Reviews

Pretty amusing flick involving mystery and some emotional twist. I noticed some great directing, camera work and very good acting in it. Casting was excellent, great selection. What I also found interesting is a topic of this drama and that are German retributions for guerilla actions in occupied Europe. Severity and amount of those crimes are diminished in this movie because we are talking about millions of civilians shot and not hundred thousands like director suggests at the end. This movie brings shooting of the Italian civilians in ratio 10 for 1 which means ten Italian civilians for one German soldier killed by the partisans while in my country was 100:1. So only in my country hundreds of thousands were killed in those retributions and have to say that Serbia is a pretty small country so you've got a picture (imagine the situation in Poland and USSR). I live by one of the spots were Germans were shooting those civilians. Name of that place is Jajinci (you can google it) and only here 80.000 people were shot. And there are a lot of spots like that in today Serbia and all the way around. In city of Kragujevac Germans couldn't gather enough civilians to shoot for the retaliation that day so they emptied the schools and shot the kids. They were shooting for three days on that October of 1941 as they couldn't kill them all in one day.

Ok, lets make it straight - without these three lead roles this movie would be less than mediocre. Three old guys robbing a bank - and that's about it. And of course, Depeche Mode. Must admit it took me a while to get where is the soundtrack coming from - love the music alteration. It was kind of strange to see the heroes of my time so old all together ... but the time didn't affect their acting, on contrary. So if you want to see this movie - give it a shot. You'll see three great performers doing a great job together.

The problem I've got with indie and low budget movies is editing, most of the times. Sometimes they include good scenario, good acting and even success on good part of directing but most of the times I daresay - editing fails. This movie shows that low budget movie editing can be very good and even much better than in most of the blockbusters. Actually, this movie with fairly unknown film names doesn't fail in any way whatsoever. It delivers fast pace action followed by pretty well depicted drama. Actors are pretty convincing, scenario is clever and involving and directing is very good at least. I loved this movie and would highly recommend it. It's a proof that intelligence beets both money and gore. Would love to see more of this talented director.

The movie director has seen Halloween for sure and was pretty inspired but didn't really know how to express that. This is why he made such a dull and ridiculous film. It was an amateur attempt to make a fiction movie. Malevolence 3: Killer is full of bad acting, bad editing and pretty long scenes that look like a first movie making task at film-making school. If you are a horror fan, don't waste your time on this pile of rubbish.

I would say this was a great movie but I am not sure if that was a good word for it. It kept me nailed to the screen, involved and attached emotionally but not amused cause I felt anger and repulsion Back in the time I read Hitler's books 'My new order' and parts of 'Mein Kampf'. I wanted to know what was the motive of such a person to do things he did to the other people. And then I noticed one part of the first book mentioned where he said: 'National-socialism is a very hard thing to establish in practice. It's everything but easy but it's feasible. USA is a country that is a living proof of that. It is a place where National-socialism has been established in its full extent. That's why USA is a very dangerous opponent. Racism working in practice as an extension to slavery, which means white people taking all the vital positions in society justifying so-called democracy by superficial freedom of the other races, wisely exterminated non-white races, experiments on living people, legal persecution of homosexuals etc.' In further text Hitler adores and fears USA. I think he would be thrilled by the fact that America didn't change long time after the war. In this movie actors are so brilliant that they depict and present this in a way that the one couldn't imagine. I grew up in a society where everyone could marry everyone and so were my grandfathers. As a matter a fact, it was kind of trendy to marry a person of another race so before I came to the USA I couldn't imagine such a madness. If I can compare what I saw ten years ago when I was living there and what I saw in this movie, I would say that not much changed except greater hypocrisy everywhere. This 'superficial' freedoms are still 'superficial' but I haven't seen waiters other than white working in Santa Monica CA and I don't think they are in Manhattan NY either. Companies I worked for seldom have any high positioned managers but white and even the public buses that have no more glass walls or bars in the middle are still dividing the races. It seems that black people don't want to share space with the white in the front of the bus (and you can't blame them for that) while white are too scared to go back. So even after the wall there is a huge wall. Of course, instead of breaking these walls the USA is pointing fingers in other directions to invent or make up the racism stories elsewhere. I have no more patience to watch movies about WWII cause I can't stand injustice on the mass scale but if you can and wanna be nailed to the screen, then watch this movie that you won't forget easily.

I've seen a lot of negative reactions to this movie so just wanted to give my own opinion in contrast to that. Even though a small production movie, this is an entertaining flick with both decent acting and directing. I liked the way director played with mystery colors until the end but also the way he presented the social surroundings in the background as it's pretty realistic and much better than in most of the big production movies. Just before this movie I'd seen a new Hollywood flick of similar genre with really big names in it and it wasn't as half as entertaining as this one. Also managed to find out that this is the first feature movie of director Scooter Corkle and I must say I am pretty impressed. Keep on working Mr. Corkle, you are a very talented movie maker and don't mind the critics neither cause some of these can be really useful. I believe that as a movie buff but also as someone who studied movie-making. And information for all other viewers, I am not related to this movie in anyway as I am European living in Europe so this is really my opinion.

Common Folks, this is not fair. I haven 't commented on movies here for a pretty long time but gotta say you are being too strict with this movie regarding this four and something rate on IMDb as well as your critiques&comments. First of all, there are much worse movies of that genre having rate over six. Then, lets see what is wrong with this movie? I haven't seen it dull, have you? It has a good pace, some pretty clever directing and scenario and is involving enough. Plot is fine, I haven't had any problems to watch the movie until the end. OK, its pretty much a cliché but hey, what Hollywood movies are not cliché these days - including the blockbusters? Yes, its true that this movie is facing some serious problems with the bad acting but do you guys know how difficult is to collect money for a movie? Do you know how difficult is to make a movie? I know that just partly, must admit, I am not the smart guy. But I know enough to pay the respect to the person who directed this movie, written a scenario and played a main role and did all these things very well. Again, there are some actors I would never call back on the stage but please be advised that not everyone can engage Robert De Niro and Anthony Hopkins in their movie. If you're able to read my comment Guisela, you did a good job, keep on working.

It's funny but I am not sure what is 7.4 about this film? Is that Keanu Reeves? Well, this guy may know how to act but he doesn't show that in this movie. How about the plot? What is the plot? You killed my dog and stole my car and now you want to apologize? Common man, you can't apologize I got to kill you and few thousand people around you cause I can't make a movie otherwise. And a way he kills? Man, I think every single video game maker would envy this director. Oh, I must admit that this movie fulfills the Hollywood mandatory condition where Russians are the bad guys. Has anyone noticed John's replies in this movie to most of the questions asked? He just repeats what he heard and sounds like Michael Armstrong in the 'Hot Fuzz'. All in all, I would recommend this movie if you are still with sega-mega drive but if you have ever played a game called counter-strike, then you might consider this movie boring. For all other viewers, just don't bother.

This film contains two faces. One represents good filmmaking and pretty good war drama depicting, some drama realism of the war that we haven't seen in the US movies for a very long time. In that way, this is one of the best war movies that Hollywood has ever produced, from my point of view. The war atmosphere, social profile of the soldiers in the US army and their dialogs are among the best I have ever seen regarding the American movies. We have all been used to watch the American soldiers in the US movies as the charming knights in the shining armour but in this movie it was far from that and much closer to reality. Acting was very good. I also think that the director has seen the Apocalypse Now and the Iron Cross but also Russian 9-th Rota, and utilized everything he liked from them.

However, the other face of this film is an irritating low sense for technical and strategical military reality of WWII:

Battle scenes are more suitable for a fairy tale than for a war movie: Germans in an AT ambush are being ambushed by the four Sherman tanks, kind a ridiculous. Tiger tank which was a heavy tank with a much longer shooting range than the medium Sherman tank was never running towards the incoming tank group but rather shooting from a distance (or retreat if necessary) where the enemy tanks couldn't have reached it which was its main advantage. Its like you're holding a gun and you see four guys with knives running after you and instead of shooting at them while retreating, you start running at them, like – now I'm going to smash your had with this gun! Above all, lets mention that Germans put their best men to be the tiger tank crew so it was almost impossible to destroy that tank from the ground. This is why the US Air force was sent after tigers in most of the cases - US dive bombers dropping huge bombs on the tiger turrets were the only real weapon against these tanks, cause even if you ambushed them with medium tanks, you couldn't approach them as they were always escorted with light or medium tanks.

Killing 300 SS soldiers with a non-mobile Sherman tank is more for some Disney Cartoon (I won't go into the details where SS soldiers are aiming a tank with a panzer-Faust from the 3 meter distance even though that weapon could shoot from a range from 30 to 150 meters. It's like you approach to 30 feet range to shoot an enemy with a sniper rifle . And one Molotov cocktail ends the tank that can't move in a jiffy.

Also, a tank lieutenant that is jumping on a highly decorated SS officer on a horse and killing him without problem is more suitable for some John Wayne movie and has nothing to do with WWII reality.

There is an idea that the group is experienced Africa corp unit but you got to now then that they were fighting the more experienced and incomparably more trained, armed and successful German troops here. Also, few scenes where Germans beg for life which is more than ridiculous cause Germans were fanatics and such thing didn't happen with their POW. Don't forget, Germany was fighting USSR and the US at the same time and still was so hard to break their spine.

Sorry folks, but this serials ask for a thorough comment. Have you ever seen the good old Hollywood 1943 flick 'Chetnicks the fighting guerrilla'? Thats the only Hollywood movie made on Serbian guerrilla in WWII. The best scenes involve the deadly clashes between Chetniks and Germans in the treacherous mountain regions of Yugoslavia. Anna Sten, Sam Goldwyn's 1930s "answer" to Greta Garbo, co-stars as Mihailovitch's self-sacrificing spouse. Initially, some dismissed this movie because of the mistaken belief that the Chetniks collaborated with the Nazis during WWII, but as Michael Lees unequivocally proves in his book {-The Rape of Serbia}, this was actually a myth fed to Churchill by the Communist partisans of Josip Broz Tito, to convince the British prime minister to shift Allied aid away from the Chetniks. The events in this film are thus factual. This is what modern US history says. However, it wasn't that simple.

While the Time Magazine in 1942 has written 'Mihailovic - Yugoslavias Unconquered' and the rest of the US media call Chetnick leader Draza Mihailovic 'Hitler's Headache No1', the London Times headlines were saying 'David hitting the Goliath', 'Chetnics - the only free flame in occupied Europe' etc ...

Was Mr. Winston Churchill so easily deceased by the unknown communists like Tito, Pijade and Kardelj who were mostly ex cons from Sremska Mitrovica penitentiary and Lepoglava prison? The answer is - NO. Actually, truth is that Draza Mihailovic at one point said his NO to Churchill and that was his fatal mistake.

Namely, Serbian King who was in exile in London was pressured by England to push Serbian guerrilla in occupied Serbia to fight Germans. After severe losses in men against the Serbs Germans announced that 100 Serbian civilians will be shot for just one killed German soldier. Since Draza Mihajlovic was a Serb he said 'Guerilla is to protect the Serbian civilians, not to exterminate them. This is what Croat ustase and Germans are for.' So he opposed Churchill. Since Churchill never gave up the idea of the invasion at the Adriatic sea until the last moment, he wanted the severe military actions against Germans on the Balkans and not only diversions and sabotages. And there was no one else except Serbs to perform them.

Now, when Draza wasn't loyal to him any more but to Serbian people, he started looking for help elsewhere and found it with the communists. Draza said we gonna blow up the bridges and railways, trains and trucks, but won't kill Germans and cause the heavy retributions against Serbian women and children. Most of them where already killed in Nacistic State of Croatia so hardly anyone would remain.

The communists led by the unknown foreigner Tito where already involved in some small guerrilla actions to overthrown the existing system and establish communism. The commies used the chaos of war as a good background for that. Tito was not a Serb and he didn't care how many Serbian civilians will die for his cause. Since that Draza Mihailovic was an intelligence service colonel of Royal Yugoslav Army, he represented the system and Tito saw him as an enemy. This is why commies attacked Chetnics many times behind their back when Chetnicks were fighting Germans.

At the end of the war thanks to W.Churchill, Chetnics where very badly equipped while communist partisans were fully armed and fed by English and some Soviet help as well. Soviets secretly supported Tito for another reason - he was a communist too while officially they were supporting chetnics. During the war Chethicks also saved 500 US airmen in the operation Halyard assisted by American OSS. That was the greatest operation behind the enemy lines in the US history. At the end of the war Chetnics will be finally betrayed by their Anglo-Saxon Allies and left to Tito's mercy. Since he had no mercy, he executed Draza Mihailovic and his high ranked officers and many Chetnicks as well. 500 American Airmen will protest in front of the White House during that Stalinist trial but without any result since Truman, Churchill and Roosevelt had made a deal before that. Serbia will stay in the communistic dark for a half of the century thanks to her treacherous Allies.

In that dark, commies will educate new Serbian generations that Chetnicks were traitors, fascists and quislings. The consequences are visible even today when many Serbs cannot except the truth about Chetnicks - that they were not what commies were teaching us. This national tragedy has been led by current Serbian government whose media still plays pro-commie propaganda like Tito is still alive. Before this serial, the director Rados Bajic was announced as a person who want to show another way of looking to the Chetnics subject and from my point of view he did: He didn't show the Chetnics like blood thirsty killers as commies did, but even worse - he portrayed them as the bunch of incapable rascals. Its not true that this serials where showing nothing: they have shown that chetniks were walking around, eating, drinking, raping and slaughtering civilians. Draza Mihailovic who was a hero of the free world of that time and the most loved Serb among the Serbs of the war period was shown as a plane retard while commies who where allies of Hitler until July of 1941 where shown as German haters. Lets not mention the art quality of the serial that was edited just like in some freshman filmmaking class and graded C-.

All in all, very very bad days for Serbia in general.

Entertaining little movie. I can't come to any major complain in general. It was watchable and involving, had a very good pace and a convincing role of the lead criminal. Acting was fine. I also found the movie somehow natural and charming. I think that the director Tze Chun is a gifted filmmaker. My impression is that this movie wasn't made with some great budget, yet it is much more interesting than many blockbusters of the same genre, if you ask me. I also believe that Cold Comes the Night is a bit underrated on IMDb. So I can say I recommend this movie. My message to director would be - pretty nice work, keep on working!

Finally a solid war movie came out of Hollywood after a while. It is very watchable and tense all the time. Pretty well story telling, involving and convincing. Good acting. There are some minor downsides but only one real problem with this movie, if you ask me. I understand that 'Lone Survivor' has been made after the real events. However, it is still a feature movie, so it needs a well standing plot logics. I do appreciate the artistic freedom of the director as well as following the facts, but I can't really accept the horse and the dove standing on the same branch. It makes at least one big hole in the movie plot. This is why I can't accept that everything over here happened because four members of the elite special forces deep behind enemy lines let the imprisoned Al Kaida go only for the fact that they were unarmed or too young/old to be shot but not to shoot. I can even accept that these are the facts - but in that case I am sure that we needed the additional explanation to understand the whole picture, not just few isolated facts. And this is what makes these facts very weak: The prisoners where not armed and not part of their mission so they didn't want to kill them. I am not sure about you but I do find this logical until some point. But not the part where they don't want to tie them up. 1. Cause they might freeze to death. They were tough locals living in the place closer to stone age than a/c or gas heating condos, I doubt they would freeze over just one night. 2. They would be eaten by the wolves. 99% of people killed by the wolves are coming from the Hollywood movies. In reality, wolves are afraid of people and are avoiding them. In my opinion, chances of wolves attacking people even if tide up are low. 3. Most important, we talk about the indigenous people, people who know the area as their pocket and are moving like cougars on these stones. Don't you think that someone from the village would notice they disappeared and go after them, if they just left them there? And then, there are their goats all around to notice them easier if that is necessary at all since they were all the time around a mile or two from the village so there were great chances that they would have been found quickly while the seals would have enough time to boogie. Like this, movie scenario suggests that this story happened because four navy seals decided to play good Samaritans and even more than that to make themselves absolutely sure that nothing bad will happen to their Al Kaida prisoners or at least potential Al Kaida company. Once again, I think that movie is still entertaining if we can call it that way since it seems that lot of people died there for real.

This is the way you develop a good horror movie if you decide to make one. I would appreciate if the other horror movie filmmakers in the US see this movie and learn something. Good horror movie camera work, very good character development and excellent soundtrack! I dare to say that this is finally one solid horror movie coming out from Hollywood film factory after awhile. However, the movie still faces some problems. The greatest once are deep holes in scenario. I am not sure how to put it without using spoilers, so lets try this way: if you know that the killer is in your house you are not walking around like in the supermarket. If you just find a dead body in one of your bedrooms and you don't leave that place along with everyone else but staying in like - maybe the killer is going to come back and kill me as well, then you have a great gap in your story, I think. What bother's me about this movie is weak slasher approach of the murders in some of the crucial scenes. The director emphasized the 80's style flying knife and ax to the scull rather than just using the moment of surprise or tent dramatic phases. I believe that what scare people is what they don't see , more than what they see. I reckon that blood and broken sculls are more gross but not scary. All in all, it was an enjoyable movie. I would recommend to mister director to keep up the good work and become even better the next time.

Without Danzel Washington this movie would be just a boring and kind a confusing work of art. From my point of view there are just few actors the most in all Hollywood that could engage you that much in one sterile action pattern movie as much as Denzel can. He was a very convincing CIA operative and a very convincing human character suggested. Everything else was average or below average. I truly think that director could have developed the intelligent drama engagement instead of insisting on so much action, sometimes unnecessary long. Endless car chases as well as cat and mouse games are followed by neglected acting talent of the main roles. Some great acting names are just pop-ups and passers-by in this movie.

I am not sure why is this movie having so low grade. From my point of view it is pretty much underrated. The 'thriller' genre posted over here might be misleading considering the fact that this is more drama than a thriller. No big thrills, no tones of blood but pretty good drama development. Also pretty good casting except maybe for the main role which doesn't mean that the guy doesn't act well, just that he is not really made for the character he played. Good acting and pretty good directing. The director pretty much looks like someone who hasn't made many movies but is talented and understands very well the concept of the movie development generally speaking. I love the atypical way of developing the characters in his movie where he uses face mimics, glances and silence to express the nature of the dramatic situation rather than bunch of unnecessary words. So, I recommend this movie as pretty interesting and if the director Michael Connors ever read my comment, I want him to know that he should keep up the good work.

By watching this movie the one can think that the cold war never ended or is it just a thought? This movie was mostly about persuasive way to portray the East in the style that western propaganda is serving the Russian story to their brain-washed audience. Nothing more than that because the plot looks like the badly developed scenario for the cold war thriller and directing is pretty mediocre. Without the brilliant Moritz Bleibtreu this would be just a piece of junk. The director got lost in the conspiracy theories behind the Russian military actions in Chechenia with the apparently stolen idea on the staged terrorist actions of CIA regarding Sept.11 developed by Michael Moore in Fahrenheit 9/11. In several moments the director tries to explain where did he get the idea of implying such things after all, when showing us 9/11 photos among the father's stuff but remains silent on that part. Pretty transparent and pathetic.

I haven't left any comment here for a while but I was so irritated by a very high IMDb rate for this movie that I had to leave my own mark. First of all, the the movie genre is like searching itself through the whole movie. The director wasn't sure is he going to make a horror, thriller, SF or comedy so it looks like he is experimenting with the genre through the movie phases never achieving one whole. Then, the idea of a horror in a controlled environment is kind of eliminating the horror atmosphere and it is very poorly executed. Also, I found the acting of the five pretty pale. Worst thing from my point of view in this movie is that all this is connected into the very boring melting pot where no real plot and no movie dynamics leads you until the end of the movie which I couldn't wait to come.

Very intelligent movie with the art film moments. Excellent acting, very good European camera school, good editing. Can't find anything bad about it. Casting was superb and actor who plays Max was just made for this role. Great drama and hard social question about the world we live in with the pretty critical answer suggested. Moral dilemmas in the world without moral are turning against our hero. Then, heroism is relative and changeable in time but money stays the main master. Power of mass control presented by the character of an evil showman looks exactly as the world we live in controlled and operated by mass media. It twists and turns the public opinion when needed and by that controls the moral values by its material needs and not by the need for true. What happens to an honest man as Max in such world is getting lost and then losing himself. Very intelligent portrait of the modern world moral values versus a good man. And one more thing: the movie is definitely not a thriller.

Very good by all means. Done marvelously in the technical and artistic way. And did I say very touching? The movie has dark and very heavy structure. It looks so authentic that involves you easily and then make you upset. It gives a smart portrait of the local neo-nazi movement in one German town but also all the social background that causes the phenomena of it. The basis of the whole movement was actually shown through the character of the main character. The ideals of its members are the same but the inner struggles of the individuals are individual. Fight between good and bad, between love and hate depicted beautifully followed by excellent acting. I also found the music very good. Excellent work! Keep on working.

This is a pretty bad movie. First of all the story of Tuskegee Airmen is too good for this load of crp. If you wanna watch a decent movie about that watch the 1995 TV movie Tuskegee Airmen which has decent drama and good acting. This movie, the Red Tails has nothing of that. Bad acting, bad scenario and bunch of ridiculous tech sequences and inaccurate history. Even though we know from the history that these airmen were among the best the US Air force had during the WWII, the battle supremacy of them against the Germans was highly exaggerated. It seemed Germans lost the whole air force during this movie. These guys are destroying German jets with their Mustang planes just like they were running the Star Track Enterprise. Lets just mention that Me 262 was so hard to get that Mustang planes to confront them had often special engine mounted on the plane just to be able to achieve the same speed at least for a short time as what you can't see you can't get. In most of the cases it was one Me262 on many Mustangs P51 and still hard to get while it was causing havoc of many kills and great fear among the US fighter planes. Most of the Me262 destroyed simply fell down due to malfunction but the US Air force used to claim kills to raise the moral of the pilots. The reason why operational jet fighter Me262 couldn't change the course of the war is cause it was produced in very small numbers coming too late. Now, in this movie the US Pilots are destroying the Me262 in a dog fight one on one. To give you the picture, that is the same ridiculous as to see the World War One airplane destroying Mustang P51 in a dog fight. Since he went that far the director could also involve F22 being destroyed by these guys. All in all - pretty irritating.

Wow, this is American Shindler's List, except no Academy Awards. A reminder that the US - a greatest world teacher of justice had had the practical Nazism on the life stage the way deep into the XX century when most of their today 'pupils' among the world countries already had parliamentary democracies. It seems that US constitution has never really matched its legal performance in practice. Good movie, excellent casting. I love Ving Rhames and John Voit performance, also Don Chiedle and Michael Rooker, very good character matching achieved. I also respect a movie making without usual Hollywood softeners. Pretty authentic and shocking. By the way, I bumped into this movie by coincidence as I had never heard about it before.