sammy-balamy

Great video for insight into Pacquiao's mentality and background....a real flavour of life for the ordinary people of the Philippines...giving 'hard times' a whole new face.

The curious content is that sacked conditioning coach Ariza is portrayed as just as much of a friend or even more so than trainer Freddy Roach, that he's given so much of a voice in the film which derides some of the key people around Manny, then implications are made that Arum is largely responsible for the Floyd-PAC fight not taking place so far....Arum is featured (in a clip so short and edited it could easily be out of context)saying that this fight is not needed and will never take place.

Then he's also featured saying that the Mayweathers have been responsible for the breakdown.....All of this whilst Floyd's contradictions of which there have been many were left alone.

Koncz is also brought into question by Ariza as was Arum but Ariza is never once portrayed in a negative light, Roach is shown giving him the 'best conditioning coach in the world' accolade in a statement and a journalist is shown saying that Ariza was responsible for Pac gaining more power...which is pure speculation as Pac was KO'ing guys well before Ariza arrived.

Pacquiao is shown to behave as if he thought Marquez won their third fight in a heavily edited post fight press conference clip while Marquez is shown clearly stating that he won the fight which echoed the sentiments of the HBO commentators....when in actuality sports commentators around the globe were divided 50/50 over the outcome of the fight........ it's a curious choice of angles and makes me wonder if PAC had ultimate approval of the director's cut.

My, my, my! Ben Affleck, what did you do to make all those people so mad at you? Haven't read the tabloids for a long, long time but people definitely have a bee in their bonnet about Ben Affleck and poor Casey's getting it in the ear for the same bee....weird.

Anyway the film is all the things I said it was in my summary. People all of a sudden become directors, script writers, authors and actors when they dislike someone.

As far as directions go,

I followed the story perfectly from start to finish and I'm not American....as for the guy who wrote in saying he had to keep winding back his DVD because it had no subtitles....'what the hell man?!'

The acting...is supposed to pull you in and gain sympathy for some characters and vitriol or suspicion for others....right? Well if that's the case they did their jobs...I was there with them.

As for the plot. Is money the only thing that can motivate law enforcers to break the law? I don't believe so. Can a little girl of three be easily identified at the age of seven?....I don't think she can.

Will she talk about a woman she barely remembers four years later if she knows that means being taken away from people she loves?....I don't think she will.

Will people suspect a retired black police chief for having a blonde girl to take care of with a white wife, of kidnapping?....I wouldn't when there could be half a dozen explanations for it.

Sometimes I say,"Thank God for critics who can keep their personal prejudices out of reviews!".

Tom Clancy's final act is a patriotic tour de farce in the light of 21st century history, Fox's fervent 'War On Terror' and the Iraqi non existent 'weapons of mass destruction'. Political agenda not withstanding the clichés are flying thick and fast. Not since the Bond 'cold war' films have we seen such evil Russians and good wholesome Americans. Branagh gets to practice and pull off a 'reasonable to us non speakers' Russian accent and his most sinister face, Chris Pine gets to look wide-eyed and desperate ala Harrison Ford and Kevin Costner gets to be...well, Kevin Costner.

They're able to bring a van decked out with state of the art computer, satellite and tracking equipment into mother Russia, plus an assortment of weaponry...break into a building containing even more state of the art security systems, circumvent them, rescue Ryan's girlfriend from Branagh and his dastardly designs for her and fly out unhindered (all last minute of course)...

Once in the plane Ryan (Pine) looks like a rabid ferret as his eagle eyes and obviously razor sharp and pin pointedly accurate powers of perception and deduction have him solving nearly the whole plot in the air...fiancé Keira Knightly even though not an agent gets given one important deduction to make..."wait, pull back..."just to show us what a great match they are. What a couple, without them everything would've gone to heck in a hand cart!

It's well shot and expensively made as you would expect and action and visual effects fans will get their money's worth. Suspend any kind of objective thinking and perception of the times we live in and you've got a winner...I couldn't and got a weener...four out of ten.

To judge something in terms of how it's executed is all well and good but in a documentary such as this the message takes precedence. It seeks the truth and all the arguments aren't displayed for that to emerge. If it it simply allowed the viewer to make up his own mind then that would be o.k but the film displays a bias thereby becoming a vehicle and a misleading one at that.

The fact that doping was prevalent in cycling and still plays a large factor is obvious. If Armstrong was racing on a level playing field of dopers then that to me would also have been acceptable. However this was far from the case.

Non of Lance's team mates were caught doping whilst they were in his team. Meanwhile all his major competitors were absent from the start line at various points in time due to suspensions and had some key teammates missing from every tour for the same reason. Throughout all the disruptions, devastation, controversy and even a suicide Armstrong was always there with a full strength squad.

The film touches on the importance of team mates and how on all of his wins Armstrong rode alone for only minutes at a time, but fails to take the next step and look at how the various disqualifications imposed on all other teams (apart from his own during his winning years) affected his competitors. Had the film done this Armstrong would never have agreed to be in it because he's still pushing the lie that he won those seven Tours fair and square once we accept as fact that they were all doping.

The UCI had invested in him and were being invested in by a lot of the same sponsors, they allowed many cyclists to burn whilst protecting this man. The film doesn't touch on those aspects and the film maker remains a fan.

I gave the film five stars because it is well shot and well put together. I am a cycling fan and it's view of the race was a pleasure to watch. There is stock footage obviously but the film does follow Armstrong and films the 2009 race independently. The film gives an insight into what it takes to be a professional rider and rider's relationships with one another and their team officials.

Some of the people interviewed I've never seen interviewed i.e doctor Ferrari, which added another point of interest for me.

The 2009 and other pre-'outed' interviews were interesting, giving an insight into Armstrong's mentality at the time and although there is marked contrast to his post-confessional ones it's by no means a transformation and a true repentance. His approach to people seems outwardly very different now, but his attitude towards his legacy and the morality of his actions remain to all intents and purposes unchanged. The exclusions of Paul Kimmage and Greg Lemond from the documentary also indicate this.

I'd say watch the film but bear the other stuff in mind too.

I'm mourning the much maligned career of Mel Gibson...he's alright, he doesn't need the money that's for sure but I'm mourning it for my own sake. The guy does great work and we're being deprived of it. I'm not gonna go into any argument about his personal life but this film is great and I watched it again the day after I first saw it. I didn't do that for any of the block busters or big earners this year or last year and they've earned billions. Well done people , 5 mill for this movie, you've really outdone yourselves with...alright I'm not getting into it.

Great gritty feel with the setting for a good part in a south of the border prison, come ghetto, come refugee camp and a very human character driven story to go with the Peckinpah type action. Gibson is great and the boy co-starring was terrific with a great solid cast all around.

Gibson does a film noir style narrative over the movie ala Payback. Humor and wit abound...as well as emotional content and blood curdling hostility. The film's graininess and seedy grimy realism seems like a cross between Seven and Traffic (the Mexican scenes not the courtroom ones)...just talking about the tones and colours of the film.

I'd say it's a really good 9.

King Pin is one of my favourite comedies of all time. I've played it to so many people over the years and it's never failed to draw belly laughs and tears.

One of Woody's best roles.......how one succeeds to be that funny and touching at the drop of a hat I can only marvel at. It is something rarely seen and I'm glad I've witnessed it at least once. It's in my collection and I know that over the years it'll keep being pulled out on a regular basis....film!

Briefly: A bowler doesn't fulfil his youthful promise and disappears into obscurity and the bottle only to be inspired years later by a young Amish man with a strong right arm and the prospect of coaching him to the final of a million dollar tournament. A road movie ensues with Vanessa Angel providing much more than a female interest.

There's no nudity to speak of but a lot of sexual and bodily function based humour....Hey! It's a Farrelly brothers movie! That isn't the only source of the film's humour and........

Bill Murray is the icing on the cake...the epitome of the cynical, hedonistic, self centred, insensitive comedy villain.

If you haven't seen it.......you gotta!!!

Hahahaha..........hahahaha.........hahahahaha Get it, it's funny!

Ten lines minimum! What if you want to keep it short and sweet like I just did? You have to keep babblin' on............ Just to fill space........... Like I'm doing now..........yawn.....borrrring!

Anyway, funny movie about husbands unleashed and their flabbergasted wives who are forced in their own minds to set 'em loose for a bit or lose 'em. Sexual and bodily function humour abound......I love it when it's well done and this is.

That's ten lines.....byeeeeeee..... No it isn't, still not enough text. I don't know whether to carry on filling or just give up........I'll carry on for a bit. Owen Wilson is as good as ever but his side-kick Jason Sudeikis is great and his character a perfect foil for Wilson's laid back, slightly introspective character. That should be enough...........

I normally review films I really like. This isn't the case but I was moved to write something.

The performances were fine, the direction was good....clear plot, dramatic tension maintained etc.

I think it's worth a watch but I found the premise weak and so ended up sympathising with the thieves, which I don't think was the movie's objective. If you don't share my point of view you'll enjoy the whole experience a lot more I'm sure.

I pretty much agree with the average review score, so a 5 will pretty much do it.

I don't play video games. I have played them, they are addictive, time consuming and left me feeling as if I'd been in a vacuum after spending several hours glued to a chair.

Reflecting on the quality of the film compared to many of this genre which receive favourable reviews I was mystified by some of the extremely low ratings, until I began reading them...gamers! It doesn't compare favourably to the game.....well, I don't care.

Well shot, good coherent direction and good acting. If you're not a gamer don't be put of because this film is based on a game. The action is Marvelesque and has aspects of The Matrix...slowed down action and bullet sequences, maintaining those qualities of realism, grittiness and detail. The characters are realistic. raw and not caricatures.

A solid 8 from me, I'll watch this a few more times for sure.

Great performances and direction. The characters are three dimensional, not overstated and sympathetic. Even though it's a two hour film it was good enough to have been longer without dragging. All of the characters are interesting enough to merit more time for development. I'll be looking for a director's cut or an extended version.

Forget the formulaic, plodding, and disjointed accusations. This is simply a good story with credible characters who have realistic and multi-layered relationships with one another.

Formulaic films are based on a popular format without any depth or insight; this movie has both. Because sibling rivalries and cop dramas are popular doesn't mean they should be ignored as a subject.

Plodding movies have scenes failing in dialogue and performance which slow the plot down. I didn't find one scene to fault in this way, both dialogue and performance are top notch.

Disjointed means that the plot doesn't flow in a coherent manner making the movie looked spliced together. The plot's progression and coherence had me watching intently for the whole movie and trying to think ahead for the characters, to find it disjointed one would need a pretty short attention span.

A great find and a nice change from the many formulaic cop movies around.

My favourite childhood T.V cop show and I guess I still haven't grown up coz I still love it.

Yeah the 'send up' film version is a send up and as such was funny. Starsky having to live up to his mother as a cop was funny to me at least, particularly for so macho a character. Trying to recreate the actual show seriously would've been nigh on impossible and Stiller either had too much reverence to try or 'he's not as dumb as he looks' (cribbing from Muhammad Ali is appropriate here!).

You either love these guys and all the clichés or you hate 'em and (luckily for me) enough people loved 'em to give us four great seasons. At the end, it's popularity undiminished, the show only closed because Dave and Paul decided to move on...pity.

Ten out of ten here, coz for me it doesn't get any better than this...I'm twelve years old again!

Ignore the critics if you favour character development over gripping your seat throughout a whole film. The relationships of the main characters need to develop for the story to have credibility and to keep the pace faster wouldn't allow that. Critics are perhaps jaded from watching too many movies if they have the need for a beat to be evidently maintained. The plot requires tension to exist because it involves the subterfuge of trust. There is tension throughout the film which I felt even in the 'lighter' scenes not directly related to the plot due to good acting which allows us to see that the existence and gravity of the plot are always present in the minds of those involved. I felt the director didn't drop the ball at the end but just fumbled it slightly otherwise I'd have given the film a higher score.

I don't understand the scathing reviews and the amount of venom this movie has elicited from some people, Is it jealousy of a talented family, Will Smith taking a secondary role or is it that the expectations of a standard roller coaster Blockbuster weren't lived up to. The story was solid, acting was top notch and the effects were easily up to scratch. Maybe people have got so used to special effects redefining the genre every time that nitpicking is the order of the day...'show me something I've never seen before or I'll be bored'....what a sad state of affairs. Jaden played the role in front of him, he had a trauma as a child in the role and was still dealing with that, trying desperately to win his father's respect by being a man and having the urge to rush back to his mother's bosom. I'd say that's pretty mufti-dimensional and he did it with aplomb. The critic who said he, "plays the role throughout with a face like a smacked bum" was obviously enjoying his hatchet job reviewing and can't remember his own childhood. Anyone who sees this movie, Pursuit Of Happiness and the fantastic remake of Karate Kid and says Jaden can't act obviously has an agenda. The film is a great rites of passage movie and takes us on a thrilling journey which shows us the father son relationship under incredible stress and up against a lot of odds. It's beautifully shot and crafted. I'd say don't miss it and give it a solid 7.

The film doesn't show the full extent of the injuries inflicted, which some people feel lessens the crime and gives us a more sympathetic view of Gertrude (the mother of the adoptive family). I think that the severity of the crime is sufficiently depicted and showing more would not increase the enormity of the it but may have the adverse effect of putting some viewers off watching a worthwhile film to it's conclusion. Demonizing Gertrude serves no purpose other than to allow us to wash our hands of any responsibility we have as a society to attain economic equality for it's members, which may decrease the amount of harm we do to one another. Monsters aren't born, we create them through our apathy and then lust for revenge when atrocities are committed over and over, generation after generation. As long as the crimes are not committed by our children we can brand the perpetrators as monsters with impunity. Watching the trial I felt the need to see Gertrude shamed and some people reviewing even wanted to go so low as to see her tortured. Knowing my own weaknesses and imagining my own reactions in certain circumstances I can realize that this impulse is hypocritical and self serving. Gertrude was looking after her own children single handed and there were no evidences of torture on them, which does not indicate the rabid monster some people would like her to be. Her crimes against the Likens girls were terrible but suggest she was reacting to pressure and found relief through finding someone to punish.

Superb fly on the wall documentary film footage about two of Ali's biggest fights. The first against Liston when Ali was a young sure to lose underdog and the second against Foreman when his age and Foreman's power had combined to lower him to major underdog status once more.

The boxing is definitely not what it's about here (Ali was so much more than a boxer to many people all around the world) , but a slice of Americana from two periods of it's history, ten years apart. Attitudes glare out at us from a cross-section of American society, towards the man, his principles and his opponents, which are things barely seen on any fight footage...another reason for the fight footage being unnecessary is that it would detract from the interest of non-boxing fans, whilst boxing fans will most probably have seen the fights more than once and will surely not be in desperate need see them again. Their interest however should be more than held by this unique back-grounding footage which would then complete the picture for them.

Boxing is a conflict, but conflict without drama is not terribly compelling and a drama is made up of attitudes and circumstances which surround an event or character, which is what this footage gives us, so it would not be so surprising that upon watching this some non-boxing fans may find themselves in search of the fight footage for which this movie is a backdrop. Top marks from this viewer.

In a clichéd Horror flick the ghosts just haunt for the sake of haunting or are inherently evil, not so here. The story has an element of a horror cliché to it... the family renting a former funeral home, but the explanations behind events are well laid foundations which should uphold credibility and make for a logical progression. The characters are three dimensional enough and flawed enough for most people to be able to sympathize or identify with. Characterization is sadly largely forgotten about in horror films, which prevents us from caring as much as we could about it's characters, which in turn lessens the fear factor. The characters in this story are worth caring about: a teenage boy dieing of cancer and embarrassed by it's effects, a mother prepared to do anything towards his survival and an ex-alcoholic father wrestling with his own inner demons about how the financial strain of his son's hospital bills are effecting his ability to support and feel love. I was scared in places and wary of dark corners for a while.

There was no guarantee just because the cameras in the bank being robbed were disabled 2 minutes before the robbers in painters' overalls appeared that there were not plain-clothes robbers already amongst the customers. We know it, but the police hadn't seen this movie at the time...

The robbers kept the hostages in separate rooms and shifted them around leaving plenty of opportunities for them 2 switch roles from robber to hostage, therefore all the customers and bank staff on the pre-robbery video cannot be safely eliminated...plus however many people may have come into the bank in the period between the cameras being disabled and the doors being locked. Painters' overalls are baggy enough to hide most people's physical differences so the elimination of suspects on such a basis is far from full-proof.

The robbers didn't commit any outright crimes. They feigned two beatings to further integrate two of their number with the hostages. Kidnapping without ransom demands or an assault becomes illegal detention. The fact that the matter was allowed to slide by a ratings conscious Police Captain pressured by people able to have corruption charges dropped against one of his detectives and exert influence on his own career is credible to this viewer.

Questions which we didn't see asked such as who was reported missing, how people got to the bank, did they have an account there? etc...have too many variables and are questions that people engaged in such meticulous planning necessary to pull this type of robbery off should be prepared for. Is it credible that a policeman would steal, as Denzel's Detective character does? Life and history point to the affirmative, but because it's Denzel he didn't really steal the jewel, it was dropped into his pocket by a thief and belonged to a war criminal...fair cop?