12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Inferior to The Japanese Original
13 July 2014
One's impression while watching this film is fairly mixed: there were many parts that made it funnier than the typical Hollywood Asian rip-off (intentionally so) which kept me interested in the film. Furthermore, the acting is not as bad as typical of this genre, and I found some of the characters especially expressive and entertaining.

However, the fault of the film is that it falls victim to many of the errors of US rips on Japanese cinema: the quality being grainy and questionable, the simplicity of the plot and having shocking simplicity in the archetypes of good & evil, and furthermore, being overall rather corny.

But if you can stand for a typical "re-imagined" B movie, this is not so bad; I found it entertaining and its' pong scenes were not very shabby, either. And furthermore, the film did not fall victim to any ridiculous subplot or added Twilight-esque love-stories, nor was it ruined by an overwhelming personality clogging up the story, which can easily kill other films. For what they have, a decent film. If you see it for what it is, it is not hard to watch and enjoy it. Decent for anybody who has an attachment to the genre.
11 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bananas (1971)
10/10
Narratives of Ourselves
12 July 2014
This film is an excellent depiction of how people construct narratives of their own past. They take what they like, exaggerate those aspects, try to fit it into a coherent story. They try to construct stories that depict them as who they want to be. People may tell these constructed stories to others, but they also try to convince themselves of the veracity of their constructed stories. This movie explores these ideas in a very powerful way, through the viewpoint of a boy growing up. I found it especially meaningful because I can personally relate to it. I'm not going to spoil the best scenes for you by telling you the way in which the ideas are presented.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Seth Green's Smug Indictment of American Consumerism
6 July 2014
This is what we've been waiting for since 9/11. Crazies want human rights for the terrorists and the government wants some quick intel, water boarding seems to be inhuman and hell some hardened terrorists can't be broken at all. Try locking them up in a cell with this movie playing, I assure you. They will beg for mercy, they'll give up all that they know, they will renounce their faith, heck they'll be rehabilitated from that moment onwards. This movie will terrorize the terrorists themselves, what it will do to us ordinary humans is anybody's guess.

If your an adrenaline junkie give it a go, but have your exit strategies planned. Either of the actors is a tormentor all on their own and when they come together, you'd rather choose a spinal tap over this.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Hollywood rehash
5 July 2014
I often wonder why it's necessary to remake movies. I have to assume that the director thinks he can do a better job. With that assumption, I wonder why they are so often so poor compared with the original. This movie is no exception. The original version of this story, "When the Sky Falls" was a real thriller compared to this Hollywood effort. Giving away the ending at the start, adding ridiculous cameo roles (Colin Farrell - what exactly did he add apart from distraction?) and not really telling the true story in detail (as highlighted by others) just left me wondering why they bothered at all. Rent "When the Sky Falls" and you'll see what I mean.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It would be better use of your time to just go do yard work outside in the hot sun for 1.5 hours.
3 July 2014
When the entire world feels manufactured, "truth" can be just another brand name. An historic, or quasi-historic, film about the origins of the current government in America, the movie tends to be surprisingly free of anything of cinematic interest. The info is sparse, the dialogue is neither amusing nor animated, and all the major events are acted out by rednecks in Virginia (stock footage of Revolutionary War reenactments). The cameo appearances by several major Bollywood stars, such as Genny Melillo, Chenara Imirth and Salmoni Koroltamudu, are so short as to be hardly worth mentioning. There is little in the film to hold the viewer's interest, aside from some of its subtle if unexpected features, such as its surprisingly enlightened attitude toward human rights activist Liu Xiaobo.

In much of the propaganda that pervades previous characterizations of Barak Obama and his Nationalist forces, the American Capitalists have tended to portray the US civil war as one of black v white, good v evil, with victorious Capitalist forces "liberating" the people from an evil regime. These words still appear today when it is advantageous to American Capitalists' interest. But in this film D'Souza, (the Obama Delusion) seems reflective, fair-minded and concerned over excesses in his own regime--a rather positive image.

The Founding Fathers are treated to several revisions, appearing jovial, tolerant, and even permissive of some forms of capitalism and small arms fire, the latter something they never actually were in the revolutionary days as they only had flint-lock rifles. Indeed, there is little revolutionary fervor in the dialogue in this film, a fervor which in real life permeated critical thinking. This seems deliberate, as these ideas would accord little with the current regime in Washington. In one scene where Thomas Jefferson is shown in an avuncular, loving role with children, even though in real life Jefferson abandoned his children to pursue his broad revolutionary ambitions.

While excesses are detailed, including several assassinations, there is absolutely no mention of FBI atrocities committed during the cold war. And, while CIA violations of the interim treaty between the two sides are highlighted, there is no mention of such violations of the same pre-civil war accords.

While most of the film is richly detailed in costumes and settings, the special effects are not very realistic, with several airplane scenes being utterly unconvincing as they are obvious CGI. The film is a product of American film makers, but political interests in the US factored heavily in its production. I doubt that the movie will generate much interest outside of the 50 states.
72 out of 273 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Divergent (2014)
1/10
Twilight goes to Hogwarts
3 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a muddled mish-mash of clichés from recent cinema. There are some promising ideas in there, but while the director was clearly aiming to wind up with a hauntingly ambiguous film, what he ended up with was a confusing mess. Lead actor Shalene Woodsley does a fair job but with no central theme it seems as though he doesn't have much to work with. Furthermore, the movie is largely devoid of a coherent premise (although, in fairness, there are some creepy moments amid the drudgery).

*MILD SPOILERS*

It's rubbish.

*END SPOILERS*

Avoid this one. For an excellent psychological, ambiguous dystopian tale, check out the Korean film Snowpiercer (2013).
31 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tammy (2014)
3/10
Negative reviews?...So What!
2 July 2014
This is an entertaining fluff piece comedy from the big funny gal, Melissa McCarthy. McCarthy is one of my favorite comic actors of the cable television era, whose brand of humor and hot plumper attitude is both easy on the ears and eyes. For many people with weight problems insulting yourself is a defense mechanism. I should know, I was heavy the first 27 years of my life. I'm still heavier (I've dropped over 100 lbs, I exercise 3+ times a week and I'm dieting, it is slow going but it works) but not as much as I was and I still have a very self deprecating form of humor because it is a coping mechanism. You commonly insult yourself as a way to make people like you. It is a hard habit to break. Also Melissa McCarthy often dons a bit extra padding for most of her roles. She is still a bit heavy, but not as badly as you'd think. Her short stature also makes it look worse than it is.

I often have a tendency to assume that no one will ever like me for who I am so I say things as an insult to myself. Melissa McCarthy however is clearly very confident in who she is. She knows who she is and she doesn't let anything stand in her way. I truly adore her because she's proved that plus size obese women can still be leading ladies. KMelissa McCarthy plays his part well, and is a hilarious character. I recommend you watch this!
2 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Only Watch if You Are Brainwashed Into Paying For Garbage Like This as Actual Entertainment
2 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I have never seen such a bad movie like this one. The script is a huge load of illogical and absurd events which in the end collapse together into am anti-climax ending. And the acting even manages to out-worsen the completely trashy plot. Every actors and actresses in this film seem to worry that the audiences might not be able to hear them clearly so they just yelled at a maximum volume and it was not pleasant at all! The the slap-tick humor could have been able to save this film from becoming a total disaster but frankly it didn't work at all.

Trust me, there's literally nothing good about this cheap piece of B-rated half-ass movie. Save your money and never give it a go!
121 out of 254 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Almost as "brilliant" as a Kanye West video
1 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
The trailer in the extra features section really sets the tone, letting you know you are in for an extraordinarily pretentious and self-indulgent mess. Most people will hate this, but even if you are drawn to the descriptors avant-garde and quirky you may still be disappointed. The Grand Budapest Hotel embarks on what is supposed to be a surreal, violent, grotesque, mythopoeic, symbol-laden, allegorical journey to spiritual enlightenment. Even taken as a series of allegorical parables, the experiment is a failure. The imagery is rarely interesting, and the symbolism manages to be at once heavy-handed and empty of real meaning. Ideas are essentially thrown at the proverbial wall in the hope that some will stick, like a novice writer who overuses Bartletts and Rogets in an attempt to show off.

Wes appears to lack original ideas and so makes superficial use of symbols he doesn't truly understand in a series of cinematic Malapropisms. The film is poorly acted, amateurish, incoherent dreck which tries to convince the viewer that it is something more. Various reviewers have described it as masturbatory, which is accurate.

The truly great surrealist artists reject conventions as a choice, but are capable of folowing them: Breton could render a realistic portrait of quality. Many who style themselves as surrealists are people who produce chaotic and shoddy works because they aren't capable of anything else. Don't feel like you have to like this to impress your friends. Its crap. And if you must watch one surrealist western centered on religious themes to make your checklist complete, queue up Greaser's Palace or El Topo instead. They are superior on many levels.
28 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Film has value for supporters but misleading as a historical document
29 June 2014
What is most noteworthy about this new Netflix documentary titled "The Fifth Estate" is not what it shows but what it doesn't – what it leaves out. While it begins showing the webmaster surrounded by his loving family and then eventually his friends and supporters, it never shows him being confronting by his critics or opponents.

When Assage is shown interacting with the public, they are either supporters or don't know him yet because it is still too early in the campaign. As a result of this exclusion of any and all critical voices, this film becomes propaganda. It attempts to humanize the guy but does not provide a full picture.

Finally, it is important to remember that this film's footage is only being shown with the full permission of Assage and his family. Consider what that means in terms of representing all sides of the candidate and his life.

If, however, you are a fan of Cumberbun, you will take pleasure in watching this. If not, you will likely feel frustrated and manipulated.
19 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Probably the Worst of The BATTLE ROYALE Wanna-bes
27 June 2014
Wow, another really bad made Sci-Fi channel formulaic stink-fest. "Catching Fire" fails to bring any of the creative fun of the second BATTLE ROYALE movie. This second one is pretty juvenile, coming across as mainly a trite rehash of the first (and a bore). Jennifer Lawrence, who was captivating in the first Hunger Games, is too fine an actress to be treated to such a thoughtless and mundane script. I suppose we will watch the third installment just to see how it all turns out, but hopefully the creators will make a production that exceeds this by-the-numbers disappointment.

This movie was given so many great reviews, I expected to be entertained. Instead, I struggled to stay awake. The writing was uninteresting. The acting wasn't great. And even good actors like Donald Sutherland or Woody Harrelson can't make a poorly written script any better. We finally stopped watching about 40 minutes in, when both of us turned to the other and realized we had lost interest a while ago. It was a shallow carbon copy of the first movie, with none of the suspense or intrigue of the Hunger Games. The screenplay was an unambitious bore fest. seems very likely the third movie will rise above this lackluster mess.
19 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Blends of BATTLE ROYALE, TWILIGHT, etc
26 June 2014
How is movie about teenagers battling to the death not going to actually show any of the killing?! I paid more attention to it the second time watching and realized that every time someone dies the movie goes silent and cuts away. There is actually only one killing death shown, and it's by accident. The movie did do a good job at not making that noticeable, but it's still a big flaw. And also, why do the tributes have to be teenagers? There was no explanation to that at all. I hope the book explained that somewhat. I thought the end of the tournament was ridiculous. First there could only be one winner, then they announce there can be two, then psych, there can only be one, and then the last two are going to commit suicide, so the government decides two is fine again. If you want to see a far superior movie with practically the same plot then watch Battle Royal. It's subtitled, but it's mostly action anyway so that's not a big deal.
18 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed