening, but terrific all at the same time. The camera work was just excellent, and the acting was superb.

One thing I noticed from people leaving comments, many people hold a hostility towards this film because it makes American's look like heroes. This is totally understandable, as we do often gratify ourselves too much. But, this movie was based on the lives of American's in the war, and the writer and Spielberg tried to make it as unbiased as they can, but the fact is more people look at the American fronts more than any other. This is a sad fact as nearly all countries suffered from this great (but yet horrible) war. It is clearly seen in the movie that surrenders of the German side were horrible because our American troops executed some of them, that stirred me in the wrong direction but yet it is true.

And as for previous comments, the English and Canadians did help clear the beaches, but didn't play a huge role.

Setting the issues before aside, this was possibly one of the best movies ever made. I know spots can get dry sometimes as will all movies, but other than that it kept me interested, and entertained.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed