This movie is fantastic in the way it figured out Elon Musk four years before the rest of the world did. Rocket explosions and crashes that are spun as "successful" due to what has been "learned" from needless deaths and destruction, the supposedly "brilliant visionary" who will gladly let the world burn, so long as he is lauded. The Elon-villain cares nothing for other people, gleefully murdering them to expand his power and in deference to his utterly misguided "philosophy." Who would have thought that it would take the unwanted Twitter acquisition for the rest of us to understand this is who Musk really is? Fantastic film based on a real person. Fiction comes alive.
Reviews
18 Reviews
Huh?
20 May 2023
There is absolutely nothing political about this film, so why are some reviewers complaining that it is "too political?" Reviewers calling it "woke"-huh? They provide no examples of how this action film is "woke." Exactly. It's not. At all.
This film is fine. Another in a long line of chum that will be fed to us from Disney for decades to come. My only real complaint is that Michael Douglas is too old for action movies and needs to stick with geriatric fare, like the Kazinsky Method.
This movie on Disney+ which everyone already had a subscription to, so you watched it basically for free. Quit your complaining.
This film is fine. Another in a long line of chum that will be fed to us from Disney for decades to come. My only real complaint is that Michael Douglas is too old for action movies and needs to stick with geriatric fare, like the Kazinsky Method.
This movie on Disney+ which everyone already had a subscription to, so you watched it basically for free. Quit your complaining.
Jurassic World Dominion
(2022)
The dangers of genetic engineering
14 January 2023
What a great film. This will one day seem like a documentary on the dangers of genetic engineering and the horrors wrought upon us by companies like Monsanto.
Nightmares await for all of humankind, from living terrors that will destroy our ecosystems-and by extension, us-to greed-fueled monopolies with control of our government and our entire food supply.
I would encourage everyone to do some reading on Monsanto. It is incredible that so few people know about the company, considering it now owns almost the entire agricultural industry in the United States. They destroy families and bankrupt independent farmers over "copyrighted seeds," which is an absurd concept on its face. Learn, and stand up against corporate tyranny.
Nightmares await for all of humankind, from living terrors that will destroy our ecosystems-and by extension, us-to greed-fueled monopolies with control of our government and our entire food supply.
I would encourage everyone to do some reading on Monsanto. It is incredible that so few people know about the company, considering it now owns almost the entire agricultural industry in the United States. They destroy families and bankrupt independent farmers over "copyrighted seeds," which is an absurd concept on its face. Learn, and stand up against corporate tyranny.
Devil in Ohio
(2022)
Audience
14 September 2022
This show is targeting an audience of 12-23 year olds with a rating of TV-MA. Speaks volumes on so many levels. Our media is either intentionally crafting provocative content for kids, or they are responding to a demand for same. Either way, it's a sad commentary on society.
When I heard this was the top streaming show over Labor Day weekend, it never occurred to me that it was for teens. Such a letdown. I suppose it's possible that the target audience will find this suspenseful and frightening. I found it predictable and over the top in every aspect.
Please, Netflix, create shows for adults or at least rate them correctly, so we know what we are getting.
When I heard this was the top streaming show over Labor Day weekend, it never occurred to me that it was for teens. Such a letdown. I suppose it's possible that the target audience will find this suspenseful and frightening. I found it predictable and over the top in every aspect.
Please, Netflix, create shows for adults or at least rate them correctly, so we know what we are getting.
The Orville
(2017–2022)
Sci-Fi is Progressive
6 September 2022
So many people complaining about this "woke" season, not because they have watched an episode, but because some talking head or podcast host told them to be outraged.
You can't claim that Season 1 and 2 were great and blast Season 3. All seasons have dealt with the same subject matter, like gender rights. It was the second episode, for God's sake. But add a fanatical dictator to the plot, and all the Trump supporters demonstrate a derangement syndrome all their own.
Science fiction has always advocated liberal ideals in search of a better universe. Working toward the collective good. Defying authoritarian regimes. Embracing other cultures and rejecting xenophobia. If these things offend you, maybe you should stick with Tucker for your TV viewing.
You can't claim that Season 1 and 2 were great and blast Season 3. All seasons have dealt with the same subject matter, like gender rights. It was the second episode, for God's sake. But add a fanatical dictator to the plot, and all the Trump supporters demonstrate a derangement syndrome all their own.
Science fiction has always advocated liberal ideals in search of a better universe. Working toward the collective good. Defying authoritarian regimes. Embracing other cultures and rejecting xenophobia. If these things offend you, maybe you should stick with Tucker for your TV viewing.
Inte0rw3bs R Funnee
28 August 2022
"This episode is a ripoff of Dark Mirror!"
Some of y'all need to read instead of watching TV all day. These shows are not "ripping off" one another. They are warning all of us about things that are really happening within our world, before it is too late. Please search for "China Social Credit System" and perhaps you will begin to understand why topics like these should be concerning to all of us.
Stop being outraged by a TV show. Be outraged by the fact that your oligarch masters are doing everything in their power to control you. Do not play along. Do not fall into their traps. You will eventually regret it.
Some of y'all need to read instead of watching TV all day. These shows are not "ripping off" one another. They are warning all of us about things that are really happening within our world, before it is too late. Please search for "China Social Credit System" and perhaps you will begin to understand why topics like these should be concerning to all of us.
Stop being outraged by a TV show. Be outraged by the fact that your oligarch masters are doing everything in their power to control you. Do not play along. Do not fall into their traps. You will eventually regret it.
Meltdown: Three Mile Island
(2022)
Ignorant
29 June 2022
Nuclear power plants are designed to function exactly.like this: when a meltdown occurs, the nuclear material superheats the surrounding earth and creates a ceramic bowl, self-sealing the material. No muss, no fuss.
Meanwhile, this idiotic series compares nuclear reactors with nuclear bombs in the opening credits. A nuclear reactor cannot explode, geniuses.
The interviews with perfectly healthy old people telling you about the horrors of the Three Mile Island "accident" tell you all you need to know. If the "meltdown" had been what these agenda-driven kooks say, they would have all died of radiation sickness more than 40 years ago.
Every neighborhood in America should have a miniature nuclear reactor. If that were the case, we'd pay practically zero for our energy.
Meanwhile, this idiotic series compares nuclear reactors with nuclear bombs in the opening credits. A nuclear reactor cannot explode, geniuses.
The interviews with perfectly healthy old people telling you about the horrors of the Three Mile Island "accident" tell you all you need to know. If the "meltdown" had been what these agenda-driven kooks say, they would have all died of radiation sickness more than 40 years ago.
Every neighborhood in America should have a miniature nuclear reactor. If that were the case, we'd pay practically zero for our energy.
Dune
(2021)
Cliffhanger nonsense
13 November 2021
Watched a three-hour movie everyone is touting as a masterpiece, just to find at the "end" that it's "just the beginning" (literally the last line of the film). Terrible. Would have been nice if this was marketed as "Part One," but it has not been.
Kent State
(1981 TV Movie)
Actually Quite Balanced
6 September 2021
This is a very balanced portrayal and demonstrates the failures on all sides of the event. Yes, those shot and killed were innocent youth, some whom just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Yes, the SDS was on campus encouraging widespread unrest and violence. Yes, most of the National Guard troops were exhausted kids put in an impossible situation with live ammunition. Yes, the politicians involved were inept boobs who had no clue as to the right way to manage the situation and took actions to violate the students' constitution rights. The only major miss here was they show the burning of the ROTC building but leave out much of the other destruction caused to the city of Kent, which was a key factor in the level of tension in the community and led to extreme reactive actions on all sides.
What?
4 September 2021
Salt
(2010)
Russians are terrible
10 May 2020
Dated a gal from Georgia (the country, not the state) for a while. She confirms that Russians are jerks. Plus, they oppressed all of Eastern Europe for decades.
This movie is a lot more fun than you would think. The "plot holes" other reviewers cite result from their inability to think. Every action Salt takes is logical and demonstrates continuity.
This movie is a lot more fun than you would think. The "plot holes" other reviewers cite result from their inability to think. Every action Salt takes is logical and demonstrates continuity.
Dispelling the Nonsense
4 May 2020
Yes, this movie is not great. But it is also not terrible. What is terrible are all the lies being stated in the reviews. So, to correct the record...
Emperor Palpatine is not "suddenly" alive again. He has been alive for decades, and in multiple forms. Did you know he had himself cloned? Of course you don't. You don't know this because the only things you know about Star Wars are the things you saw in the movies. There is a lot more to Star Wars than the films. Try reading a book sometime.
Yes, Palpatine had children. No, that doesn't mean he was ever a nice guy who "felt and demonstrated love." Why are you presuming Rey's parent was born of a loving marriage? Ever heard of rape? "When did Palpatine have time to raise a child?" You think all parents are attentive to their children and raise them personally and with care? Which planet are you living on? You mean Palpatine was a super-evil Sith Lord who only created children to further his own agenda? Wow, insightful!
And Rey's parent wasn't Palpatine's only child. Anakin was his child, as well, but you don't know that because you never bothered to learn about Star Wars.
Why are you surprised that Rey and Ben can force-heal? This is not a new skill. Palpatine's master Darth Plagueis could keep others from dying and also manipulate the midichlorians to create life (the skill Palpatine used to create Anakin). They even explained this in Episode III, so you've had 15 years to get your head around it.
Rey is not a "Mary Sue." And it has nothing to do with two lightsabers versus one. Rey is the most powerful force-user in history because she was bred to be that very thing. If Lebron James and Venus Williams had a daughter, would you call her a "Mary Sue" when she kicked your ass at probably every sport conceived by man?
Leia was not "suddenly" trained as a Jedi. Again, read a damned book.
Yes, Rey is a Palpatine. And she adopts the name Skywalker at the end because that is the path she has chosen. That's who she is. Life is about choice, not lineage. Pretty simple.
"Disney greed" has not somehow destroyed a once noble franchise. George Lucas made some movies. He didn't make them to preach the Gospel or "because art." He made them to get paid. Do you think he would have fought so hard to retain merchandising rights if it was only about his "vision?" Don't conflate the use of the Hero's Journey with some altruistic motive.
Emperor Palpatine is not "suddenly" alive again. He has been alive for decades, and in multiple forms. Did you know he had himself cloned? Of course you don't. You don't know this because the only things you know about Star Wars are the things you saw in the movies. There is a lot more to Star Wars than the films. Try reading a book sometime.
Yes, Palpatine had children. No, that doesn't mean he was ever a nice guy who "felt and demonstrated love." Why are you presuming Rey's parent was born of a loving marriage? Ever heard of rape? "When did Palpatine have time to raise a child?" You think all parents are attentive to their children and raise them personally and with care? Which planet are you living on? You mean Palpatine was a super-evil Sith Lord who only created children to further his own agenda? Wow, insightful!
And Rey's parent wasn't Palpatine's only child. Anakin was his child, as well, but you don't know that because you never bothered to learn about Star Wars.
Why are you surprised that Rey and Ben can force-heal? This is not a new skill. Palpatine's master Darth Plagueis could keep others from dying and also manipulate the midichlorians to create life (the skill Palpatine used to create Anakin). They even explained this in Episode III, so you've had 15 years to get your head around it.
Rey is not a "Mary Sue." And it has nothing to do with two lightsabers versus one. Rey is the most powerful force-user in history because she was bred to be that very thing. If Lebron James and Venus Williams had a daughter, would you call her a "Mary Sue" when she kicked your ass at probably every sport conceived by man?
Leia was not "suddenly" trained as a Jedi. Again, read a damned book.
Yes, Rey is a Palpatine. And she adopts the name Skywalker at the end because that is the path she has chosen. That's who she is. Life is about choice, not lineage. Pretty simple.
"Disney greed" has not somehow destroyed a once noble franchise. George Lucas made some movies. He didn't make them to preach the Gospel or "because art." He made them to get paid. Do you think he would have fought so hard to retain merchandising rights if it was only about his "vision?" Don't conflate the use of the Hero's Journey with some altruistic motive.
Black Swan
(2010)
Interwebz Critics Is Funny
26 April 2020
This movie is really quite decent, and the acting is quality. Black Swan is a unique psychological thriller/horror piece about descent into madness, so you get exactly what you should have been expecting.
This movie is not about ballet. The critical dance-reviewers of this film remind me of the pretentious weenies who bashed Whiplash because "it's not true to life, man!" You mean Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and the others--who are actors and not actually dancers, by the way--didn't perform the way true ballerinas would? Wow! Thanks for your incredible insight!
This movie is not a documentary. "Pffft. Nina would never be selected to dance this role, because the investors would never allow it in the high-dollar world of professional ballet!" Oy. It's a story. Suspension of disbelief, people. Going To The Movies 101.
And those who grouse about the actual theme--the potential negative consequences of an insatiable drive to achieve--well, I suspect you've never actually achieved anything of true rare value.
The movie isn't "real" because Nina has no friends? News flash: If you want to be prima ballerina or the next Picasso or Concertmaster of the Cleveland Orchestra or President of the United States or any other position of prestige, then you have no life outside of striving for the unattainable perfection required to achieve that goal.
There are no friends. There are no video games. There is no gardening, or reading for pleasure, or dating, or Saturday afternoon relaxing at Starbucks. In fact, there is no watching of movies like Black Swan. There is only rehearsal and improving your craft. And that life can destroy pretty much anyone. Which is the entire point of this film. Too bad you missed it.
This movie is not about ballet. The critical dance-reviewers of this film remind me of the pretentious weenies who bashed Whiplash because "it's not true to life, man!" You mean Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and the others--who are actors and not actually dancers, by the way--didn't perform the way true ballerinas would? Wow! Thanks for your incredible insight!
This movie is not a documentary. "Pffft. Nina would never be selected to dance this role, because the investors would never allow it in the high-dollar world of professional ballet!" Oy. It's a story. Suspension of disbelief, people. Going To The Movies 101.
And those who grouse about the actual theme--the potential negative consequences of an insatiable drive to achieve--well, I suspect you've never actually achieved anything of true rare value.
The movie isn't "real" because Nina has no friends? News flash: If you want to be prima ballerina or the next Picasso or Concertmaster of the Cleveland Orchestra or President of the United States or any other position of prestige, then you have no life outside of striving for the unattainable perfection required to achieve that goal.
There are no friends. There are no video games. There is no gardening, or reading for pleasure, or dating, or Saturday afternoon relaxing at Starbucks. In fact, there is no watching of movies like Black Swan. There is only rehearsal and improving your craft. And that life can destroy pretty much anyone. Which is the entire point of this film. Too bad you missed it.
People Are Funny
28 December 2019
I'm not saying this movie was good. In fact, I didn't like it at all. It was very predictable and the source material was clearly written just so the author could profit from an American tragedy. If it had been about a child whose father died on the Lusitania, no one would have cared; it certainly would not have received nominations. That should tell you all you need to know.
However, all the folks here yelling about the main character are ridiculous. Of course the kid is annoying. He is autistic, geniuses. Have you ever met an autistic kid? They don't need psychiatrists or mental hospitals. Those things don't help them.
However, all the folks here yelling about the main character are ridiculous. Of course the kid is annoying. He is autistic, geniuses. Have you ever met an autistic kid? They don't need psychiatrists or mental hospitals. Those things don't help them.
Amanda Knox
(2016)
True Criminals
25 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, people, a documentary doesn't present both sides. Documentaries are the media equivalent of a debate argument or a persuasive essay. A documentary presents a claim and then supports it with information. Documentaries are biased by design.
For unbiased information, we are supposed to look to the news and journalists. Within the first few minutes of this film, we can see that trust is misplaced. The "journalist" recorded here appears truly deplorable. It is clear the media smeared Knox by printing every fabricated or insinuated tale as though it were fact. Foxy Knoxy? Lucifer-like, satanic witch? Yeah, that's evenhanded journalism assuring a fair trial. *scoff*
Drug-fueled sex orgy? Because they smoked a little weed? Puh-leeeease.
The investigator comes off as a pompous ass. Knox is an anarchist because she doesn't like being questioned by authorities? Pretty sure only the truly stupid are cooperative when they have been accused of murder.
I'm dumbfounded by the people screaming for Knox's head based upon the "damning" physical evidence. You mean they found Knox's DNA and fingerprints in her own home? Wow, what a revelation! Listen, your DNA and fingerprints cover just about every square inch of your residence, including the bedroom of anyone living with you. Skin and hair are everywhere (that's what dust is mostly made of), and don't tell me you never hung out in your roommate's room listening to music, chatting, or smoking a bowl.
Knox was acquitted. That means she is presumed innocent. End of story.
For unbiased information, we are supposed to look to the news and journalists. Within the first few minutes of this film, we can see that trust is misplaced. The "journalist" recorded here appears truly deplorable. It is clear the media smeared Knox by printing every fabricated or insinuated tale as though it were fact. Foxy Knoxy? Lucifer-like, satanic witch? Yeah, that's evenhanded journalism assuring a fair trial. *scoff*
Drug-fueled sex orgy? Because they smoked a little weed? Puh-leeeease.
The investigator comes off as a pompous ass. Knox is an anarchist because she doesn't like being questioned by authorities? Pretty sure only the truly stupid are cooperative when they have been accused of murder.
I'm dumbfounded by the people screaming for Knox's head based upon the "damning" physical evidence. You mean they found Knox's DNA and fingerprints in her own home? Wow, what a revelation! Listen, your DNA and fingerprints cover just about every square inch of your residence, including the bedroom of anyone living with you. Skin and hair are everywhere (that's what dust is mostly made of), and don't tell me you never hung out in your roommate's room listening to music, chatting, or smoking a bowl.
Knox was acquitted. That means she is presumed innocent. End of story.
Making a Murderer
(2015–2018)
Good, Compelling Reality TV
23 June 2018
This film series is a documentary.
Doc-u-men-ta-ry : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art : being, consisting of, or contained in documents : a presentation (such as a film or novel) expressing or dealing with factual events
I don't know why people seem to believe documentaries are somehow "required" to present both sides in an unbiased manner. That's the job of journalists, and even they don't do it; the nightly news is filled with bias.
People who confuse "documentary" with "news" don't understand what documentaries are supposed to be. Read the definitions above. Nowhere does it say that all facts must be presented or the presentation should be unbiased.
The intent of documentary film is to present an argument and support that argument with information. Documentary film is the media equivalent to a structured debate or writing a persuasive essay. You include opposing arguments and facts only to the point they help make your case. End of story.
This series provides a clear narrative from a certain point of view. It tells a compelling story about a man and his encounters with law enforcement and our obviously imperfect judicial system. Some of the things we see are truly horrific. Things on both sides of the argument.
And that's really the point. We should really only be shocked by horrific things done by criminals. We shouldn't observe police and prosecutors engaged in any activity that even gives of whiff of impropriety. Yet, we do. In fact, it's observed so often, it has become almost a running joke. A very tragic joke, to be sure.
Also, it's dumbfounding how many people fundamentally misunderstand our criminal justice system. Only the prosecution must prove anything using evidence. The entire purpose of the defense is to create reasonable doubt. Avery's attorneys have no mandate to provide evidence or even substantiate their claims in any manner. Defense attorneys routinely manufacture outrageous lies to save their clients. This is done every day. It is how it is supposed to be done, if the lawyer is any good. If the defense were required to state the truth and provide evidence, 99% of trials would never happen, because the defendant would just plead guilty.
Doc-u-men-ta-ry : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art : being, consisting of, or contained in documents : a presentation (such as a film or novel) expressing or dealing with factual events
I don't know why people seem to believe documentaries are somehow "required" to present both sides in an unbiased manner. That's the job of journalists, and even they don't do it; the nightly news is filled with bias.
People who confuse "documentary" with "news" don't understand what documentaries are supposed to be. Read the definitions above. Nowhere does it say that all facts must be presented or the presentation should be unbiased.
The intent of documentary film is to present an argument and support that argument with information. Documentary film is the media equivalent to a structured debate or writing a persuasive essay. You include opposing arguments and facts only to the point they help make your case. End of story.
This series provides a clear narrative from a certain point of view. It tells a compelling story about a man and his encounters with law enforcement and our obviously imperfect judicial system. Some of the things we see are truly horrific. Things on both sides of the argument.
And that's really the point. We should really only be shocked by horrific things done by criminals. We shouldn't observe police and prosecutors engaged in any activity that even gives of whiff of impropriety. Yet, we do. In fact, it's observed so often, it has become almost a running joke. A very tragic joke, to be sure.
Also, it's dumbfounding how many people fundamentally misunderstand our criminal justice system. Only the prosecution must prove anything using evidence. The entire purpose of the defense is to create reasonable doubt. Avery's attorneys have no mandate to provide evidence or even substantiate their claims in any manner. Defense attorneys routinely manufacture outrageous lies to save their clients. This is done every day. It is how it is supposed to be done, if the lawyer is any good. If the defense were required to state the truth and provide evidence, 99% of trials would never happen, because the defendant would just plead guilty.
The Confession Tapes
(2017– )
Decent show; disappointed in my fellow viewers
23 June 2018
Doc-u-men-ta-ry
: of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art
: being, consisting of, or contained in documents
: a presentation (such as a film or novel) expressing or dealing with factual events
I don't know why people seem to believe documentaries are somehow "required" to present both sides in an unbiased manner. That's the job of journalists, and even they don't do it; the nightly news is filled with bias.
People who confuse "documentary" with "news" don't understand what documentaries are supposed to be. Read the definitions above. Nowhere does it say that all facts must be presented or the presentation should be unbiased.
The intent of documentary film is to present an argument and support that argument with information. Documentary film is the media equivalent to a structured debate or writing a persuasive essay. You include opposing arguments and facts only to the point they help make your case. End of story.
Also, it's dumbfounding how many people fundamentally misunderstand our criminal justice system. Only the prosecution must prove anything using evidence. The entire purpose of the defense is to create reasonable doubt. The defense is not required to offer evidence to support their claims. They create outrageous lies to save their client. This is done every day. It is how it is supposed to be done. If the defense were required to state the truth and provide evidence, 99% of trials would never happen, because the defendant would just plead guilty.
Grow up, people.
I don't know why people seem to believe documentaries are somehow "required" to present both sides in an unbiased manner. That's the job of journalists, and even they don't do it; the nightly news is filled with bias.
People who confuse "documentary" with "news" don't understand what documentaries are supposed to be. Read the definitions above. Nowhere does it say that all facts must be presented or the presentation should be unbiased.
The intent of documentary film is to present an argument and support that argument with information. Documentary film is the media equivalent to a structured debate or writing a persuasive essay. You include opposing arguments and facts only to the point they help make your case. End of story.
Also, it's dumbfounding how many people fundamentally misunderstand our criminal justice system. Only the prosecution must prove anything using evidence. The entire purpose of the defense is to create reasonable doubt. The defense is not required to offer evidence to support their claims. They create outrageous lies to save their client. This is done every day. It is how it is supposed to be done. If the defense were required to state the truth and provide evidence, 99% of trials would never happen, because the defendant would just plead guilty.
Grow up, people.
Tell Your Friends