Change Your Image
mgbannert
Protect you from bad movies, dreamt up by sinister cyborgs in the doomed catacombs of Skynet. And to praise and recommend those movies that are worth your while.
Have you ever felt cheated out of 2 hours of your life by watching a really bad movie? Happened to me a lot, i know what it feels like.
I'm going to help you avoid that. And direct you to those rare gems in the cinematic world where you feel you've been wonderfully entertained, shocked, mesmerized, had your funny-bone tickled, and your mind expanded.
Let's go on a journey of discovery in the world of make-believe - THE MOVIES :-)
Reviews
Napoleon (2023)
A Pathetic Blunder
A sorrowfully flawed movie. I didn't expect this to be a great account of Napoleon and his impact on history as it is too big a story to tell in the 2 hour 38 minutes film, but I did expect some historical accuracy. Anyone who has read a little history will be disappointed.
Having read all the 4 novels of Bernard Cornwell covering the era of Napoleon and Wellington, plus the entire Sharpe series, and Adam Zamoyski's "Moscow 1812", and other accounts, and seen the 1970 'Waterloo' epic, I have a smattering of knowledge of the life of napoleon and events of the era and so I felt utterly disappointed with what could have been a momentous Ridley achievement.
What was Ridley trying to do?
No mention whatever of the Peninsular War in Portugal and Spain. No mention of the Battle of Trafalgar that lost France it's Navy and doomed France to fight land wars only.
No mention of why Napoleon lost in Egypt: Nelson destroyed his fleet at the Battle of the Nile. Unable to resupply his 60,000 troops he fled Egypt and left 50,000 troops behind - where the survivors disappeared from history as slaves to the Mamlukes. Incredible that such scathing contempt for his troops was never held to account.
And his disastrous foray to conquer Moscow was so glossed over but was pivotal in why he lost at Waterloo. He was doomed due his loss of men and horses. Napoleon was short of cavalry at Waterloo, and of supply-train horses because of the huge loss of horses in the retreat from Moscow.
And that Battle of Waterloo staging was terribly inaccurate. We have been to the Waterloo battlefield. British troops did not fight from breast and trenchworks. And no mention of how critical the farmstead of La Haiye Saint was to the English lines.
Nor mention of the tactics employed by Wellington of deploying his troops in that 'thin red line' where two ranks of men could bring maximum musket fire down onto the massed advancing columns of French troops, or of the breaking of the advance of Napoleon's Imperial Guard which usually was Bonaparte's Coup de Grace on another battlefield victory.
And Napoleon never charged sabre in hand into the final desperate melee.
Ridley Scott should stick to sci-fi fantasy where facts don't matter and historical accuracy still has to be writ.
I still enjoyed it despite my pedantic expectations...but tonight I have found the 1970 'Waterloo' epic movie to watch free on YouTube!
Now that was a great movie, more so that it is 53 years ago and still unsurpassed.
Virtual Revolution (2016)
Not worth the time
After reading a number of critic's reviews who raved about how original this film was I decided to give this a go. But unfortunately right from the outset this is just a succession of clichés, borrowed from better movies like Blade Runner.
Even the main character is trying a bad impersonation as a Harrison- Ford-wanna-be, and it's awful.
The dialog is stilted, and the occasional one-liners are unoriginal.
Example; the hero gets beaten up badly early on and his ID and gun taken off him. As he's lying there he mumbles "That was fun..." Are we supposed to laugh? Or admire his stoicism? It gets worse, and this movie is not worth the time spent watching it. You'll just get more and more annoyed as you are bored struggling through the story. Don't bother and avoid this.