annevejb
Joined May 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.
Badges8
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews233
annevejb's rating
I first saw the Be Cool version of this story and thought that it was high entertainment.
Get Shorty, this I have rate as well, even though I have seen it all before
Heading to the reviews I note that several consider this as highly rated, just Be Cool as weak, not worthwhile. Me, I notice the big screen High Def quality of the images in Be Cool, the raw quality in Get Shorty. They tell me something about what can happen different levels of funding are assigned to a quality project.
So, I could have gotten that wrong.
71 characters to go. I am going to see both films a lot more times, hopefully.
Get Shorty, this I have rate as well, even though I have seen it all before
Heading to the reviews I note that several consider this as highly rated, just Be Cool as weak, not worthwhile. Me, I notice the big screen High Def quality of the images in Be Cool, the raw quality in Get Shorty. They tell me something about what can happen different levels of funding are assigned to a quality project.
So, I could have gotten that wrong.
71 characters to go. I am going to see both films a lot more times, hopefully.
A fun story, I really loved this.
That's all I really wanted to say, so now to pad things out to get the word count right.
This looks like a fairly low budget film. Except the quality is really good and the flow is superb. Superb having a better word count than good.
The characterisation of the grandparents as wow, the story has a load of fascinating surprises in how the people present themselves but the oldies really do well.
This is so much better than how I experienced the late 1960's as a student. The young are mostly so alive while appearing Goth dead. Goth as very different to how I understood it.
That's all I really wanted to say, so now to pad things out to get the word count right.
This looks like a fairly low budget film. Except the quality is really good and the flow is superb. Superb having a better word count than good.
The characterisation of the grandparents as wow, the story has a load of fascinating surprises in how the people present themselves but the oldies really do well.
This is so much better than how I experienced the late 1960's as a student. The young are mostly so alive while appearing Goth dead. Goth as very different to how I understood it.
The big thing to me is that it allows the state integrity. The police and doctors etc don't have to be idiots.
The weak part of the film, to me, is that it ignores the final bullet. What looks like a shot to the back of JFK's head that blows a big chunk of his face off. A fake followed by a murder? The question of if the M film had been tampered with answered by saying 1970's style editing wasn't up to it, not knowing about modern digital editing. The proofs given in this story don't hold well, but this film does bring out stuff that I consider to be worthwhile.
There are loads of recent films about this event, thanks for Amazon Prime for letting me see this one day when I couldn't find anything else to do.
I don't understand why most reviews dismiss the story, thought it sounds like the director has created documentaries in the past that I wouldn't want to see. This yes. What is the truth? I feel that this has a bit of it, but a few of the other user reviews suggest that some of the details are flawed.
The weak part of the film, to me, is that it ignores the final bullet. What looks like a shot to the back of JFK's head that blows a big chunk of his face off. A fake followed by a murder? The question of if the M film had been tampered with answered by saying 1970's style editing wasn't up to it, not knowing about modern digital editing. The proofs given in this story don't hold well, but this film does bring out stuff that I consider to be worthwhile.
There are loads of recent films about this event, thanks for Amazon Prime for letting me see this one day when I couldn't find anything else to do.
I don't understand why most reviews dismiss the story, thought it sounds like the director has created documentaries in the past that I wouldn't want to see. This yes. What is the truth? I feel that this has a bit of it, but a few of the other user reviews suggest that some of the details are flawed.