cjwilkinson-81808
Joined Jun 2019
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews31
cjwilkinson-81808's rating
This is a genuinely badly-made film - poorly written, poorly directed and poorly produced.
You do at least get fair warning of this from the very start, where the music crashes into clips of dialogue during the introduction, which is accompanied by typography somewhat amateurishly overlaying the visuals.
The plot is utterly implausible, and totally unconvincing. The characters are all unlikeable - although the acting is not completely awful by any means - just that the actors have nothing at all to work with.
The problem is not that this film is low budget - it's that is completely devoid of anything - depth, imagination, fun, scares - even jokes - and the central character is supposed to be a comedian.
Instead of developing the idea of a heckler haunting the protagonist, it looks as if they wanted to make a slasher film and just used the initially promising concept as a way into making something much more formulaic - with predictable results.
You do at least get fair warning of this from the very start, where the music crashes into clips of dialogue during the introduction, which is accompanied by typography somewhat amateurishly overlaying the visuals.
The plot is utterly implausible, and totally unconvincing. The characters are all unlikeable - although the acting is not completely awful by any means - just that the actors have nothing at all to work with.
The problem is not that this film is low budget - it's that is completely devoid of anything - depth, imagination, fun, scares - even jokes - and the central character is supposed to be a comedian.
Instead of developing the idea of a heckler haunting the protagonist, it looks as if they wanted to make a slasher film and just used the initially promising concept as a way into making something much more formulaic - with predictable results.
So, here we have the usual group of twenty-somethings exploring a disused medical institution, bringing their cameras with them.
We are supposed to believe that these people are well-known documentary makers, despite showing no depth of knowledge or even interest in their subject, any aptitude for film-making or charisma in front of the camera. In fact, there is nothing about this group even to like, let alone engage the viewer.
The plot is no less sub-par. Without wanting to give the plot away (thin though it is), can you guess whether this group make it out of the building again?
That is the correct guess.
For the entire first half of the film, nothing happens. I am not exaggerating. They wander about the building, and that's it.
For most of the second half, they yell, scream, holler, wail, shout at each other and run about in a blind panic
A good editor would have cut this film down to about 5 or 10 minutes, and it would have still been too long..
We are supposed to believe that these people are well-known documentary makers, despite showing no depth of knowledge or even interest in their subject, any aptitude for film-making or charisma in front of the camera. In fact, there is nothing about this group even to like, let alone engage the viewer.
The plot is no less sub-par. Without wanting to give the plot away (thin though it is), can you guess whether this group make it out of the building again?
That is the correct guess.
For the entire first half of the film, nothing happens. I am not exaggerating. They wander about the building, and that's it.
For most of the second half, they yell, scream, holler, wail, shout at each other and run about in a blind panic
A good editor would have cut this film down to about 5 or 10 minutes, and it would have still been too long..
Every Bond film is to a certain extent a remake of the ones that came before it, but this one is almost unique in that it only seems to take the ideas that have already been bled dry and/or have become hopelessly outdated from previous Bond movies .
Although the production values and acting are good (which is a given for such a huge franchise), whereas previous Bond films have dazzled, the poverty of imagination in the creation of this movie is the only thing that will leave you with a sense of wonderment.
It's as if the producers decided to take all the worst and most dated aspects of Bond movies and put them into one film. Where once it was clever, it is now just faintly ridiculous that the "baddie" organisation has a sinister name. Similarly, the idea of villains in underground bunkers on islands is such a tired old trope that it would have to be done brilliantly not to be the dull caricature of previous movies it is here. And Bond is still driving a vintage car, which now just looks incongruous now.
The basic failings of the plot are compounded by trying to involve the audience with Bond's emotions and personal life. It's a Bond film - nobody cares about him being in love or his conflicted emotions. It's just tedious, and the overriding impression of No Time To Die is that it's just no fun.
The film is a long one, but it feels even longer as it takes itself so seriously. You won't shed a tear at the end - you'll just be relieved that not only is Bond put out of his misery when the film's over, but that you are too.
Although the production values and acting are good (which is a given for such a huge franchise), whereas previous Bond films have dazzled, the poverty of imagination in the creation of this movie is the only thing that will leave you with a sense of wonderment.
It's as if the producers decided to take all the worst and most dated aspects of Bond movies and put them into one film. Where once it was clever, it is now just faintly ridiculous that the "baddie" organisation has a sinister name. Similarly, the idea of villains in underground bunkers on islands is such a tired old trope that it would have to be done brilliantly not to be the dull caricature of previous movies it is here. And Bond is still driving a vintage car, which now just looks incongruous now.
The basic failings of the plot are compounded by trying to involve the audience with Bond's emotions and personal life. It's a Bond film - nobody cares about him being in love or his conflicted emotions. It's just tedious, and the overriding impression of No Time To Die is that it's just no fun.
The film is a long one, but it feels even longer as it takes itself so seriously. You won't shed a tear at the end - you'll just be relieved that not only is Bond put out of his misery when the film's over, but that you are too.