If the goal of a film is to get an emotional reaction from its audience, then this was a success. If the goal of a film is to get a *positive* emotional reaction, then this film failed for me . I'd have to go back and watch it again to figure out exactly where in the one-hour-and-fifty-nine minutes I walked out, but I'm not willing to do that to myself again. I don't want to provide any spoilers but I imagine those of you who have seen the film will know when I departed, and those who see it after reading this will realize where. Why Mr. Lanthimos seems compelled to show animal cruelty in their films is beyond me, but I hope that they seek professional help. I thought Poor Things looked interesting until I realized who directed it and figure I'd have to, again, walk out.
Reviews
32 Reviews
The Outsiders
(1983)
Hasn't Aged Well
25 April 2023
After hearing an interview with one of the cast members, and my wife never having seen the movie, we decided to track it down and give it a watch -- me for the first time in probably close to forty years.
Wow. I wish I had left it as a fond memory rather than stomping that memory to pieces.
Considering that this came after The Godfather and Apocalypse Now and right before Rumble Fish, I'm guessing Coppola doesn't talk about this much. It's a huge step back in his directing.
The acting is pretty amateurish or, in some cases, embarrassing. Swayze, Howell, and Lane stand out as actually seeming to know what to do in front of a camera. Dillon is good, too. Seems like Lowe and Cruise were mainly told to either not wear shirts or leave them open as much as possible. Cruise is so over the top it's amazing there were other rolls after this one, and an interesting descent after a pretty good performance in Taps prior to this. And how did Howell's career end up where it has? He was pretty good in this and I think one could make a whole career of just reviewing the string of really disappointing films he's made since. Estevez is about what you'd expect, which says something but I'm not sure what.
I imagine Coppola's direction to Cruise and Estevez and Macchio was, "Okay -- think of the most stereotypical juvenile delinquent from the 1950s and 1960s. And take that to 11." Macchio's next movie was The Karate Kid, which was acted way better than this.
The directing is static, stilted, and generally just a bit off and dated. I feel like a lot was left on the cutting room floor, which may explain some of it. The fight choreography is entirely absent. Kudos for all the night work, but I'm gonna give that point to the cinematographer and lighting departments.
I'll skip re-reading the book.
Wow. I wish I had left it as a fond memory rather than stomping that memory to pieces.
Considering that this came after The Godfather and Apocalypse Now and right before Rumble Fish, I'm guessing Coppola doesn't talk about this much. It's a huge step back in his directing.
The acting is pretty amateurish or, in some cases, embarrassing. Swayze, Howell, and Lane stand out as actually seeming to know what to do in front of a camera. Dillon is good, too. Seems like Lowe and Cruise were mainly told to either not wear shirts or leave them open as much as possible. Cruise is so over the top it's amazing there were other rolls after this one, and an interesting descent after a pretty good performance in Taps prior to this. And how did Howell's career end up where it has? He was pretty good in this and I think one could make a whole career of just reviewing the string of really disappointing films he's made since. Estevez is about what you'd expect, which says something but I'm not sure what.
I imagine Coppola's direction to Cruise and Estevez and Macchio was, "Okay -- think of the most stereotypical juvenile delinquent from the 1950s and 1960s. And take that to 11." Macchio's next movie was The Karate Kid, which was acted way better than this.
The directing is static, stilted, and generally just a bit off and dated. I feel like a lot was left on the cutting room floor, which may explain some of it. The fight choreography is entirely absent. Kudos for all the night work, but I'm gonna give that point to the cinematographer and lighting departments.
I'll skip re-reading the book.
Worst Cooks in America
(2010– )
Jumped The Shark
30 January 2023
This used to be a good and entertaining show where viewers and contestants alike could actually learn things about cooking and tasting and food in general. Since adding the "celebrity" (to be frank, wasn't sure who a lot of them were) and "influencer" versions the contestants are more about getting more exposure for themselves and their "brand" than actually accomplishing or learning anything about cooking. Surprised some haven't worn hats with flashing lights or a large sign saying "LOOK AT ME!!" Although being loud and obnoxious does accomplish the same thing. As such this is no longer a cooking show but a game show that's vaguely about food.
All About Steve
(2009)
I wanted to like this
11 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I really wanted to like this movie. Solid cast -- Bullock, Haden Church, Cooper, Jeong, Hesseman, Qualls, David -- but, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein: There's no there there. There's no story. It's a vignette stretched out to 90+ minutes. Good performances throughout but with no reason.
Nothing's resolved, no one learns anything -- except maybe Church's character, and he's gone from douchebag to minor-douchebag. Mary's still the same, Steve is still the same. Everything is left unresolved -- kinda expected Mary to wind up with Howard since he used the right words and recognized her quotes, but they just left it hanging. And kinda implied that he wound up with Elizabeth.
Maybe Mary gets her job back? Her nothing job that leaves her living with her parents?
Maybe the director lost the last 5 pages of the script?
And apparently the entire US is about the size of Colorado and everywhere can be driven to in less than a day. Maybe smaller than Colorado.
Cute idea, good performances, not a story, not a movie. Glad to see this writer has gone on to not inflict anything else on us.
Nothing's resolved, no one learns anything -- except maybe Church's character, and he's gone from douchebag to minor-douchebag. Mary's still the same, Steve is still the same. Everything is left unresolved -- kinda expected Mary to wind up with Howard since he used the right words and recognized her quotes, but they just left it hanging. And kinda implied that he wound up with Elizabeth.
Maybe Mary gets her job back? Her nothing job that leaves her living with her parents?
Maybe the director lost the last 5 pages of the script?
And apparently the entire US is about the size of Colorado and everywhere can be driven to in less than a day. Maybe smaller than Colorado.
Cute idea, good performances, not a story, not a movie. Glad to see this writer has gone on to not inflict anything else on us.
A League of Their Own
(2022)
So Far So Good
13 August 2022
I've only watched the first two episodes, so I may revisit this later. Love the idea, and I'm not expecting a multi-part, many- hour serious to be a duplication on a two-hour movie. That would be stupid. Also don't mind updating. Some anachronism in language. Great costumes and production values. Good writing. Top-notch acting. Some one-note characters are a bit grating; for example, the league owner is one-dimensional as yet and really doesn't need to be there taking up screen time to say the same thing over and over -- maybe he'll get written out.
The editing confuses me some times with jump cuts between story lines that seem out of place and forced. Not there for any thematic or parallel composition. Like going from 4th gear straight to first.
Another noted - and gave this a one rating for it (?) - that the CGI baseball is horrible. And it is. Hoping that improves. I get why they do it, but not sure why they didn't spend a bit more to get better quality. Maybe they blew all their money on sets and costumes.
I'll have to go back and watch the film again at some point now, too.
The editing confuses me some times with jump cuts between story lines that seem out of place and forced. Not there for any thematic or parallel composition. Like going from 4th gear straight to first.
Another noted - and gave this a one rating for it (?) - that the CGI baseball is horrible. And it is. Hoping that improves. I get why they do it, but not sure why they didn't spend a bit more to get better quality. Maybe they blew all their money on sets and costumes.
I'll have to go back and watch the film again at some point now, too.
The Wheel of Time
(2021– )
Unoriginal.
6 May 2022
Let's take a quest like LOTR, mix up the characters a bit to include different races and genders and sexuality, add in more running, running, running, give it a a heaping helping of furrowed-brows and trite backstories.... I think I made it five episodes before I couldn't face any more.
Wine Country
(2019)
I Remember When Films Had Plot And Story
10 August 2020
There are a handful of good jokes in this hour and forty-three minutes of vignettes and SNL sketches masquerading as a movie, but that's it. No plot, no story, tissue-paper-thin characters, no surprises or real development.
Not surprising that the writers are from television - this might have made an okay sit-com episode. But stretched out for another 80 minutes is just torture.
For a movie about getting older I'm guessing every character in this film is of an age where they remember films having plot and direction and character development.
Also, I dream of being as funny as Amy Poehler thinks she is.
Not surprising that the writers are from television - this might have made an okay sit-com episode. But stretched out for another 80 minutes is just torture.
For a movie about getting older I'm guessing every character in this film is of an age where they remember films having plot and direction and character development.
Also, I dream of being as funny as Amy Poehler thinks she is.
Medical Police
(2020)
Torture
13 January 2020
Forcing people to watch this should be considered a crime against humanity. Astoundingly bad. Horribly written, acted, and directed. This is like having a collection of toddlers all tell you a joke they made up. But less cute.
Aloha
(I) (2015)
Has Anyone Checked On Cameron Crowe
8 January 2019
It's like somewhere in the middle of writing or directing or editing, Crowe had a series of small strokes. Storylines make no sense, have illogical or no conclusion, or make leaps to a completely different place. It's about the military, but it's like it was written by someone who has only seen the military from a distance. Same with computers...and Hawaii...and Hawaiians...and women...and planes.....
The number of big names attached to this is astounding, and I imagine all of them got nice paychecks out of it. Too bad they can't be proud of it.
The number of big names attached to this is astounding, and I imagine all of them got nice paychecks out of it. Too bad they can't be proud of it.
Destination Wedding
(2018)
Laugh Out Loud
1 December 2018
One of the funniest, most original movies I've seen in a long time. All dialogue -- which I've seen some reviewers complain about, because I guess words are hard -- but hilarious throughout. Not really all that predictable. Just the two stars pretty much playing against type and delivering great performances. Buying this so I can watch it again.
Painful
28 May 2018
I enjoy the interviews with comedians as humans, not watching the comedian do a bit to exhaustion. This was the latter. If I wanted to watch her character, I'd watch her show instead of Jerry Seinfeld's. I gave up after about 8 minutes, preferring instead to slam my testicles in a dresser drawer.
Rising Fear
(2016)
My Eyes! My Ears!
28 August 2017
Some movies are bad in such a way that they're entertaining or amusing. This is not such a movie. This one is just painful to watch and painful to listen to because the directing, editing, and acting is all so bad. At one point early on the doughy, half-dimensional "star" was being tortured and I actually envied him because he wasn't sitting on my couch watching this movie.
I gave it 2 stars instead of 1 because it obeyed my commands and stopped when I pressed the Stop button.
I gave it 2 stars instead of 1 because it obeyed my commands and stopped when I pressed the Stop button.
Dane Cook: Troublemaker
(2014 TV Special)
Is that an echo?
20 May 2016
Almost two years after it came out and no one has even bothered to write a review -- that probably says more about this special than any negative review ever could. No rabid fans even.
His website hasn't been updated in over two years either. So maybe it's finally safe to say that we, as a culture, have persevered and overcome those dark, dark years and we're now all safe from the comic musings of Mr. Dane Cook.
Someday we can all sit around and reminisce about that moment when we suddenly realized, "He's just not all that funny."
Like any stand-up, this had some good bits in it. Sure. Talking to any random guy for 88 minutes will probably also result in some funny moments. I imagine if you talked to the guy who hangs out at the convenience store bumming cigarettes for 88 minutes you'd get a few chuckles.
Good lookin' guy, nice voice, well-spoken...just not really funny.
His website hasn't been updated in over two years either. So maybe it's finally safe to say that we, as a culture, have persevered and overcome those dark, dark years and we're now all safe from the comic musings of Mr. Dane Cook.
Someday we can all sit around and reminisce about that moment when we suddenly realized, "He's just not all that funny."
Like any stand-up, this had some good bits in it. Sure. Talking to any random guy for 88 minutes will probably also result in some funny moments. I imagine if you talked to the guy who hangs out at the convenience store bumming cigarettes for 88 minutes you'd get a few chuckles.
Good lookin' guy, nice voice, well-spoken...just not really funny.
Fantastic Four
(2015)
No Story
27 February 2016
This isn't a story -- this is five origin stories (The Four from the title, plus Doom) and then a fifteen-minute plot thrown in because that's all the time they had left. Maybe it was 18 minutes.
In another 10 years -- when they try to make a Fantastic Four movie again -- maybe they should just start with The Four already with their powers and allude to origins, teasing us to want another movie. Can't be any worse than the this and the other attempt that also got a bit hung up on origins, although not as much as this one.
In this one they allude to Doom's past, and that's enough. So why not just allude to the origin for all of them? Could work.
I can't find any fault with any of the acting or directing, just that they were all working with a script that amounts to vignettes cobbled together to be something like a movie.
In another 10 years -- when they try to make a Fantastic Four movie again -- maybe they should just start with The Four already with their powers and allude to origins, teasing us to want another movie. Can't be any worse than the this and the other attempt that also got a bit hung up on origins, although not as much as this one.
In this one they allude to Doom's past, and that's enough. So why not just allude to the origin for all of them? Could work.
I can't find any fault with any of the acting or directing, just that they were all working with a script that amounts to vignettes cobbled together to be something like a movie.
The Intern
(I) (2015)
Had High Hopes
20 February 2016
I really had high hopes for this movie, based solely on the cast and director/writer. Unfortunately...meh.
Somewhere along the way they forgot they needed a plot rather than a meandering set of vignettes and half-baked sub-plots. All of which get tied up neatly in 30 seconds at the end, leaving everyone exactly where they started. It's almost as if on one of the days of shooting someone said, "We've got enough footage: let's see if we can edit this into a decent movie."
They couldn't.
Hathaway and DeNiro are, of course, excellent. It's just unfortunate they don't have anything really solid to be excellent at in this semi-coherent storyline. Some of the secondary actors really shine, too.
Somewhere along the way they forgot they needed a plot rather than a meandering set of vignettes and half-baked sub-plots. All of which get tied up neatly in 30 seconds at the end, leaving everyone exactly where they started. It's almost as if on one of the days of shooting someone said, "We've got enough footage: let's see if we can edit this into a decent movie."
They couldn't.
Hathaway and DeNiro are, of course, excellent. It's just unfortunate they don't have anything really solid to be excellent at in this semi-coherent storyline. Some of the secondary actors really shine, too.
There Be Dragons
(2011)
Interesting PR piece for Opus Dei
21 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Realistically, this is two movies. One about the writer and his father. One about Opus Dei. The two stories are related by the thinnest of threads and the relation doesn't actually need to be there at all.
I think the story about father and son, Monolo and Robert, would have been worth pursuing in more depth. The reason behind their rift is only alluded to and not explored terribly well, and their spontaneous reconciliation at the end felt forced. Deus ex machina. Perhaps a bit literally.
Meanwhile, the story about Josemaria Escriva -- I can't understand why Joffe didn't show him walking on water as he did just about everything else. I found that this felt like a really nice public relations piece for Opus Dei. I guess the Church and Joffe felt they'd taken enough hits from Dan Brown and needed some positive spin.
I think the story about father and son, Monolo and Robert, would have been worth pursuing in more depth. The reason behind their rift is only alluded to and not explored terribly well, and their spontaneous reconciliation at the end felt forced. Deus ex machina. Perhaps a bit literally.
Meanwhile, the story about Josemaria Escriva -- I can't understand why Joffe didn't show him walking on water as he did just about everything else. I found that this felt like a really nice public relations piece for Opus Dei. I guess the Church and Joffe felt they'd taken enough hits from Dan Brown and needed some positive spin.
Moonlight
(2007–2008)
Another detective, just as dumb
8 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
It seems that each detective show out there has some little quirk to it. The detective has OCD, they're a soccer mom, etc. But they all seem to be stone, cold stupid. "Moonlight", unfortunately, also falls into this category. Mick St. John (Alex O'Loughlin) is a vampire, but having been made immortal and, by the looks of his apartment, rich, he's not any brighter after being around for 90 years (60 as a vampire).
He tells us that becoming a vampire has heightened his sense of smell and sight and hearing, evidently not his analytical skills.
Let's consider....
Don't move around even though you might run into someone who might notice that you haven't aged. You can't count on everyone to have gone blind like your detective friend.
And when going to have your revenge on a recent ex-con, do so at his book signing, in a bathroom with only one exit, and don't even lock the door behind you.
And when you get home, wounded, and desperately in need of blood, don't shut the door behind you even though you've just been involved in a shooting and someone (like, say, the police) might want to ask you a few questions. Have a security camera at the door, sure, but don't actually shut the door.
These are just a few examples where, while watching, I slapped my forehead and thought, "Again, the networks think we're all idiots so they make the heroes idiots, too." Granted, this might be true for some, but I don't like to be pandered to and have my intelligence insulted.
As for spoilers, I don't think I've provided any. Then again, the silly little music video at the end of Episode 1 provided enough spoilers for the whole season. He'll bite Beth, she'll work with him, they'll be in love, blah blah blah blah. For my money, Josef (Jason Dohring) is the more interesting character but, like the rest, probably won't survive beyond the six episodes completed.
He tells us that becoming a vampire has heightened his sense of smell and sight and hearing, evidently not his analytical skills.
Let's consider....
Don't move around even though you might run into someone who might notice that you haven't aged. You can't count on everyone to have gone blind like your detective friend.
And when going to have your revenge on a recent ex-con, do so at his book signing, in a bathroom with only one exit, and don't even lock the door behind you.
And when you get home, wounded, and desperately in need of blood, don't shut the door behind you even though you've just been involved in a shooting and someone (like, say, the police) might want to ask you a few questions. Have a security camera at the door, sure, but don't actually shut the door.
These are just a few examples where, while watching, I slapped my forehead and thought, "Again, the networks think we're all idiots so they make the heroes idiots, too." Granted, this might be true for some, but I don't like to be pandered to and have my intelligence insulted.
As for spoilers, I don't think I've provided any. Then again, the silly little music video at the end of Episode 1 provided enough spoilers for the whole season. He'll bite Beth, she'll work with him, they'll be in love, blah blah blah blah. For my money, Josef (Jason Dohring) is the more interesting character but, like the rest, probably won't survive beyond the six episodes completed.
Tourgasm
(2006)
Astoundingly unfunny
15 June 2006
One would expect that HBO would want to put their best foot forward in the premiere episode in order to hook people. Well, if Episode 1 was as good as they could get, they've got a real problem.
First of all, the four comedians are really only two comedians: Dane Cook and Gary Gulman. Bobby Kelly and Jay Davis are evidently there just to make the other two look good by comparison. Not that you'll get a lot of looking at their stand-up abilities since the show isn't about that. Actual stand-up makes up mere moments in the half hour. Unfortunately. What you get is a reality show of four jerks on a bus together.
There are evidently 9 episodes, so HBO probably won't cancel it. But if Jay Davis isn't tied to the back of the bus and dragged through, say, Colorado in the first few minutes of Episode 2, I can't see much reason to continue watching.
First of all, the four comedians are really only two comedians: Dane Cook and Gary Gulman. Bobby Kelly and Jay Davis are evidently there just to make the other two look good by comparison. Not that you'll get a lot of looking at their stand-up abilities since the show isn't about that. Actual stand-up makes up mere moments in the half hour. Unfortunately. What you get is a reality show of four jerks on a bus together.
There are evidently 9 episodes, so HBO probably won't cancel it. But if Jay Davis isn't tied to the back of the bus and dragged through, say, Colorado in the first few minutes of Episode 2, I can't see much reason to continue watching.
What the #$*! Do We (K)now!?
(2004)
Open your eyes and ears and you'll watch this multiple times
16 March 2005
I've read a fair bit of quantum physics, both boring fact and some of the more "out there" theories, and I have to say that this movie was a very accessible, very interesting look into the world of quantum physics that also includes spirituality and mysticism. I'm sure that some will be turned off on that basis alone, as some of the religious fundamentalists will be (and are, evidently).
An unconventional documentary, this gives some real world examples of quantum physics while also looking at physiology.
Open thought is all that's required to enjoy this movie, I believe. If you go into it with a closed mind, you'll get no enjoyment out of this whatsoever. If you're willing to even entertain some interesting ideas, this is a great experience.
An earlier reviewer commented that one lady takes all of the screen time for the more mystical comments, which I didn't find true at all. There was an even distribution among physicists, theologians, physicians.
An unconventional documentary, this gives some real world examples of quantum physics while also looking at physiology.
Open thought is all that's required to enjoy this movie, I believe. If you go into it with a closed mind, you'll get no enjoyment out of this whatsoever. If you're willing to even entertain some interesting ideas, this is a great experience.
An earlier reviewer commented that one lady takes all of the screen time for the more mystical comments, which I didn't find true at all. There was an even distribution among physicists, theologians, physicians.
All the Queen's Men
(2001)
Not as bad as I feared
7 June 2004
With Matt LeBlanc in the title role, I'm afraid that I feared the worst as there is certainly a compelling reason for him not appearing in many feature films; one can certainly point a camera at him, but I can't understand why someone would point a microphone at him.
However, his supporting cast certainly props him up well. Eddie Izzard in particular. And Nicolette Krebitz is certainly a delight to look at and someone who seems to be able to act.
In general, this film can't decide what it is. Comedy? Drama? Espionage? There's certainly not a lot of comedy outside of the guys wearing dresses. Then again, Berlin in the dying days of WW2 probably wasn't a whole lot of laughs.
The voice-over/explanation before the film even begins is worthless and should be deleted from all future prints. Yet while the producers seem to want to force this down our throats, they wouldn't spring for sub-titles during the German portions of the film.
The writing is nothing to salute and from people with less-than-noteworthy careers. The directing by Ruzowitzky is noteworthy only in it's lack of noteworthiness. Pretty static and boring.
Not a film to run screaming from, but I wouldn't recommend seeking it out, either.
However, his supporting cast certainly props him up well. Eddie Izzard in particular. And Nicolette Krebitz is certainly a delight to look at and someone who seems to be able to act.
In general, this film can't decide what it is. Comedy? Drama? Espionage? There's certainly not a lot of comedy outside of the guys wearing dresses. Then again, Berlin in the dying days of WW2 probably wasn't a whole lot of laughs.
The voice-over/explanation before the film even begins is worthless and should be deleted from all future prints. Yet while the producers seem to want to force this down our throats, they wouldn't spring for sub-titles during the German portions of the film.
The writing is nothing to salute and from people with less-than-noteworthy careers. The directing by Ruzowitzky is noteworthy only in it's lack of noteworthiness. Pretty static and boring.
Not a film to run screaming from, but I wouldn't recommend seeking it out, either.
Daredevil
(2003)
Better than SpiderMan by a long shot
23 September 2003
It's a shame this didn't do better because this is a lot better than SpiderMan was, although that one got all the hype. Affleck can act better than Maguire, and a potted plant can act better than Dunst. Jennifer Garner can act a helluva lot better than a potted plant.
This also had a lot fewer plot holes than SpiderMan. However, I guess people like what's unoriginal and comfortable, and SpiderMan was all of that. Daredevil, for my money, had better action, better acting, and a better story.
This also had a lot fewer plot holes than SpiderMan. However, I guess people like what's unoriginal and comfortable, and SpiderMan was all of that. Daredevil, for my money, had better action, better acting, and a better story.
Daredevil
(2003)
Best Marvel adaptation yet
8 August 2003
I think this is one of the best comic book adaptations yet. The acting was good (a helluva lot better than Dunst and Maguire in SpiderMan), the action was good (better than X-Men or SpiderMan). Good cinematography, dialog.... Good film. Glad I saw it and glad I bought it. Although I wish the DVD had deleted scenes. There are a ton of 'em alluded to in the other extras, so it'd be interesting to see those.
Mad City
(1997)
Blatant, yet bad, rip off
8 August 2003
This is such a blatant and awful rip-off of The Big Carnival it's shocking that none of the writers for The Big Carnival got credit. A shame, actually. The Big Carnival is a fine film while this hackneyed attempt to address the same subject today doesn't come close. Travolta is unsympathetic and Hoffman is clumsy, as if he showed up half-asleep to the set each day and did whatever it took to get to the end of the day.
Ace in the Hole
(1951)
Better than the remake
8 August 2003
This great film was sloppily remade as Mad City with Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta.
Kirk Douglas, as always, brings more to the part than I believe was probably there to begin with. While based on a true story, this fictional look at how a media circus develops should have been a cautionary tale for a news-hungry public. However, 50 years later, we still haven't learned that lesson.
Billy Wilder's direction is, as always, above compare.
Kirk Douglas, as always, brings more to the part than I believe was probably there to begin with. While based on a true story, this fictional look at how a media circus develops should have been a cautionary tale for a news-hungry public. However, 50 years later, we still haven't learned that lesson.
Billy Wilder's direction is, as always, above compare.
The Time Machine
(2002)
Good adaptation, good special effects
10 March 2002
I saw the 1960 version on television when I was about five years old. And that one scared the crap outa me. Gave me nightmares. So, in an odd way, I was kinda looking forward to this one.
I thought it was a good adaptation of (a) H.G.Wells story and (b) the 1960 script. Updated effects, more on character. The stuff they did to show the passage of time was very impressive.
As for the acting.... Well, I liked everyone except for the star, Guy Pearce. Didn't buy him for an instant. Seemed a bit too wishy washy and awestruck to be believable as a scientist. The paradox he's out to find an answer to has been answered so many times by people who couldn't build a toaster, much less a time machine.
Everyone else was great. Irons, Jones, the Mumbas. Fabulous. But they should've gone with someone else as the lead.
Still, enjoyable. Scary at points.
I thought it was a good adaptation of (a) H.G.Wells story and (b) the 1960 script. Updated effects, more on character. The stuff they did to show the passage of time was very impressive.
As for the acting.... Well, I liked everyone except for the star, Guy Pearce. Didn't buy him for an instant. Seemed a bit too wishy washy and awestruck to be believable as a scientist. The paradox he's out to find an answer to has been answered so many times by people who couldn't build a toaster, much less a time machine.
Everyone else was great. Irons, Jones, the Mumbas. Fabulous. But they should've gone with someone else as the lead.
Still, enjoyable. Scary at points.
Tell Your Friends