wvriend

The poor, simplistic story uses absurdistische style elements from 60-70 movies (Fellini movies or A Clockwork Orange), but totally mis the intended effect. It's not my intention to ridicule a serious attempt to create a good movie but the story never seems intelligent, intriguing or to contain a message. The way the past haunts the mother who left her children, the way they invade her life: it's all was agonising simple, not intelligent and very stereotype. We couldn't even figure out what was the cause of this mishap: a lack of interest with the filmmaker or a lack of talent. So, a waste of time.

Script is so bad (cliche course of actions full of weak humor). So weak even that even good actors seem to find it hard to provide a good performance.

Went to see this one with 5 persons. Due to the unexpected twist at the end the results of the jury: one cried, one fell asleep, 3x a 7 (the girls), 2x a 6. The main character Kate can get on your nerves at times as she plays her role like a teen that lacks attention. But, London at Christmas time around Covent Garden, a charity ball for the homeless, newly found family luck for Kate's war affected family and the main treat: the outcome of the real nature of Kate's relationship with Tom (I'm not gonna spoil that one here) make it worth to go and visit. If you have a romantic nature, that is. Otherwise you're better of watching Terminator.

Being a prequel to the highly rated Badman movies you might expect a simple, effect driven prequel. But contrary to expectations, the story evolves naturally, interesting and well played by all actors. To me, Joker turned out to be interesting, touching at times and exciting as it emphasises the psyche of the Joker and his emerging into violence. To the level that you might ask yourself who is to blame for the final raving madness. So, where Joker is a kind of caricature in the Badman movies, here he is a real life troubled person naturally evolving into violent madness. Joaquin Phoenix excels as he succeeds to portray both mental sides of his troubled persona and again, never turns the Joker into a caricature. I would not be surprised if Joaquin receives an Oscar nomination for his portrayal.

A typical (early career) Woody Allen movie with the lead male recognisable as a younger version of the chaotic, fast talking, witty and pseudo intellectual romantic and the female as a naive country girl. Not one cheap effect or act of violence or sex that you normally find in movies to please the regular audience.

Hope 'endgame' means no more sequels. Story is so thin, the dialogues so silly and the melodrama painful that even the fine actors are not given a chance to show their abilities. What a marvellous waste ot time.

Chekhov's story about an unlucky but trapped woman is brought to life against the background of a poor rural community in Turkey. Starting off with intelligence and witty conversations the story gradually reveals the enstraged lives of an egocentric husband (once an actor and now a sequestered living landlord), his sister and his young, disillusioned wife. In the final stages both the husband and wife learn valuable lessons, but if this will help them to close the gap? Regarding the movies theme and motives: wikipedia's description of Chekhov book 'The Wife' below, on which the movie is based below tells it all:

In this classic short story, Chekhov takes a snapshot of the Russian life, illuminating the harsh complexities and yet subtle simplicities that interact seamlessly together. The cold and gloom of the Russian environment cannot compare to the relationship that Pavel Andreitch, a rich aristocratic, has with his wife, who is no longer in love, or even tolerant of her husband, although helplessly reliant on his financial support. Their disintegrating relationship is set to the backdrop of the starving peasants of the lower classes, illuminating the perennial tension of an egotistical, self-centered man and the struggling goodness of a woman who cares about more than just herself.

What a movie, what fantastic actors. Based on a true story. Two ethnic characters, black musician and Italian hustler, learn to stand up (musician) and what segregation means (hustler). The'white' being the chauffeur of the 'black' and their very different characters and backgrounds are the base for both humorous and endearing moment. Through great acting both main characters are brought to life as real life sympatic persons. The story (kind of road movie) is depicted from an actual begin '60 experience. It's about a friendship built against the background of segregated US. Both the (mild) portayal of US segregation and how the respect and friendship evolve makes 'the green book' a strong advocate for respect. Go see and enjoy!

After seeing Drishyam and A Wednesday, this is the third Indian crime story is watched. And again it was a delight to watch. The story has clever and unexpected twists. It has humor, proper acting. Pure content (story) over form (effects). The moment you think you understand what will happen, events unfold differently but credible. Only during the final scenes you find out what happened and even then, it leaves you puzzling about what the main character might have left out to tell us. Anybody who likes humorous, well played, clever and unpredictable stories will not be disappointed. Enjoy!

Groucho's humor feels outadated and merely consists of endless boring chatter. Arguably not funny, certainly not witty. Especially Groucho's appearance might have ruined the movie by his-non stop non-humorous psychomumble. Movie might have been better without him. No match for the smarter and with more wit constructed movies like The General or any of the Chaplin movies.

The good thing though: Groucho , set a fine example for modern sitcoms that thrive on characters that never seem to shut up and are only funny according to taped laughter.

The first two episodes both had an original story and lots of humor. This sequel clearly misses both. The way the story unfolds lacks any surprise or suspense, is predictable as is the humor. What remains is the well known funny stuff that makes you smile sometimes.

Sorry, but a waste of money. Better had waited till the movie is available through Netflix.

It isn't rare that new instalments of a franchise show deteriorated performances and story lines. The sixth MI movie is a big exception to that: it shows a large number of next level and thrilling action sequences as part of a twisting but consistent story line with good acting.

Actions are mostly shot without the silly use of blue/green background screens. The story line is consistent without far reached twists. Serious stuff is brought in balance with humour without the usual overacting as can be seen in lots of current movies. Finally, the sceneries are cleverly chosen and will not disappoint you. Whether it concerns the mountain sceneries, Paris , London and other recognisable places.

Go and see!

Who ever wrote the lines: please pick another job. Characters are portrait as cariratures mostly foul mouthed, tough cookie-like heroes for some of the audience, but non realistic hollywood braindead idiots for others. Can imagine that whatever happens in wars formost the acting and lines of Pena and Bernthal are unrealistic and a disgrace to actual servicemen/women. A waste of time compared to Saving Private Ryan and the like.

The first version had a tough bionic like super woman portrait by Angelina Jolie. In this remake Alicia Vikander portrays Lara is a vulnerable but strong willed, athletic modern young girl/woman. Furthermore, Lara now starts of in the London young urban scene. It results in a less gun powdered more fun and none-the-less great action movie. So, no need to be afraid of looking at a weak, overplayed remake. This one is fresh, fun and exciting. Looking forward to the remake of the 2nd Tomb Raider.

The political play at the start of WWII was interesting. Foremost the power struggle within the Conservative party that was forced by the opposition to accept Churchill as the only acceptable conservative to lead the war cabinet as a prime minister. The movie portrays the struggle of Churchill who favours going to war against Nazi-Germany and Halifax, who is favoured by the conservatives to become prime minister and wants a peace treaty with the Germans (which is in line with the politics of the now ill-favoured conservative Chamberlain). In the movie Churchill finally wins both the support of his own conservative party as the support in parliament to go to war. This only after Churchill, on his way to address parliament, (a) loses all doubts he has as the common people on his spontaneous subway trip to parliament make clear that they expect England to fight Nazi-Germany and (b) after a subsequent pre-assembly with some MPs wins them over to favour the go-to-war option. Out of the blue, after Churchill's speech, also most of the Conservatives have become pro-Churchill/pro-War. Churchill is portrait as a eccentric, feeble person without much self confidence. For those who read some of biographic works on Churchill, or who can imagine what it may take to win and hold leadership in the political arena, Churchill is portrayed as a caricature more than a person. A shame as Oldman is a fine actor who deserved a better script. A better script might also have lead to a more intriguing and exiting insight into political gameplay. Especially in the case of British politics between september 1939 and may 1940. Instead of attending the Oscar ceremony it might be a good idea for the script writers to go and watch movies like The Ides of March or series like House of Cards (English or US version).

After great (3D) shots in outer space the story soon looses grip. The plots are predictable and therefor never exciting. This is also due to the main characters, two brothers who are getting in each others way early in the movie, who never convince as portraying real persons. Partly because of bad and overacting and possibly because of the weak story lines.

The story is about a corrupted climate control system in space surrounding our atmosphere. The effects of the corruption (extreme cold, hailstorms and the like) are shown quite sensational. The unfolding of the corruption, like the sequence how the weather control structure is destructed, is far-fetched and unbelievable. In the cinema I saw the movie the public sometimes laughed because of the lack of credibility.

If you want to see nice out of space pictures you will not be disappointed. If you are in need of a good story then you might better go and pick a different movie.

This biopic is interesting as it depicts a life story against the background France (Paris in particular) during a foregone era (1915-1960). The theatrical performance of Marion Cotillard, who portrays Piaf, is praised but can also get on your nerves as her performance merely portrayed a caricature.

Thirty years after its first staging Denzel Washington produced a moving film about a poor black working class man chasing ghosts of the past (US segregated years) and its effects on his family (gathering around his caring and strong wife) and life long friend.

The story is moving not at the least because of the strong performance of all the actors.

Although almost the entire movie is staged in the backyard of the house, the story itself offers much stuff tot think over and discuss whatever your role you play in your family.

Great movie.

Sometimes a movie can be really annoying. Whether it is because of a bad story or because of even worse acting. This movie will certainly annoy people with a sense of humor because… the only humor consists of the main character holding his eyes wide open ??!!??!! Fake voters constantly keep on re-entering this movie into the top 250. Please, IMDb rate the fake voters accordingly and kick this cheap time waster out of the top 5,000. Shame on the film makers and actors.

One wonders how a story about a man Bauby who is locked up in himself, able only to move one eye lid, can be interesting for almost two hours. Well, the story that is told by Bauby (while no one can hear) him is vivid, humorous, touching and philosophical at times. Bauby makes the best of the situation, whether he dictates a message to his lover over the phone through his wife, having a day at the beach with his family or else. Mathieu Almaric (Quantum of Solace) as Bauby is astonishing. With only one eye available to show expression he manages to bring Bauby to life and do him credit. What's left is a movie that is encouraging and hopeful. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is truly amazing and worth watching. It will leave you with a positive touch.

A feel good movie about the beauty of India's rural areas and diversity of its people. The movie preaches equality and gentle progression as it says in the English title: we, the people. This message is portrait through a Nasa manager who goes back to visit his nanny and finds love and truth on his way. The experiences he collects during his stay are shown without false sentiments but with the lighthearted spirit one recognizes from Bollywood. Of course with chanting, dancing, a small tear and lots of humor. Enjoy the sympathetic characters and a lost three hour visit to rural India.

Intelligent suspense with fine acting about a family living in a small town bullied by a corrupt policeman. When the ladies of the family are threatened and take measures, the father defends his family in a cat and mouse game with the police. No bombs and guns but lots of suspense, twists and good acting. If you like the suspense of Hitchcock than don't forget to take your time and enjoy this Indian movie.

Udaan is one of the best Indian movies I've seen. It is moving, inspiring and engaging. Rohan, the 16 year old is expelled from boarding school and send back to his father who doesn't know how to give love. His former friends, his new little brother and his caring uncle feed the faint sparkle pursuing another life away from home might be possible. As the film is not set in the gutters of India, the story does not become too raw for the western stomach and the focus remains on the story. The movie well deserves a place in the top 250. I won't spoil too much. Go and watch!

A story that could challenge a good old fashioned western (cowboy movie). With back flashes that explain the history of the main character prior involvements this India western has a solid story with actors that resemble characters you might (during the almost three hours) feel sympathy for. Very enjoyable.

This top 250 2016 film might be considered funny depending on your sense of humor. On the other hand, the story, script and acting does not match a IMDb top 1000 quotation. Almost three hours is too much for the simple story, the over the top acting, the odd sound effects, etc.. Most of all, the acting of main actor Aamir Khan is far over the top and can become annoying. If you want to see a good Indian movie, do yourself a favour and look at the film's average score of the top 1000 users/scorers at IMDb.