7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Divide (2011)
Not good, but surprisingly captivating
20 June 2012
One thing upfront: The Divide is not a good movie. It lacks a solid storyline, a convincing character development and moves too fast in some and too slow in most phases of the movie. Acting is not brilliant, but bearable and in parts even good. The theme is ancient. Sartre has written it a long time ago. Many loose ends in the storyline and unanswered questions in this flick leave the viewer with a feeling of dissatisfaction. But: I was captivated nevertheless. It felt like looking at a Dali painting. Too much color, too much surrealism to really like it. But then, I had to look. There are scenes that stand out. Most are combined with the soft and intense soundtrack (the one thing I really liked about this movie). The end is just as empty as the movie itself - yet it left an impression. I sort of felt a deep sadness after watching this film and therefore I must admit it might be better than my conscious mind thinks - at least it created some sort of feeling. Most movies these days only bore me with special effects. So I'd say: Movie itself is a 3, but in the end it felt like a 7... therefore I'll give it a 5 (but would not watch it a second time)
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Buried (2010)
Strong beginning - extremely weak afterwards
2 January 2011
Buried gripped me within the first seconds. The situation was really tense. Waking up in darkness, realizing the horror you have ended up in, then some light, some hope and then... well, then Hollywood kicked in.

After the first twenty or so minutes, the script goes down the drain. Humans in desperate situtions fight for their lives with every fibre of there existence. They claw, scratch and fight for their lives, they follow every glimpse of hope, conserve and value every little resource they have to survive. In Buried the victim doesn't. There are just too many totally unrealistic things going on in Buried, the tense atmosphere created in the first part dissipated quickly and made this movie close to unbearable. There were moments when I was ready to leave the theatre - not because of the tension but because if those ridiculous things happening in the box while obviously the scriptwriter was running out of ideas. The ending just as most of the movie disappointed in every respect.

I am sad to say Buried could have been one hell of a movie... but turned out to be utterly disappointing.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good start.... and then it went down the drain
22 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers

First I need to say that I love the "Indy"-Merchandise and I am willing to accept a lot before I turn my back on it... but this movie made squirm in my seat more than once in utter disbelief of just how thoughtless the prominent makers of this movie treated their aging main character.

OK, more into detail: 1. I liked the way this movie took of. I seemed sort of credible... until the moment, when the Russians appear....

2. From this point on disappointment grew rapidly. Some facts that I just couldn't get over: - Top Secret installation, Area 51, stuffed to the roof with artifacts (also one from an earlier and better Indy movie)... is guarded by some dumb geeks who salute a walking uniform... and they were the only line of defense for all those secrets... wow, poor USA...

  • Alien Magnetism... OK, I can accept that in defiance of reality this "alien" magnetism seems to have chance its physical concept continuously... sometimes its strong, sometimes weak, sometimes it attracts gold but ignores belt buckles or knifes... quite a selective magnetism... a little too much for my taste - Indy - GODLIKE The franchise always walked a thin line between reality, fantasy and fun. Earlier installations handled that quite well. This one doesn't. Surviving a nuclear blast in a lead lined fridge... LOL... is ridiculous for three reasons: a) lead may ward of a LITTLE radiation but OK, I can accept that this wonder lead warded off more. b) Lead does melt in the heat of a candle... now wasn't there some heat involved in this explosion? OK.... but c) being thrown miles in an refrigerator and coming out of there unharmed to watch the nice mushroom cloud.... AAAAAAHHHHHH. Where they drunk when they wrote this??? A nuclear shelter, slipping into the remains of an Alien Spaceship ANYTHING would have been better than that.... Indy is cool because he is NOT a superhero (remember, he even uses a gun instead of his whip when some freaky guy wants to kill him... he is inventive, not invincible) - To keep the long story short... it went on like this. "Hi Ex-Wife, haven't seen you in a while (your whole life), let's fall in love again, OK? OK!", beyond gravity (barely slipping out of your boat when going down a waterfall), the Mack friend-foe-friend-foe... changes, he's kind of the joker in this poor script, Russians can't shoot... Indy and family do not even need to duck the bullets... and so on - The riddles Indy had too solve were so boring. Hell time has moved on since the last movie. We have seen TV-Shows that were more inventive than this...

All in all this movie was a real disappointment. Too violent to watch with kids and too stupid to watch for grown ups - it can be regarded a total waste of money.

I'll got to the store now and rent the Adventures of young Indiana Jones... and that says it all.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
300 (2006)
Utterly disappointing
25 March 2007
I have eagerly waited quite a while to see this movie... and felt like leaving the theater after about 45 minutes. Corny dialog, thin story, and just too many clichés messed up what could have been a great film. What angered me most was that I loved the trailer. I was looking for something new on the screen, a new way of presenting an war-epic. Instead I received what could well go though as a cheap "Join-the army, defend your country"-commercial. "The man next to you", "Honor, duty, liberty","Free men defend..." all that macho-blah-blah has been overused too many times in Hollywood-style war-lover flicks such as this. Worst of all, some scenes even made me laugh although they were not intended to. This is a deeply flawed movie. It never decides if it wants to be a fantasy story or a real drama about soldiers. It totally ignores the inner feelings of people in battle (there is one scene where you catch a glimpse of the thoughts of a Spartan soldier... and it is played soooo bad). The makers of this movie never made up their mind: Is this an animated comic book or a history film? Is it an war-epic movie or a fantasy-story? Shall the movie be ironic or serious? I bow to the marketing section of 300 - you guys rule!! I fell for the preview praises and the awesome trailer (where was the great music by the way?)... and now you have my money. My advice to all who haven't seen this film yet: If you love soldier dramas: Watch Black Hawk Down, you get a lot of the dialog 300 recycled and will be able to enjoy it much more. If you like fantasy: Have a Lord of the Rings-Weekend. If you love historical action: Watch Gladiator. And if you are just fond of people who are dying for their beliefs: Give Braveheart a try. 300 tried to be a little like of each of them and became an ugly homunculus. My bottom line: Don't believe the hype.
16 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Battlestar Galactica (2004–2009)
Neither as brilliant nor as bad as some say
18 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, rarely have I seen/read so many extreme comments on a show. I personally disagree with both sides. BSG has flaws, no doubt about it. Some episodes were boring, some events hardly plausible and some things just completely stupid. But you could say the same about almost every SF show that has been aired up to now... I have seen much worse/ridiculous errors in Star Trek than in BSG.

To me the show is overall enjoyable because: 1. I like the rougher style of the show. It is a nice dark change in the genre that has lately bored me with Stargate, Star Trek and other shows that were just too predictable or too political correct. In BSG you are never completely sure if everything evolves as you expect it (there ARE exceptions in some episodes, of course). I almost never was bored.

2. I do not agree with those who do not like the actors. I think most of them are doing a great job.

3. Starbuck and Tigh. Booom. Both of the undergo some real development during the show and to me it was pretty believable.

4. The effects. I love the design of the new BSG a lot (nevertheless I still think the original looked awesome, too). And: finally someone who (after Babylon 5) takes heed to the fact that objects in space could move/sound differently... :-) 5. I would never compare it to the original... and why should I? It is a totally different show.

What I really do not like: 1. Too many "human" Cylons. The overuse of the human Cylons somehow annoys me. I love the idea of the machines evolution into "men"... but they are sometimes just a bit too human and too little "robotical". The robots look great, so why not show them more frequently? 2. Apollo/Bamber. As much as I like the "new" Starbuck. The new Apollo sucks. Too many mood-changes in to little time for this pretty young mans face. The clean officer, the fat commander, the good husband, the adulterer. That's just a little too much for one character... and obviously one actor.

3. Some episodes/plots are just too lengthy. But that is also a question of personal taste.

My personal conclusion is: I enjoy this show a lot more than I enjoyed DS9, Voyager or Stargate Atlantis. It entertains me and is far from being boring. Therefore I can ignore the few flaws that are undeniably present and just keep on enjoying it until the producers decide differently.

And I still do not understand why people get so extreme over it...
5 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Dune (1984)
One of the few movies with a style of its own
14 December 2005
Seriously, I do not understand why so many people dislike this movie. I think you have to take a couple of things into account. First: It is a 2 hour movie telling a story that spans several hundred pages in a book - so certain losses are just natural. Second: Compared to three times recycled multi-million-dollar-trash like the new Star Wars Episodes, this movie offers something really unique: A style of its own. The mixture between scifi elements, medieval setting and the culture of the the Middle East is excellent and Lynch welded them together into one solid piece of art... even though he seems to disagree today. Within this setting the lack of non-stop-action or overwhelming SFX never bothered me. On the contrary, this movie gives you time to watch... and many scenes are worth a second look. Third: I loved the actors, who were just as stiff, ugly, arrogant, noble or nice like the characters they tried to represent.

In the end it is a question of taste if you like this movie or not. But for me, it will always have a place in my DVD-shelf...
37 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
eXistenZ (1999)
Avoid at all costs
19 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was so ridiculous, I was inclined to switch my TV off and ask the video-store for a refund. Unbelievable that some people compare this piece of crap to something like "The Matrix". A story with loads of loose ends, the silly idea of a second butt hole in your spine (*laugh* yeah, sometimes it can get infected, sometimes it is safe to lick or plug.... well, who cares - it is all a game, so why bother with details) and actors who disappoint all the way through this movie. My favorite turn-off was the oh-so-scary scene in the glibber-mutant-fish-farm (remember the tooth-gun?). Ugly for nothing. These "shock-effects" were so absurd, they made me laugh when I was supposed to be scared or at least disgusted.

This movie makes you sick - avoid at all costs.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

Recently Viewed