63 reviews
The weak acting, directing, camerawork, choreography, and story combined with massive logic fails and plot inconsistencies make this seem like school kids making a movie in their back yard, yet for some reason it's still enjoyable despite the very rough edges.
There's nothing wrong with the English dub (though I only listened to it for a few minutes for the sake of determining how good or bad it was) but the setting calls for the added authenticity of the original Japanese dialog.
I wouldn't exactly recommend this first of a four movie series it but it's a better way to spend an hour and 15 minutes than scrolling on your phone.
There's nothing wrong with the English dub (though I only listened to it for a few minutes for the sake of determining how good or bad it was) but the setting calls for the added authenticity of the original Japanese dialog.
I wouldn't exactly recommend this first of a four movie series it but it's a better way to spend an hour and 15 minutes than scrolling on your phone.
Read the reviews giving glowing praise of "Resurrection" and you'll get an idea of the only kind of audience that will enjoy this movie because, while the plot device sounds interesting, the execution falls flat.
There's no character development arc for the protagonist of this movie despite losing her husband, recovering from critical injuries, gaining powers, and experiencing more should-be significant events that she barely registers. Even the stereotypical close-nit devout rural community that provides the setting for the bulk of this film seems to just take it all in stride. It's as if the director put the entire script on Prozac.
Only one supporting character experiences any kind of growth but the movie glosses over his final transformation and fails to explain the radical choice he ultimately makes. There's a single outburst from a religious fanatic who you expect to become the antagonist but he's never heard from again, some scientific research that comes and goes, and a single interaction with the protagonist's father that provides the only meaningful dialogue in the entire movie.
While this is far from the worst movie I've ever seen it will certainly fall short of most people's expectations despite the glowing reviews from a select few.
There's no character development arc for the protagonist of this movie despite losing her husband, recovering from critical injuries, gaining powers, and experiencing more should-be significant events that she barely registers. Even the stereotypical close-nit devout rural community that provides the setting for the bulk of this film seems to just take it all in stride. It's as if the director put the entire script on Prozac.
Only one supporting character experiences any kind of growth but the movie glosses over his final transformation and fails to explain the radical choice he ultimately makes. There's a single outburst from a religious fanatic who you expect to become the antagonist but he's never heard from again, some scientific research that comes and goes, and a single interaction with the protagonist's father that provides the only meaningful dialogue in the entire movie.
While this is far from the worst movie I've ever seen it will certainly fall short of most people's expectations despite the glowing reviews from a select few.
They tried to combine equal parts of two cult classic cartoons but they ended up with something that was less than the sum of its parts. While I appreciate the attempt, I think it might have worked better if they instead either dropped Courage, Muriel, and Eustace into the Scooby-verse or "the gang" into the Nowhere-verse ...or maybe there's something inherently incompatible between their respective types of humour ...or maybe they just needed better writers.
Whatever the case, this amalgamation of Courage and Scooby is sort-of amusing but in the end it was only worth watching if you're really desperate for a bit of cartoon nostalgia.
Whatever the case, this amalgamation of Courage and Scooby is sort-of amusing but in the end it was only worth watching if you're really desperate for a bit of cartoon nostalgia.
Many of the most positive reviews seem to based strongly on nostalgia but I doubt anyone under fifty will find anything about this movie quite so endearing.
I just watched this again for the first time in about fifty years and, though I remember enjoying this movie as a child (replacing nun's sugar with soap powder -- how scandalous!), seeing it again through adult eyes I realize there's really very little substance to this film. It's well into the second half of this movie before any emotional stakes are introduced and those were predictable even to a child fifty years ago.
Haley Mills' made a lot of memorable movies as a young starlet that have stood the test of time but this is not one of them. Go watch "Parent Trap" again instead and leave "The Trouble with Angels" as a fond memory from our youth.
I just watched this again for the first time in about fifty years and, though I remember enjoying this movie as a child (replacing nun's sugar with soap powder -- how scandalous!), seeing it again through adult eyes I realize there's really very little substance to this film. It's well into the second half of this movie before any emotional stakes are introduced and those were predictable even to a child fifty years ago.
Haley Mills' made a lot of memorable movies as a young starlet that have stood the test of time but this is not one of them. Go watch "Parent Trap" again instead and leave "The Trouble with Angels" as a fond memory from our youth.
I've watched Troy twice -- either the theatrical release or the director's cut when it first came out twenty years ago (too long ago to remember which) and the "TV" version just now -- and somehow they've managed to edit out every ounce of vitality from the censored version of this movie. It still has great action scenes and a great cast, yet the moment the killing stops they left nothing worth watching and I think that explains why there are so many negative reviews recently.
That said, Troy (uncensored version) is just 7/10 good, not great, but it's worth watching provided you see it the way it was intended and not the butchered TV version.
That said, Troy (uncensored version) is just 7/10 good, not great, but it's worth watching provided you see it the way it was intended and not the butchered TV version.
Discovery starts out much darker in tone and more action-oriented than previous Star Trek series but the pace slows and the tone lightens as this series progresses. That's not necessarily a bad thing but viewers drawn the action of the first two seasons may be find it harder to pay attention in the fourth and final seasons. Unfortunately, as the story pacing slows the plot depth shallows; yet the later seasons remain enjoyable to watch -- the last fifteen minutes of the final episode notwithstanding which are boring and needless quasi-epilogue filler.
In a departure from the previous series, Discovery focuses on a single main character rather than the entire crew; and though some effort is made in later seasons to place more emphasis on her relationship with side characters, none of those relationships ever come close to the camaraderie and familiarity of prior series' crews. That's also not necessarily a bad thing, just different, but it does make it very difficult to care about what happens to other crew members.
As is commonplace for the entire Star Trek franchise, the conflict and resolution of each episode frequently ignores established technological canon (sometimes within the same episode) or even simple common sense which can be frustrating to endure for people who like stories to make sense; however, the special effects and story lines, particularly the five season-long themes spanning a millennia of time, are the best of any of the previous series or movies.
Despite my criticisms, Discovery was still an enjoyable series and worthy addition to the Star Trek family.
In a departure from the previous series, Discovery focuses on a single main character rather than the entire crew; and though some effort is made in later seasons to place more emphasis on her relationship with side characters, none of those relationships ever come close to the camaraderie and familiarity of prior series' crews. That's also not necessarily a bad thing, just different, but it does make it very difficult to care about what happens to other crew members.
As is commonplace for the entire Star Trek franchise, the conflict and resolution of each episode frequently ignores established technological canon (sometimes within the same episode) or even simple common sense which can be frustrating to endure for people who like stories to make sense; however, the special effects and story lines, particularly the five season-long themes spanning a millennia of time, are the best of any of the previous series or movies.
Despite my criticisms, Discovery was still an enjoyable series and worthy addition to the Star Trek family.
Despite mostly poor acting, this was still an enjoyable movie thanks largely to the interesting theme that starts once the brother dies and the special effects used to transition from location to location a decade before drones were available.
As others have pointed out, it does seem like something a student might turn in for a film class and it could have been much better if an hour or so were edited out; particularly scenes that were revisited but didn't add any new context, most of which were only included, as far as I can tell, to show off the sister's and mother's breasts again (and again, and again) or to watch them having sex (again and again). Likewise, there's a pointless scene in a sex hotel that could be cut -- even the few seconds of that scene where he imagines one woman turning into his sister is unnecessary since his sexual interest in her, both in life and death, was already (repeatedly) established.
I would say that how much you value novelty (and breasts) over good acting and storytelling will determine how much you'll enjoy this movie (or not). It's not a great movie, but it's certainly unique.
As others have pointed out, it does seem like something a student might turn in for a film class and it could have been much better if an hour or so were edited out; particularly scenes that were revisited but didn't add any new context, most of which were only included, as far as I can tell, to show off the sister's and mother's breasts again (and again, and again) or to watch them having sex (again and again). Likewise, there's a pointless scene in a sex hotel that could be cut -- even the few seconds of that scene where he imagines one woman turning into his sister is unnecessary since his sexual interest in her, both in life and death, was already (repeatedly) established.
I would say that how much you value novelty (and breasts) over good acting and storytelling will determine how much you'll enjoy this movie (or not). It's not a great movie, but it's certainly unique.
The story revolves around a changing group of people (other than the main characters) who die but find themselves reassembled in an apartment they can't escape with a large black sphere (Gantz) that provides them with weapons, a power suit, and instructions to kill an alien target within a time limit. Those who survive are free to return to their lives until they are summoned again, with increasingly poor odds of survival each time.
The animation is reminiscent of the R-rated anime more common back in the '80s, with uncensored graphic violence, nudity, sex, and generally mature themes, and it's refreshing to watch an adult-oriented story that hasn't been watered down to receive PG rating (though it does have a jarringly out-of-place JPop theme song). The series covers about half of the story from the manga before concluding with an open-to-interpretation ending that, but that's better than ending on a cliffhanger that never gets resolved.
Gonzo Studios has a tendency to use unnecessary flashbacks or simply cut animation quality when they run out of time and/or money, and I can live with that, but they made a lot of choices which may or may not have been in the manga that simply that make no sense. Why is the population of 2004 Tokyo 95% Caucasian and why would they all look forward to seeing someone get run over by train and refuse to help? How can high school bullies, who look like they're in their 30s, get away with pulling teeth out of their victims? Why would a group of people, including a guy who easily beats up the biggest of the aforementioned bullies, stand around and do nothing when a guy carries a teenage girl away into the next room to rape her? Why do people who just died and see other people being reassembled in front of their eyes act like nothing strange is going on and refuse to listen to the main characters who are trying to save their lives?
The thing that will really have you shouting at the screen is all the times (and this happens a lot) when the characters stand around talking about how they should shoot the monster despite the time limit and immediate threat to their lives, yet no-one actually starts shooting. Two or three people will die before even one of them starts shooting while the rest still just stand there. Then, when half of them do finally join in (the rest still standing there watching), they charge towards the monster, guns in hand but still not shooting, until a couple more people are killed.
Overall, I do recommend Gantz, but it's frustrating to watch something that could have been so much better brought down by things that should never have been allowed into the series in the first place.
The animation is reminiscent of the R-rated anime more common back in the '80s, with uncensored graphic violence, nudity, sex, and generally mature themes, and it's refreshing to watch an adult-oriented story that hasn't been watered down to receive PG rating (though it does have a jarringly out-of-place JPop theme song). The series covers about half of the story from the manga before concluding with an open-to-interpretation ending that, but that's better than ending on a cliffhanger that never gets resolved.
Gonzo Studios has a tendency to use unnecessary flashbacks or simply cut animation quality when they run out of time and/or money, and I can live with that, but they made a lot of choices which may or may not have been in the manga that simply that make no sense. Why is the population of 2004 Tokyo 95% Caucasian and why would they all look forward to seeing someone get run over by train and refuse to help? How can high school bullies, who look like they're in their 30s, get away with pulling teeth out of their victims? Why would a group of people, including a guy who easily beats up the biggest of the aforementioned bullies, stand around and do nothing when a guy carries a teenage girl away into the next room to rape her? Why do people who just died and see other people being reassembled in front of their eyes act like nothing strange is going on and refuse to listen to the main characters who are trying to save their lives?
The thing that will really have you shouting at the screen is all the times (and this happens a lot) when the characters stand around talking about how they should shoot the monster despite the time limit and immediate threat to their lives, yet no-one actually starts shooting. Two or three people will die before even one of them starts shooting while the rest still just stand there. Then, when half of them do finally join in (the rest still standing there watching), they charge towards the monster, guns in hand but still not shooting, until a couple more people are killed.
Overall, I do recommend Gantz, but it's frustrating to watch something that could have been so much better brought down by things that should never have been allowed into the series in the first place.
The first 2/3rds of this movie is an excellent, funny satire about a man, desperate for work, who lands a job as a telemarketer; something he soon discovers he excels at but is ultimately confronted with having to sell a new form of legal slavery if he wants to financially succeed for the first time in his life.
Rather than spend the last third of the movie dealing with the ethics of capitalism and the morality of his choice, the movie instead decides to abandon reality and delve into an outlandish subplot of forced genetic mutation. This could easily have been made into concussion, alcohol, and drug induced delusional metaphor allowing the character to reexamine his life but, sadly, it's just a very wrong plot turn in an otherwise solid satire.
Despite the silliness of the last half hour it's still a good movie, just not the great one it could have been.
Rather than spend the last third of the movie dealing with the ethics of capitalism and the morality of his choice, the movie instead decides to abandon reality and delve into an outlandish subplot of forced genetic mutation. This could easily have been made into concussion, alcohol, and drug induced delusional metaphor allowing the character to reexamine his life but, sadly, it's just a very wrong plot turn in an otherwise solid satire.
Despite the silliness of the last half hour it's still a good movie, just not the great one it could have been.
This movie was so bad I felt compelled to warn people lest they think there's some redeeming value in this remake of the original Spanish film, "Rec": There isn't.
I don't know what they spent the $12 million budget on ($17 million in 2023 dollars) but YouTubers working on shoestring budgets with their own money regularly create far better works so there's really no excuse for the 89 minutes of painfully bad ...well, everything.
Bad acting, bad dialog (was it improv?), bad cinematography (even by low-light "shaky cam" standards), presumably bad directing (it's hard to believe this was anyone's vision), really bad logic fails ('80s horror movie bad), and not even a hint of the fan service or corny humour that could have elevated this to at least 'B' movie status.
In the end, "Quarantine" seems more like a bootleg of a dry run rehearsal than a finished production and I can only imagine being enjoyed by a group of friends that like to hate-watch bad movies so they can criticize all the flaws afterwards.
I don't know what they spent the $12 million budget on ($17 million in 2023 dollars) but YouTubers working on shoestring budgets with their own money regularly create far better works so there's really no excuse for the 89 minutes of painfully bad ...well, everything.
Bad acting, bad dialog (was it improv?), bad cinematography (even by low-light "shaky cam" standards), presumably bad directing (it's hard to believe this was anyone's vision), really bad logic fails ('80s horror movie bad), and not even a hint of the fan service or corny humour that could have elevated this to at least 'B' movie status.
In the end, "Quarantine" seems more like a bootleg of a dry run rehearsal than a finished production and I can only imagine being enjoyed by a group of friends that like to hate-watch bad movies so they can criticize all the flaws afterwards.
The show is passably entertaining if you care more about novel ideas than having things make sense, but this is common problem with supernatural, fantasy, and science fiction TV shows. Fans know how dumbed-down scripts can be for these genres, particularly when created for network TV, and this series does nothing to raise the bar in that regard.
It doesn't help that the dialogue is particularly weak, or perhaps it's just the bad acting, which is little more than filler to pad out episodes while you wait for something to happen. This too is unfortunately typical of this kind of TV show. Honestly, I doubt you'd miss much if you fast-forwarded though the talking and just watched the action scenes.
The series concludes with a what-the?!? Ending which makes it very hard to recommend when there are so many better shows (some with actual endings) you could watch instead.
It doesn't help that the dialogue is particularly weak, or perhaps it's just the bad acting, which is little more than filler to pad out episodes while you wait for something to happen. This too is unfortunately typical of this kind of TV show. Honestly, I doubt you'd miss much if you fast-forwarded though the talking and just watched the action scenes.
The series concludes with a what-the?!? Ending which makes it very hard to recommend when there are so many better shows (some with actual endings) you could watch instead.
I wasn't expecting Toy Story 4 to be as good as 2 or 3, but it wasn't even at the level of the first Toy Story movie. It's not bad, per se, but it's far from what the money behind Pixar's premiere franchise should have been able to produce. If all they did was follow the same formula from the previous movies, Toy Story 4 would have turned out several notches better.
Actions lack consequences, there's never any sense of real peril, and there wasn't a single memorable joke or sight gag. On the other hand, the pace is constant and there's never any dull moments.
Overall, I'm glad I waited to see Toy Story 4 for free on TV because it wasn't worth a theatre ticket nor the price of buying it to add to my movie collection.
Actions lack consequences, there's never any sense of real peril, and there wasn't a single memorable joke or sight gag. On the other hand, the pace is constant and there's never any dull moments.
Overall, I'm glad I waited to see Toy Story 4 for free on TV because it wasn't worth a theatre ticket nor the price of buying it to add to my movie collection.
The acting, directing, filming are all fine but, even if you are devoid of any understanding of how sound works, the movie itself provides more than enough information to contradict its own premise and cause its own downfall.
Had the movie been about a family that is isolated for some reason (camping trip or remote cabin perhaps) and somehow becomes trapped by monsters and have to figure out how to survive it would have a relatively enjoyable film. As it stand though, anyone exercising the most rudimentary of critical thinking skills will find the premise that for more than a year the entire world has been at the mercy of creatures who are easily fooled, easily distracted, have an easily exploitable weakness, and are relatively easy to kill simply too unbelievable to enjoy even without the absurd corn silo scene.
Had the movie been about a family that is isolated for some reason (camping trip or remote cabin perhaps) and somehow becomes trapped by monsters and have to figure out how to survive it would have a relatively enjoyable film. As it stand though, anyone exercising the most rudimentary of critical thinking skills will find the premise that for more than a year the entire world has been at the mercy of creatures who are easily fooled, easily distracted, have an easily exploitable weakness, and are relatively easy to kill simply too unbelievable to enjoy even without the absurd corn silo scene.
The last two episodes of each season touch on what could be, if expanded upon, an interesting sci-fi tale of alien invasion, government conspiracies, and military hubris. The rest of the episodes are basically days-in-the-life of the witches which could be, if the interpersonal lives and feelings of the witches were explored, an interesting tale of emotional examination. Unfortunately, neither of these is the case and we're left with what is little more than a collection of non-sequitur vignettes.
For example, some of the girls share beds suggesting they are couples, yet we learn nothing about their relationships despite this strong implication. Nor do we ever learn how any of the witches feel about virtually anything at all, either meaningful or trivial. Also, there is clearly something going on behind the scenes with regard to the military and the aliens invading Earth, but we never discover the truth about that either. In fact, the first episode of the second season starts by literally killing off what the end of the first season hints at. Yes, the often commented on fan service abounds, including full nudity (though genitals are always blocked by conveniently placed objects), but the matter-of-fact way it's presented (even strangers don't give the girls a second glance) coupled with the rather plain, though competent, animation style leaves these moments practically devoid of sexuality. Even the scenes where the one witch with a penchant for fondling the other witches' breasts, including full nude scenes in the communal bath, are more light-comedy than titillation.
Ultimately, while Strike Witches isn't terrible by any means, neither does it offer any reason to recommend it.
For example, some of the girls share beds suggesting they are couples, yet we learn nothing about their relationships despite this strong implication. Nor do we ever learn how any of the witches feel about virtually anything at all, either meaningful or trivial. Also, there is clearly something going on behind the scenes with regard to the military and the aliens invading Earth, but we never discover the truth about that either. In fact, the first episode of the second season starts by literally killing off what the end of the first season hints at. Yes, the often commented on fan service abounds, including full nudity (though genitals are always blocked by conveniently placed objects), but the matter-of-fact way it's presented (even strangers don't give the girls a second glance) coupled with the rather plain, though competent, animation style leaves these moments practically devoid of sexuality. Even the scenes where the one witch with a penchant for fondling the other witches' breasts, including full nude scenes in the communal bath, are more light-comedy than titillation.
Ultimately, while Strike Witches isn't terrible by any means, neither does it offer any reason to recommend it.
Ready Player One starts out with a strong, or at least decent, first act. The second act introduces bad '80s action movie/children's TV show villain tropes into the movie's real world elements. The third acts just stops trying to make in-real-life sense altogether. The CGI is good, the acting is nothing to complain about, the pop-culture references can be fun to spot, but the promising start makes the increasingly grown-worthy logic fails that much more disappointing.
The bewilderingly bad final eight-episode act ruins what was an otherwise passable, albeit predictable, story. I wasted my money buying this poorly written series with sub-par animation due to the undeserving high praise it received in both ratings and reviews.
With so many movies, series, books, and games out there to watch, read, and play, there are far better ways to spend your time than viewing this, at best, moderately entertaining animé.
With so many movies, series, books, and games out there to watch, read, and play, there are far better ways to spend your time than viewing this, at best, moderately entertaining animé.
The acting, directing, script, and overall plot are terrible, but this is typical of big-budget action films and it's not much worse than an MCU film for example. What makes this movie particularly painful to watch, however, is either how much effort must have gone into turning literally every scene needlessly stupid or how little effort was spent to prevent it.
You could make a half-dozen other films with all the different issues this movie presents, failing to satisfactorily address even one of them. The acting is sub-par though the poor directing and amateurish script are at least partially to blame (except for the child actress who is either too young or too untalented to play her role -- blame that on whoever cast her).
The one highlight of this film is Kymsleen Kholie who demonstrates a rare degree of natural talent in this, her debut role. Given the wide critical praise she received I can only guess it is Bollywood's deeply-entrenched nepotism preventing her from becoming the star she so clearly deserves to become lest outshine someone's daughter and become India's next top female actress.
The one highlight of this film is Kymsleen Kholie who demonstrates a rare degree of natural talent in this, her debut role. Given the wide critical praise she received I can only guess it is Bollywood's deeply-entrenched nepotism preventing her from becoming the star she so clearly deserves to become lest outshine someone's daughter and become India's next top female actress.
If this movie were produced by YouTubers or high school students (with a gross misunderstanding of Canadian legal system) it might be impressive that they managed to create a full-length feature film, but as a professional production it's so low budget and pieced together and frequently nonsensical that it's hard to watch despite an otherwise interesting premise and decent acting by the primaries (not so much when it comes to the supporting cast). It took me several sittings to make it all the way through to the end as there is only so much dumbness one can take in one sitting.
Don't watch this movie a second time or you'll notice all the shortcomings you missed while wondering how little they must have thought of audiences the first time you watched it.
Utilizing that unique brand of '80s outrageous cheesiness, this movie maintains that fine balancing act between not taking itself too seriously and not making any sense at all; resulting in a textbook example of an enjoyably bizarre action film.
Thornton and Berry have no on-screen chemistry (possibly Berry's worst ever performance) whether they're exchanging hackneyed dialogue or performing two of the most unconvincing and clumsy sex scenes (uncensored version) ever recorded in a major motion picture. There is no credible reason for Berry to have won an Oscar for this role. The addition of uninspired cinematography and horribly misguided direction make this a nearly unwatchable disaster.
I've never given a one star rating before but this movie lacks any redeeming elements to justify anything more. Ignore the hype: This movie is not worth your time.
I've never given a one star rating before but this movie lacks any redeeming elements to justify anything more. Ignore the hype: This movie is not worth your time.
Ittefaq starts out with an implausible coincidence that obviously leads to the convoluted story typical of this genre. The tale is compelling enough to forgive the unlikely partial interrogations of the suspects that allow the story to unfold at a measured pace in order to keep the audience guessing; but for all the thought that went into crafting the main part of this whodunit, almost none was given towards the elements of the twist ending and the painfully nonsensical final scene. Despite that, the movie is both well shot and well acted and the disappointing end doesn't completely ruin an otherwise very enjoyable movie.
Despite being littered with cartoonish CGI, amateur wirework, poorly choreographed fight scenes, pointless and unnecessary songs, and terrible editing, the compelling story is told in such a way that, if one is able to overlook the many shortcomings, Rudhramadevi ends up being an enjoyable movie to watch.
Points for several interesting concepts which in rare moments almost work, but overall this Vincent Gallo vanity project was so poorly acted, poorly scripted, and poorly directed it comes off as a strange combination of amateurish and surreal. While film students may enjoy discussing the various elements of this film in class it should otherwise be avoided.