Reviews

Easy eight, maybe even eight and a half...i was captivated the entire movie and entertained almost the whole movie through... the beginning is, of course, 'the setup'...and we get to know the characters, somewhat...in a lot of ways, this part is pretty typical of many other movies...but it's necessary. That's part of what i liked about the movie...no fat. Every scene contributes. And, like others have pointed(haha) out...it's scary AND it's funny... i felt everyone was very good in their role. Alisha weir as abigail was SCARY good...no pun intended...you can tell this kid's seasoned...which is surprising, considering her age.

But everyone contributes in cooking THIS pie... if this sort of movie sounds like fun from whatever source you've learned about, then i suggest seeing it. I DEFinitely had fun watching...

I can't beLIEVE this movie only has a seven point two...it's one of the most perfect movies i've ever seen...one reviewer said, 'loved the movie...HATED the ending'.

The ending was, in my opinion, over the top AND...it had EARNED the right to BE over the top... i kept seeing this movie over and over, over the years, just to see if it held up and was as good as i thought...and each time the answer was 'yes. It is...'.

Brad pitt and anthony hopkins...wow. Do they EVER play well off of each other...and then there's the excellent supporting cast. Of course, claire forlani...a woman who would give even Death regrets of not being mortal...Jake Weber...Jeffrey Tambor...Marcia Gay Harden... granted...these characterizations are not complex...but it lends balance, not distraction, to the lead roles...a truly supPORting cast. The story is exQUIsitely written and portrayed...the director and editor knew eXACTly what to downplay and what to emphasize... damn! I LOVE this movie...a seven point TWO? What planet am i on?

It's being torn to pieces or overpraised...it's, once again, armchair movie critic time... first off, i would, if i could, give it a 7.5... was it original? Not by a long shot...predictable? Yes...but i wouldn't consider it overlong, as some have (cut down on the Red Bulls before watching and maybe you'll find the intended beat), and, personally, i enjoyed the pacing of the movie.

I think some parts of the story exhibited good writing and even the parts that i didn't consider original were well done, just the same. But, most importantly of all AND why i sit myself in an audience... i found it very entertaining...GREAT popcorn movie... dev comes out punching and hopefully will do better as he goes along...

People really have a problem with this story?

I've never been in a war...in FACT, i'm a retired nurse and paramedic... but i know what war is all about...and once someone wages it against people i care about, there ARE no rules... threaten MILLIONS?

What a JOKE this movie is...if i knew the best/ most effective torture techniques, i'd use them...inCLUding finding the perpertrator's family and torturing THEM...i bet THAT would be an effective technique... politeness...civility...any synonym for these words has no place in this conversation...and it's about the magnitude of potential damage...and, as i've told soooo many people over the course of my, now long, life...context is God...it dictates the appropriate reaction... morals are...a luxury...they have no place in war. The object of war is to win...the US dropped bombs on Japan. Atomic weapons. It wasn't necessary according to MANY authorities in the know. But it was done to send a message. 'start a war and this could be you'.

And i'm not saying, 'might is right'...just in case there are some might misinterpret what i AM saying here...not at ALL... i'm saying, if you're going to threaten millions of people's lives, LITerally, be prepared for the consequences you've set in motion.

It's unfair that a)it only has a rating of seven point two and b) people who didn't see it when it first came out get to rate it...it loses its context and this shows in at LEAST some of the few reviews i've looked at... although...the ones that rated it 'PROPerly' understand this... this movie is the one that inspired George Romero to make 'night of the living dead', pretty much the granddaddy of zombie movies...he said so in an interview i read...which was very serendipitous because when i first SAW 'night of the living dead' it reminded me of 'carnival of souls'...i guess it somehow got communicated... in any case, 'carnival of souls' has an aMAzing amount of atmosphere...and is, as some have said, ahead of its time...but not something that, necessarily, wore well...considering the budget and tech that they had to work with back then...but, as an eleven year old first seeing this movie...i had to change my pants afterwards...the greatest part was that i got to see it fairly often in the years that followed...including at some repertory theaters along the way that played it as a double feature WITH NOTLD... they knew what they were doing, obviously...maybe i wasn't the only person that read the interview... in any case...i'm not recommending that you see this movie unLESS you're interested in the genre's history...but i loved it when i was younger... had to come back to mention that...years later, while driving cross country, i came across the pavilion where it was filmed...outside of salt lake city...at first, when i passed it by, i thought...'naaaaah... CAN'T be...'. But i turned around and went back to have another look...the entrance gate was locked but i went to the fence and it WAS the place...spooked me pale...

Along with the current rating...which i didn't want to bring down with an eight... i'm really glad that the consensus indicates that most people REALly enjoyed this movie... i felt it was a BIT overlong but still EXCellent... the writing was, of course, at the root of this excellence... but the characterizations were not only extremely balanced, but inCREdibly acted out...jake gyllenhaal, with that twitchy affectation, was brilliant. Hugh jackman, although seemingly simple in his righteous rage, was still a somewhat complex portrayal of a man lost between his sense of duty and his sense of humanity...paul dano. WOW! A lot pivoted on his portrayal of this character...SO well handled...which i guess is to say that the movie owed a LOT to its director, as well... and then there was the supPORting cast...terrence howard, viola davis, maria bello and, of course, melissa leo...all holding it together from the outer ring... all in all a FINE example of great storytelling.

And what a fanTAStic ending... thanks for all of this...the LEAST that you all deserve, considering how little attention i remember this movie receiving...

Good...not GREAT...although certain aspects of it ARE great...the cinematography, for one...kirsten dunst for another...she just might get a best actress nomination for this role... it's going to be hard to review this without some spoilers but i intend to do my best... the movie felt a bit lacking, BUT...i feel that, in the way that it IS lacking, is what made it a good movie in another way...it simply tells a good story...visually, very well depicted...it was well balanced...not 'over the top' in any given direction...i wasn't crazy about what happens at the end but that's just me...i'm not saying the ending was bad... i think it's worth seeing, for what THAT's worth...the people here who have torn it down are the usual people who have nothing better to do with their frustrating lives...the movie DOES deliver...i think some people will just want more 'over the top' moments... oh. And i don't know WHY nick offerman got top billing here... there were other characters MUCH more worthy...a few, in fact...

A) there's nothing wrong with it b) it CERtainly deserves better than what the consensus rating is it's not entertaining, i'll give people that...and yes, it's based on and still FEELS(and, spatially, plays out) like a play...and YES, it IS a piece for denzel to exhibit his acting chops... as IF any of this is 'WRONG'???? No. Sorry...the rating says more about the raters than what's being rated. But yeah, folks...it's NOT 'the equalizer'. Sorry, i'm not.

Or maybe many of the reviewers had a hard time with the black cast. That's a possibility i'd rather not entertain, though... i LOVE that all of these actors got a chance to show just how talented they are... maybe the secret is, if you're watching it at home, just watch it in pieces...it IS hard to swallow all in one sitting...

SUCH a surPRISE...that the featured review glows AND...is written by a first time reviewer... i thinks i smell something rotten in Totten...Ham, that is... i REALly enjoyed the pilot of this series...i thought it showed promise...that it would be entertaining...and, in parts, it WAS...i think some of the acting is VERY good...and the fight scenes were fun. Like the one towards the beginning of the pilot...but, after the first episode, it seemed to go downhill all too quickly from there.

Between the adolescent humor and the predictability of outcomes i just couldn't wait till the season was over to delete it...i kept HOping that it would improve. But it never did.

Then again, i could see that it might be appreciated by those under 15 or so...not everything is made for me, after all... and it'll be a pleasure, when i finish writing this, to give a thumbs down/dislike to that featured reviewer...are people PAID to do that sort of thing?

Did this EVER get an eight point four rating??? And why is it that when something is GOOD the rating is so low?

I LOVED the first episode of this series...but it seems to have gone steadily downhill since then...i WANT to like it, but...there's been this dumbing down tendency, it seems to me... initially i thought the banter between devereux and nell was fun and clever...but his character keeps getting into more and more ridiculous situations... maybe it's just that adolescent humor hasn't appealed to me since i was an adolescent?

And it's a real SHAME because i feel that this show has some pretty good things going for it... i could accept the fairy...i guess there had to be SOME explanation for Nell's capabilities, since she wasn't born on a planet with a sun producing a MUCH higher gravity... and what happens to Nell in the last scene in this episode....don't the writers know what 'too much' is?

It's a shame that the rating system doesn't progress in .5 gradations, but that's ok...it just gives me this opportunity to make sure i have the number of required characters more easily.

Definitely good movie...especially since i learned a lot about stuff i'd only heard of while growing up...but i was too young for it to 'take'. I can't say what, specifically, because that would be a spoiler.

Still...this movie has a LOT going for it...good action and acting... good direction, editing and cinematography AND...it's based on an actual event...enough is touched upon for us to realize that, again, there's more going on 'behind the scenes'/what the public is told. Per usual...in any case...definitely recommended if the general description seems attractive...

Read some of the reviews on the way over here...i think it was the 'lead review', or whatever the first one is called, that said that the middle was weakened by it being funny...and he couldn't figure out if it was intentional or not...it seemed to me this movie was just what it wanted to be...in other words, the writer/directors knew what they were doing... it's a roller coaster ride, for sure...and i thought it was fun. Worthwhile....even if i wasn't crazy about the ending...but getting there was worth the ride. I thought the beginning was strong... for me it lagged a bit in the middle...but, overall, i think it was worth seeing.

Halfway through...too much adolescent type humor for me. But i'm glad i DIDn't because i enjoyed the second half...and what's with all the criticisms about the CGI? I just sat back and whatever they decided to do with that layer of the film, they did...it wasn't distracting, as some said, in any way. Maybe the people for whom it WAS should put together their OWN films, complete with their concept/s of what the CGI should be like... i agree with those that said the film was 'uneven'. And i'd care to throw in that it was maybe, unnecessarily, longer than it could've been and a bit of editing might have made it feel like a tighter picture. I DID enjoy the second half, for what that's worth.

And this movie was pretty damn GOOD!

FIRST off, yeah! The ACTing by Sean Patrick Flannery was GREAT! I wasn't even ten minutes in and HAD to look up 'who IS this guy???' and i'm betting that this role will open a door for him, even though he's been around for a while...it was on the level, in my opinion, of Anthony Hopkins' performance as Hannibal Lecter. I'm not saying this guy is as good an actor, of course. Especially since i haven't seen any of his other films...and Hopkins has proven he's remarkably diverse...one of the best actors of the last 60 years, at least...but given the two roles, i'd say Flannery handled THIS one as well as Hopkins did Lecter. I doubt many of the people here would've stuck around as long, watching this movie, if this wasn't true... i thought it would've served the role of the psychiatrist if the actor wasn't as pretty as the one who played it...he didn't do a bad job of it...it's just that it would've proven more somber if he had been more ordinary looking...older, as well...to lend some more gravity to his smugness. It's easy for young people to be smug. Part of the narcissism of youth. Part of the denial of the incredible insecurity young people SHOULD feel not knowing much about life...so i think the casting could've been better with an older, gruff looking actor.

I felt the movie was at its best when it was just the two of them...the occurrences with just the two of them were not novel...been done many times...pretty much same story...but the intensity and pacing is riveting...but whenever the warden was in a scene it was made much more 'ordinary'. Cliched. I think it was partly his poorly written dialogue but, again, it was also his 'look'...he IS the keeper of a different hell. And he didn't seem darkly affected. So there's that... but the movie, overall, is effective...and i think there's a definite possibility of a sequel...i hope that they up the execution of the story, though. So to speak... ; - ) in any case, i was well entertained, overall, when i initially thought i'd turn it off after, at MOST, 15 minutes. Didn't happen.

So no...the high marks are not fakes. Not, like many, many high mark reviews on questionable movies, first time reviewers... we all saw it and were entertained...and it's not my 'usual fare'. But it was fare enough...

I thought some of the reviews that i read here were very accurate in what they said. That it was 'typical, decent television'. Engaging and yet predictable where i wouldn't want it to be. But i've watched lots and lots of movies and television series in my life. One might think of this as an updated/moder '24', only, thank the gods, shorter. Ten episodes instead of however many that show was(24?). I think the most well written AND performed part was that of Diane Farr/Hong Chau. She excelled in the role. The acting wasn't the weak link in this series, although some DID come across like tv actors...but, imo, especially in the last episodes, were quite a few poorly thought out scenes. Improbable...or 'well, if they do THAT, what about...'. Probably easy to miss for a lot of people but, obviously from some of the reviews, not all...in any case, it was ok if you want something well paced and exciting...

That the reviews might reflect that this 'chapter' was better than the ones before that i'd watch for...maybe a half hour before either walking out of the theater(one of the benefits of having a monthly subscription to a theater chain. I don't have to sit through a bad movie because i paid for it) or...turning it off. And the reviews were right. I lasted almost forty minutes for this one. I COULD say, 'maybe it's because i'm old', that THAT's why an empty movie like this franchise churns out doesn't appeal to me...and many rave reviewers here wrote about 'the action...the action...the action'. But, as far as I'M concerned, even THAT was ridiculous....unless Wick lives on a lead diet, because in the last scene i watched, where he's on his way out of the Osaka Continental, someone missed him at close range(like 2 feet away, tops?) with an automatic rifle spitting out who KNOWS how many rounds a second? Please. With all the money that's pumped into a movie like this, they SHOULD be able to do better. Yes. The locations were beautifully filmed, hence the two stars. But i really question the mentality of anyone who would want to see this ridiculous excuse for a 'GREAT...the BEST...the absolute BEST' action adventure...by the way...did you like that imitation?

Really well, since i studied it in yeshiva for eight years in hebrew, i know that this movie was not always true to 'scripture'. What's funny is that when is a movie ever the same as a book? And why SHOULD it be? Personally, i thought this was a VERY entertaining piece of storytelling, even though it left out some crucial parts after Israel crossed the Red Sea...like what happened when Moses comes down from Sinai and discovers the nation of Israel worshipping the golden calf...funny how they began doing that as he was going UP the mountain. I don't understand why Ridley/the writers chose to do that. But, truth is, i don't really care...i know that much, if not most, of 'the Gospels' aren't true. So why get upset at, yet, aNOTHer re-vision. But i WAS looking forward to Moses hurling the tablets at the calf. Oh well. And, for those of you who didn't know...the tablets were ground up and given to the Israelites in a drink...those who worshipped the calf died. The rest died while walking around the desert for 40 years...that whole generation. None of that, though, in this version. Still...i was well entertained by this telling...and i'm REAL glad it didn't lose money. A lot of people praised Bale for his acting...but i think EVERYone turned in a good performance...some reviewers said it 'dragged' and that makes me wonder if we actually watched the same movie...but, then again, asking ANYone of the Red Bull generation to sit for two and a half hours and them being able to would seem like a modern day miracle.

I'm surprised at the low rating of this film. Maybe i shouldn't be, though, since it IS, largely, an intellectual exercise...i definitely enjoyed looking at some of the reviews here. It was great to see a decent number of people having enjoyed the film... many said it was about artificial intelligence...but i felt it was more about the nature of consciousness, both artificial and human. I liked that one of the reviewers said that it was, essentially, a play. I, very much, agree...a play in three acts. Very few characters and locations. The movie takes concentration to process(haha) what's being said. So i wouldn't advise seeing it when you're tired...i thought the acting (or directing of their acting) of one of the characters was weak. In some ways i think i understand WHY they were the way they were, but...i feel it was overdone.

So. Not a PERfect film but definitely thought provoking and insightful, in my opinion. Recommended if what i said here seems interesting.

Was not, in any way, lacking...surprisingly good dialogue...very good story. I usually shy away from 'modern day American warfare' movies for political reasons...this movie was surPRIsingly easy to watch, in this respect...it didn't present any sort of 'hoo RA' mentality...it was mostly about comraderie, in my opinion, although there were PLENty of (bloody) combat interactions. None of them felt gratuitous. All contributed to where the story was headed. It was also VERY well paced...i was never either bored OR overstimulated. Either of which can be a big problem. All the acting performances were top notch. AND, even though it was shot in Spain, not ONCE did it not seem like Afghanistan when the story was taking place there...if this sort of movie usually appeals to you i would HIGHly recommend it.

Decent story but...there's just not enough meat...even some of the backstories are 'bareboned'. Everything is 'matter of fact'. I just finished watching it and i don't really want to try to think about what might have made it better...maybe they didn't have a big budget and did what they could with what they had...and it's not like they did a BAD job...but once it gets under way, it's somewhat predictable except for how it will turn out...and i'm not about to reveal that here. I hate spoilers. People, in many of the reviews, are crediting bautista for his great acting. I disagree...he played his part just fine, but... that's it. The person who i thought did a GREAT acting job was the kid...do i recommend the movie? Not really. Maybe if you have nothing else to watch and an hour and a half to kill...otherwise, find something else in the same genre/s...whatever they are...

Despite what some of the reviewers say...yes. There are some very insightful things that are addressed in the story. But it doesn't pay off in the end, in my opinion. It's a bit confused, i think...part of it a commentary on child bearing/rearing and part of it a horror story. But i don't feel the two blended well...maybe in two or three rewrites, but it felt like it was still a work in progress and found itself needing an ending which wasn't at all satisfying. Just a 'let's do this and get it over with' type last act...the first two acts were enjoyable, though. And endings are difficult. But important.

Because this movie certainly deserved it...i thought i would come here and there would be the usual negative reviews tearing down something actually worth seeing for i don't know WHAT reasons. So i was pleasantly surprised to see all the eights and nines...it's a good movie.

Multilayered. Complex, but not too...it's easy to follow...and though it's been done before, what hasn't?

It works on every level that a movie like this should...the pacing is excellent...i bet you don't look at your watch ONCE while it's playing. And the action is well interspersed with the story lines...it doesn't TOtally depend on it.

Definitely recommended if it sounds at all interesting.

Forgot to mention a few things. Someone said, in French, that this guy is the 'new Jean Reno'. I'm sure he's referring to 'Leon...the Professional'. I love Reno...but the guy in this movie is MUCH more believable...so yes. I agree... AND...it's funny that it's a French movie, considering the 'political' angle...and yes, i know...France isn't ALL that much different than the US...but i would've, MUCH more, expected that part of the plot to be American. I can't say more without it being a spoiler, so i'll just leave it at this...

And everyone who had anything to do with this movie. Zach braff, for those of you who didn't notice, is the writer/director of this story. Not an EASY story. And not a superhero or car chase or shootout throughout. I hope that doesn't count as a spoiler... usually i wind up saying that i rated something higher because the overall rating wasn't what it should be, given the reviewers on this site...but THIS time i rated it what i really believed it deserved...i consider this to be one of the FEW 'perfect' movies. And everyone in it or that had anything to do with it deserves praise... some might even be nominated for awards...like florence pugh who was outSTANDing as the lead character. And, of course, morgan freeman, who ALways turns in an great performance...i think i understand why it was so lowly rated but, if i said it here, i'm pretty sure imdb wouldn't print this. And i want to encourage people to see this movie...times are hard in america right now...harder than i remember in my 72 years of life...and it doesn't look like it's going to get BETter...so consider this movie therapy. An outlet for the sorrow and pain you might be feeling... even if you're not in America...i could use a few more like these...thank you Zach Braff...i've seen thousands of movies...few compare to this one...tight and seamless...hitting on all eight. And getting me where i needed to go...

Have we seen people here saying, 'if i could've given this 0 stars, i would have'? Well...if i could have given this 12 stars i would have. Do NOT deprive yourself of this excellent series because of the know nothings who criticized it. They're, at most, kids. Or people who can't handle strong emotions or violence. This production offers the full spectrum of storytelling and was nothing less than superb in any of the hues that make up this spectrum. Acting, cinematography, costumes, pacing...and, most importantly, writing. If you don't believe this, read the other reviews that praise it. I can't wait for season 2.

'ignore the white noise'...'when the amphetamines kick in and you start to write a screenplay'...so cute...so flat minded...awwwww... whatsamatter children? Can't handle a little non-linearity? I'm writing this on April 14th, 2023. You want to see the relevance? Look at the news around this time period and then go back to the movie and go to the 33 minute mark and watch it again...if you actually made it THAT far before jumping over to your keyboards to show everyone how cute you are...the day you geniuses write anything CLOSE to as inTENtionally mind boggling as either DeLillo's book or Baumbach's screenplay, will be the day you have something worth hearing...and that's only the beginning of my criticism of your criticisms...but my characterless limit has been met. You all are sooo wearisome.