sanjsrik
Joined Aug 2010
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.
Ratings112
sanjsrik's rating
Reviews95
sanjsrik's rating
I made it through the first 20 minutes and that was 20 minutes too long. It was cartoonish, badly acted, childish in its plot, and plain silly. Nothing in the "movie" told me I was watching anything other than an amateurish student film. Was it meant to be this bad? I just kept asking myself over and over again. Was it meant to be this bad? None of the characters are believable. There's a "super dog"??? Who came up with this script? Nothing in this "movie" was good. There's massive plot holes and nothing makes any sense. And that was within the first 10 minutes. Who actually makes it through this whole entire thing and doesn't come away wondering why did I waste my time?
The "movie" has no good dialog, no good plot, meanders all over the place, actors say lines with smirks knowing how bad they are, and generally, the only thing that might have been good, the locations and sets, are ruined because you have to look around the actors to see the locations. Otherwise, there's so much woodenness in the lines, and the acting, and the plot, and the entire "movie".
Did guy richie have gambling debts he needed to pay off? Is this just the norm now for directors to phone it in with sub-par bad movies?
I'd provide spoilers but what would be the point? If you watch it long enough to care, you've already committed hari kari to get away from remembering how bad this movie was.
Did guy richie have gambling debts he needed to pay off? Is this just the norm now for directors to phone it in with sub-par bad movies?
I'd provide spoilers but what would be the point? If you watch it long enough to care, you've already committed hari kari to get away from remembering how bad this movie was.
There could be a worse way to make a gangster movie, they could have hired pee wee herman and then at least it would have been better than this because it might have been funny. This is just painful to watch. It's "actors" acting like what caricatures of gangsters would act like if they saw them on tv when they were children.
It's just a bad bad bad bad boring and slow and painful movie to watch. The characters are laughable, the "plot" whatever the plot is, is meandering, the "action" is about as exciting as watching paint dry.
Don't waste your time. I swear deniro must have had bills to pay because there's no other reason why he's been making worse and worse movies and tv shows.
It's just a bad bad bad bad boring and slow and painful movie to watch. The characters are laughable, the "plot" whatever the plot is, is meandering, the "action" is about as exciting as watching paint dry.
Don't waste your time. I swear deniro must have had bills to pay because there's no other reason why he's been making worse and worse movies and tv shows.