Bitmouse

This movie was a f@cking vision. 75 characters required tocompletereview.

Almost as good as UHF. Weird: The Al Yankovic Story, check it out on Hulu today.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This movie was largely incoherent from a story telling point of view. The main characters repeated the line, "if this fails then it (meaning the whole saga) has been for nothing." I think this clearly shows how obvious it was to the writers that they story was largely irrelevant and forced in relation to the previous 8 films. It seems to me Disney ran out of steam on this one. They weren't really the right people to make this final trilogy as their interest is in the wrong place.

More Mary Sue girl power stuff. Tired of other peoples political or social justice views being shooved down my throat. Movies used to be about the people in them and the Dynamics, political or social narratives used to sometimes be a part of it, but not the whole narrative. Blaming the problems of society on men seems to contradict the feminist trend of becoming like men. Can't women become, "successful," whatever the hell that means, by doing their own unique thing and not modelling it after male, "success?"

Sad that the blatant sexism in this movie still goes under the radar. Yet another movie/show with a father who is depicted as a sort of buffoon who is talked down to by his wife. I couldn't keep watching. The disrespect of men in the western world since the early 1900's is talked about by some notables but hasn't quite made the mainstream yet. I suspect the people who created this film were just trying to do their best and perhaps were portraying how they see/experience life. However, in an era of examination of roles, tropes, and stereotypes men haven't had their fair shake yet. We need a Men's movement in the best sense of the word.

I really liked it. I don't know exactly what the critics had against this film. I am a highly educated person, like films, storytelling. Am a student of Jung and Campbell. I thought it was a good, complex enough myth. The characters seemed human enough. I am not sure the CGI was spot on. However, that sort of thing is forgivable. CGI is to support the movie, not be the movie. Storytelling, all was good.

This is honestly the shiniest turd I have ever seen. 75 character minimum review quotient now satisfied because I wrote this superfluous sentence.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I watched the whole movie for the sole purpose of being able to leave an accurate review. It was just bad. The dialogue was worse than the Star Wars prequels. It was just campy.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I generally keep my reviews short. So I will just say that I really liked this movie. One of the best movies I've seen in a long time.

I liked it. Maybe folks just can't handle a main character who doesn't talk? Western civilization doesn't really value silence.

This is perhaps the most compelling heroic narrative still in circulation. It details both an internal personal heroic journey as well as one that is external and societal. It taps into a coherent and relevant understanding of human psychology that delivers a potent story. Do you live a life of fear, on in which your truest self is repressed by those around you? This story offers an analog in which through embracing our own mortality we become free to choose are own destiny.

Like Prometheus Alien: Covenant lacks focus, perhaps as evidenced by its title. Ridley Scott seems like a nice gentleman as evidenced by recent interviews, however, it is sad to see when an artist does not acknowledge that perhaps they are past their prime and delegate needed responsibilities onto other artists. The Martian was a hit because of it's strong starting material. I believe that Ridley Scott has a vision with Prometheus and Alien: Covenant, but as an audience member I am not sure what that is. I do not think that Ridley Scott could eloquently and simply communicate what his message is with these films. It seems that he is exploring a mosaic that is connected within his head and psyche, but does not translate broadly if at all beyond the boundaries of his own experience. I would tell Mr. Scott given the opportunity, these sentiments, in the hopes that he would reflect on how his films are being received. My wish would be that he would refine his vision so that further films are more impactful. Further thoughts: The way they dispatched the aliens towards the end of the movie were well done. What is Ridley Scott's obsession with hyper-violence? It makes me think that Hollywood displays a propensity towards sociopathology.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This movie has Adam Sandler's (and probably a bunch of other peoples' hearts). That part is amazing. However, Adam persists in the same style of humor more or less with the same tone with which he started his career. The problem is that comedy has transformed significantly since that time. My thought is that Adam should transition away from comedy centered films. He is a good storyteller.

I really enjoyed the movie. However, the movie doesn't contribute to the canon in any meaningful way. 150 characters long dong sing-a-long song. Yeap

Meh. More Marvel mediocrity. Why does every Marvel hero need to be a white male who is either an arrogant condescending **** or a martyr (in psych language this term is often used to describe someone who has a poor sense of self worth and often takes on the pain of others to justify being loved)? Thoughts on the racial bias of lead roles aside, where are the balanced normal people? This movie starts with a fairly decent existential exposition with an interesting exploration of the nature of reality. However, it soon descends into the normal Marvel drible of madman serving some unconvincingly shrouded reimagining of one dimenosional personified evil who must of course be fought, through brute force, by some previously mentioned **** to save the world and usually get the girl. While I do admire all of these adaptations of the monomyth, for they do hold the cultural imagination, loosely, by their shaky reflection of these classic tropes, I find Marvel as always squanders the opportunity to do something truly great. Movie could be the living bible of our civilization. Base entertainment could combine with high spiritual truth and myth. However, most film falls far. It makes me for what purpose people write these movies? I would imagine for profit, prestige, and power. Had they learned from the myths to which they owe their livelihood they would learn that such goals lead to naught. A higher course would yield higher fruit.

Pretty sure the critics were bought, this movie was awesome. It had much greater depth than anything marvel had put out. It's characters had real depth, suffering, and purpose. The antagonists were interesting and truly powerful with believable motives. More movies like this please. Forget the critics, they are about as honest as a politician.

Finally, the reboot created a Star Trek film which truly hearkens to the original. This movie has more pacing, a random contained plot with little reference to prior films and shows an aging crew with more complicated dynamics and a more mature perspective. I would love to see more sci-fi film's hearkening to some of the earlier heydays of sci-fi where slow meandering plots were the name of the game. Somehow this paints a more true to life image. Still this film has plenty of pulse-pounding moments as you can't escape over 30 years of film making. They of course only add to the film making this an enjoyable blend of original and modern.

I really didn't like that they used Han Solo as a two dimensional prop. It doesn't feel like they really did the original Star Wars justice. Abrams, for what he is good at, isn't very good at directing depth. I would venture this is because he has spent too much time working on his career and hasn't developed very much personal depth. For every thing we accomplish in our life we fail to accomplish another. That being said it was excellent in many ways. Particularly it's pacing and it ability to transition from scenes of one gestalt to another. Again, that being said, it left me feeling insulted as a Star Wars fan, the original cast and story was more or less dismissed. It is understandable, much of the original cast is in a very different place than they were during the first trilogy. However, I still didn't feel that they captured the Star Wars feel, which was something I imagine most fans wanted. I think it is a fill that can be enjoyed by many, but as someone who grew up with Star Wars, it sort of drives home the message that at least in it's current iteration the original feel won't be found.

Hmm, I recognize this was a work of spirit for the creator. My main complaint is that it seems an example of our times reliance on what has come before.

I was pleasantly surprised. For me as a viewer the lengthy backstory and disparate plots points served to create a rich and engrossing movie. Further, exploring existential questions made for a more enjoyable superhero flick. I don't know if this is the sort of thing most movie goers are looking for? Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. I thoroughly enjoyed it. There were a few convenient incongruities that I feel served to cater to what folks were hoping to see in the movie, such as Superman and Batman's totally unnecessary fight. Why did Superman stop trying to talk to him? A simple explanation would have sufficed. However, something must fund blockbusters. Anyways, don't always believe the reviews. What averages across the population may not apply to you. For example... I have hazel eyes. Statistically they should be, or would more likely be, brown. Similarly, statistically you shouldn't like this movie. However, you maybe one of the outliers who does. So enjoy if you do. I get it if you don't.

Much better than anticipated. I think this movie's poor rating reflects the nature of mass opinion more than anything regarding the movie. I enjoyed it.