Reviews

Following works of Mr. Nolan, in my opinion so far he remained neutral towards the topic of his movie itself, and concentrated on the art. This movie deviates a bit from this practice, delivering the strongest critique of the United States politicians' incompetence and stupidity over the years (and still consistently continuing; only names change). Elaborating this would deviate too far from the movie review, so it remains as an observer's statement and "as is". The movie is, however well and professionally directed, with some author's touch here and there (but nothing too extreme). Some actors were truly excellent, especially Mr. Downey Jr., Mr. Murphy, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Oldman (as Truman). Music is good, as well as editing. There are simply too many characters and relations in the movie, so it takes a bit of an effort to "connect the dots". As one reviewer noticed here, could be exhausting. So, all in all this is a good movie and not about the bomb (or the underlying science). It's an excerpt from a story about a nation that was built on genocide of natives, slavery, racism, despoilment, hypocrisy, lies, propaganda and deceptions. There were quite a number of (American) movies with the same or similar criticism, but no one (except the artists) learned anything from them, so the saga continues. Pity.

As you probably got from the reviews before, this movie is trash. However, it doesn't even try to be something else, so the approach here is honest (if nothing else). No one involved took this movie seriously. Don't be mad with Stallone. He gives the audience a classic cheap exploitation action movie: poor sfx, bad casting, even worse "acting", cheesy jokes, quick cuts, lots of "target practicing" with waves of "enemies" and, of course, lots of explosions. And the main role goes to the guy who invested most of the money as a producer. No, this is not a Shakespearean tragedy/comedy. So, besides being expandables or contractables, they're just plain consumables. Or not, depending on your mood that day.

Another installment in the Star Wars fairy tales (there's more science in Hitchcock's Psycho, btw.) brings us an attempt to be appealing to all generations and fails stupidly. First of all, one has to be aware that this is a Disney "cartoon" with live actors, so there are an abundance of cliches, common in all Disney works (or abominations, depending on the perspective). Starts off relatively promising and serious, giving a (false) impression that this might just be good as a fairy tale for grownups. However, approaching the conclusion, it returns back to childish plot (but not for children; just infantile) with some sort of turtle-like Ewoks from another (really, there's no physics laws here) galaxy (we're talking billions and billions of light years in a few hours travel). AS that is not enough, there are zombies (wearing armor, but still) and magic and swords ... dragons are only what's missing. Maybe vampires and werewolfs (there are large dog/horse mixes). Again, this is a fairy tale, not SF in any aspect. What started many years ago as a compilation of ideas stolen (sorry, borrowed) by Lucas (from Burroughs, Valerian comics and so on), turned into recycled ready-made product for nobody and anybody. There are good actors / direction, camera work, music and scenery, though. In short: professionally made nonsense. Suggestion: brain off, eyes / ears on and endure. Don't think. Maybe you'll like it. Leaves a bitter aftertaste, nevertheless.

It seems that the original series has set the standards too high. This could have been good, but it isn't and the main reason is writing. Actors and directors were well selected and even the story is fine, as a template. But then came the writers and the previously strong liquor turned lemonade. Too many fillers, too many "forced" situations. It seems (to me) that everybody lost motivation here. Timothy Olyphant can carry the show, true, and he does (even in the first or second gear). Other actors participated as well, but this writing ... Or maybe I'm spoiled by the original series and True Detective (only first season) standards. This one just ain't right or justified for a slightly more demanding viewer. Pity.

This series meets my taste for Star Trek (the only better was DS9 epic, but that's another league). The team finally captured the whole Roddenberry's (essentially) subversive concept )packed in an abundance of scientific nonsense), enriching it with unleashed creativity. So, it's fun. And well made. Entertainment as it should be, but still serious about itself, even when it isn't. Cast is excellent, as well as writing, performances, editing, music/singing/dancing, cartoon ... the works. I don't like the "original series" (any more), especially from today's perspective (all about Kirk getting laid everywhere in the galaxy). I was a kid then and it was "wow". Then. Now it isn't. As a true fan, I needed the approach presented in STSNW. This goes for both seasons (and I hope there will be more, keeping this winning "combination") and adding more creative ideas. I recommend this to myself, knowing that out there there will always be grumpy "true believers" (fanatics?) that would object and grumble. Have it your way. I love this series.

This movie tome seems like a long and boring and repetitive video-game (and is filmed like that, here and there). Also recycled (a vast portion has been taken from the previous part(s)). Although it has many normally good or even excellent actors, it also seems that, except for Mr. Reeves, nobody really broke a sweat here. And for Mr. Reeves it means literally: he really did hard physical labor, but that's OK, since (despite being a nice person and all) he is a truly bad actor (not only here). No facial expressions, no "inner dialogue", no gestures, no voice variations nothing. He just recites his scarce lines (of which most are "Yeah."), like a ragdoll. Shallow and empty. Vast budget shows, but that's all there is. This movie could be very well one hour shorter (and probably more watchable, with the denser content). It's like someone previously wrote in the comment: a slow (cheats: god mode, give health) protagonist with mostly non-competent enemies, all set to "can I play, daddy?" skill level. Sad. However, it will have its audience and earn some money (which is all that really counts).

Being ridiculously absurd and entertaining, this was right movie for me at the right moment, after completing a big work project. Beautifully photographed in a wonderful land, it's also perfectly directed, edited and even actors gave it their best, making the whole thing almost serious. So, since the main purpose of this movie are not history lessons, but fun, it delivers perfectly. However, it's probably a bit too short (for me) and there will be no sequels (why would it be anyway? It's just as it should be, i every aspect). Dog is also good. Highly recommended to all fans of "real McCoy". Go, Finland!

After watching the original Alien, it was pretty obvious that possible sequels (or whatever connected to it) will have hard time standing up to it. Alien is still one of the best movies I ever had pleasure to watch. Only this one came close. For me, that is. All others are exploitation and money milking with smoke and mirrors. Alien 3 keeps claustrophobic atmosphere of the original (extremely important and essential part) adding some new (religious, as a satire) elements. Very good cast with fine interpretations, very good direction and camera work (i.e. Photography), together with editing and music make it a standout in the crowd. I would recommend it, but only to people knowing how to appreciate a good movie when the watch one. It is obvious from the reviews before that they mike a tiny minority of the audience. All others: just keep on being disappointed and watch Disney vandalisms. Knock yourself out.

Although the whole concept of Star wars (and the Star Trek, for that matter) is many parsecs far from science (especially physics), it is a - in this way - a very well presented fiction. A fairy tale fore grownups. Mr. Favreau also (and despite Disney) found a way to present it with dignity. It's also a very entertaining show, but I think that it should be better presented in a full feature movies (as in "Star Wars Story" movies), instead of 8 episodes per season. When trimmed of all "surplus" (previously on, end credits ...), the remaining rest is about 20 minutes net (x 8 = 160 minutes, or less than 3 hours). Nevertheless, the Mandalorian is very good, much much better than other "spin-offs". Highly recommended to all that children inside us, that still know how to enjoy a good and a well told story. The other flaw is that it's rare nad never enough. Too long a wait for the next season (which I hope we'll see soon).

Played all the Halo games, read no Halo books. And it does not matter. This is really good. Looks expensive. Happens (obviously) before the first visit to any Halo ring and gives an insight to the universe around it. Good cast (although mostly unknown to wider audience) and their performances. Same for writing, direction, pacing, music, editing, the works. Everything is in place and there's a place for everything. Immersive and entertaining. I enjoyed every minute of the first season and am really looking forward to see what's next in season 2. There are some plot holes, of course, but nothing to write home about. However, most of the good TV-shows were cancelled or ended prematurely, while trash persists, so I'm also afraid a bit. So, if you like politics/action/drama/intrigues/tension/so on mix, this is just on spot. Reminds me of Expanse. Very well done. I hope I didn't jinx it with this impression.

This series follows the almost fully established Disney practice in reducing "usable" content as much as possible. This is valid for all Star Wars series so far (starting from Mandalorian): first, for more than 2:15 minutes they practically show a whole previous episode under "previously on ..." + (slowly) repeat opening credits. Closing credits are more than 10 minutes and the whole episode is labelled as 35 minutes. What's left, after all this balast? Almost nothing. Don't forget also the "idling", where actors just walk around from A to B with no dialogue and nothing happening. It feels like made by idiots for idiots and is really a struggle to bear. So, if one extracts anything worth watching (as in "actual content") and trims the rest, the whole 12 episode season can be reduced to a one nice and watchable average length feature movie. However, presented in actual fashion, it's more of a torture for me. Recommended for people with attention span ability of not more than continuous 15 minutes at best. Pity, since the concepts and stories have great potential.

After watching tons of movie/TV production garbage lately, finally something fun and entertaining. Good cast, total nonsense of a story (although writing is good, considering), great direction, editing and music selection. There is a reasonable suspicion that Mr. Fuqua had much more to do with this than credited. He makes good movies. Acting is quite appropriate, although Mr. Pitt is really good (even here, where he didn't really have to be). Let the higher brain functions rest and enjoy the simple, pure, mindless, but well made fun. Claim back your two hours you might have lost before, on some other usual and (unfortunately) industry dominant moving pictures trash.

This is not a good Yugoslav movie and certainly not a representative one. Main actors (mother and father) reprise their roles from Balkan Spy (albeit bloodless and pale here) and the rest doesn't even come near the wits of the movies based on Dusan Kovacevic's work (Balkan Spy, Who's Singin' There?, or Marathons) or other truly clever movies from the period before war on Balkans (for example, Underground). It's not even funny. A classic "coming of age" core topic was much better presented in any other (especially Italian) movie. In good (writing) hands, with different casting and so on this could have been a good movie. But it simply isn't. Pity.

This movie is everything bad other reviewers say it is, and also everything good thereof. I would also object casting: other, better cast/selected actors may be more credible/convincing (no details, never mind now), but this is what we have and it's OK. You work with what you have. Everybody did their part professionally (more or less), within imposed limits (by writers, producers, etc.). Good pacing, professional direction. Kid is really good, though. And it's a mindless fun plus a good way to kill about two hours. Nothing more (or less) than that. The less you expect, the more pleasant you'll feel at the end.

Despite two excellent actors and their truly great performances (others just serve for the scenery), as well as a fine direction and cinematography, the whole concept does not work for me. Story is too far fetched and a bit stupid. Even the aforementioned cannot pull the movie out. Not much comedy, action or crime (as labelled by IMDb) Four stars for trying (although ultimately failing).

Imagine a movie with a possible plot and story, but well hidden in countless too fast futile blabbing, almost random quick-cut editing, pointless shots and so on. ADHD movie. There must be a Latin word for this mess. I made it to the one third and then could not any more: stopped and deleted it from disk, never to return. I wasn't expecting anything but that's exactly what I got: nothing presented in stew od anything the director could lay his hands on. Indigestible. Good (and totally wasted) cast, though. I read some plot descriptions behind this on the Web but did not see any of it. My attempt to watch it was a few days ago, but I already forgot most of it, except for a bad experience, described here. See the post title for more.

... and it's not trying to be anything else. It's fiction, a sequence of scenes, pictures, characters, events. Just drawn, sketches here and there, letting the viewer fill in the gaps. It's an another approach, not much comparable with previous films and not trying to give a sense of reality, although New York is just too recognizable. Yes, Nolan did it better but this one is not bad at all. Just different. It's dark. As the knight, but even darker. Closer to comic books. I did not expect it to be Nolan's. Very good cast and their interpretations. Excellent camera work and editing. Fine music (composed and selected). There are also a few really bad "movie mistakes" (yes, everybody would be electrocuted in water, for instance and yes, here Batman could not hide his identity as Wayne, and so on) but the rest is OK. Cannot agree with many reviewers here: it' not too long at all. Or boring. I rarely watch the whole movie at once and this time I did (also did with The Outfit). No sweat. I guess I was in the mood for it. Go, watch it and experience it yourself. The reviews here are too polarized.

... masterfully turned movie. It's a slippery floor. There's only one location (a few rooms) and a good story, so a director must use all the skills not to leave it as a stage play (normally somewhat "wooden"), but make it a film. And it succeeds. Matter of fact is that this movie, after Bunraku (2010 - highly recommended), is a first success in doing so. Rare, so to speak. Even actors helped a lot for this not to look a theater play, but a movie. Reminds me also of some old black and white movies, from time when Hollywood did not make mostly trash, as they do lately. I enjoyed every minute of this: a bit slow buildup of tensions for the final act. Camera work, editing and sound is also masterful. Treat yourself and watch this truly clever story. And, yes: you're welcome.

This movie, so well written, paced, directed, acted, edited and musically scored is truly a gem. It's not the "scary" parts (there are some that may scare sensitive audience, like jump-scares and such) but the whole concept or the idea, if you like. Really sinister, like storytelling of Stephen King and/or Clive Barker. This movie is like a homage to them. I remember some ideas used back in Dead and Buried (1981) by Gary Sherman and some Wes Craven works. Imaginative and scary. Great performances by the whole cast and really an enjoyable movie experience, so rare in general, and especially recently (when 99,9% of video production is pure trash). Exceptionally recommended. And, yes: do not ruin the experience by watching "the sequel" (not by the same author). This movie is a whole and should have stayed that way (as many others did, but producers' greed was unfortunately stronger).

Well directed, pretty good writing, uneven acting (partly over the top theatrical, partly just as it should be), well produced and shot, keeps viewers' attention, slightly predictable at moments (and in general), masterfully edited and with an appropriate music score. As the tile says: good watch (but only once, since then you'll know "the secret", and the mystery will be gone forever).

And that's about it. Read the books. Watch Lynch's version, if you want to try to get what this is all about. However, if you like Jordan's and Abu Dhabi's deserts and Norwegian coastline (i.e. Postcards), watch this one. No room for acting, developing characters, explaining anything and so on. A bunch of nice pictures to watch or a music video for Hans Zimmer's music. And Spice Girls called Bene Gesserit cooking all up. Visuals and music deserve 6 stars. Aside from this, this could be any "SF" movie. Oh, yes: in the year 10,000 and something there are dragonfly aircraft with Huey (Vietnam) cockpit controls. And a desert mouse with big ears. Basically nothing else.

Clint Eastwood is one of the most interesting characters of the American cinematography. He either makes a true masterpiece (Million Dollar Baby, Unforgiven, Changeling and so on) or a total pile of garbage (American Sniper, this one and so on). Nothing in between. And he should have retired (as the actor, at least) some 30 years ago. One has to know when to quit and remain great in the memory. As a director, he is still a master of the trade, but the stories he tells - either mesmerizingly beautiful or painfully utter crap. The older he gets, the worst it is. This is one of the worst movies he ever made (and starred in). Slow, dull, bad (and worse) cast and acting, it shows from afar how old he is and unable to deliver, despite the effort. Do not watch. Remember him for his good movies.

... to make a beautifully photographed (camera work is fantastic and deserves 12) and directed movie (10 until last two minutes, when it drops to 3, with a "romantic music theme") around an utter and complete religious BS. The "truth" of this story is as real as zombies and vampires. BS comes from the religion (as a phenomenon) and especially Catholicism itself (or any form of Christianity, for that matter), being the largest mass murderer and pedophile organization in human history. Radical Islam tries but there's a lot to do before they get even close. As in - before Latin language and Vatican no evil existed and therefore no exorcism was possible. Christianity is the only "entity" eligible to judge right from wrong and good from evil. But, people love to be scared (especially by fruits of a malevolent imagination) and I suppose this movie delivers in that sense using all filming tricks in and out of the book. Acting is also good, considering. And I felt sorry for the dog (Sadie). That' s about it. Good watch (most of it), popcorn may occasionally fly around the room and make a mess.

This movie follows a meme circulating on the Internet about what aliens see on Earth from space. Google it and - yes, facepalm: Only North America exists and only white male (OK, with a help of PC black male) from America saves the Earth. Everything else, outside USA, may exist, if needed (here: Russia); otherwise not. The movie plot has a fairly interesting plot idea (although not new) ruined by cliches and banalities, cheesy acting and dialogues, bad writing and heroic musical score. Almost as made by Disney. Now, I know that actors have to pay their bills and all, even in the times of pandemic, but no one needed this really, even for that. Recommended only to seriously intoxicated rednecks and alike. Others: skip. Nothing to see here. Go home. Wait for something that makes sense and does not insult peoples' intelligence (I mean - people and land existing outside the USA, despite Hollywood).

Bad reviews here fall short of understanding. The whole premise of the zombie movie is ridiculous in itself: there are no zombies. Everything else here arises from that. It's not nearly as mocking and fun as Jarmusch's Dead Don't Die, but it's kind of fun. Yes, it's cheesy (Swiss kind, with a lot of - plot - holes), predictable, no acting worth mentioning and so on. Direction is pretty good, considering. One-off watch for a dull afternoon. It also seems that movie's pretensions do not reach farther than that. It's not a philosophical discussion with morals or anything alike. So, it's kind of OK. Zombies have nothing to eat here (no brains involved). And I've seen worse in the genre (and also better). Once again, a reminder: there are no zombies. It's a fantasy, people. Live with it and take it at a face value. 6 stars is about right (nice sfx, btw.)