roger_towne

As you'd expect with these kinds of movies, the first reviews are always 10-stars. Then you hear from the real people.

In this case, if you're 14 years old ... you've only seen a few movies in your lifetime ... or you love soap operas, then surely you'll enjoy this movie. Otherwise, it's a shallow story with many cliches that you already know how it'll finish after the first scene.

How's that sound for a 10-star movie? Nevermind you have to bear through a few awful characters and a supposed co-investigation by the two leads that's about as plausible as having fantastic sushi without the fish. Right.

The only redeeming quality about Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch is the occasional stellar views of Paris. Half an extra star for that.

Sheesh, why would Cole Hauser attach his hard-earned "Yellowstone" brand to garbage like this? I can understand Morgan Freeman who's been in a freefall for a few years now. Animal Kingdom's Darren Mann is already past it and part of 1923. But after Hauser finally made a household name for himself, he joins project crap?

The issue here is not only the performances of leads Hauser and Freeman who both were painfully obvious in how much they were mailing it in, but the storywriting by (director) Michael Mailer and (co-writer) Timothy Holland. Go check out their combined experience with good movies on IMDB and you'll find it's none.

Just as you'd expect, the story here is dull, uninspiring and has more than its share of cliches. Making matters worse is the second rate sound effects and backround music which feels straight out of a wannabe video from YouTube. Just awful.

If that's not bad enough, take a good look at Purnie's (Liann Pattison) car wreck. If you look closely, the car is already damaged BEFORE it crashes. As a matter of act, a real close look reveals the bumper and marker lights were already removed. It's pathetically obvious a damaged car was being pushed into the embankment, but of course we're too stupid to notice that stuff.

Same for how a late 1990s Lincoln Town Car won't have airbags.

Shame on these people for making such garbage, and shame on Cole for taking the easy cash.

The first 5 minutes should tell you everything. Bruce Willis is practically slurring due to his unfortunate Aphasia diagnosis, the shootout sequence looks pathetically 3rd rate (500 agents miss their target from 30ft away) and the overall choreography looked like garbage.

Meanwhile, Travolta looked uninterested and more like he just wanted a paycheck. Dorff may have been aching for anyone to notice him. The storyline is what you'd expect from Edward Drake whose written a BARRAGE of other AWFUL Bruce Willis garbage-movies none of which have garnered anything above a 4.0 rating on IMDB ... like Gasoline Alley (3.8), American Siege (3.4), Apex (2.9), Cosmic Sin (2.5) and Breach (2.9).

Maybe a good nickname for Drake is "The Garbage Man" because that's what he seems to be good at.

This film is also disappointing for Director in Chuck Russell who hasn't done anything meaningful in 20 years. He should know better. Then again, in the new garbage-days of movie making, maybe he doesn't care just like half of Hollywood these days.

At one point, Tom Roth and Rebecca Hall were known for their terrific movies. No more. Nowadays they choose roles in movies that simply put have uninteresting storylines.

Resurrection is a great example for both. Early on, the movie gets your attention. But soon after, the plot is unveiled. At that point you ask, really? That's what this movie is about? Because it's just not interesting. At all.

As the story builds, you can't help wondering ... is that it? They're going to stick with this dumb storyline? Because you're thinking there just HAS to be more to it. But no. It culminates into a hallucinogenic climax that's as absurd as it is pointless.

Then writer/director Andrew Semans, who hasn't brought a single piece of own work to screen since the forgettable "Nancy, Please" ten years ago, tries to inject a twist at the end to leave you wowed. Pffft. Instead it was yet another stupid waste of time by low-budget filmmakers selling to the highest bidder (IFC in this case).

The only redeeming quality is Grace Kaufman who at least gave the film some semblance of fresh air. Hence 2 stars rather than one.

First, the fact Matthew Reilly has never written or directed a movie portends the downright awful storytelling you might expect. Second, if you didn't know better, you'd swear this was the mastercraft of a 20-something gamer with a progressive-idealist agenda. Third, several scenes were so farfetched and inexplicably incorrect you'd wonder if Reilly was was on meth writting this farce. For a movie based on the threat of a Russian rocket attack, does he even know what an ICBM is? Are we really to believe the best military force in the world would be left vulnerable by two small anti-rocket bases with no redundancy or failure plans? Are we stupid? Then there's the anti-white man "message" which seems vogue in Hollywood today. Truth is, the only positive "white men" were Captain John Welsh, shot dead 12 mins into movie, and our superhero's father who had about 5 minutes of screentime. The rest were either the mercenary bad guys touting Trumpist anti-socialism rhetoric or negative stereotypes on the presidential staff. Meanwhile, those were fighting for the goodness of mankind were our female hero, an Indian corporal, an African American general and woman-president. It gets to a point where I just wish they'd say a disclaimer up front "Message Movie", that way I just move on.

A name change from Gypsy Moon to "9 Bullets" won't save this movie from being garbage. Neither will Sam Worthington or Barbara Hershey both of whom have small and smaller parts, respectively. The storyline is so weak and predictable you already know what's going to happen after Lena Headey's yawn-inspiring burlesque scene 10 minutes into this waste of time.

Gaston tries to drive the story with two main themes - the non-existent chemistry between Dean Scott Vazquez and Lena Headey, and contrived Hollywood storytelling featuring an uninterested Sam Worthington. Again, yawn.

The story reaches an exceptionally underwhelming crescendo that's as insulting to the your intelligence as anything you've wasted your time watching so far. Don't you like being treated like a moron? Seems that's about 50% of what Hollywood puts out now, even with name-brand stars.

Yet another waste-of-time.

First, you don't have to be in the ad-agency business to know the first scene is a laugher. No bigtime corporate CEO will tolerate the crap you see during that early conference room scene. Nor would he/she "say how he feels" in front of a room full of key business people, never mind a guy who's enraged him/her. Nevermind be enraptured by those pompass theatrics. To the contrary, folks become CEOs of multinationals by constantly fighting through a dog-eat-dog world and coming out on top.

It's obvious Reto Salimbeni has no idea how it works the real life corporate business world. Especially when you're talking "biggest airline in the world" that's very likely to be as cut-throat and intimidatingly serious as the military. Yet Salimbeni not only portrays this CEO as weak dumbass early on, but re-emphasizes the point later in the movie by depicting him as an enjoyingly gullible moron swept by Eddie's theatrics again, albeit mistakenly. Cripes.

Secondly, just is absurd is the notion a devout nun would set aside her lifetime's work and profound belief systems to lie against her holy maker for the sake of taking care of a wronged girl she just told will eventually find her peace. Worse, Reto Salimbeni doesn't established any credibilty in the movie for this scene to be remotely believable in any way shape or form.

Third, moving past the cliches and predictability, the courtroom twist at the end was a nice effort to distract from these holes. But following that we see Angelina running off to a new life as a contently smiling new woman, even though her cruel life experience and subsequent demons led her to be an addictive drug user and eventual killer. Regardless of whether the guy deserved it, still not good message to send that killing someone and running away from your problems leads to ultimate peace. Yawn.

Then again, maybe this is why Reto Salimbeni has one movie writing credit to his career ... and one feature movie. Overall, good thriller for an 8-year old. But not for a sophisticated audience nevermind anyone who appreciates good films. The fact it's getting all these 8-9-10 ratings on IMBD just shows how unreliable these ratings have become.

There was an opportunity here to weave the viewer through a sick twisted journey of pedophiles and the worst of humanity, but worn-out cliches, mouth-yawning action, unnecessary story sequences and painfully stupid character decisions bury this movie in the cemetary of forgotten films. Too bad, there were actually some worthy moments and glimpses of potential. But as usual, too many writers and filmmakers today can't look past the typical crap to create moving stories with interesting characters.

The first scene of this movie was captivating and set an exciting tone. Unfortunately, everything went downhill thereafter. Pace was uneven and at times slow and Olivia Wilde's attempt at psycho bravado at times wasn't that interesting. But it's the story that is loses you the most. It distracts with the direction it takes and the finish just isn't satisfying.

In all, another typical movie from today's industry that's seen much of the talent migrate to streaming TV series.

Pretty simple to sum it up here, the "Card Counter" just wasn't an interesting story. Pace is slow on top. Outside a few moments, pretty much a yawner.

Only redeeming quality is the short backstory on Abu Ghraib both in terms of the atrocities committed as well as the unfortunate necessity of secret black sites for uncompromising interrogation.

If this movie was truly a "stunning", "beautiful film" like these reviews say, wouldn't writer/director Jieho Lee have made more than one movie? That tells you all you need to know. In short, this is pure amateur work. The story is stupid, characters are weak and the overall it's just predictable, boring and uninteresting. What's amazingly unreal is how bad this movie is given the cast. But if you love shallow stories overfilled with drama and hollywood endings, then you might like this one.

This movie is in a word, awful. The acting, editing and story are all amateur. If that's not enough, you have the pleasure of seeing Lala Kent (yes that's a first name) and Kelly Greyson who have botoxed faces and injected lips. Yay, love looking at that.

The storyline itself not only has been done before, but is so shallow you already know what's going to happen in the first 10 minutes. Aside from the typical dumb mistakes you always see characters making in poorly written movies, often you can't help wondering why you're still watching the same scene. That's because the editing was just as amateur as the story writer.

If that's not enough, this morass of bungled scenes is complimented by a soundtrack so shoddy and unskilled you'll be looking around the room to see if this is truly happening. Together, it was truly an unbearable movie to watch.

Then there's Bruce Willis, who's selling out to anyone as fast as Nicholas Cage. Is the guy broke or what? Otherwise, he sure must need to act so bad that he's willing to participate in this garbage. It's easy to point at "A Good Day to Die Hard" as the beginning of his demise, but it actually dates all the way back to Hudson Hawk.

It wasn't just that the feature film cost $70M to make and only grossed $17M, but how Willis took over the movie project with his ego running amok. In short, Willis drove it into the ground. The movie was so bad that during the screening, Andi McDowell was concerned if she'd ever work again.

After the critics completely roasted it, Willis went back to his trusted formula of "Die-Hard everyman". What's more, as he fell off the A-list actor list, he not only doubled-down on the same John McClane personna, but he prolifered the same worn shallow image across myriad artless films, like this one.

Lastly, I guess director Mike Burns believe that because has experience as Music Supervisor on several movies, he can direct. Same for writer Bill Lawrence who only has one movie to his credit. And while R. J. Cooper does have a fair amount of editing experience, it certainly didn't reflect well in this movie given how many scenes were overshot. Same for Burn's participation in the soundtrack which as 'amateur hour' as anything else.

Hard to understand what possesses these people to think they can make even reasonable movies. The fact they pick botox stars probably reflects their entire overall judgment. End result is a great example of pure garbage.

There was potential for this movie, but the story was just way too shallow. Sean and Taylor King just never developed it enough. The end result is once done, you can't help feeling "what's the point?". Another waste by amateurs.

Nice try, but far from any cigar.

First, 20 minutes into the movie any buff will see the plot a mile away. Secondly, though you try giving a chance, the sad sack directing and poor acting make that exceedingly difficult. That's only compounded by over-shot scenes which clearly needed editing.

The end result was a predictable story with little pace and boring acting, sans Thomas Joseph O'Neill who seems to have real talent. Kathi Selvakumar's hapless inexperience as a director was as much on display as Raji Nair's as a writer. Same for Carroll Chiramel's editing which might be OK for film shorts but not yet ready for prime time cinema.

If you're 15 and haven't seen a ton of movies, you'll probably like this one. But if you're anything close to a movie buff, don't be fooled by the fancy (but meaningless) title, slick artwork, suspensful-sounding description or Canadian production. Otherwise, have several cocktails ready for the pain and your smartphone nearby for distraction.

This movie actually had stuff going for it. Sure, there were no name actors, some weak acting and ineffective editing. But writer/director Josh Doke built interest and momentum to help you look past that. As you follow along as Doke builds to the story to a roiling crescendo, he thanks you by pulling the rug out.

After abruptly ending, numerous ends were left hanging and you couldn't help feeling ripped off. Thanks Mr Doke for another waste of time and disappointing piece of Hollywood crap.

While based on a true story, one that wasn't told from an overly-liberal viewpoint, there were too many aspects that failed.

First, Deirdre Lovejoy overacted her part as police chief Collins. Just not a good fit. As a matter of fact, overall there weren't many "strong" acting performances. Secondly, it was clear a mile away that Officer "Ricky" (Lovensky Jean-Baptiste) would be the one to crack the story. That made the rest of the entirely predictable. Lastly, the movie ended with too much hanging in the balance - you didn't see chief Collins brought to justice, the corruption wasn't rooted out and Wilson (Adian Quinn) never reconnects with his daughter.

All in all, it just wasn't satisfying. Too bad, there certainly was potential.

The story starts out with a young boy (Castor) seeing his parents shot dead. After being spared, he grows up homeless on the streets of London and becomes an animal. Then after never having a human connection in life, never mind empathy or any outlets for his rage, he eventually meets the gangster who gave him life back in his youth. Castor's reaction? He's joyous with feelings of warmth and gratitude. WHAT?

Meanwhile, after the gangster abuses his wife (Isabele) physically and emotionally to the point she finally shoots him dead, it's revealed her father is a former cold-blooded hitman who stops at nothing to protect his daughter. WHAT??

Likewise, as Steve Guttenberg (Jean-Baptiste Philippe) gives his best impression of an oddly crime kingpin ruling London who's as gentle & thoughtful as he is weird (an implausible mix on its own), he's eventually shot dead and replaced by a weak moron who's ostensibly running the baddest mix of thugs in the land. WHAT???

Then there was the grand-finale shootout. The showdown pitted 30 of Jean-Baptiste's henchmen pointing automatics and other artillary at Castor and Isabele's hitman father ... yet after guns are ablaze for seemingly hours, Castor easily squirred away with no retribution to follow. WHAT????

At the end, after Castor has evolved into a husband-worthy suit-wearing prince who somehow amazingly shed his inner rage, shame, dysfunction, antisocial and other pathic behaviors from his all-encompassing life experiences without any aftereffects, a sudden yet predictable twist emerges. Castor is then shot dead by a man early in the movie he wronged. In other words, just as Isabele is readying for a new life chapter with her new nobly savior, err, ironically Castor becomes the same victim he's perpetrated on others.

Wow, what deep, mystical writing.

Not. Sheesh, gimme a break. Too many aspects of this movie were literally farcical, and the implausible plotting was annoying. If it wasn't for terrific music selection, an oddly strange character effect by Guttenberg, and one worthy scene in the church between Castor and Isabele's hitman father, the movie would have been utter trash. Yet none of those elements were enough to make this one worth watching.

While the story had potential, especially by virtue of crossing Japanese & Western cultures, it devolves into a shameless kill-a-thon where everyone is dead by the end of the movie. Characters had potential, but too much gore and unsatisfying finish threw this flich too much off track.

Appreciate the fact this movie is based on a true story and that there's a positive message. It also seems there was a lot of thought and passion behind this film. However, the production quality in terms of sound, lighting and editing at times felt amateur. At times it seemed you were watching a documentary. Overall mixed bag at best.

Aside from maybe Shelley (Heather Graham), none of the characters in this movie were very likeable. Together with a disjointed storyline that wasn't very satisfying, by all means this is a movie a movie most will never miss. Some credit is given for cinematography and settings.

Because that's about how much funny parts you get. In other words, you have to sit through 1hr 40mins of a stupid story with too many dumb characters to get 5 minutes of funny humor. Folly on you if you believe all those 7-8-9-10 reviews. Even a 10-year old would roll his/her eyes at this boring, shallow, dumb story waiting for a funny moment every 20 minutes. As another reviewer said, how does Hollywood approve this stuff? Amazing how idiotic they believe us moviegoers to be.

Good flick if you've only seen 2 movies your entire life ... you're 9 years old ... or you have amnesia and you've forgot all human existence. Otherwise, for any regular movie watcher, nevermind serious movie buff, reading the back of a cereal box is a higher-quality experience. Downright awful. Don't let the friendly reviewers fool you either.

Too many long drawn-out scenes, boring dialogs, overplayed drama and weak predictable story that doesn't satisfy at all. Amazing how this stuff is even made. To me, all it says is that the England can produce just as awful movies as the USA. And I say that with no disrespect at all. Truly bad movie.

Generally speaking movies today aren't what they used to be. Much of the talent has migrated to the small screen or TV series. The tentpole "super movies" will always be around like James Bond, Batman and what not. But the arthouse and quality 2nd tier movies not so much.

"Alone" had the potential to be in the latter category, but the storyline falls victim to many of the same predictable, contrived trappings that so many others do. If they would have cleaned that up, they'd have themselves a truly good movie.

As it is, for the most part it is very watchable. Yet any experienced movie buff will cringe at those dumb moments where the creators just HAVE to do the same stupid things they always do in movies. Overall, consider it a move that provides B+ for effort and a C for execution.

This film has a decidedly apparent "family movie" feel with smiling faces, good times, hippety rag time and well dress characters. A lot more like Wally & Beaver than Capone & Dillinger. Then again, the movie intends for you to like these bank robbers so that should make sense. In all, if you're looking for a real bank robber movie, go elsewhere. If you like face people trying to charm you during a story where the calling card takes much too long to finally come around, then you'll enjoy it.