Change Your Image
tristintheshyman
Reviews
Hacksaw Ridge (2016)
Good movie, but don't watch if you're sensitive to gore.
The movie overall is pretty good. The plot moves at a reasonable rate and the movie never feels like it's slowing down for any unreasonable reason. The movie gives a good explanation of his motives and you really understand why the guy was a pacifist and how difficult it was being in his shoes. The movie seems really historically accurate; there aren't too many "Hollywood" moments, where the hero gets saved at the minute, excluding the moment at the courthouse where he's getting court-marshaled. About half-way through the movie, the violence really starts to kick up a notch. The first scene in "Japan" you see a bunch of bloody dead bodies as they are brought past the soldiers. From then on, there is astonishingly disturbing and accurate war violence. Men are blown to pieces, people are shown disemboweled and with bullet holes through their bodies and without legs or with muscle showing. Trust me, this review does not do justice how gory this movie is. I implore you, once again, if you are even remotely put off by gore to avoid this movie, as it is unremitting past the one hour mark. If you can make it past the extreme gore, however, the movie is really good, well worth your time. The storytelling is excellent and the dialogue is very accurate. Overall, really good movie, solid 8.5/10.
Noah (2014)
Boring and unnecessarily long.
Honestly and legitimately the first movie I have ever walked out on.
The movie overall is terrible. Let me just say that I am a Christian and I should have liked this movie. But I just couldn't. The first half of this movie builds up to the tension of whether Noah will live or die and construct the ark before the flood comes and then the scene is shown and then the tension melts away. That should have been the ending and I wanted it to be the end. A nice, tidy little ending, they show up on land forty days later and it ends. Instead I am treated to a cheesy, melodramatic plot in the second half of the movie. Then, mercifully the movie ends 45 minutes too long.
Want me to give you one final reason you shouldn't watch this movie? The main character Noah, is nothing like in the bible. At one point in the movie he is shown throwing people off of the ark. In another, he is contemplating killing his granddaughter for the love of God.
Just don't watch this movie. It's a waste of time and money.
MythBusters (2003)
I believe the people that negatively review the show aren't seeing the point of it
I will first take apart the negative reviews of the show.
1. This show is not educational.
a. DUH!!!! It is not designed to be educational. It is designed to be a kick ass show about science, which it is.
b. I admit, there are not many scientific references in the show, but most of the myths they test are from Hollywood; and we know how much Hollywood loves science.
c. Next, the myths are based upon how many users recommend them, and if you want to blame anyone, blame the users for recommending non-scientific myths.
2. The later parts of the show were worse because they had another team testing it, and it ruined the show because there were women on it and the team are all morons.
a. This comment is sexist(and I am a man). Who says girls can't have just as must fun as boys?
b. Have you seen the girl on this show, man? She is not girly at all.
c. The original episodes were good, but the problem was they were only getting through one myth at a time,and,with the amount of myths they had being recommended,it was getting harder and harder to decide which myths to test. So they decided to employ another team to get them through the backlog of myths to test.
d. The team is not morons, they are just trying to have a good bit of fun.
3. Mythbusters myth results aren't always true, and that's the way it is.
a. They are human, they make mistakes.
b. If you write to them and ask them to redo a myth, they will.
c. Specific "example", from the review itself. The myth of your socks getting knocked off. The Mythbusters were testing the old BOXING adage,not the case in general. They were testing whether this could happen and someone could live to tell the tale. And besides, they proved it could happen (on a revisit), but you need a truck to hit you. Doing 75mph. They bust myths that based on the fact, either it is impossible for it to happen,or,the circumstances required are so out of reach,that it might as well be impossible. And being hit by a train (from the review itself), is an almost impossible circumstance.
4. The show has a good premise, but the myths they bust are stupid.
a. Please read point one, sub-points b-c.
5. They spoil movies.
a. So what? If you don't want to watch a spoiler, then watch something else.
b. If there is nothing else on, turn the TV off and go do something else.
6. The last review is so stupid I am only going to glorify it a short response.
a. If you want to read it, it is the review titled Wrong material for Finger in a Barrel.
I. What does that have to do with the show? The reviews are supposed to be about the show in general, not one specific episode.
After all of that, I am finally able to summarize all the good parts about the show:
a. The show makes science fun.
b. This show is not boring, as MOST science-based shows are.
c. This show is somewhat educational, even though it may not try or look to be.
d. This show has a broad audience appeal, and can be watched by almost anyone, regardless of age or gender.
I. For example, both my mom, and my littlest brother, age 8, enjoy the show and almost can't tear themselves away under any circumstance.
The Boys in Company C (1978)
Good Movie Overall, Kind of Confusing at Times
Overall, I thought that the movie was pretty good. The comedy in the beginning was original, witty and funny. After that things start to get serious, but not too much so after they land in Vietnam. The shooting scenes are great and realistic. The acting during these parts and throughout is actually pretty good. However, in the end, they lost me. It seems that the scene wasn't quite done right. There isn't any real tension in the first half, and the scene falls flat. During the second half, they announce another stipulation for no real reason, except it seems, to liven things up. Now we have a proper moral dilemma. Then, at the end of a game a battle starts; for no particular reason except they (Vietnam) lost. The sergeant is killed without reason and at random. A random private is killed without reason. There is a lot of random shooting. This scene does not mesh very well. It seems that the team is lacking discipline in this scene, as they cry about team members lost. This did not happen earlier in the movie. It seems as though they have turned into wimps in this scene. And to top it all off, the movie leaves us at a cliffhanger, with no real resolution.
Good Will Hunting (1997)
A good movie, worth watching
This movie is not as overrated ,and the plot as bad as some people claim. The plot is understandable, and the character is somewhat deep. The serious scenes are acted out pretty well. The end makes sense. All that being said, this movie does not live up to its "Oscar-Winning" hype. The start of the movie , first, kinda doesn't make any sense.If Will Hunting was so smart, how come it took him until now for someone to spot his jewel. It just doesn't make sense. The plot, however decent and understandable, doesn't seem to segue smoothly. For example, there is a scene where the professor and the therapist are arguing. Then, when Will comes in and they kiss and make up. Where in the hell did that come from? Finally, there is the ending, which is the worst part. It leaves us hanging, with no clues whatsoever as to the outcome of his trip to Cali. I am probably making this film out worse than it actually is. The movie itself is worth a good watch. Not the greatest, though.
K-19: The Widowmaker (2002)
A great movie, with plenty of action, unpredictability, and historical references
This movie was originally suggested to me by my father, and at first I thought it was going to be some boring, predictable film. I was presently surprised by how good this film was. The acting was impeccable, the action was unpredictable, and lasted for a very good while,and was hurled at you very quickly. The emotional scenes did their job, and the suspense kept me grabbing on my seat waiting to see what happened. That being said it is not perfect. Who the bad guy is is never really established, and there seems to be almost too much suspense and I waited for a long time for the plot to be resolved. There are scenes, which may be historically accurate, but are irrelevant to the plot itself. Finally, the action, which I mentioned earlier, does not really occur until at least 1/3 of the way through. These do not take away from the movie that much and it is definitely worth the two hours of watching it.
Jack Reacher (2012)
Not as bad as most people have made it out to be, however not as good as some of the reviews suggest
Overall, the movie was okay, not by any means the redeeming movie of Tom Cruise's career. He is simply not suited for the role. From what I have read in past reviews, Reacher is supposed to be tall, hulking, and ominous. Tom Cruise is petite, hardly built, and looks like a super model throughout the film.
Now we can get to the movie itself. First off, any action in the movie, is overshadowed by the ridiculous amount of dialogue in the film. Most of it is necessary to the storyline, I understand. However, the dialogue was boring and long-winded. They could have found a happier medium between action and dialogue.
The action (what little of it there was)seemed choreographed almost too well. The action( after the first scene) is also boring, and the scenes fall flat. Also , the dialogue was cheesy and there were so many clichés in this movie it was almost funny. I mean, for example, the criminals in the movie are portrayed as bumbling idiots with no plan. Also, on a smaller note, most wore black throughout.
The plot seemed convoluted and each "twist" in the plot seems cliché and overused and can be seen from miles out. Also,there were at least six good sized plot holes in the movie. For example (and this is minor compared to some)the scene where he steals the Chevelle, when he arrived at his suspect's house a warrant seems to have materialized in the glove box. Also, in a ridiculous coincidence, the suspect's mom, who sat on the porch, just so happened to be stoned out of her mind. She does not even check the piece of paper Tom has is even a warrant!
This movie's ending is not stellar either. The ending seems to leave us hanging, yet is very predictable and boring. And if this is an allusion to a sequel, please, for the love of God, do it better next time!
This movie is not, as some reviews say, a total waste of time, however. There are a few humorous one-liners in the movie, and there are some unintentionally funny one- liners during supposedly serious scenes. There is also a scene where he makes fun of a slutty waitress. That was probably the funniest scene in the film and probably the only one worth watching.
To summarize, this movie is not horrible, maybe a waste of time for the serious moviegoer looking for the next great thriller, and definitely not a movie worth sitting through the full 2 hours it takes to be completed.