19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Eighth Grade (2018)
A comedy that does not make you laugh
30 September 2018
A movie about what it is to be a completely regular teenage girl, taking you through all the kinds of challenges faced. Including peer pressure, trying to be popular, early romances, family relationships and so on. I am sure a lot of people will recognize themselves in her story, and it is somewhat interesting to see the world through her eyes to better understand what teenagers are going through. So, it is more like an educational movie that could be based on some regular persons completely normal life than a comedy. It is quite light hearted and could make you smile in recognition sometimes, but it is never funny to the point you would laugh.
52 out of 104 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Quiet Place (2018)
A dumb place
31 May 2018
I saw the positive reviews and went to watch this movie. Now I sincerely wonder if the movie company just bought the good reviews from a company. The movie uses scare tactics like being completely silent for 30 minutes, then blast your head off with a sudden loud noise. It was not scary, just annoying and headache inducing.

I know you need to leave logic at the door when entering a cinema to enjoy a movie thoroughly, but this one is just so utterly off the charts illogical that it is just painful to watch.

The only survivors are so pathetic and stupid that they would surely be the first to go in such an apocalyptic event. And the monsters themselves have superpowers and super senses in one moment, in the next they can be two cm away from a human and be completely clueless about their whereabouts. Whatever suits the specific scene in progress.

I recovered my imdb password and logged in after several years just to warn you guys about this movie. Avoid at all cost, and if you must see it, make sure you dont pay for it by watching it on TV or elsewhere than the movie theatre.
17 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Unnecessary reboot
10 August 2015
This movie spends most of the time telling the story of how the superheroes lived before they got their powers. A story most already knows, and I was just waiting for them to get that part over with so the real movie can begin. Unfortunately, by that time you will most likely be asleep, and wont be able to enjoy the five minutes or so of superhero action at the end.

Maybe they didn't have the budget for special effects and instead decided to fill most of the time with boring dialogs. Nevertheless, you'd have more fun just picking up a comic book and read that instead.

Waste of your time, even if you're a fan of the comics like me.
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good start but trips and falls flat on its face
13 October 2009
A small group of men hijacks a subway and holds everyone hostage. The city of New York has merely one hour to respond with a ransom. Media quickly responds to it as if it is an act of terror, and the whole country is watching while the Mayor and police tries to resolve the situation.

In the middle of it all lands a sympathetic and intelligent dispatcher, Walter Garber (Denzel Washington), who despite of being a complete nobody tries his best to step up and negotiate as the hijackings mastermind Ryder (John Travolta) insists on only talking to him.

The setting is good for an interesting story, as Ryder is very Charismatic and he is a complex character which is both good and evil. Which makes him connect with Walter, which at first appears to be his exact opposite. Unfortunately it never really pulls through, and the interesting mix feels like it is carrying too much weight from it's original 1974 version from a time where badguys should be bad, and goodguys should be good. It seems like the actors wants to go in one direction, while the old fashioned story is predetermined to go another.

There's plenty of room for twists and turns in the movie, but sadly they never appear. I was in fact surprised by the lack of twists rather than surprised by twists. It all feels a bit outdated, only with some Internet and some cell phones thrown in, but I am sure it was quite fresh back in the '70s.

Travolta delivers a pretty good performance though, although his character fails to be believable, it is like it is meant for another story. You'd think that with big actor names the movie would have some spectacular moments, like massive mayhem and destruction CG of some sort, but instead it all looks pretty much budget. They even used some animations with flyovers in Manhattan that seems to be captured from Google Earth. That's something I would expect to find on YouTube.

If no big name actors in it, you would never think twice calling this a B-movie.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Another IP gets a movie, and pulls it off with some dignity
8 August 2009
I heard of G.I. Joe before, but in my country it was never popular, so I had no idea about what to expect. Which turned out to be no problem, as the movie is telling the story of how it all began, with the introduction of the G.I. team which is the secret protector of Earth who steps in with amazing technology and the best of the best soldiers when everything else has failed. It's the story of how Joe found his way into this team, to become the legendary G.I. Joe.

Other characters, evil and good, are also introduced through a series of brief flashbacks. You will be pretty educated about G.I. Joe and his arch enemy, the Cobra, when leaving the theater.

To make it even less hardcore, they also added some romance in there, so it's safe to bring your date. I went with a female friend, and she liked it at least. But don't worry, the romance never gets in the way of the action. And that's what the movie is all about, action and special effects. It's not about the story or good acting.

I guess the movie is what you'd expect to appear if Transformers 2 and The Day the Earth Stood Still fell in love and made a baby. It has swarms of destructive Nano bots, men in robot suits, lots of action, some romance with tomboy girls and pretty much gives the same feel. Looks more like its dad Transformers 2 though.

I never found myself caught up in the movie at any point since it's never exciting as you always know what will happen before the characters in the movie figures it out, and it has no surprising plot turns in any way. It's just a long exercise in CGI-assisted action scenes, with a humorous tone to it. It will give you a few laughs.

If you are picky about special effects you might catch a few scenes where the graphics looks pretty fake, which is in fact more rare than the opposite these days, but it still is pretty good eye candy.

It's a movie that is soon forgotten, but which is still entertaining enough to be hypnotized to after a long stressful week. Remember to turn off your brain before watching and you'll be fine.
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Cloverfield (2008)
Sci-fi Blairwich project
25 January 2008
A big monster attacks New York, and some guy runs around with a camcorder and films what is going on from the perspective of average Joe. No heroes, no plot, no point. Just confusion until the recording ends at some random point in the event, leaving no answers to what really happened.

The movie got high ratings because its new and unique presentation, you have a sensation of being there like an insignificant individual who is tossed around as a victim to events that are not clearly understood at any point in the movie. Its basically like looking at some war footage from a civilian who is randomly running around in a war zone, trying to survive. This gives the old fashioned Godzilla kind of movie an amount of realism that is unusual and fresh.

But, its just not enough to make the movie a rewarding experience. Its a freak show of a movie, doing something a bit unusual, sure, but its like eating a cactus just to do something new when having dinner. Yes, different, but maybe its a reason no one did it before...

To build a foundation of realism, the first part of the movie is only showing the camcorder guy walking around in some regular party, talking to random people. To give you the feeling that this is real. And surely enough, it could have been recorded at any boring party you have ever been to. And, this is just where the movie fails to entertain. Its like watching your relatives endless vacation photos.

When things finally do happen, at the point where you are about to leave the theater out of boredom, the camera is mostly waving around like crazy while the recorder is running around in panic, making you want to throw up from motion sickness.

Although I can appreciate them trying to do something different, to make you feel like you are really there to experience this, it just ends up like a blur of noise and messy clips.

The whole point of the movie is obviously to recreate the kind of confusion and panic an individual would experience during such an unlikely attack, however, this fact also leaves you with some kind of unsatisfied taste in your mouth as watching the movie will not put your curiosity at rest. In fact, you can just watch the trailer, its the whole movie right there, you wont get anything more from seeing the whole thing. Just more of the same, but you can just watch the trailer in a loop until you get tired of it, and there you go. Saved you some money...

Rent a video game instead, like Half Life 2 Orange box, it is a better way to experience monsters attacking as if you were there yourself...
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Epic Movie (2007)
Not even a turkey
20 May 2007
I usually love these kinds of movies, and I disregard all negative reviews I see them as I am used to those kind of movies getting very low reviews no matter how good they are within their genre anyways. Seems like no reviewer want to admit they have the kind of childish humor these movies offer, and rather want to boast how intellectual they are by giving a boring and sad movie a great score instead. Well, I like some plain, shallow fun sometimes, its a great relief from everydays worries and stress.

So, although warned by all kinds of reviews, I went on to see this one after all. But, what do you know, they were actually right for once! Not only are the jokes not funny, but the movie totally lacks a proper story. It's basically a big pulp of sketches that are done randomly, then stitched together in the hope they will form some kind of movie. They try to make fun of movies who are already more crazy than this one, like the Borat movie, and it just does not click.

urgh, no, I wasted too much time watching the movie already, so no point wasting more time writing about it. Do yourself a favor, just don't watch it. And this is coming from someone who really like this type of movie...
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Ghost Rider (2007)
Soul-less Cliché Rider
26 February 2007
This movie is like porridge. It's easy to consume, yet offers no interesting taste, gives a false sense of being full before it continues its journey and finally ends up where it belongs. Leaving no special memories or useful nutritions behind.

It's the story about how the Marvels comic book character Ghost Rider became the Ghost Rider, by selling his soul to the Devil. And how he challenges his own curse in the name of goodness. Sounds kinda cool, and should have been cool. I loved the recent movies of Batman, Spiderman, Superman and most of the rest of them. But, this one is all dumbed down for the masses, and with some totally out of place romance added so that the movie makers wont risk losing money from your girlfriend refusing to see the movie with you.

Yep, it's the classic money press Hollywood style movie. Take a comic book brand, mix with a famous actor, add some special effects, action and romance. Oh, and don't forget that sweet happy ending. Viola, you got yourself a safe little money machine. Only this time, it ironically lost all of its soul.

As most mainstream movie goers I like Nicholas Cage, and you will find him perform as usual. But, you will need to be less than five years old for this movie to provide any suspense or thrills. You have seen every single thing here before a million times. If you are easily amused it might give you a kick, but then again, you would probably be better off watching Tele Tubbies.

The special effects, which are the only possible reason I can think of to see the movie, are on par with what you can expect, although I was surprised to see some very poor budget movie'ish face morphing effects that gave me flashbacks from the early 90s. They wont blow you away, just barely keep you from falling asleep.

Tame, cowardly, boring and mostly an insult to the comic strip.
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Like Roadrunner...
26 November 2006
Remember the Roadrunner cartoon? Where Willy the Coyote masterminded the most ridiculous plans just got get a mouthful of the Roadrunner? Remember how annoying it became when the Roadrunner always escaped and got back to the coyote because of a ridiculous amount of luck? Remember how much you wanted Roadrunner to die a horrid death in agony, seeing the coyote enjoying its well deserved dinner? Well, seeing this movie made those memories come back. The only excitement I could feel was when HOPING the evil badguy could just get rid of the gay looking teen agent with one quick bullet to the head. But, like the Roadrunner he just fools around until he saves the day by sheer luck, again and again until it becomes truly annoying.

The main character is as shallow as a glass of water, and as likable as icecream with ketchup.

This is an utter piece of politically correct crap for kids under 7 years old. If you have to see a kids movie with your kids, this is not the one, unless you need some sleep. And even then you are gambling the kids wont start nagging you to leave the theatre during your nap, because they are bored by the movie.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Unrealistic thriller based on real world tension
20 October 2006
North Korea has developed a nuclear long range missile that can reach America. It's almost ready for launch, and the American president has few other options but ordering a military strike to remove the threat.

A navy seal team is put together and sent to the missile site to go undercover and destroy the facility, making it seem like an accident thus preventing provoking North Korea into retileration, which could quickly blow up into a full scale war causing millions of lives lost.

A very real world scenario, and it's a good background for a thrilling movie. However, with all this realism you would want more realism from the plot. There are so many holes in the plot, if the movie was a bucket, it would have water pour straight through the bottom.

For example, why would a surgical strike with stealth bombers be more provokative than sending a team of trigger happy seals behind enemy lines, blasting everything sky high for everyone to see? Yet, the whole tension is about the navy seals finishing their mission in time before the surgical strike is the only option left, naturally with no communication abilities with HQ to report about progress, and the usual war hungry American military adviser pushing for the most dangerous options.

The movie is also way too political correct. There are no bad-guys, South Koreans work together with the Americans, and even the North Koreans are good guys who are secretly on the Americans side. Only one person is left as the bad guy, Kim jong Il, North Koreas dictator.

I was also surprised to see how poor the special effects were. Reminded me of something from the early 80's. Blood splatter from gunfire was clearly just painted on top of the movie during post processing, and having a poorly done 3D model of the nuclear missile rotate around on a screen in the presidents conference room just made it look comical.

All in all, messy, inaccurate and most of all, predictable and pretty boring stuff. The first behind enemy lines was just a million times better in all aspects.
39 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Open Season (2006)
Non epic cute fun
3 October 2006
I read the reviews on IMDb before I saw this movie, and was pleasantly surprised. Not just because my expectations were so low, but found it to be quite enjoyable altogether.

It is naughty enough to entertain adults with its mild sense of black humour (if you like rabbits, prepare to be offended), and cute enough to charm the political correct. The animations themselves are absolutely on par with the best out there, and one scene where the animals race down the wild river is quite remarkable.

It is, of course, totally predictable, and brings home nothing new or extraordinary. It delivers exactly what you would expect. Just shut off your brain, enjoy the colorful animations and occasional laughs. Well worth a look...
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Cars (2006)
lack of flesh, lack of soul...
25 June 2006
In the world of 3D animated movies we have seen toys, fishes, ogres, mammoths and what not so far. And this time it seems like the money machines in Hollywood decided there must be a movie-market for kids who like cars. After all, toy cars makes big bucks at toy stores all over the world, so it seems like a right thing to introduce...

Don't get me wrong, I love the 3D animated genre, and Shrek and Ice Age are some of my fondest movie memories. But, those movies had a soul, which this one lacks.

The story is basic, big ego falls down to earth and finds out simple values in life are better. probably true, but after seeing the same theme from Hollywood over and over and over it gets old. Without the support of some good humour, it just falls over and becomes boring. My girlfriend actually left the movie in the middle, and she normally love this kind of movie. I wanted to leave too, but stayed if not for anything else for the 3D effects, which is on par with what you would expect today, but nothing extraordinary, and the lack of living creatures and focus on cats makes the characters seem much less lively than what we are used to from before. No body language or expressions to speak of, just pretty boring cars. Looks more like a 3D racing game at times.

Its one of those movies you go to see just to see it, as it is advertised everywhere and is considered a big title. But, it's pretty much waste of your time...
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Cowboys in da hoods
10 August 2005
Rap hip hop cool western, yo! A gang of black cowboy gangstas are planning the biggest heist of their lives. A fortune is passing through a small bank in a godforsaken town ruled by a sinister tyrant and his sadistic son. The paths of the gang and the tyrant passed before, and sweet revenge or brutal death is imminent as they meet again.

Now, this actually sounds quite intriguing to me, but there is one huge problem: The movie actually takes itself dead serious, while it on the best is a big joke.

OK, I can try to ignore the girls in the movie has silicon enlarged lips, with a tattoo outliner and a nice lip gloss thrown in, looking like some random prostitutes dragged off the street, with much less acting skills than you would expect even from a female of that given profession.

I can also try to ignore the desperate attempts at trying to be new by putting every known western cliché upside down, like the women are the strong ones kicking the guys butt, the black people are the cool dudes from da hood untouched by the slavery common a the time, while the white guys at best are stupid and pathetic cannon fodder, or at best evil and rotten to the bone.

I bet the director would be sued for racism if he movie had all the black guys exchanged with white guys. Not that I care about the political correctness of a movie, if the movie is good anything flies.

But, what kind of mindless, drug abused mind have come up with the plot?? I mean, some guys come up with the brilliant plan of walking straight into a bank loaded with treasure yet with no guards whatsoever, flash a gun, take the money before some guy chasing them magically appears outside from nowhere and we have a final shootout.

THATS IT! Swallow it down with some oh so deep soulshattering philosophy about bonds between brothers are stronger than life and death, made into a joke by what is possibly the worst western movie ever made.

I thought it would be refreshing and new, but they killed everything good about western movies, and added a bunch of boring, cliché-filled, badly executed elements instead.

I will even go so far to say that I can in fact enjoy a good turkey, because it becomes so bad it is actually fun to watch in good company, but this.. This is not even that.

Don't SEE THIS MOVIE! IT IS A TOTAL AND UTTERLY WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY! If you need to see an alternative Western movie, see Wild Wild West with Will Smith again instead, it is mindblowingly better than this load of humus.
24 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
As entertaining as arguing with your family
5 July 2005
Half of the movie Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) needs to drag his two kids around while they are either screaming, accusing him for being a bad dad or in all possible ways trying to sabotage his efforts in keeping them alive.

This becomes very annoying, and personally I lost all sympathy for the main characters. A great opportunity to remake a spectacular science fiction movie turns into some kind of half hearted soap opera about a dysfunctional family.

I actually eventually found myself hoping the machines would blast the kids away to get on with the action.

As you can expect from a movie who can afford paying Tom Cruise's ludricous salaries, the special effects are top notch. Any mediocre actor could have delivered the same acting performance though, and frankly Tom Cruise looks more like a sad middle aged man now, just a shadow of the sex symbol he once was.

All in all a disappointing movie, that could have been so great, but sadly is not...
8 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Most disappointing sequel ever!
3 May 2005
I do not know where to begin. Oh, yes: FOR GODS SAKE, Don't SEE THIS MOVIE!

I don't know anything about this guy who actually changed his name to Ice Cube, but he sure looks and sounds just like the kind of moron who would do something like that in the movie.

His acting is so mediocre, you feel sorry for him. His wimpy voice, total lack of face expressions and idiotic one-liners makes this character totally misplaced in a role as the meanest agent ever.

He goes from being a pathetic moron to doing some amazing stunts that no man can survive, except with a huge dose of luck. Which is what saves him, time after time after time. In the end you want him to die, as he is simply too annoying.

Not to mention his comic relief partner. A Q like figure who is just totally overdoing being stupid and "funny". Not since JarJar have I hated a comic relief character more than in this movie.

Oh, and about the story. Well, I guess there is one in there but it is so full of cliché's and is merely there as a foundation for lots of action scenes. Not that anything is wrong with mindless action full of special effects, but it is just really poorly done. The clipping, flow of the movie, everything just crashes.

It is a shame, as the original XXX had its charm, and was a great modern tribute to the James Bond type of movies. But this one just reeks of some investors who put some money on the table to buy some brands, like Ice Cube (man, what kind of moron calls himself Ice Cube??) and the XXX brand.

Phew, I feel better now, after wasting 90 minutes watching this load of crap I needed to let out some steam. Oh, I left before the ending by the way, it was just too unbearable to sit through. And I normally LIKE this kind of movies!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Sin City (2005)
See it if you know what you are doing
20 April 2005
Don't take your girlfriend to see this movie unlesss you know she is able to handle a great deal of unnecessary violence.

This is the bloodiest affair since Kill Bill, and the movie being mostly in black and white does not help much, it will if possible make it even more brutal. Expect to see people's head split in half, private body parts being ripped off and lots of blood pouring out all over the place.

If violence is a form of art, this movie would be any art museums treasure though. The movie is truly a piece of astonishing work, and it is hard not to be blended by it's beauty despite it's raw content.

Any of Frank Millers comic book fans will be pleased to see the movie is the most accurate expression of any comic book to date, which is quite an accomplishment in this case, Miller's books are not your average Spider Man thing, but deep and dark tales of men challenged on many complex levels.

The movie is entertaining, up to the point of what entertainment the comic book itself can offer. There is no real main character or hero here though, there are rather several, but the Sin City connects it all together. An interesting approach for a movie, although might put some people off.

All in all, the movie is a fresh gush of wind when it comes to getting a good comic book to the screen in a faithful way. If messy violence is your thing, then you will find fewer better looking wrappings around it than this one.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Hostage (2005)
A much needed comeback for Bruce
30 March 2005
The movie was a pleasant surprise after a long range of mediocre movies starring Bruce Willis.

The overall feel reminded me a bit about what made Die Hard his breakthrough movie, as Jeff Talley (Bruce) basically will be on a one man mission against all odds, but this time with a much darker and serious twist to it all.

There's not any of the small winks and humoristic one liners that made Die Hard so charming, but instead some raw and brutal feel to it all, mostly because you get to know the characters in the movie so well, and it is much more complex, close and intimate than what you have seen before from Bruce Willis.

Bruce in fact delivers some pretty good acting at times, which was also a surprise, he is well known for his stone-face approach, usually only surfing on some built in charm and macho appearance. But this time he plays a real human, not a machine-man who goes on unaffected by what happens around him.

The story itself is exciting with a lot of twists that keeps you on your toes through the movie.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Pacifier (2005)
Fun movie - if you are five years old and never saw a movie before
28 March 2005
Seems like Vin Diesel wants to follow in Arnold Schwarzeneggers footsteps when he went from a typical badass macho character to something like a comedian in movies like Kindergarden Cop and Twins.

Maybe Diesel made too much money from before, and thought he wanted to focus on his talent as an actor instead, and widen his artistic abilities.

There is one drawback with this plan though: He simply cannot act, and the story of the movie badly needs some serious acting talent to rescue it from total failure. Sadly enough the only person who delivers anything close to good acting is Brad Garrett, who only has a guest appearance.

The movie is your typical "badass comes to realize family is more important than whatever he is doing" thing, which we have seen numerous of times before. Nothing new here, and with no acting talent the only thing that can possibly save the movie is humor.

Unfortunately the humour is so childish even a 7 year old would be offended, and I can't recall laughing at all during the movie. It is just too cute, politically correct as well as over the top predictable.

The only reason to see the movie I can think of, saving having someone point a gun at your head, is hardcore fans of Vin Diesel might get a kick from just watching him move around on the screen or whatever. But this is just a sad piece of movie, clearly just a money making effort trying to capitalize on Vin Diesels name in a cute and proved family comedy concept that is way below par.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Constantine (2005)
Much better than my expectations
27 February 2005
Yes, I read all the harsh reviews, so I feared the worst, yet as a dedicated movie fan I hardly pass on any movie released in the theater's, and this was no exception.

I feared another shot at End of Days, which hovers far above the rest of the movies put on my list of shame. It is always sad to see an actor that cannot really act become victim of that fact when the movie he plays in actually requires the actor to carry the movie instead of having the movie carry the actor.

Seeing Schwarzenegger embarrass himself like this was something I did not need to see happen with another great movie hero like Keanu Reeves, it kind of kills even the memories of the good movies they starred in.

I am making a big point of me expecting the worst here, as I believe this fact made it possible for me to have a very positive surprise. I found the movie to be quite entertaining, and if you do not expect a new Matrix sensation this is a worthwhile movie to spend some money and time on.

I enjoyed the cartoon'ish feel of the movie, and the special effects were on par too. Many complained about Keanu's acting, but honestly, could he ever really act? His stone faced character is one of the traits making him a bit mysterious and macho in the first place, do not expect more or less than before from him.

All in all, good entertainment and a worthwhile break from reality...
8 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

Recently Viewed