pekka-raninen-1
Joined Sep 2006
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.
Reviews17
pekka-raninen-1's rating
The theme of the movie is very important. So are the subjects (they seem to be real people). But, as a film, in itself, this is not as good as it could be. Or how it should be.
I admire Mark Ruffalo quite much. But the whole film rests on his shoulders. And his shoulders only. The other characters - and actors - just don't seem to serve their purpose that much. I was especially disappointed of Tim Robbins, but I admit that it could be the failure on the director's part.
As a movie, it is a bit too long, and kind of shuts down somewhere in the middle (abt. At 1 hour mark). After that, things go a bit awkward and the plot and direction (or editing?) just jump to places. Other characters apart from Mr. Ruffalo's don't carry the weight they should.
But, if you don't know anything about Du Pont or other chemical giants, and the consequences of their doings, this film could provide some useful information.
I just wish they squeezed it to 90 minutes, not over 2 hours as it is now.
I admire Mark Ruffalo quite much. But the whole film rests on his shoulders. And his shoulders only. The other characters - and actors - just don't seem to serve their purpose that much. I was especially disappointed of Tim Robbins, but I admit that it could be the failure on the director's part.
As a movie, it is a bit too long, and kind of shuts down somewhere in the middle (abt. At 1 hour mark). After that, things go a bit awkward and the plot and direction (or editing?) just jump to places. Other characters apart from Mr. Ruffalo's don't carry the weight they should.
But, if you don't know anything about Du Pont or other chemical giants, and the consequences of their doings, this film could provide some useful information.
I just wish they squeezed it to 90 minutes, not over 2 hours as it is now.
In 1996, I bought the first Tomb Raider/Lara Croft video game for Playstation 1. With the kids, we played it through, and the 2nd Tomb Raider game too.
At the time, it was a new, fascinating way of an adventure for the whole family. The 3rd etc. Games just started to suck, in a big way. Too much shooting, not enough smart puzzles to solve.
Nowadays, having watched these Lara movies... They are just complete nonsense in and out. Just as books usually do not turn out as great movies, this is a fine example of the Hollywood nonsense fiction.
Cinematically, I admired some shots, esp. The still ones. But is the adventure there? Not. Are the characters interesting enough? No. Are the actors there? Not. Is the plot anywhere believable in any way? Not.
This movie is just FX nonsense, and half of it is just your average CGI stuff.
Maybe I'm just too old? Not.
At the time, it was a new, fascinating way of an adventure for the whole family. The 3rd etc. Games just started to suck, in a big way. Too much shooting, not enough smart puzzles to solve.
Nowadays, having watched these Lara movies... They are just complete nonsense in and out. Just as books usually do not turn out as great movies, this is a fine example of the Hollywood nonsense fiction.
Cinematically, I admired some shots, esp. The still ones. But is the adventure there? Not. Are the characters interesting enough? No. Are the actors there? Not. Is the plot anywhere believable in any way? Not.
This movie is just FX nonsense, and half of it is just your average CGI stuff.
Maybe I'm just too old? Not.