Reviews

47 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Reacher (2022– )
3/10
Disappointing & boring, conventional
23 January 2024
This is a very disappointing series. Both seasons are disappointing. If anything, the series gets worse as it goes. I've read the books, and in the books Reacher is an interesting guy, very smart, very clever. In this series, he's nothing like that. He seems dumb as a fence post, to be honest. Also, in the books Reacher is naturally big and strong and moves easily; in this TV series, he is muscle-bound and stiff and looks more like a weight lifter than just a naturally strong man. So as a protagonist, the actor (Alan Ritchson) is a complete bust. Some of the secondary characters (members of his old team, like Neagley, Dixon, and O'Donnell) are far more interesting than Reacher is. I really don't understand how so many of these reviewers could be rating this show so highly. It's a routine, conventional action series with lots of violence, the sort of things adolescents enjoy (but not adults with taste).
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Maestro (2023)
3/10
Terrbly stiff and contrived, a disappointment
28 December 2023
In the beginning, I was hopeful. After twenty minutes, I was terribly disappointed and wanted to stop watching. The story is so contrived and feels so artificial. The dialogue is stiff and seems more theatrical than real. Maybe if this was a drama on a stage with people in the theater watching and listening, it would be more appropriate to its setting. But as a movie? It feels more like a movie made in the 1930s or 1940s, but not in a good way. I think many viewers are rating it more highly because they feel they must, that anything less would be an insult to Bernstein. But that sort of rating is an insult to those who read these reviews so as to decide whether to watched a movie. And in this case, my recommendation is: No, don't bother.
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Sadly mediocre, lazy documentary on a great city
30 November 2023
This documentary is remarkably lazy and mediocre. Disappointing, really, to have such junk produced about what is truly a great city with an amazing history. The glib pitter-patter from the host, Bettany Hughes, is repetitive and superficial. Seems evident that the production budget was so low that it barely covered a trip to Egypt. Lots of stock shots. Nothing new or interesting in terms of information, really. The documentary could have been 20 minutes long instead of 45 minutes and nothing would be lost. In the end, I felt I'd wasted my time, and that's unfortunate. I will look to see if I can't find something on Alexandria that is more professional than this unfortunate production.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Night Moves (2013)
4/10
So Dark, So Depressing, So Hopeless... So Slow
7 August 2023
Kelly Reichardt's "Night Moves" is one of the most depressing movies I've ever seen. After watching it, I thought, "What's the point?" The characters are all unlikable. The story is tragic. But perhaps the worst part is that all the stress built up in the viewer has almost nothing to do with suspense and everything to do with impatience. "Could you just get on with the story and move it along???" I kept pleading. But no, never happened. An endless, crawling pace. Dark camera work, dark. Dark soundtrack. If there's a lesson to the movie, it seems to be, "Don't blow stuff up, someone could get hurt, and then you'll feel awfully guilty." Really?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Extraction II (2023)
3/10
Cartoon junk
9 July 2023
It's hard to communicate how disappointing this flick is and how utterly worthless it is. Total waste of time. It's what I call "violence porn". Cartoonish junk for viewers who enjoy watching characters kill one another, blow one another up, etc. And then, of course, profess how much they love their running buddies and/or their families and/or their countries, whatever it is that supposedly fuels their need to destroy the manufactured enemies (always the "bad guys" of course). It makes me feel sad to think of the millions of dollars spent making this garbage and the millions of dollars spent to view it. Kind of makes me sad for the human species.
14 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Superb documentary & great music
23 February 2023
I grew up in the South, graduated high school in 1970, so I was listening to the Allman Brothers right when they began touring and recording. They were an amazing group, truly phenomenal artists. Growing up in a small town, my friends and I spent evenings and nights gathered under the oak trees down by the river with the Allman Brothers cranked up as loud as could get away with. We were focused on the entire band, not just Duane, who is the focus of this documentary. Gregg's voice seemed as powerful and moving to us as Duane's guitar. But when Duane died, we knew the group would never be the same again (though Gregg and Butch Trucks and Betts sure put out some great music in the decades afterward). It was an incredible journey for those fellas, and this documentary tells the story well. Good job. I'll watch it again.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Lightweight & repetitive; badly needs editing
29 January 2023
This lightweight 3-part docu-series could easily be half as long and badly needs a thorough editing. It's full of repetition, for starters. Endless repetition. And there's too few facts and too much speculation, with very little acknowledgment about this unfortunate circumstance. The presenters were apparently chosen because they're young and attractive. The male presenter, Neil Oliver, seems especially superficial. In any case, the constant looks of surprise and amazement on the faces of the presenters didn't make me feel very surprised or amazed. Instead, I felt like I was wasting half my time. By the third part of the docu-series, I was fast forwarding, eager to reach the end.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fauda (2015–2022)
3/10
Disappointing 4th season
22 January 2023
I was a big fan of "Fauda" when it began in 2015 because it showed the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It no longer does. It's become just another pro-Israeli propaganda effort, with no attempt to portray the moral and political complexities of that conflict. I am now completely disappointed in the series. It's just another cop thriller with good guys and bad guys, and the good guys are Israelis, and the bad guys are Palestinian. What a major failure on the part of the series. I wonder what happened to cause this decline in quality. Pressure from the Israeli government? From advertisers? What?
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Mitchum carries it until he can't anymore
14 December 2022
I suppose this should be called a spy/noir flick. It starts that way and continues for the most part until near the end, when the overly complicated plot becomes incredible (that is, not credible) and the love story is delivered to the audience like a second thought (or third, maybe, and in any case completely unbelievable), and finally (if all that wasn't a big enough disappointment) the ending is an absolutely goofy, artificial, "political message" scene that might have been written by J. Edgar Hoover's favorite pet beagle on a bad day. The last scene made with snort with disgust. Yep, that bad. So watch to first 75 minutes of this flick, then stop... and go have a cup of coffee or a beer. You'll be doing yourself a favor.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What a disappointing "documentary"
19 November 2022
I expected a serious, informative documentary. What I got is a superficial, poorly written, self-hyped, overly dramatic (staged?) video that left me feeling not better informed but rather stupid for having watched it. This is simply another reminder (and example) that there are way too many crummy and disappointing "adventure" documentaries being made and promoted to gullible viewers who swallow the hype. What's going on? Maybe the video technology is so easy to use these days that rank amateurs can present themselves as professionals? But the artistic ability is poor, the educational angle is lacking, the result is very disappointing. Ugh.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Inauthentic & full of juvenile hero worship - ugh
19 November 2022
Very disappointed in how poorly written and researched this entire series is. Anyone who studies this era and the Anglo frontiersmen will know that they weren't nearly as heroic as this series makes them out to be. And their behavior towards indigenous American Indians was in many cases horrible, certainly far worse than this series admits. The writing is juvenile, the myths being promoted are very one-sided and biased. I kept thinking I was watching a series meant to be on some cable channel being promoted to people who are ignorant and uncritical and want to remain that way. The series certainly caters to such unfortunate narratives of history.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Writing & narration gets a 3, visuals get a 9... so a 6
16 October 2022
The camera work is well done and pulls the viewer in. The writing and narration is irritating, treating the animals like they are cute little human characters, cartoon-like, ugh. It's called anthropomorphizing, and it's tedious and juvenile. Too bad, really. This series could have been amazing. Structuring the series into 3 parts for 3 seasons works, though one wonders why the 4th season (winter) was not done. In the end, the series is worth watching for the visuals. There is some helpful information in the narration if you can stomach the disrespectful treatment of the animals in the writing.
13 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not brilliant but at least politically correct
29 September 2022
This documentary has several good moments and it has many weak moments. But its makers have been very conscientious about making sure the interviewees represent all genders, racial groups, and age groups. So give it a high grade for political correctness, wokeness, whatever you wish to call it. Of course, that has nothing to do with the science or mathematics of infinity. But, onward! It's a tough subject, to be sure. A real mind-stretcher of a subject. The documentary itself drifts toward vague statements and metaphors at times. And I fell asleep a couple of times while watching it. But there's a couple of moments that made me happy to be watching it... although the piece could easily have been 60 minutes instead of 80 minutes. It seemed overlong. Almost infinite.
9 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A Rancid Piece of Misinformation & Trash... Avoid It
21 August 2022
I could write whole paragraphs on what a piece of schlock this so-called documentary is. It's basically a version of that sensational piece of government propaganda, "Reefer Madness," only this could be called "Acid Madness". Using breathless, hyperbolic narration, it basically recounts some of the most hyperbolic and lurid events of the 1960s while managing to make LSD the narrative thread even when it makes no sense. Weird, sad, unfortunate. It completely ignores all the serious research that was done during the 1940s-1970s on psychedelics as therapeutic tools for healing people with depression, addiction, terminal illnesses, etc. ... research that is now coming back into use. This documentary, if it were well made, could set back that effort. Fortunately, its very badly made and isn't worth watching. So don't watch it; that's my recommendation.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Extremely disappointing
9 July 2022
This poorly written and terribly acted TV series has almost nothing to do with the actual "Call of the Wild" story. If you want a good version of the story, I suggest the 2020 movie "Call of the Wild" starring Harrison Ford. This TV series is an embarrassment. I know it's geared toward young people, but that doesn't mean it has to be overly juvenile and insulting to even a child's intelligence. I'm really quite aggravated that the makers of the series blew such a great opportunity to make a great TV show.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dune (2021)
4/10
Disappointing, or How to Screw Up a Great Story With Bad lighting
8 March 2022
Disappointing movie. It sure shows how to screw up a great story with lousy cinematography, filmed so dark that you can barely see it... I suppose it's cheaper on a film budget than a well-lit picture, but it makes the fact this flick was nominated for an Oscar in cinematography fairly laughable.
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A revisionist disappointment
23 January 2022
Aside from poor casting, mediocre acting, maudlin characters, and marital/love relations that are not in the least credible, this movie offers a revisionist version of the 1938 Munich Agreement that excuses the betrayal of the Czechs by Britain and France by caving in to Hitler. The movie's makers would have us believe Britain's Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement merely as a way to buy time for war preparations, and that simply isn't true. Chamberlain falsely believed he had purchased a lasting peace. Well, I see Brits were makers of the movie, so I suppose they decided to make themselves feel a bit better. It's not a very good movie, in any case. Quite a disappointment.
34 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Allied (2016)
5/10
The ending is a desperate oversell
28 November 2021
Pretty good flick... until the ending, which is grossly sentimental and overwrought. Disappointed in that desperate effort to oversell what was until then a fairly decent wartime spy flick as a romantic drama.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Syrupy schlock
2 August 2021
If you like movies made for 13-year-olds who value bad jokes over good ones, and don't care for real drama or even real adventure, then this movie is for you. It made me wince so many times my face hurts.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Very disappointed
21 February 2021
I've enjoyed every Paul Greengrass movie I've seen... until this one. How could such a fine director make such a conventional, routine, cliche-filled movie? Just a flat out boring movie. I'm bewildered. Maybe because he's a Brit and never saw the many westerns just like this one that already existed? I dunno. But I wouldn't recommend anyone taking the two hours to watch it.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Very disappointing, do avoid it
19 September 2020
Anyone who enjoyed the original Bletchley Circle series, set in the UK, will be sorely disappointed by this juvenile bit of bad story writing, bad character writing, bad dialogue writing, bad acting, bad... well, it's just an amateurish mess, really, the whole thing. I'm at a loss on how a spinoff series could have gone so wrong.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
This Is a Movie? I Think Not. Don't Bother.
4 February 2020
The Wick character was interesting in the first movie, and that carried over to the second movie. Both of those movies had a story. This third movie does not. It's nothing more than one long fight sequence stupid, and not a very good fight, either. The choreography here doesn't match movies one and two. So basically, it just seems cartoonish, except it isn't much fun to watch. I wasted two hours on it. Don't bother.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Disappointing
30 January 2020
I'm not as impressed with the technology (night cameras) as other reviewers seem to be. In large part, this is because the footage is not nearly as unusual or dramatic as the hype suggests. In fact, the footage is quite ordinary. What's worse, though, is the way the "story" cuts away from footage that might upset the parents of a child under age 10, as when stalking lions are about to kill an elephant. But don't worry, the camera will return when the lions are later enjoying their meal. I find such censorship bizarre and disappointing in a nature film; it's simply dishonest. Finally, the narrator's voice is particularly irritating. She drones on and on as if suggesting you fall asleep. A night film, get it? Okay, that's not the purpose of the drone. But it can achieve that end. It's not the sort of narration that keeps you interested, I'll simply say that much. On the whole, this series is quite disappointing. It is way below the quality of other nature series I've seen on Netflix. And that's unfortunate.
39 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mile 22 (2018)
3/10
Peter Berg and Marl Wahlberg Made This Mess?
8 December 2019
Hard to believe that Berg and Wahlberg could have been involved in such an inferior production as "Mile 22". The story is supposedly driving forward hard but really it's just frantic and doesn't hold together... though it doesn't take long before the viewer just doesn't care, he (or she) is only looking for the nearest exit. I almost made it halfway through the flick before I bailed out. A real disappointment, this movie. I'm fairly tolerant of movies with problems if there are any redeeming traits. I couldn't find any with this turkey.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Joker (I) (2019)
9/10
SUPERB! BRILLIANT! (and that NYT reviewer really blew it)
16 November 2019
My wife and I saw "Joker" last night at the cinema, and I'm still feeling stunned. Powerful piece of work. So this morning I went online and read A.O. Scott's review of the movie in the New York Times. Good grief, did Scott see the same movie I did? Such a lame review. I think maybe the movie frightened him. And it is a scary movie in some ways, esp. for anyone who's ever doubted his of her sanity. Joaquin Phoenix gives a brilliant performance, what I'd call and Academy Award performance. The storyline is strong (Dostoevskian, even). The camera work, the production values, all strong. And the music score is simply perfect throughout. Bottom line: a great flick. Go experience it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed