Change Your Image
InCole
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Irishman (2019)
In a time of endless boring reboots and superhero movies, Martin Scorsese shows audiences what a real movie is
The Irishman is real cinema and the sad fact of the matter is that in the current era of cinema the only place Scorsese was able to find a home for this amazing film project was on a streaming service.
What is perhaps most amazing about The Irishman is during a time when younger filmmakers are de-aging and using CG models for dead actors like what we saw in Rogue One or the de-aging in Mandalorian of Luke
Along comes Scorsese who is now 80 years old and yet so in touch with filmmaking innovation that he has been able to do de-aging far beyond anything we have seen so far. There is a sensation of uncanny valley but you really can't see it or point to a single thing and say oh that's CGI de-aging
The amazing de-aging technology and technique aside the film story and acting as to be expected from a Scorsese film are just outstanding a great adaptation of what is in essence a non-fictional story (a real story with true events all the way throughout)
Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci really are something else and the last of their kind
As is Scorsese
And I wonder how many people realise this but where is the new talent?
Hollywood has become closed off to creating and fostering new talent and it is a shame as once the generation of the greats have retired we will be left with just endless reboots, endless remakes, endless superhero flicks with crappy CGI and 0 story 0 acting
Such a shame, but for now we have the Irishman to still enjoy.
Peter Rabbit (2018)
Cute hybrid Peter Rabbit film let down by bad casting
This is a very cute hybrid live action animated hybrid film (live action with CG characters inserted in)
But it could have been much better with better casting, in general I don't think Domhnall Gleeson should play villains he always overacts as a villain he did in the Rey trilogy and he did so here as well
Then you have the star of the film... Peter Rabbit which for whatever reason was cast as the world's most famous talentless man, James Corden. You don't hear Peter Rabbit you just hear the horrendous voice talent of James Corden and worse yet they even have him sing at the end of the film as just a reminder of how talentless he is (seriously, why does he sing all the time when he is such a horrendous singer?)
If they had done a better job casting McGregor and Peter Rabbit then this film would have been far more enjoyable and would have probably been more of a success.
The Gray Man (2022)
Bland, generic, poorly written with crappy CGI and even crappy acting
First thing is first, I am a massive fan of MCU, I loved Chris Evans as Captain America and have seen those films multiple times. I also love Ryan Gosling - who often makes me question my sexuality as he is just so damn handsome lol! Fortunately he seems to be the only man to elicit such thoughts from me and it is a common joke I've seen as well so at least I know I am not alone in this.
But yeah, big fan of Chris Evans, big fan of Ryan Gosling and a big fan of the MCU films that the Russos have done.
So obviously I went into this with high expectations but this film not only fails to achieve the expectations I had for it, but it falls far far below it and is perhaps among the worst films of 2022 and the worst films of the past 10-20 years that I have seen.
2022 has brought some pretty mediocre films, mostly due to the negative impact of COVID on the production of those projects but many of those were at least enjoyable experiences that I am at least glad to have seen once.
The Gray Man however is so bad that I even wonder if the 5/10 I've given it is a fair rating or if it deserves even lower. I regret wasting 2 hours of my time watching it and I genuinely worry this film could seriously harm Chris Evans and even Ryan Gosling's careers. Ryan Gosling already has other projects coming soon so those should be able to make Hollywood forget about this disaster but Chris Evans on the other hand only has two projects in pre-production so this film will have more time to in people's minds to ruin his future career.
So what is so bad about this film? Well pretty much everything;
The acting ---
Acting was just all over the place but in general it came across as bland and uninspired. Ryan Gosling pretty much seems to be playing himself as in the Ryan Gosling we see in interviews, this despite the fact he has a massive range. The Ryan we see in La La Land is completely different from the one we see in Blade Runner, Drive, First Man, The Nice Guys, etc... Each of those performances don't come across as it being Ryan Gosling instead we see the character he is playing not just Ryan Gosling as generic character x. It is unclear if it is bad writing of the character, bad directing or what the root cause is, but in any case a very poor performance from an actor who clearly can and has done far better performances.
Chris Evans meanwhile completely overacts his evil villain character, and it is painful to watch as someone who wanted to see Evans show just how well he can portray a villain. Again unclear if bad writing or bad directing or simply poor casting choice.
The writing + story ---
The script is basically a generic action flick only the story is even far more superficial and shallow than even the story of a film like Fast Furious, or Expendables which had far more depth to them than The Gray Man does. None of the characters in Gray Man really get any proper backstory or any kind of character arc. Their personalities are the same as we see them from the start to the end of the film and all characters fit in to generic action flick archetypes.
There isn't all that much dialogue in the film but the dialogue that is there comes across as very unnatural and as simple filler. There are a few catchy lines here and there but because the rest is bad they feel out of place and forced.
The action ---
So this you'd expect to be good for an action flick, but the cinematography doesn't do the great choreography justice. There are some pretty great close quarter combat on display in this film, combat that is nearly as good, if not as good as that what we see in John Wick. But the issue is we don't actually get to see it. The camera is either too shaky to actually see what is going on, or doing fast pans, or fast cuts in editing. So we rarely get to see the choreography properly despite how great it is.
Yet then in contrast to this we get CGI shots that are absolutely horrific with some of the worst CGI I have ever seen in a big budget film (perhaps even worse than the CGI in Black Widow) and those shots are shown very slowly, often in slow motion or with slow cuts, slow CG camera movements. They really want you to soak in the crappy CGI on display in this film....
With a show time of 2 hours, this film could have easily been as good as Casino Royale, Skyfall, Bourne trilogy, etc... especially with the talent they pulled into this film. Yet it is absolutely wasted with bad writing, bad directing, bad acting, bad editing, and horrific CGI.
Save 2 hours of your life, like I wish I did, skip this film at all costs....
The Matrix Resurrections (2021)
Bad and intentionally so by Lana Wachowski as explained in the film itself!
So right off the bat I was concerned when I saw the first trailer and we see Morpheus is back only it is not Morpheus. I won't spoil why that is in the story but in terms of why that really is I have no doubt the real reason is that a lot of the original cast like Laurence Fishburne or any of the other original cast read the script and were like "hard pass" or Lana didn't even approach them knowing what she was planning to do with the film.
Only Keanu and Carrie are back and I have a strong suspicion this is because they are in a profit share contract from the trilogy and thus as a trade-off for profit sharing usually is that they are then contractually obligated to do a certain or even unlimited number of sequels depending on the contract they have signed.
Within the film Lana hints that Warner Brothers has in essence forced them to make this film against their will and if they were not to do it then WB would have kicked them out of their contract with WB and let someone else make Matrix 4.
Lana as a big f* you to WB thus has made this film intentionally bad to destroy the franchise so WB can't milk their creation any further. It is also possible that simply by being forced to make the sequel Lana had no passion for the project and thus why it is bad. Or a combination of both of the above.
The sad thing is the first hour had potential, but after that first hour it goes downhill very fast. The start of the film is in essence the peak of Mount Everest, by the end of the film you find yourself in the sewage system of an underground bunker under Mount Everest. That should say just how bad the film is.
The film is 2 and a half hours long and that hour and a half of the second half of the film is just a whole load of pure nothingness. Imagine an entire film existing purely of an extended cut of the meeting between Neo and the Architect in Matrix Reloaded, well that is what the second half of this film comes across as but only worse.
The action sequences are horrendous, the fight choreography is a joke, the singular car chase scene in the entire film is taken straight out of World War Z and the entire movie would fit better as a zombie movie than a Matrix film.
Even the acting EVEN by Keanu Reeves is bad in this film. Though we don't get to see much of his acting anyway as Neo doesn't really do anything in this film. Does he fight? No? Does he have amazing dialogue? No he actually doesn't talk much. Does he achieve anything of note in this film? Again no, in fact you could easily cut Neo out of the entire film and the film would still work.
Anyway circling around to this film being intentionally bad, well Lana Wachowski be glad with one thing you did achieve what you wanted to and namely screwed over Warner Bros and all Matrix fans in the process as well. Congratulations!
The Courier (2020)
Best film of both 2020 and 2021!
So this review is going to take a slightly different approach. I wanted to touch on some of the arguments made by people who have reviewed this film with lower ratings on IMDB.
One key point I see coming back is that people are calling this film formulaic, generic, a rehash of other better spy films, boring or just generally bad and bland film.
I just cannot for the life of me get how someone can watch this film and make those claims. Spy films are one of my favourite genres and I have seen them all. My first introduction to spy dramas was North by Northwest this was back when I was about 10 years old my dad showed me this film for the first time and it blew my mind as a kid. The suspense, the mystery. I wanted to watch it again and again until I understood it. The week after he showed it to me I popped that VHS tape back in the player and must have rewatched it every day for an entire week until I understood it all.
Now North by Northwest is pretty much universally agreed upon as being the great grandfather of all spy films so considering that was my first taste of the genre I think I can safely say my bar is set pretty damn high when it comes to spy films.
Speaking more recently we have had some great films such as Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (I gave it a 7/10), Bridge of Spies (gave it a 8/10), The Departed (gave it a 8/10 as well) and a few others that escape my memory at this time.
Now the reason I mentioned these ones above specifically is they all took the spy genre and yes they all have certain cliches that as a spy film it is hard to get away from, but the cliches aside they all took a unique approach to making a spy film. I am speaking about the cinematography, acting dynamics, and more importantly - the script.
How this relates to The Courier and where the negative reviewers have gone wrong is they have failed to recognise how unique the perspective is in The Courier. Rather than following the trail of spying as in the action and suspense around the actual act of spying or simply by hiding who the spy is until the end, etc... This spy film puts us into the shoes of Greville Wynne.
Not only does it put us in his shoes, we see spying from a completely different perspective. We witness the relationship between Greville Wynne and Oleg Penkovsky and the film primarily focuses on that. The spying actually takes second place to the brotherly friendship that forms between Wynne and Penkovsky. A friendship so strong that even to the risk of himself and to his family Oleg never told the KGB the truth. He risked the lives of himself and his wife and children to save the life of Wynne.
That is the focus point of this film, the spying comes secondary to this and the action is just a footnote and that is extremely unique for a spy film.
Now is this film perfect? No otherwise I would have rated it a 9 or 10. But it is damn well bloody good and the acting is out of this world especially the on-screen chemistry between Cumberbatch and Merab Ninidze.
The cinematography is stellar, the directing is perfect, the soundtrack fits very well and really adds to the emotional moments in the film and the script is very unique in how it goes about showing and telling a spy story.
Best of all, for the most part the film manages to stay reasonably true to the source material and the real events.
So no, I am sorry I cannot agree with the people saying this is a bland or generic spy film. In all the great spy films I have seen I don't think I've ever seen a spy film be so bold as to put the spying as a secondary story and put the relation between two characters as the primary story in the film.
What really surprised me was how despite putting the act of spying as a secondary part of the plot the film yet manages to convey the emotion and stress that spying put on the two main characters extremely well. Part of this comes from the excellent directing and part of this comes from the excellent acting by the two stars of the film.
In general I like Benedict Cumberbatch but I do feel he falls flat in some films while in others he really delivers a stunning performance. Well honestly, The Courier in my opinion is his best performance yet.
6 Underground (2019)
Enjoyable action film with mediocre writing and story
Overall the film is definitely an enjoyable action film. Not one I would be able to watch more than once but definitely a film I could recommend to action flick fans to at least watch once.
The issue with the film is the story and writing is quite mediocre. Don't get me wrong, there are moments where the writing is quite brilliant and I had a small giggle but for the most part the lines fall flat and the dialogue all feels very forced and unnatural. The story itself is also nothing special and is just good enough to give the action context. But the focus point of this film is by far the action.
I don't know how much CGI was used in this film as all the action comes across as authentic and feels very real. This is because they used a lot of practical effects to ground the action sequences so any CGI added to these is not distinguishable from what is real and what is fake.
My only complaint about the action is that at times the cinematography and editing is all done too fast. Fast cuts, shaky cameras, fast pans, etc... When in actuality it was not needed as the stunts in this film are top class so I would have really enjoyed to have seen more of the stunts on film rather than to lose so much of the visuals to fast cuts/pans/shaky cam.
Another complaint about this film is the first 50 minutes really felt very directionless the story kind of jumps around and you have story sequences tossed in the middle of hectic action sequences with some over the top gore added in and it was just an awkward mess but suddenly after the 50 minute mark it almost becomes an entirely different film. The plot is a lot more focused, the action sequences are more focused and the over the top gore is just gone for the rest of the film.
In terms of the action sequences, one of the biggest issues with many modern day action flicks is that CGI is overused. There are some sequences in this film they easily could have saved money on and done fully in CGI but they didn't they did it in practical effect and added CGI layers on top and it just adds so much to the quality of these sequences. I can't even watch any new Fast Furious films as they are 100% over the top CGI - not here in this film. Everything while grandiose and visually amazing is all done in practical effects and the payoff is just so worth it.
If the film had better story and writing I could easily have rated it higher but alas beyond the epic action sequences and top quality acting the story and writing just falls flat thus the 6/10 I have given it.
Star Wars: The Bad Batch (2021)
Clone Wars - Rebels - its all back even better than before!
Dave Filoni is the Jesus of Star Wars, literally our lord and saviour of all that makes Star Wars great.
Without giving too much away, I can say that Bad Batch is linked to both Rebels and Clone Wars and fits in perfectly with those and the films.
Immediately from the first moments you know you are going to love the show as it comes right out of the gate with a very strong message from Dave Filoni basically saying "Yes I know what all the Star Wars fans want and guess what HERE IT F*ING IS - you have waited long enough for it and HERE IT IS enjoy it!"
While episode 1 ends on a strong note saying "Hey! This is what it means to be a Star Wars fan, I get it and I want to give you that enjoyment again"
I was literally in tears at the end of the first episode as it was just so amazing to see not just that Dave Filoni gets it but that he delivers it in top quality. It is hard to explain it without spoilers so you will just have to take my word for it until you see it yourself.
I will say this though, watch Clone Wars first (all the way) and then watch Rebels before watching Bad Batch as otherwise you will not understand key plot points. While not necessary for the plot of Bad Batch, I would still recommend to watch Rogue One as well first as there are hints towards it too in Bad Batch.
Blackfish (2013)
Animals do not belong in cages - just look at humans in COVID lockdown
People are fast to protest their right to be free and go outside during COVID-19 lockdown yet you will see those same people gladly go to a zoo or SeaWorld and enjoy watching other animals suffer the very same fate that humans themselves do not want to put up.
Heck even telling other humans to wear a mask is too much, imagine being told to perform on queue for a fish. Many animals are highly evolved no different from humans but just evolved in a different direction. They had the same millions of years to evolve like us humans. We see evidence every day that many mammals are as evolved as humans or very close to as evolved.
In neuroscience (study of brains) we see further evidence of this as well that some animals have deeper emotional bonds than humans while other have more evolved senses etc... Their brains have simply evolved differently but this means they all suffer the same as we do in cages.
Our cages are far better we are stuck in our homes with our comforts and freedom to do what we want in our homes. These animals are stuck in horrid conditions compared to what our situation is in the comfort of our own homes.
And yet humans will protest the COVID-19 lockdown and restrictions and still not see the irony of going to a zoo or SeaWorld and similar after the lockdown is over.
I hope I still witness the abolishing of zoos and SeaWorlds in my lifetime I would hate to see the same human stupidity continue while I am still alive. All for the purpose of greed of these zoo and SeaWorld owners.
Deadwood (2019)
Brilliant yet disappointing all at the same time
The reviews of this title are very mixed if you have a scroll through the most helpful reviews on IMDB and this is no surprise and I will explain why.
First of all, the brilliant aspects of this movie return to the realms of Deadwood.
The movie is produced and written by most all of the same people who were involved in the original TV show as such they know the story, they know the mood and they know the dialogue/characters very well.
Some people complained about the dialogue in the reviews here but perhaps have forgotten that the TV show had a lot of western and Shakespeare vernacular as well you just don't notice it as much as it is spread over multiple episodes and thus less concentrated. I think the writers in doing a movie have ended up compressing the dialogue and thus you get a lot more of this type of dialogue than we are used to so close together.
As these are the original writers & producers they also have clearly taken some risks with the movie by focusing on some character arcs which they were unable to fully explore in the show and I find this quite alright, these are major side characters that they did build up for future plot lines and clearly they were frustrated with being unable to finish these character arcs and used the film to do so.
Now as for the disappointing, a lot of people do not realise this but think back (or re-watch) the first season of any of your favourite TV shows and then see how much better the actors perform their roles in the following seasons. This is natural as for big TV shows these actors perform year round almost on that show and the longer the show runs the more years these actors get to perform as those characters. More years means better performances with more natural emotions and dialogue sequences as well as much better on-screen synergy between the different actors.
This movie was made about 10 years after the show finished (cancelled or whatever reason it was?) and as such these actors have not performed these characters in over 10 years thus the on-screen synergy is of course missing and you see the actors really trying to recapture the character they knew they played 10 years ago. No doubt if this was a TV show the performances would have gotten better over the series run but as it is a movie we are locked in essence to that first season feeling.
Lastly it seemed the writers still want to revisit Deadwood further, without spoiling anything - the ending definitely had a "to be continued" vibe to it with yet further key plot points utterly and completely up in the air. With yet new key plot points added to the story that now also need resolution.
Will we perhaps see a Deadwood 2 film or a new Deadwood TV show at any time in the future? I certainly hope that this is not the end of Deadwood with yet so much left unanswered.
Holmes & Watson (2018)
A funny comedy - if not very misunderstood by those who have seen it
This comedy seems to have gone over very poorly with its audience. But reading a lot of the reviews on this site it just seems like people have misunderstood the comedy or gone into the film expecting something else.
It pokes fun at both the Arthur Doyle books as well as very heavily the Sherlock movies with Robert Downey Jr.
It does so in a very effortless manner and nothing feels forced, the comedy interactions all seem to come very natural and the jokes come and go very smoothly and nothing feels like it is shoved in your face.
It is hard to say why so many people did not like the film but with comedy this is normal I guess as comedy is perhaps the one film genre that has no universal taste. When it comes to drama or action movies it is far easier to make a film that everyone will love.
With comedy you will never find a movie that literally everyone loves, some people prefer old Pink Panther movies, some prefer new ones. Some people love the movie "Airplane!" others hate it.
My style of comedy is Airplane as well as the new Pink Panther movies with Steve Martin. I also love Monty Python films.
If you go into this film with an open mind you can come out enjoying it and will have probably had some good laughs. At least if the style of comedy is what you like.
This is not the best comedy film I've seen either but that is why I have given it a 7 as it is worth watching once - having some good laughs and then probably never watching it again.
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
50 minutes of nothing - real movie starts at 51st minute into the film
I am a hardcore fan of the Underworld series but missed this film when it came out in the cinema and only caught up on it now due to life related matters.
That worked out for the best though as this movie is quite disappointing. Having watched it at home I was quite shocked to see I made it 50 minutes into the film and not much happened; no action, no plot development, no character development and hardly any character introduction. Which is silly because this movie introduces a whole range of new characters - if they were really going to waste the first 50 minutes of the movie they could have at least used it to introduce the new characters.
The issue with this film overall is just that it is made in poor quality - what I mean by this is that every element of the film is just poor. The special effects, choreography (there was literally a scene in the film where two characters stood absolutely still swimming their swords forward non stop for a solid 3 minutes...), the acting, the music and the cinematography, the dialogue and the screenplay. Literally every element of what makes a film good was horrendous in this film.
This film also messes with a lot of what previous films have established - the older the vampire the more powerful yet in this film some very elder vampires were killed like nothing by some very young ones. It just makes no sense in terms of what previous films already established.
To summarise; bad plot, poor acting, boring action sequences and even though this is a fantasy film with vampires and werewolves it abandons the logic of the franchise and goes completely into the realm of nonsense.
Then again this is definitely a franchise that seems to get worse as they make more sequels. I just hope they make one final sequel and give it the quality it deserves and let the franchise end on a positive note.
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017)
Great potential ruined by horrendous acting
I am a massive fan of Luc Besson which is the only reason why I even watched this movie despite the bad ratings it has received from individuals and critics alike.
With exception of the opening dialogue with the two main characters the script is really fantastic and the visuals are absolutely stunning and the overall story is really good.
But whoever did the casting for this movie should never do casting again. With exception of Cara Delevingne who I love as an actress the rest of the actors are just bland or out of place.
Dane DeHaan is almost doing a Keanu Reeves impression the entire movie long and it is very annoying.Clive Owen is just well, typical Clive Owen as soon as he appears on a scene with his usual self the entire immersion is ruined. I have seen him do some stellar performances but it has to be the right type of role and sci-fi is not his genre. At times his performances seem to show that he just doesn't know why he even took this role in the first place.
Some of the lesser roles were performed really well and shockingly, Rihanna was extremely well suited for the role she played in the film. After her performance in Battleship it is interesting to see that she can actually act if she has the right role and right director.
But with exception of Rihanna and Cara Delevigne all the other main characters were just so poorly acted. Luc Besson was too focused on the visuals that he seems to have forgotten to oversee the casting on this movie. They might have been better off keeping Rihanna and Cara Delevigne but casting unknown actors for ALL the other roles. They listen better to director input and would have given it their all if they hired the right novices. Just look at Game of Thrones or the original Star Wars.
Alternatively, they could have gone the Fifth Element route and hired quality actors. After all that is another film by Luc Besson and one that shows what happens when his vision is executed by quality actors.
Such a shame as the story that the writers and Luc Besson built and the world is really one I would have liked to see more of, some very creative sequences and generally well thought out story.
The Orville (2017)
Has that unique "real" Star Trek
I don't enjoy everything that Seth MacFarlane has worked on but he has really outdone himself on this one. The cheesy comedy fits right in and he doesn't overdo it. At the same time of the cheesy comedy the foundation of the show is written and directed like a proper Star Trek series.
The feeling of mystery, the feeling of danger and feeling of joy is all in The Orville and in fact, while I enjoy Star Trek Discovery it somehow doesn't have that Star Trek feeling it is lacking something in the writing. But Orville has captured that feeling fully and feels no different from watching the original series, Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, etc...
In fact if I were to draw similarities I'd say it reminds me most of Deep Space Nine as some of the humour and jokes are similar and the way it is written the good guys are not blatantly good and instead everything becomes more shades of grey in some episodes.
I am sad that the "professional" critics have slammed this show - but then again professional critics seem to have something against Seth MacFarlane they always slam things that he has worked on - maybe he has done something to personally insult them all once, I don't know. But there definitely is a grudge there.
I just hope this show can continue as I really enjoy it and it brings back such fond memories of the days when we had Star Trek TV shows. As sadly while Discovery is enjoyable to watch it just doesn't feel like a Star Trek show.
Futurama: Jurassic Bark (2002)
The second time I ever cried in Futurama
I bought a box set with all Futurama and have been watching them in order as had not had opportunity to do so in the past.
The first time I cried in Futurama was Season 3 episode 10 with the lucky clover. That was just beautifully done and it really hit hard on the emotions.
And this is the second episode I have cried on in all of Futurama. It is worth noting that for Jurassic Bark, the story is inspired by Hachiko but it still is beautifully done and obviously a unique take on it. Some very great writing and a good balance of the usual Futurama comedy but then the rare glimpse of deeper emotions that Futurama sometimes portrays on their show.
Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
The best and only good film that Next Generation timeline created
This is the 8th Star Trek movie and 2nd one featuring the Next Generation crew, after this one there are 2 more (Insurrection & Nemesis) featuring the same crew before Star Trek takes a bit of a cinematic break and we finally get our epic reboot in 2009.
That aside, sadly this is the only great movie that ever came of Next Generation. Also sad is that none of the other series ever received a film.
All that aside, this film is great as it is a very well rounded experience with some good acting performances and a well rounded plot that is both emotional and features some intense action sequences. Nothing feels forced and the set pieces do not come from a mile away.
It is also worth noting that the sound track in this film is really great and especially the background music when the borg are on screen really hits the mark of perfection.
It is just a shame they were not able to achieve this level of quality in terms of writing and directing on the following 2 next Generation films.
Star Trek: Generations (1994)
Not the best, but also not the worst
In short Star Trek Generations is simply a big missed opportunity. Considering that just 3 years earlier Undiscovered Country came out and was hands down among the best Star Trek movies. This is a very weak follow-up of that film.
The opening of the film is quite OK but from there it just goes downhill. There is a lot of boring screen time filler scenes that simply do not serve a purpose and while the movie is redeemed by some really great scenes and some elements that make Star Trek so great. Sadly this is just a film with so much missed opportunity.
Considering they managed to bring together Kirk and Picard into one film you would expect so, so much more. Even if it was a film with just Picard it would have been quite mediocre.
It just lacks focus and direction in the script writing and in general it just feels like they really had to pull out all movie clichés just to get the story to work.
It is watchable and it can be entertaining at times so I would still say to give it a watch especially if you are doing a Star Trek Bluray marathon (like I am doing) but just be prepared to experience a mediocre Star Trek film.
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
A fulfilling end to the original series and an outstanding film
In short, this film gets everything right. Music, acting, effects and pacing/editing.
It is well written and has the usual cheesy moments we would hope for from the originals series but also serious moments and even exciting action moments.
The ending sequence literally had me at the edge of my chair which is quite impressive for a 1991 film being watched in 2017. It is hard for me to pick the best original series film but this will definitely be among the list. Along with Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock. But each are great in their own way.
It kind of brought tears to my eyes in the end because you can tell the staff were very emotional about this being their last time to be in Star Trek and that emotion definitely came through on screen.
Also I have to mention, a big shout out to Christopher Plummer for his stellar performance in this film. It just would not have been the same without him!
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
Easily the worst Star Trek movie in the series
I recently bought the Bluray box set with all Star Trek movies and am watching them in sequence. While I have seen them before they have been very spread out so it is fun to watch in sequence.
Getting to ST5: Final Frontier. What an utter waste of time and disappointment!
Considering that Star Trek 2, 3, 4 were all decent to very good films to follow in the footsteps of those greats and then have this? I would not have minded that this was a mediocre film but this was just downright awful.
As for what makes it so awful, the overarching issue of this film is that it just lacks any and all direction. It is more like you are just watching a random sequence of scenes that have been poorly glued together on the story board by a child with a glue stick.
90% of the scenes in this movie (and I am not at all kidding!) are utterly useless and pointless for the plot of the movie. In fact if you took out all the useless scenes that did nothing at all for character building, story building and was not related in any shape, way, or form to the main plot you would have a 30 minute movie!
This movie is in fact 1 hours and 50 minutes long and because of the utter usefulness of majority of the scenes it felt more like a 3 hour long movie. After 40 minutes I had felt like I had been watching this for an eternity. It was that slow and that boring.
The acting is bad, the story is beyond simplistic, editing is horrendous and the synergy between the actors is horrendous and at times cringe worthy.
Having a look at William Shatner's IMDb page I see that luckily this is the only Star Trek movie he wrote and directed and thus luckily the next movies should be better as I would rather kill myself before sitting through another movie this bad.
I mention Shatner because you really can tell that at the time he directed and wrote this movie he clearly was suffering from self delusion and ego. There are too many scenes where he overacts (no director to tell him he is doing it bad) and many scenes feel written just to prop him in front and center of the scene.
The movie as a whole is cheesy and full of plot holes deep enough to sink an oil tanker in and then still have space left over.
Just a disaster and I feel bad for all the other actors for having to go through this experience and utter waste of time. This is the kind of movie that usually ruins careers as well and it all would have been Shatner's fault.
Assassin's Creed (2016)
Enjoyable but fails to capture the magic of the game
Overall an enjoyable movie to watch at least one time, but it simply fails to capture the elements that make the game series what it is.
The story of each Assassin's Creed game takes place 95% inside the animus and thus in the historical setting of the Assassin's Creed universe.
The remaining 5% takes place in the modern setting and kind of glues it all together and gives further meaning to all the actions you are doing in the historical setting.
Where this movie fails is that it focuses almost entirely on the modern day setting and only uses the historic setting as a reason for action scenes. We learn very little about both main characters of the movie played by Michael Fassbender. In historic setting that is Aguilar and in modern day setting that is Cal Lynch.
In terms of Aguilar we actually learn little to nothing about the character and in terms of Cal Lynch we only see tidbits of his life. Due to this complete and utter lack of character building in both modern and historic settings of the movie storyline, we simply have little reason to become attached and immersed into the story and movie as a whole.
For those who have played the games, just saying the name Ezio Auditore da Firenze is enough to invoke feelings of attachment and fandom. Due to the vast depth of knowledge we have about Ezio, his youth, his adulthood and even his old-age.
This movie should have avoided the modern day setting as much as possible and instead focused more on telling the story of Aguilar. Perhaps only at the end showing us even Cal Lynch. This would have delivered a much better movie experience and would also leave it open for a great sequel.
The music is another issue of the movie, the trailer had horrendous music and the movie was not much better. Why they did not even consider to hire Jesper Kyd is beyond me.
Terminator Genisys (2015)
A hard movie to reboot, yet done successfully!
Let's face it, this is not an easy franchise to reboot. It is always hard to reboot a movie franchise when the first one or two titles were so great and had a strong cast, great music and a good story + director/crew.
We saw the results of one failed sequel where they just tried to simulate the things they thought made T1 and T2 such big hits, but they were way off with T3, which just was horrible.
Then came Terminator Salvations, which was an attempt at a reboot, but they made some bad directional choices for the story and casting and the movie flopped as a result.
Then finally, came Terminator Genisys, which finally rebooted the franchise successfully in my eyes. Sure it is not as good as T1 and T2 but darn it does it come close. I think the main issue is just that the movie overuses CGI and the overall quality is quite a bit lower than that of T1 and T2. By quality I mean writing, cinematography, directing and editing.
The quality issues aside, the reboot does a pretty good job at achieving many of the things that made T1 and T2 such great classics. They also managed to stay true to the story line and find ways to bend it and reboot it (similar to the approach of the Star Trek reboot and soon to be released Star Wars reboot).
They also found a great way to keep Arnold in the movie (because let's face it, you just cannot have a Terminator movie without Arnold, after all he is the Terminator and without Arnold I highly doubt T1 and T2 could have been a success). Better yet, they managed to do it in a way that would not require CGI. Like the failed attempt they did in Terminator Salvation.
If this was a standalone title and the first Terminator movie, I would rate it a 6/10 or a 7/10. Why? It is enjoyable and overall a fun movie to watch but nothing great or epic. I gave it an 8/10 because I recognise that this is a hard franchise to reboot and an even harder one to get funding for due to the failures of T3 and T:Salvation.
Star Trek for example was also a hard franchise to reboot but one that at least there was financial faith in due to the many successful movies and series it has had, same goes for Star Wars. Heck, even the prequels of Star Wars were bad and yet still achieved massive financial success.
Shichinin no samurai (1954)
Info about movie
Hi all,
I'm not surprised that there are the few sum of people who don't like the movie or even hate it and I'm very pleased to see that there are many people who loved the movie and could understand the quality of the Directing and Acting and Sword movement. I myself study Japanese sword movement "Shinkendo" and found the sword movement superb and flawless and would love to be able to achieve such movement one day myself
;spoiler possibility; as for the plot of the bandits raiding the farming village and not giving up even after losing quite a few of their men in their first attack against the village (now protected by samurai), that is traditional culture for Japanese > more recent example would be pearl harbor > Japanese won't give up till they have reached their achievement or have died ,,, i also read that a few viewers have found it a boring movie that would be then that they prefer action without story over a well balanced action/story movie and also i notice many people miss the essence of the story in the movie >>> so if you love to see really classical movies with lot of story in it and plenty of action, and like to watch movies that show many aspects of a foreign culture then watch this movie but if you prefer movies that are straight forward action, no-brain movies then this would not be a movie for you