shag00

This is a real bore. The story is quite shallow considering it is billed as as action flick and there is not much action anyway and what there is is not memorable in the least. Everything has a horrible feeling of plastic, every scene is almost the same except a different colour. And then the story, at the end of the movie the white guy receives the Medal of Honor and it's just impossible, from the content of the movie, to understand why. I am unfamiliar with the story of this guy and the movie does virtually nothing to justify why he gets his medal. It truly lets down what one must assume was a very brave guy because we don't know what he did.

This is a film that sets out to explore some of our fragilities brought about by war and it certainly tackles this content. Paralleling this is an exploration of small man syndrome which actually takes centre stage of the film. Considering the content it is quite surprising that the film maker does address the issue of female companionship for US service men. Many armies of the period did have organised female companionship programs. The US with it's archaic religious dogma was one army that did not have a female companionship program but like much of what involves the US it is yet another case of the elephant in the room. As for Micky Fox, mis-cast would be an understatement. Many of the scenes with him being aggressive are nothing short of unrealistic and laughable. It begs the question of his stance in the film being, is it because he disapproves of **** or is it because he is five foot nothing.

When the film starts you think to yourself, where are these guys? The men and their uniforms are so clean they might be at a picnic. The odd thing is the recreation of the trench warfare battleground itself, despite not being very wet, is very well done. Outside the trenches there is a bit of water but the trenches themselves appear to have only had a a couple of guys with spray bottles precede the camera. Towards the end the courier is shot at when he opens a door and he falls backward. It is not clear whether he guy waiting for him inside the door, 2 metres away hits him or not. It is hard to imagine the waiting guy could possibly have missed but our hero just has nap and wakes up without any apparent injury. Overall it is not a bad movie but it's nowhere near a great one.

I am surprised this movie has been so poorly reviewed. I won't claim it's a masterpiece without peer but it is an entertaining story. Even having a child in the cast does not ruin it although having children in movies is always a bad idea. The story is believable without the logic defying script that many modern films fail on. It's a story told without the JJ Abrams desire to fill it with explosions and fights.

The saga has just run out of steam. Instead of story we are treated to more woke BS. Luke is just a pathetic loser, the antithesis of what a jedi has previously been made out to be. A sad instalment to a promising series.

This movie's most striking feature is how disjointed the action sequences are, one moment the stars are held under gunpoint the next the camera shakes and the stars are off running. In some instances they need to done breathing equipment before running, just makes you wonder what the baddies were doing all this time. This movie is so slow paced it can't help but put you to sleep. There is so little of substance it is difficult to actually point to the bad sections of the film.

This is a budget, feminised take on Inception (2010). For me an opening scene of some woman furiously weeping is really putting a millstone around the film's neck. The sex scenes in the movie are like commercials on TV, there to pay for the programming or in this case there to keep the audience from tuning out as they certainly not what you expect to see, or, in the flow of the story. The reason the feminism rankles is because the reality is, of all murders committed worldwide 98% are committed by men and that needs to be addressed, in the same way as if the sky were green. Just saying "inclusiveness" as a magic bullet for absurdness is just BS.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This movie is let down by presenting a plot which is frankly, disjointed. I cannot remember the last time I found it necessary to access the internet to understand the mess I was watching on screen. The fact no one seems able to concisely describe the plot is testament to it's lunacy. even the synopsis presented here at Metacritic is a bit different to what happens on screen. I have seen claims of intellectual this and that in regards to this movie but seminal it ain't. One of the pivotal moments of the film, when the 2 clones meet each other, is an exercise in pure fallacy. Of all the things that would occur, ignoring each other is definitely not something anyone (any couple) would do, especially on a one man lunar station.

This is not the worst movie I will see this year. The overwhelming take away for me was the thought, I have seen this episode what about the ones before and after. This is just an unsettling, annoying feeling. The movie has to many loose ends which are just left in the breeze. From a plot perspective there are 2 story lines, the clones and the sun. These 2 story lines overlap but never intersect, the whole sun story line could have cut from the movie pretty much without notice.

The whole show is just full of counter intuitive actions and narrative. It's never sure if the guy has had a mental breakdown though at various points he acts like he is a dyed in the wool nutcase. It is just a cut above rubbish, a time waster.

It's a reasonable premise for a story but shockingly told. Why people with supernatural abilities would be down and outs is never revealed. It should be the guts of the story but in reality is a minor sub plot to a drug gang stealing money, quite ho-hum. If you are recovering from a bad bout of the flu it might be worth watching.

The original was a great film and birthed here is the progeny **** night out with the original and The Brady Bunch. That a better story for part 2 could not have been hashed out, especially considering the budget, is at best lamentable. The original stood out because silliness was pushed aside as there was a foundation of story to the film which is glaringly obvious in this instalment of over 3 hours. And the grand fight finale, packed with silliness. If the real colonel died in the original how does he have an avatar? (well of course he doesn't it's just milking a stand out movie by a bankrupt creative team) and then my favourite is choking the colonel under water, needless to say that is hardly necessary as you will choke (drown) under water without anyone blocking your airway. To think that is all you could come up with for a second instalment just speaks volumes for the levels of talent of those charged with creating entertainment.

This is an unusual movie in that the normal short comings of many poor films are not so evident here.This movie is not boring nor did it send me to sleep, the dialogue was appropriate to the setting and the believability of events was OK. The issue for me was the style, it was so deeply anchored in the non culture of American social ladder climbing as to make you cringe. Probably not a good choice for a non US audience.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This film is billed as a thriller but the thrills were left out of my copy. A better fit would be to describe it as a special edition of a 1980's TV soap. The story is simple, grandparents want to take their grandchild and kill the people who have custody of him. Not really any twists or turns, in fact not much of anything including interest.

The movie has just enough to not get kicked. The overall story is quite good but as usual poor directing lets it slide. It's no use doing a crime story when the procedural parts are just so far from reality. A guy kills someone then next minute his house is raided by a dozen police cars and SWAT despite there being no evidence that he he is involved - just would not happen. Next scene he is being interogated in a cell that one expect to see in a Hannibal Lecter film in jail except he has not been to court yet so could not be in a jail and one suspects there are not to many steel cages suspended in mid air in existence as interrogation rooms. Although it does destroy the film it is certainly a bit of gravel in your shoe.

This movie is a great example of the current trend in America to take a famous story and remake it with the focus to make it a woke masterpiece. Not surprisingly once you loose focus from the story in a movie it is a disaster and this movie certainly is a disaster. To a non American there is something jarring about American bible songs/music being the centrepiece of an upmarket London club in the inter war era. As is the inter racial romance on the boat. The first 5-10 minutes of the film takes place on a WW1 battlefield where the detective is wounded and suffers some disfiguring wound to his face which you assume will have some impact latter on in the film but it does not. When the detective appears next, several years later, he has no facial disfigurement. So what was the film opening minutes about? Unbelievable poor direction.

By most accounts this is a good movie which leads me to believe there must be two versions of it because the version I saw was definitely not a good movie. There is a lot written about how the scene settings were so close to actual 8th century life and yet in the movie (and also on the trailer on this page) there is a scene **** on a flying horse wearing braces - and here I was thinking that braces did not really become a thing until the 2nd half of the 20th century. There is an absurd amount of guys screaming which we are informed was an 8th century thing as well - thank christ that's over and done with. The few sex scenes seemed authentic - at least the guys took their pants off. To me the director confused the religion of the day with fantasy witchcraft and it showed, poorly. One main setting, Iceland is considerably more lush than any photo I have ever seen and considerably more so than how the movie dialogue itself describes Iceland, that of being desolate. And one of the scenes, after killing everyone they ride to the coast and find a ship there. It just struck me that the chances of that are so low as to be next to impossible. But the boat scene just gets better, after convincing the captain that he is taking the prince's place he sails a small distance and decides to jump out and swim to the shore. Again, the chances of that are next to zero (life expectancy in artic seas in normal clothes is measured in minutes). So it's a long way from realistic, the camera work is nothing special, the story is a straight revenge plot with no twists and it does not really have you on the edge of your seat. That pretty much makes it a waste of time to see.

This nonsense of a film is less interesting than staring out your window to watch the traffic passing by. The writing/script is poor and badly delivered. The ending is something you wonder about, about whether it is connected to the body of the film. This is without doubt the worst film I have ever seen.

There was a lot of raw material to make a film from, after all Alexander was one of history's stand out individuals. The film starts out in sometime B.C. and for 3 hours it switches between 10 years earlier, 3 months later, 15 years earlier etc, etc. All very confusing and all very unnecessary, after all he is an historical figure. I thought the mother's role was over done. Let's face it, if a son moves overseas for the best part of a decade it's a good bet he's not to closely tied/reliant on his mother. The whole thing with snakes and the mother was just crass. Alexander's motive for world domination is passable addressed but the multiple other aspects of his life are largely ignored and though facts are scarce as this happened such a long time ago some risk could have been taken via poetic licence for the reasons he did what he did.

Deservedly rates lower than the original. It lacks the spectacle and is a bit confusing trying to straddle the events of 300, which is poorly told. I this watched immediately after watching 300, maybe as a stand alone view it would have come off better.

Worth watching, some of the effects, costumes and characters are a bit jarring but not sufficiently to overwhelm the story or it's watchability. I'm sure that slow motion blood splatter is appealing to some (under 25, excitable and erect) but really does not improve the package.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Worth watching but that is more a comment on the generally dismally low quality of films of this genre.A definite plus that there is a story and an off beat original one at that. These directors that are hired to direct movies - where do they find them? I refer to a scene near the end where a female captive grabs an axe to break a door down. The idea here is to smash through a light duty panel on the door so she can put her arm through and unlock it. All fine so far, then, she smashes the panel furthest from the door lock and you can't help wonder, why? So while she is fart arsing around trying to unlock the door one of the baddie's turns up and smashes her hand against the door with the butt of his shotgun and you think to yourself, that must really hurt. Then the amazing bit starts, rather than withdraw her arm from the hole she just screams and does nothing giving the baddie the opportunity to smash her hand with his gun a couple more times. When are these writers and directors going to appreciate that we, the audience, understand what artistic licence is and what it is not. In this story the artistic licence includes a 90 year old granny who is as hot to trot as your average 20 year old **** unlikely as that is we accept it as it is central to the story and within the bounds of possibility. Leaving your hand exposed, while you can withdraw it to safety, while it is being ruthlessly smashed is not, it also just looks stupid.

At least there is a story, albeit woefully executed. Bad preceeds any aspect of the movie you care to address. The fact that the movie addresses some social issues that have existed since the dawn of time does nothing to or is of relevance to the quality of the movie.

A lot of work needs doing on tightening the focus of the film. We find who is the evil force but never really why/how. Flashback is poorly executed and too heavily relied upon. Many of the patients in the hospital may as well be items of furniture as (except for a baby) there is no interaction with them and yet they are pivotal to the entire setting of the movie. There is no real explanation as to why the lead actress is chosen as the evil vessel and some deaths appear to be gratuitous rather than following the story. All in all quite boring.

Maybe it's just a result of 70's culture as this movie has just not withstood the test of time. Stupid cliches about **** and other social aspects of society in an attempt to be cool really fall flat. When directors of films realise films are audio/visual stories rather than a platform for social comment we might get good movies.

There is no story, just imagine someone taking home videos but set in the 17th century. Each scene stumbles on to the next one with little in the way of a thread holding them all together. The movie starts with a family being exiled from a settlement for some religious disagreement but no details. The following scenes are just scenes of their daily lives set a against a background of kiddies disappearing with one featuring a "witch" and killing new borns (though the there is a male and female). No attempt to explain who the witch is or why, why they have become active, where they came from etc. Movie ends with a bunch of naked women floating in the air during some kind of perceived ritual. Very much a scene to parade some bare arse rather than tieing up and explaining the story, perhaps because there is not really any story.

I realise this is a movie for the pre pubescent set but it really stretches credulity even so. What does this monster, roughly the size of a 20 story building do for the rest of the time it is not fighting other monsters, yeah, the ones that eat radioactive **** My ten year old was excited over the movie but I was anything but.

Is it reasonable to expect that a movie which is rated above 90 is simply superlative? Well this one was and it falls a long way short of superlative, are file reviewers a waste of space? A lot of negative reviews are the result of one actor being chopped in half in one scene, frankly I think that is gross over reaction by the prudish puritan fraternity and really has no bearing on the film in its entirety. The film falls down in my opinion because it is so jarring in it's presentation of the wild west, it is set somewhere around 1870. What is jarring is that the director has managed to insert so much 2015 in circa 1870. The opening scene of 2 deadbeats, with audio only you wold swear they had a 21st century education, being able to discuss how many veins in a person's neck was not common knowledge, I'd be prepared to wager, back in 1870, even in 2019 probably only some doctors could answer that. Shortly after the opening scene we have a shot of the village announcement board, announcing the village name and population of around 250. It looked like a 21st century tourist trap, I thought then that the movie was a spoof. Then we move into the house of one of the main actors, at first you think it's a dump, old unpainted floor boards with a one inch gap between each one and then you see the above floor furnishings which could have been taken from Vouge magazine. And in this bustling of around 250 people we have 2 doctors and people prancing around dressed like they are headed for the Oscars. It is so out of place that it just jars you. People, in 1870, who lived in villages with a population of 250 would have maybe a general store and that's it. But wait, this town has a sheriff and 2 deputies, more than 10% of the entire population. One bloke has a leg injury which is very opaque, I am never sure whether it is broken or just lacerated but he can walk for days on end with a crutch. It is very silly and unrealistic. They decide to travel at night and somehow manage to navigate to where they want to go, I particularly liked using a telescope in the dead of night - really gave me a sense these guys knew what they were doing. So we are back to familiar territory, people being in places and doing things that could not exist or are just not possible.

It's a hard slog, there is something odd with the non stop use of the word glory. The flash backs to the wife are well stale at best and pointless at worst. A very shallow attempt at an anti war film.

This could well be a super hero movie as the punishment these guys take is certainly more than mere humans. We start the movie with the now standard sentimental BS as a time filler before the also now obligatory moral decision which they make, which also gets them killed. When the action starts we see 9 shots absorbed by the heroes which inexplicably does not prevent them from running away to jump off a small cliff. So after bouncing down this cliff and hill strewn with large boulders they all have their guns and run off again, how no one broke a bone or many bones is certainly a miracle. Now with savvy directing we find they are now pace to face with their pursuers who no doubt had a elevator installed to descend to the heroes new level, they also are uninjured. Moving on, only 1 hero left and he is taken in by some local good guys, they dump him in a room and pretty much leave him. Fortunately the local good guys realise our hero is super human therefore not in need of medical attention despite enough injuries to kill a dozen men. Truly astounding! To make the movie really realistic they do have "red mist" bullet hits, no doubt to keep the young boys hard.

The movie to long which is something that I rarely feel. The first half is a tough slog being itself 50/50 army boot camp dross and religious zealotry. Quite hard to sit through. The main character is a bit odd in that despite his fairly dire predicament he is portrayed as smiling like an idiot in many early scenes. The second half of the movie saves it.

God what a drag, the film is unbelievably slow paced. This is a story about the evacuation of 330,000 men in 10 days from a beach, you could be forgiven for thinking it was the evacuation of a boy scout troop with a few planes thrown in for fun. There is a fixation on a white stick inside the English planes on the left hand side which gets multiple close in shots but it's never made clear what this stick does or why it is given so much prominence. In general I was somewhat mystified by how few of anything, except English soldiers, were shown in the film. There was no sense of urgency in the film, I would imagine that under the circumstances there would have been a great deal of urgency if not near panic or outright panic. Beyond me how clap trap like this rates so high on rotten tomatoes.

I am at a loss to understand how this movie was so well received. This is a modern, poorly dramatised remake of a classic book and fails on just about every level. The first and last narration pieces stand at odds with the guts of the movie and appear trashy while trying to give film status. The story of mankind's survival is superseded by the crappy soap opera of a dysfunctional American family, for lack of a better term. What was the point of having the tripods buried (a million years ago, what is the point of manning them through capsules and lightning. Just stupid **** A good story spoiled by having to listen and watch Cruise continually argue with his brain dead off spring.

When will the film making cadre ever come to the realisation that a film should have logical progression and "constant" laws of physics. If the alien can run around outside the space ship how could, and why would anyone suggest, that it can be killed by depriving it of oxygen? Why are there valves attached to the transmitter/antennae of the space station? How can anything gain access to the inside of the space station by running up the exhaust pipe? Is it not fundamentally necessary for a space ship to be airtight? If you people do not have the imagination to create a story that even remotely within the realms of reason you should find another job.

More mindless crap, the first minute turns you right off and that feeling never fades. The premise of the story is reasonable, the execution all to familiar. OK, so lets assume their is a breathable atmosphere on Mars and that lesser gravity on Mars than Earth (it is 38%) how does hero jump 200-300 metres. How stupid is open decked flying machines with guys with swords in any way compatible with energy weapons? But then again a number of people voted this a 10 movie...

Here we go again with impossible **** making it to the screen, do this people have no imagination at all. Someone offs themself by jumping into a vat of liquid lead. There is no DNA to clone. The whole genetic memory thing, acid blood, super human strenght and looks just like Ripley, please. Someone left the tap on and the spaceship turns into an aquarium. It takes the same time for the spaceship to return from non-controlled space (which must be a long way away) as it does to walk from 1 point in the space ship to the hanger of the ship, around 3 hours. The basic story is fine, highly dangerous alien lifeform bent on galactic domination. Why can't that story be told without resort to absolutely stupid ideas on how the world works, or in other words the story told within a believable universe.

Another horror prequel. I still can't get my head my head around how any captain of a passenger ship would override the computer to place all the ship in mortal danger. I find it even harder to believe that the 2nd officer, who had up till this point been arguing with the captain to not endanger the ship, just flashes a look at her cuddle and rolls over and gives her authority. That's in the first 15 minutes and it goes down from there. I mean is there no limit to the stupid things that these writers dream up. Any sort of gripping story does not portray the leads as blithering idiots. Avoid this film.

What a load of clap trap, seems like belligerent group of young teenagers. The story is a kind word to use, a better description would be the pseudo intellectual question list which is guaranteed to be a hit with those struggling at school. No one would spend a trillion dollars to send a group of dysfunctional morons to some distant planet, even the trillion dollar price tag is a bit irksome. If you think this is anywhere near the original Alien then I have bad news. Avoid this.

A real eye-roller, so much so that they will be spinning. It is beyond belief that this movie is rated so highly when in fact it such an amateur effort. The silliness really starts when a women is pushed off a cliff (maybe 100m high)and lands on a tiny tree which impales her. The tree is so small and the cliff so high that regardless of being impaled the tree would have been flattened by the impact but no, a small 1 inch diameter branch holds her suspended above the ground.Barely have your eyes stopped rolling and she reaches out for a cigarette lighter, even though she does not smoke, which luckily landed within arms reach after the fall. She then ignites some grass at the base of the tree to set it on fire (yes the tree she is impaled on)which miraculously causes the tree to more or less disintegrate so she is no longer impaled. Though despite this she appears not to have been burned, the whole thing is totally cartoonish. The movie never recovers from this **** The same scenes are shot in different locations, there is 1 scene where 1 of the guys tries to run her over where the shot of the approach is in a different location to the shot of the car departing from her, again amateurish. There is another scene of her cauterising her wound after pulling out a bit of the tree that impaled her (after losing many litres of blood). The problem is there is no wound at her back (there must be an entry and exit hole). Basically most scenes will have the eyes rolling it is just so bad.

Costner is mis-cast, he just does not fit in pre 1950's time frames. Another movie full of American happy-happy BS which is just so out place in 12th century England during that time's equivalent of a depression (all the men off to war). The attempts at humour just consistently fall flat. Don't waste your time with this one.

Notwithstanding the ending which has been discussed extensively by others my biggest disappointment was the dialogue and to a lesser extent the wardrobe. What we have here is more a time travel movie than a WWII movie. It plays like a bunch of misfit Americans transported out of "the hood" and re-materialising on a WWII battlefield. I felt that the extensive use of modern idiom and hair styles really took away from a historically set movie. I mean, we don't expect the latest Beh Hur to be presented in Latin or ancient Yiddish but we do expect language and idiom that is widely perceived to be in use during the time the movie is set. Just another unrealistic aspect of modern movie making that quite frankly is jarring.