nicolasroop
Joined Jul 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.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews136
nicolasroop's rating
It's difficult to review a film like this because it wants you to feel bad for it's characters but they're all kind of terrible people. Fantastic acting from all parties involved but I think a few of the scripts issues that makes this movie more trashy than it needed to be.
There is a very uncomfortable scene that happens towards the middle of the film that really did not need to be there. It's only glaced upon once more in the film and it did nothing for the story. If you've seen it, you know what I mean.
There's also a simplicity to this story that felt like it only got skin deep for me. The political climate in that part of the world is volatile to say the least, but the film doesn't really show enough of that to make us feel like real danger is looming. Just some couple who are loosing their farm to the native people of that land. Interesting, but not as deep or thoughtful as it could've been.
Overall, not a bad film, but not a particularly good one either. The film seems to wallow in this pit of a crappy childhood as opposed to the realism of the danger these people put themselves in and the lack of care for the native people of that land. Personally, for me, it dragged the film down and made what should've been a hard hitting story into something that was difficult to relate to.
2.5 dogs out of 5.
There is a very uncomfortable scene that happens towards the middle of the film that really did not need to be there. It's only glaced upon once more in the film and it did nothing for the story. If you've seen it, you know what I mean.
There's also a simplicity to this story that felt like it only got skin deep for me. The political climate in that part of the world is volatile to say the least, but the film doesn't really show enough of that to make us feel like real danger is looming. Just some couple who are loosing their farm to the native people of that land. Interesting, but not as deep or thoughtful as it could've been.
Overall, not a bad film, but not a particularly good one either. The film seems to wallow in this pit of a crappy childhood as opposed to the realism of the danger these people put themselves in and the lack of care for the native people of that land. Personally, for me, it dragged the film down and made what should've been a hard hitting story into something that was difficult to relate to.
2.5 dogs out of 5.
This could have been good. But too much nostalgia is a bad thing and this film proves it. What we have here is a remake/reboot/sequel that just doesn't work and is too afraid to push the boundries and try for something new.
Let me say, the acting is terrible. The new cast just sucked. Nothing iconic about them, nor the killer. Even worse than the 1997 original or it's 1998 sequel, neither of which were very good movies in their own rights. The 3 legacy cast members aren't even trying here either. Freddy Prince Jr being the worst offender to this. They were definitely there for the paycheck and that's it. And the "menacing" guy in a slicker just didn't cut it this time. I found myself rolling my eyes as opposed to gluing to the screen.
That brings me to another point to make. Not even the film's could kills make this better. Of which, there were too few and they were very unsatisfactory for the slasher genre these days. Not to mention, the logical leaps you have to take to make this storyline work were too much to handle. The incident that occured to start it off wasn't really their fault this time, so the entire thing felt unearned and cheap. The twist at the end, both of them, felt like someone had writer's block and just decided to jot down whatever they could to finish the story. Just awful writing throughout.
I wish I had better things to say about it, but there wasn't much positive to take away from the experience. They tried to revive this already defunct franchise, but the writers and the director should take note. In order to revive a film franchise that wasn't very good in the first place, you need to be able to breathe new life into it. This film does none of that. Instead, it robs itself of any creativity that could have been.
Overall, you're better off wasting your afternoon with something better than this cinematic abomination. This was a lazy, creatively bankrupt and, frankly, cheap knockoff of the original, which wasn't that good of a film either. I guess nostalgia really isn't what it's cracked up to be.
1 meat hook out of 5.
Let me say, the acting is terrible. The new cast just sucked. Nothing iconic about them, nor the killer. Even worse than the 1997 original or it's 1998 sequel, neither of which were very good movies in their own rights. The 3 legacy cast members aren't even trying here either. Freddy Prince Jr being the worst offender to this. They were definitely there for the paycheck and that's it. And the "menacing" guy in a slicker just didn't cut it this time. I found myself rolling my eyes as opposed to gluing to the screen.
That brings me to another point to make. Not even the film's could kills make this better. Of which, there were too few and they were very unsatisfactory for the slasher genre these days. Not to mention, the logical leaps you have to take to make this storyline work were too much to handle. The incident that occured to start it off wasn't really their fault this time, so the entire thing felt unearned and cheap. The twist at the end, both of them, felt like someone had writer's block and just decided to jot down whatever they could to finish the story. Just awful writing throughout.
I wish I had better things to say about it, but there wasn't much positive to take away from the experience. They tried to revive this already defunct franchise, but the writers and the director should take note. In order to revive a film franchise that wasn't very good in the first place, you need to be able to breathe new life into it. This film does none of that. Instead, it robs itself of any creativity that could have been.
Overall, you're better off wasting your afternoon with something better than this cinematic abomination. This was a lazy, creatively bankrupt and, frankly, cheap knockoff of the original, which wasn't that good of a film either. I guess nostalgia really isn't what it's cracked up to be.
1 meat hook out of 5.
As much as I love Dexter Morgan and his particular brand of justice, I just cannot get behind how convoluted this storyline is. All he would've had to do to get Bautista off his butt was tell him that Deb in fact shot and killed Laguerta because she came after Dexter so hard and she defended her brother. I mean what is he going to do, incarcerate her? She's freakin dead! He may have had a hell of a time in court getting off for aiding in the death of an officer, but I don't think Bautista would've brought it there considering Deb's fate. And then he could've blamed the accusations on his ex/the cop for thinking Dexter was so involved in the Bay Harbour butcher case because of Kurt Caldwell's craziness, as she had already told Bautista in the first place.
But no, instead they write him into running out on him, from a hospital no less, further incriminating himself to Bautista. Why? Why would you write this plotline like this if they wanted Dexter's story to continue? How dumb.
On the other hand, I'm interested to see what happens with Harrison and how he will end up evading his own justice to the crime he just committed. Also, what is going on with Uma Thurman's character? That was very weird, and I'm kinda interested in seeing where that goes too.
Overall, half and half of a great/bad start here. Personally, I think they should've left Dexter Morgan dead and buried, and he should've been Harrison's spiritual mentor, like his father was for him. There's just not much to do with his storyline that isn't, at this point, going to be too much of a good thing, making it a stupid thing. However, I do want to see want is going to happen with his kid and what this whole invitation business is all about. Guess we'll find out in the next episode.
2.5 resurrections out of 5.
But no, instead they write him into running out on him, from a hospital no less, further incriminating himself to Bautista. Why? Why would you write this plotline like this if they wanted Dexter's story to continue? How dumb.
On the other hand, I'm interested to see what happens with Harrison and how he will end up evading his own justice to the crime he just committed. Also, what is going on with Uma Thurman's character? That was very weird, and I'm kinda interested in seeing where that goes too.
Overall, half and half of a great/bad start here. Personally, I think they should've left Dexter Morgan dead and buried, and he should've been Harrison's spiritual mentor, like his father was for him. There's just not much to do with his storyline that isn't, at this point, going to be too much of a good thing, making it a stupid thing. However, I do want to see want is going to happen with his kid and what this whole invitation business is all about. Guess we'll find out in the next episode.
2.5 resurrections out of 5.