15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Polar (I) (2019)
4/10
John Wick wannabe. Dull in its attempt to be original.
28 January 2019
Everyone who watched more than one movie will see many many copy-paste in this one. This of course is not a bad thing in itself. It just that in the process a lot of context for copied content has been lost. What we get is a vulgar version of what could be a good movie.

This movie tried to take us back to early 2000s with its storyline, characters and over the top action. But it is too late for that. Too many movies already done it better.

Main character is however a great one. 5/10 is only because of him. Seriously. He is actually what makes this a watchable movie.

I would not recommend it. Waste of time. Even for those who have nothing better to do wit their time.
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
For movies like this cinemas are built. Ritchie does not do movies for critics but for us.
25 January 2019
Those who liked Holmes or other Guys movies will enjoy this one as well.

Story, characters, screenplay is all rather familiar to the fans. Familiar but not boring, old...

What I liked the most was the fact that there was not a single section of the movie that was boring. Two hours went by like a few minutes. AND I had few very good laughs.

It's a great entertainment for the whole family. Boys will like it more but my wife did enjoy it as well.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Venom (2018)
4/10
Movie for adults cut into pieces just to fit PH-13. Effect: Bad jokes, bad script, dated CGI (kids care little about the quality?)
23 December 2018
This movie is a typical example of bad production decisions: movie for adults dumb down to fit into PG-13 standards. Why: just to make sure enough kids will be allowed into the cinemas. So instead of getting a lot of good dark humor we got a lot of stupid dialogues. Instead of seeing few great CGI we see a lot of bad rendering. They even cut out some scenes from the trailer... that's suck. Like this whole movie.

Marvel is known for making rather fun to watch movies. Nothing too sophisticated nor too dumb. Association with Marvel here ends with the main character. Everything else is totally not like Marvel. This is another Suicide Squad where some good but not popular ideas has been later on cut out.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Very, very funny...
22 September 2018
I did know what to expect. I thought it will be something like Kudo but I could never guess that I will have so much fun.

The story is about one of the most trusted general of Muhammad: Bilal ibn Riyah. So do not get me wrong but when I hear one of the most repeated sentence in this story is "freedom and equality" - that's really makes me laugh... Muhammad was many things but tolerant he was not and freedom also have very different meaning to him and his followers. So if you know anything about this culture and system of thought than you will have fun. If not - you will be rather bored and may even think "what a nobel guys they were"...

Other than that the animation is really impressive sometimes and rendering looks great. Good voice acting.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Innocents (2018)
7/10
Better Than they say. Worst than they say.
5 September 2018
It's not your typical Netflix series. The story is not the strongest it's suit. Dialogues are also often very TV-like... and the main character is the least interesting one... I know it sound like it's bad but it isn't.

I think this series have great potential: script can be improved - yes but it is overall pretty interesting and sometimes even innovative. Dialogues are often cliche- yes but some of them take us very deep into some psychologically interesting places... oh! And support characters are very well written.

The strongest side of this series is production. Beautiful shots, great music, fantastic locations... it's a candy for an eye and for the ears.

I gave it a 7/10 as I was expecting another Netflix supershow. Instead it was just good. I'm certain that they will improve over time. To be honest some series did start from lower level that this one and had better reception.

Give it a try.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Anne with an E (2017–2019)
First seasons sticks to the book. Second season is swift introduction to political correctness for kids
11 July 2018
It's hard to score this series without considering its ideological roots.

Good music, fine cast and well written story of the first season has been exchanged for boring, tedious and unnecessary indoctrination in the second.

It's not the fact that they choose to change the original story. It's not even for what they have chosen to add... it's how it was done. I felt like I was on unconscious bias course. "This is a gay person DO NOT BY ENY MEANS SAY OR THINK ANYTHING WRONG ABOUT HIM/HER".

Ann is enlightened teenager with nothing but "love" in her heart for anyone in the world even for oppressed gay people. Enough of it already... we get it: We are all "people kind".
101 out of 162 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Titan (2018)
2/10
Badness of this movie is hard to explain
4 April 2018
There is not even one good thing about this movie.

1. Plot is dumb beyond anything I've seen so far: Bad people who looks like good people are really bad. They do bad things to good people. And everything in the name of scientific progress... 2. Director was absent during the shooting. I do 3. Screenplay, dialogues - whole writing was so painfully bad...

Every minute of this movie is a terrible waste of time.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Black Panther (2018)
4/10
Marvel at its worse. Political correctness at its best.
7 March 2018
I'm fully aware of what type the Marvel movies are. I've seen them all and I can appreciate how the studio chose to present its stories and characters. Nothing too ambitious nor too stupid. Well design entertainment. Black Panther however is not like that.

Production value in Marvel movies is there to overshadow possible drawbacks. Panther is sloppy in the production and since there are many drawbacks this movie is simply put - boring. CGI is rather good but when it's bad - it's very bad. It looks like several director assistants put this movie together. Few did very good job - the rest not so much. The result makes me want to compare this movie with the last DC... That's how bad it is.

Story is yet another thing that made me scratch my head. This was pretty much a Marvel version of Amistad. Seems like yesterday, I know but why to put this theme in the movie? They wanted to compete for Oscars or something? Basically the story goes like this: Black folks are oppressed all around the world and there's secret, super advanced and resources-rich country in the middle of the poorest continent but they do nothing about the evil in the world. That's not even half of what is wrong with the story but you get the picture.

Acting is something you never look too closely in Marvel movies simply because there's not much time for it. Slow moments are rather few and are well positioned in the story and well directed. Not here. Main character apart from crying 10 times does little to symphonized with him. Black Panther and his friends are so dull and uninteresting that I much more liked two main villains and theirs motivations. Seriously. And dialogues? Only the bad guys made sense here. "Good guys" talk and talk nonsense for hours. Not to give you some perspective or background but to save money on CGI (I guess).

I pay no attention to details like music in Marvel movies. But here you cannot miss this. Soundtrack contains everything from typical rap, through typical African music to classical drama-like music. This would normally be good BUT. The way this music is implemented in the scenes would make you think "wait, what?!?". I rarely watch movie where soundtrack is making it worse not better.

The list of what's wrong goes on...

This is a bad movie, bad Marvel movie, and poor overall production.
9 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Even CGI is bad.
17 February 2018
Not very often you see 300mln $ movie that presents significant production problems. In the very first scene you can see multiple examples of how not to shot SGI scene, and how not to render Batmans cape... I do not know how - it's hard to explain but first scene tells you a lot about the quality of the whole movie. Not all of the special effects are bad but some are very bad...

As much as I like Aflec - he is one of the worst Batmans. Maybe it's his costume, maybe his acting - hard to tell. And he is shooting guns!!! Batman does not do that!!!

Story would have not entertain even a 12 yer old. Simplistic and dull. Seriously. I know its a superhero movie but come one! We are really not that dumb.

This move is like Ubisoft games - very unfinished.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Beautiful emptiness
11 October 2017
Production-wise this movie is a masterpiece: scenography, light, some very impressive CGI, music, long and well done shots – it will all make you feel like you're watching better, upgraded version of the original Blade Runner.

However this artistic style, the fact that director took his time with every scene – this will only make you feel worse when the ending credits finally appears. Then you will finally come to understand that this movie practically had no screenplay, story so weak that it only makes you wonder "am I not getting something or what?". What however is the worse is the main character – another lonely robot with cybernetic soul.

This movie is made for critics not for people who love movies. Why? Critics care little about story, or a purpose of the movie. For critic, screenplay is just one point on a long chart of requirements that "good" movie should meet. So the fact that spectator is totally detached from the main character makes no impact on technical side of the production. This is technically true.

This is 2h 45min of nice views, great shots, some innovative CGI with no reason to watch it.
10 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Jason Bourne (I) (2016)
6/10
Overproduced. Bad choreography. Simplistic plot.
21 August 2016
It is impossible to not mention previous Bourne moves, but not without a reason. Not only this one fails to do justice to very well written and well done series, but it is also just rather Sunday TV action movie than a Cunema blockbuster.

It is rather clear from the beginning that producer (Matt himself) does not trust the viewers with remembering the character nor with understanding protagonist position. So basically whole plot is a mix of all previous ones with one (yes, just one) new element. So for everyone who is looking for some continuity - will be very disappointed.

Screenplay is 40% chase, 15% looking at Bourne face, 30% rewinding the previous Bourne movies, 15% of very bad dialogues. Whole thing is very cliché. Very, very "seen it 100 times before".

However if you do not care about Bourne this movie will stunt you wit the scale of NFS-like pursues, big explosions and other production values. But actions scenes are way too long. One chase is like 20 minutes! With very unstable camera you really want it to end fast. Same goes for fighting scenes. You see practically nothing. Like they had no one to do choreography for them. After John Wick, Batman, and other movies with great fighting scenes I was hoping every producer would understand that shaking camera is no way to do fight scene anymore... I was wrong.

Movie is a solid 5/10 but it might be too hard for it so I gave it a 6/10. It's not worth your money. It should be in TV very soon.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Regression (I) (2015)
8/10
What a score for such a great movie... Worth to watch.
19 August 2016
I'm very surprised by the low score of this movie.

Screenplay is good, directing work is very fine, cinematography is well done... There's little wrong with that movie from technical point of view.

Hawk played well. Good role. Even Emma Watson did pretty good job. Supporting characters are doing good job as well.

Story itself is interesting and movie is doing good job of feeding your paranoia. You are getting to know what's what maybe too soon but nevertheless this is well produced movie.

One thing I have agings this movie is very typical liberal-like approach to the matter of faith. Basically all who belief are stupid little people and the atheists/agnostics are the only straight thinking folks around. Cliché.

This is not a high-flyer of Alejandro work but it is very decent movie.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Not only the weakest in the series but weak in general. Cheap tricks, dull story, badly directed.
13 June 2016
In the past entries the most interesting characters in the movie were Magneto and Xavier. Both with the strong history, well written dialogues etc.

Apocalypse is so weak in terms of the story that producer(probably) made an obvious choice to go for CGI rather than further development of the characters. There are also good old "previously on X-Men" scenes that have to fill the gaps between totally stupid conversations and another dull huge CGI scene. Final cheap trick is of course making fun of the Christian belief system. It seems to me as it is a way to gain popularity and climb out from the deep whole that director and producer dumped the movie in to.

Polish accent was so...Stupid. Seriously. Scenes that supposed to be emotional were simply funny as Fasbender did not learned even one word properly and Polish "actors" were literally reading from the cart board. It seriously ruined every single scene in that segment including the final one.

This is by far the weakest X-Men movie made to date. It's little like Hobbit. CGI is everywhere and characters are nowhere to be found. It also feels a little like Batman VS. Supermen where both Batman and Supermen characters are totally different (in a bad way) and the reasons behind their choices are simplistic, primitive.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Very enjoyable. Was not expecting it to be that good.
13 May 2015
This was very nice surprise for me. Maybe that why I liked it so much.

This is a light version of "Primer". Very well made, good screenplay, well directed, acting could be a little better but overall this is decent production.

What I liked the most about it is that it tries to capture "what would you do" situations and made you ask yourself those questions. Not many movies a specially those made for teenagers are doing it.

It's nothing mind blowing, nothing very new in terms of storytelling but it's really worth watching.

I guess not often we get a movies that perfectly fills up all the flaws of previous movies from the genre. And this is not one of them. It's not Matrix, not Primer, not The Signal. It's more like John Wick of it's type: all the same but well made.

For all who likes Micheals Bay movies should enjoy this one as well.
8 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Ridley keeps getting worst.
5 March 2015
This movie is like summer musical hit: poor vocal, typical lyrics, very typical music line. It's good for 10-12 years old who doesn't even know what "taste" means and how much the song is actually wrong about the reality it's describing.

Acting is the weakest of this movie elements. It probably started with very poor cast: John Turturro (great actor but very unfitting here), Aaron Paul (since when he can play?), Sigourney Weaver (maybe it was the fault of characterization...). Even Christian Bale was paid to just show up and that's exactly what he did. Actor known very well of his ability to become the character he is playing, here he simply reads the lines like the rest of the actors. I was surprised by Joel Edgerton performance. He actually was pretty good.

Screenplay... Well I do not understand why Hollywood directors are so persistent in making already good story "better". Braking the logic behind the motivations of main characters is unbearable. You simply cannot watch this move and not ask yourself "what the hell?!". Theological incorrectness is not what I'm aiming for here. I'm talking about simple logic, consistency.

Main character (Moses) is very vague and dull. I just wanted for him to stop whining. It was so frustrating watching him progress through the story. Terrible. I read this story once now and then I pretty much liked him. But Ridley made him totally unlikable. Scott did not explored any of intriguing elements of Moses motivations, problems, dilemmas.

Overall this movie is bad. Very poor performance of most actors created very artificial world. Only few spectators would find this interesting. Good story was adapted in the way that it's no longer interesting nor compelling.

I would not recommend this movie.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed