Reviews

I'm writing this review after having watched the entire first season, and just finished watching the 6th out of 8 episodes in the second season. The only thing I can say is: the show Writers must really HATE the viewers. And, I'm surprised anyone would put his name on the script: I believe the Writers' Guild uses "Alan B. Smithee" for writing credits that the writer wants to disavow. "Smithee" name should be all over S2 scripts.

There is no other explanation for a show so full of half-starts, unresolved episodes, and unfulfilled promises. It's like an anthology series with episodes that don't give the viewer an ending for each episode.

I understand that the writers, in online interviews, have asked the viewers to "hold on" and wait for the payoff--but, with just two episodes left in S2, I can't imagine any satisfying way to tie together the various threads that have been floated throughout this season.

I began watching this series based on the pedigree of Hugh Howey, who provided the source material--and who wrote the very excellent books the "Silo" series is based on.

But "Beacon 23" is no "Silo." I have to agree with other reviews that point out that Stephan James is not the Leading Man this series needs. In fact, I'm not sure if anyone could rise above and save such poor plotting and writing.

That said, there are some flashes of interesting performances--like Ellen Wong in the recent two-parter; but I have no idea if we'll see her character, "Iris" again. Which is emblematic of the show itself: it's like the actors/characters are running away from an unfulfilling experience. The disappearance of Lena Headey in S2 is also a slap in the face, since many viewers (me included) decided to watch "Beacon 23" because we expected to see her always watchable acting; and see what new character she would bring to life. But, it appears Ms. Headey has taken the money, and run.

I'll hang-on for the final two episodes, but it's very doubtful that I'll return for more punishment in the future. Assuming MGM+ decides the series gets a third time at bat.

I don't know what I was doing when this film came out, or why I didn't watch it in the theater or cable--until now. Whatever the reason, I'm glad I finally found it.

This film was in the "early" part of it's stars careers: Dwayne Johnson was still just transitioning from a wrestler to movies; Carla Gugino was still struggling for roles, Ioan Gruffudd was practically unknown, and Alexandra Daddario had not knocked every man in America's socks off in "True Detective" yet.

As for the film, it's pure non-stop action. Dwayne has the right mix of action hero and frightened dad. And, the destruction scenes in LA and San Francisco (both places I've lived) are pretty good for 2015. The not-to-be-missed scenes are the huge tidal wave in San Francisco; Alexandra swimming for her life in a flooded building. Believe me, you've seen photos of the swimming scene; and you don't want to miss her in action. Thank me later.

Bottom line: great entertainment, especially if you're a guy.

Rarely am I surprised--in a good way--by a tv show or film. By the time I see things, there's been enough buzz so that I know what I'm getting, based on the actors, director, or genre.

Which is why I didn't expect much going in. I had seen a few clips of Donald Glover from other things--and frankly was not impressed.

This re-imagining of the Brad & Angie film is brilliant. The introduction of John and Jane is very effective, and allows the viewer to gradually get to like the two leads.

The on-screen chemistry is bumpy at the beginning, but by episode 3, they are a solid, believable couple--like people we know.

Each episode are different and present different challenges for John & Jane, as they continuously have to prove themselves to the mysterious company that employs them. My fav episode is the Lake Como assignment that, Episode 5, with Ron Perlman as the guest star.

If there's any concern I have, it would be the finale episode--and it's ambiguous ending. There's talk online that if there's a second season (which I very, very much hope there is), it will have a New cast as John & Jane.

I hope NOT. That would be a crucial mistake. Having hit pay-dirt with the current cast, asking the viewers to essentially go through the same process every season, will not work on this type of show.

Bottom line: Well done, Donald Glover! You did more than remake "Mr. & Mrs. Smith"--you created a new & possibly better version of the storyline. Don't screw-up by changing the cast.

F. Gary Gray is an under-rated director. He would have been perfect as a "Studio Director" back in the 1930s, 1940s. You give him a script, and assign a cast...and he'll deliver a watchable movie, that will make a small profit.

"Lift" is such a movie.

This Kevin Hart heist film doesn't require any thinking on the part of the viewer, and most of the images on the screen a pleasant to watch. Especially, the scenes of Vienna; where Gray previously filmed a remake of "The Italian Job."

The primary obstacle to enjoying this movie is Kevin Hart; who is a good supporting player; but cannot "Lead" a film that has a storyline.

Movies require the viewer to "suspend disbelief" and accept what they're watching as "real." However there is NO amount of "suspension" that allow the viewer to believe that Gugu Mbatha-Raw and Kevin Hart passed the pre-casting "chemistry test." She's a Leading Lady; and, again, Kevin is NOT a Leading Man.

I literally just stubbled across this show--via a poor review that was linked on Twitter. The reviewer, from an online site, felt that "Class of '09" didn't do anything interesting and compared negatively to films like "Minority Report."

I agree this is no "Minority Report" and we're not watching Spielberg--but "Class" is a solid series. The performers, of which Kate Mara is the best known, are surprising good. The characters and storyline is, IMO, a notch above most cops & robbers AND sci-fi that's on any platform. The locations (it's shot in Georgia) bring life to the action, and the production design is a nice mixture of now and future house & design.

My guess is that people may be put-off by the three separate timelines in which the characters exists. I can see that it was a nice hook during the series pitch: the viewer gets to see the past & the present--and the results it has on the future. But, yes, after a while the cuteness wears off.

Bottom line: I believe "Class of '09" is an entertaining, middle-weight series, that doesn't ask too much of the viewers...and offers a pleasant way to relax the evening away.

NOTE: I've only seen the first 3 episodes of 8; so, I can't vouch for the remaining five.

It's only been four episodes and I've gone back & forth on this series. The first two episodes served as a good set up for an intriguing narrative--but, the third episode went into crazy-land. Now, the latest, forth episode (and the halfway mark of eight episodes) just aired, and I'm a fanboy again. Since this last episode was directed by the great Jon Cassar (who worked with Sutherland on "24") the pacing was excellent, and the inter-action between actors are finally working. So, that may be the reason I liked it. But, the main problem with the series remains: the characters' actions are preposterous. I'm sure the writers think they're being "twisty"--but that's not what's on screen. Just dumb talk, actions, and motivation. Bottom line: the writers are trying too hard to create a "Lost" or "Twin Peaks" but instead they're creating nonsense.

Having seen the complete series, I can't recommend this Euro-series. The story never really grabbed the viewer, and (maybe because I'm an American) the "risk" never really registered with me. Beyond that, I didn't like most of the characters (many of whom will killed off--with no impact on me) or their choices. The one "pure at heart" character basically gets shafted--while many of the loathsome characters survive and flourish. Speaking of characters: I've always loved Eva Green since her early films, like "Dreamers"--and lately she's been making horrible choices in projects. "Liaison" is just the latest. Finally, there's Vincent Cassel. I've never liked him--especially as a Leading/Romantic type. He's way too self-centered; and his facial expressions gives new meaning to the phrase "He has a punch-able face." Needless to say, I found his character in "Liaison" unappealing. Bottom line: because of a storyline & characters not worth caring about, and unappealing actors, in a world of "Night Agent" and "Gray Man" and even "Red Notice" there is no reason to spend hours with this silly "Liaison."

Wow! Wow! Wow! I just watched "Sharper"--and am laying on the floor in disbelief. This is so, so good.

Arriving with no fanfare, or expectations, I had no idea what to expect. And with the exception of Julianne Moore and Sebatian Stan, none of the actors registered with me.

From the beginning, I realized it would be a "multiple point of view" story, with each of the characters inter-playing with each other and the viewer gaining more & more insight. But, like a Rian Johnson mystery, there are layers on layers of splendid twists and turns. I won't spoil any of them--but you will want to re-watch.

The acting is top notch--especially from the performers who I didn't know.

Top Marks, however, goes to Julianne Moore, who has always been good in everything (going back to her walk-on in "The Fugitive" with Harrison Ford); but this time she knocks it out of the park. No other actress could have given this performance: mature, sexy, charming, strong, devious. All rolled into one.

Bottom line: See this for the mystery & performances.

There are more and more spy films and series being produced now--maybe trying to fill the void since "Homeland" has gone off the air. Most are routine--and "Treason" falls into that category. It's your basic catch-a-mole-trust-nobody story, played out in the UK. And, picking up on the popular trend in shows like the mini-series remake of "The Ipcress File" the U. S. and UK spies have relationships that are not always in alignment.

That said, "Treason" has a one thing going for it: the actors.

First and foremost is Olga Kurylenko. Having first hit the big screen as "the girl" in the first (and best) "Hitman" film, she has since racked up an impressive list of action films including "Black Widow" and the very under-appreciated "The Courier." IMO, Ms. Kurylenko is in the top ranks of Female Action Stars. She's exotically beautiful, and athletic enough to handle the physical stunts.

In Treason, she is the catalyst for, and connection for, all of the events in this "Is he or Isn't he a Traitor" scenario.

The other actors (especially. Beau Gadsdon, as the teenage daughter) are also very good. Worthy of note is Oona Chaplin, Charlie Chaplin's grand daughter, as the wife.

The directional pacing never allows for a dull moment, and there the CGI is minimal, which adds to the realism of the action.

Bottom line: not a bad movie to watch on a Saturday afternoon.

I just binge-watched the entire S3, and of all three seasons, this is by far the most enjoyable.

Although the storyline is more confusing than any film or series I've seen in 10 years, the action/fight scenes & use of filming locations are top-notch.

The actors physically fit their roles and deliver. I particularly liked Nina Voss, who was "Astrid" a recurring character in "Homeland" and can always be counted on to deliver euro-cred to American films or tv productions.

Not to be overlooked is the team of directors' who (over eight episodes) maintain an edge-of-your-seats pacing.

In conclusion, with S3 Jack Ryan has morphed into "Jack Bauer" and this series is the new "24"--without the ticking time clock.

My suggestion: the producers should hire Jon Cassar (one of the creators of "24") for next season to help craft the storyline, and direct a few episodes.

This six part series is definitely not a remake of the Michael Caine classic. Although I'm just half way through the series, it's obvious that the most interesting character is not "Harry Palmer"--but "Jean Courtney" as portrayed by Lucy Boynton. She's a upper-class independent thinking woman in 1960s Britain, which means she's no more respected than the Working Class, Palmer. And, this makes their spy partnership all the more interesting. Plus, she's far more competent (and the Team Leader) than Palmer. All-in-all, a very clever re-interpretation of "The Ipcress File." And, the production design, 1960s wardrobe, and little bits like "Walk on the Wild Side" playing as background music,"The Manchurian Candidate" in a London movie house, and the divorce gambit of going to Brighton and get photographed in bed with a hired woman are all excellent touches.

What started out as a simple "Fatal Attraction" takes the viewer on a wild ride through "Strangers on a Train" territory. The twists and turns keep on coming, and I found it a thoroughly enjoyable Sunday afternoon film. Worth the time.

The basic story premise of a female former U.S. Army Ranger going on a revenge spree against the backwoods country criminal gang is a good one. The low budget production could have even been overcome, as so many indie films have proven in the past. Unfortunately, the film director failed to realize that he could make a good film by keeping the dialogue to a minimum. Especially, if his "actors" are completely talentless.

Finally, the "Deliverance" vibe of this film is an insult to every rural state in the nation. The Dumb Country Boys cliches died with "The Dukes of Hazard" tv series, and Burt Reynolds "Cannonball Run" movies.

Just watched the first three episodes, and so far it seems like Cassie is not exactly the image the Flight Attendant union would prefer. She drinks all the time, has sex with anything in pants, and is completely irresponsible. While the scene with her brother may be working towards addressing her "issues" so far it looks like the show is just accepting her actions as OK.

Oh, and since my wife is blonde--and has to put up with blonde jokes--I kinda think that should be mentioned too.

Well, maybe episode #4 will turn the corner. Fingers crossed!

Given that my "Jackie Chan Experience" had been limited to the "Rush Hour" films with Chris Tucker, I was totally (no pun intended) blown away by "The Foreigner." Not only is this is a really good revenge/action movie but Jackie Chan, though still limiting his English dialogue, manages to hold his own with Pierce Brosnan. Jackie Chan's performance made me think back to the silent movies (I went to film school) when actors conveyed emotion through facial expression, not words.

As for the plot--that aI won't spoil for you--it's above average, and blends several social issues about immigration, family loyalty, and Britain/Ireland history. Bottom line: this film was much better than I expected it would be.

I have the feeling that the makers of this film wanted it to be "The Empire Strikes Back" of the MCU. Without speaking to any story details, I'll say that from the very opening scene until the final shot of the film (and the post-credits preview scene) it's a "downer."

So, if you're the type of movie-goer who feels entertained by emotional downers, then you'll enjoy this film. My guess, however, is that most people who go to a Marvel film expect action AND a "feel good" at the end. That's not this film.

I'm glad I waited for the Amazon & iTunes RENTAL to come out...this is not a film I want to own, or will watch again.

I had very, very low expectations--so I can't say I was disappointed. In fact, it was NOT as bad as I expected. Some of the sight gags worked, whereas the gross-out humor never works for me. The plot points--and surprises--were of the OK, not Good, variety. But, my real question is: WHY did any studio give Dax Shepard $20 million? Also, with all due respect, Michael Pena is much too old for the part. Bottom line: OK for a Saturday afternoon...when you want to watch a cable movie, and not get out of bed.

The Charles Laughton/Tyrone Powers/Marlene Dietrich/Billy Wilder 1957 film of "Witness for the Prosecution" has been one of my favorite films since I was in high school. So, watching this Toby Jones version--that follows Agatha Christie's original short story--comes as quite a surprise. Mostly the same characters, but with a decidedly different take on the story of love & guilt. The two "Witness" films are like watching the Kurosawa film "Rashomon"--the guilt lands on different characters.

That said, and because I'm a student of film, I liked the Toby Jones version, too; and don't feel like it's inferior to the Billy Wilder film. The photography and set designs are all shadows, fog and smoke; just the right mood for a story that is does not reveal itself and fools the eyes. The acting is all excellent, which is in keeping with all British productions. And, the pacing of the narrative is accomplished with no tech or CGI--which is refreshing in this age of SuperHero films.

Bottom line: if approached without bias, this film of Agatha Christie's "first draft" of Witness for the Prosecution is rewarding on it's on merits.

I just stumbled across this film on iTunes on a lazy Sunday, and have been jumping for joy! I love "thinking" spy thrillers--films like The Ipcress Files, Funeral In Berlin, The Night Manager, Homeland, and even Turn: Washington's Spies--and Restless ranks right up there with the best. The plot is intelligent without being too complex, the directing was spot-on (I particularly liked the cutting back-and-forth between time periods at the end of the first part of this two-part mini), and the period clothes, cars and interiors are right up there with The Man in the High Castle. Oh and the acting by this cast of Brits, should make U.S. actors want to go back to school. And I can't say enough about Hayley Atwell's performance: incredible! Plus, with her generous curves, she was made for 1940s films. All around excellent film. Find it on DVD or iTunes and watch it--and then watch it again. You won't be disappointed.