urrutiagiogua

Watching this the first time, I felt this movie was one of the best basketball movies of all time. Pretty much due to how I thought all the actual players were good at the acting portion of it.

Watching it a second time, now I can say it's a good movie but perhaps not the greatest. Certain scenes feel filled in just to give air time to some of the prominent players and coaches. But I guess, that also gives a sort of validity to the story.

I think this isn't the best Adam Sandler movie, he seems quite in cruise control; but the story does enough to carry everybody. The only person I was quite amazed by was Anthony Edwards as Kermit (weird name to give the character). I think he is outstanding in a antagonist way even though he isn't a villain of any sorts.

These types of movies are great to show out the "Hustle" of the main character to overcome whatever he has to. It's a great watch and rewatch.

Honestly, this sucked big time. From 0 humor to really insane plot that didn't make sense at all, just abhorrent. I don't know how somebody from the stature of Cooper had accepted to do this considering at the time he was hot stuff. This a pure money grab but just a thoughtless lazy project that didn't tie anything up or gave some closure. If you wanna say Galifianakis character did, well it was extremely forced dragging poor Melissa McCarthey into all of it.

Leslie Chow was the only bright spot of part II and the writing of this made him intollerable, unfunny (which was his trait), and some daredevil that can beat death if he so wanted to. Poor writing from the beginning to the end.

God bless Helms and Cooper for trying, but you could tell their mind wasn't in it. I really hope they don't revive this with some wacky requel and just let the first film basque in the glory of what it once was.

Ok, so this was an easy money grab for the studio. I mean just try to milk this plot and with even more craziness. Obviously this didn't live up nor surpasses its predecessor. However, there are a few bright spots here and there. The movie isn't a total failure, but the gag kinda seems outdated already as you can't really surprise an audience already.

I think Helms and Cooper have a pass as they do their best. However, Galifinakis is unbearable at times. I don't understand sometimes his character at all. He is trying to play an awkward role too hard. In the first movie it did blend in subtly in the majority of parts, but you were gonna bank on the studio giving him more screen time in the second movie completely making him really annoying.

Now, I did say the movie had some bright spots and of course that was Chow. He lifts the movie up when he is on screen and gives the other characters things to play off. It definitely made it more enjoyable.

Since the movie is a copy and paste from the first one, there aren't different conclusions as the first one, just that the experience makes them bond and allow Helms character to stand up for himself.

Comedies are so hard to review after many years have passed. As perhaps what was funny then seems cringey now. Nonetheless, the Hangover still in 2023 sustains the passage of time. There are certain jokes that are outdated for sure, but it still hits in several levels. I've never blacked out at all, so I can't relate to that, though the concept is really great.

Aside from the outdated jokes, some of the characters are pretty stereotypical and somewhat predictable. And watching this time feels more on the side of Cooper and Helms that give accurate portraits of what really happened the day before. Galifinakis while his presence makes every scene a more silly vibe with how he dresses, his comments, etc can be expendable.

The movie works from the plot only and not the intended comedy like the cops or anything Galifinakis does or Leslie Chow in certain parts. Great rewatch.

Honestly, I feel that the movie didn't live up to it's potential. Colm's focus on making a mark and whether he is wasting his time was a great setup to begin with. However, it didn't get explored as much to my satisfaction. Perhaps the story of a man searching for that one thing that he can leave behind in inmortality could've been better than the other side of it which was cutting Padraic's friendship away. I felt more could've been pursued. Perhaps the finger cutting was too drastic, as Padraic's character was trying to find answers as anybody, perhaps just still be his friend while still doing your music, I don't know.

That's much it, in terms of what didn't work for me. I felt that Colin's acting was very superb. The first 10 minutes of the film had me really feeling deeply sorry for him and then simply the resolve to try to get his friend back. Colm's character I felt was alright, a good actor but nothing out of the ordinary.

The story and plot definitely felt fresh and new, the execution also really good; but the perspective of the movie didn't make it for me and just was left feeling a bit dissapointed with the unfulfilled potential of the film.

I love the movie due to the fact that it's about Giannis. I have been the biggest fan of his since winning most improved. Before the movie, I had read bits and pieces of his story, but the movie encapsulates what the family had been through.

Both parent actors were great. Showed prowess in terms of moving the story along and the roller coaster ride they went through.

Being a basketball fanatic, I appreciate that disney has been better at showing basketball sequences now, however they still have work to do. Some of the draft scenes aren't really how they normally go. I suppose being a Disney movie the emphasis is more on the protagonist than these subtle details.

Overrall, Giannis gives me motivation and watching the movie I also get that from it. It was a great watch.

Mile 22 is a fast paced, blink and you'll miss it type of movie. A lot of things are happening, however it feels comprehensible in a way. The actors fulfill their purpose (could've had Rousey's character in exchange of Alice).

The storyline has layers to it and makes it worth your while at the end with the plot twist which I didn't really expect on how eveything tied in. It kinda seemed that it was going the common action 90 minute way, but definitely swerves once all is into place.

Mark Walhberg's character is weird. They wanna make him this no nonesense mad all the time type of guy, but comes a bit flat. I don't blame him for it, just seemed that the dialogue or the script wasn't there for him. I was more expecting a role such as the one he made for the departed where he was witty, smart ass and just got under your skin, which James Silva wasn't. Once again, I feel the script didn't benefit him because we know Mark can do the acting.

I wasn't sold neither with the background story of Alice and her divorce, daughter, etc. They kinda tied it with Li's character a bit in terms of getting their trust because of family. But still, just felt that it wasn't strong enough. Also, I suspect that for these types of positions in a nations intelligence many of these agents seem to not have families. Which I think in this case compromises decision making.

The action scenes are pretty good, specially Li's fighting sequences which I would've loved to have seen more. The ending was unexpected and there was no happy ending so to speak. So I give major props to that. Good watch.

What I love about this movie is that even after all these years, it is simply agonizing and disturbing. The premise is so simple and yet so grand in how the story evolves.

Definitely the movie does not function with any other actress that isn't called Kathy Bates. She is such a force to be reckon with. The unpredictablilty of her character is so nerve racking. I have seen this tons of times and character and her motives still work for me. No wonder she wins an Oscar. Incredible performance.

James Caan also is wonderful in this movie. Both have great chemistry and it just feels like Paul is helpless in whatever he does. The psychological torture he goes through makes this film timeless.

I believe the hobbling scene is one of the most iconic of all the years in cinema. Definitely the idea of not really showing you much of it, makes it so much more daunting, even though in the book they chop his foot off.

I've loved the book and the movie. A classic!

The setting for this movie should've given more to what the actual movie did. Unfortunately, the movie does not land on what it is seeking to do. I respect Adam Driver enough to see he does some heavy lifting in this movie to which sadly his co-star does not shoulder.

Aside from a few jump scares and action sequences, the movie is stuck in the sense of demonstrating any type of tension. At all times you can feel that the main characters will achieve their goal regardless of what obstacles. The majority of the action scenes are repetitive.

Koa, to me, feels like dead weight in this plot. Perhaps she saved Mills in the ending; however, it doesn't feel like she adds any type of value only for Mills to relate her to his deceased daughter, which again feels totally unnecessary as it is not well executed in the movie.

I don't understand why they can't speak the same language. It doesn't lead to anywhere and when supposedly it does, it just doesn't land when Koa "realizes" that her family is dead. Which again, I'm not sure whether she knows Mills lied or not. It simply does not work. And too on the nose with the audience when he tells her in the cave, obviously not understanding him. The film is an hour 33 mins and it kinda feels super long.

I felt that this had a potential upside, I don't think Adam Driver is to blame here; he is pretty good. The rest of the movie, I don't know.

A really great follow up to this franchise. In franchises that run long, it feels lazy to spin old stories that are so iconic such as Drago, who feels like a mystic antagonist from the Rocky franchise. Nonetheless, it pays off as the Creed character evolves as a fighter and a person that allows him to overcome the fear Ivan Drago's son instills in him in the beginning.

I've always thought of Sly Stallone as a one dimensional actor; HOWEVER, my guy brings out his best on this one. The kind of awkwardness towards his family, the subtle mind changing lines he gives out is not only a credit to the writers but to the performance of Stallone. It's never on the nose nor does it feel too forced. I gotta say that Stallone in this one is impressive. Michael B. Jordan is not too far on this one also, it does feel really well played by the main characters involved.

The fighting choreography also feels lean and continous. It didn't feel like too many shots were seen but rather a good flow of fighting sequences that make it extremely entertaining. Perhaps the fighting through cracked ribs and the russians applauding Adonis felt too Disney, but ended really satisfied with the outcome of the sequel. Great movie!

The movie in itself is flawed. The plot is kinda tough to follow and some of the characters motivation doesn't make sense. However, the chemistry between the actor's allow this film to be enjoyable.

Throughtout the movie, it feels as if important scenes were cut and so some of the flow of it seems too convoluted. The idea of being comedic in the face of danger can get a bit old; nonetheless some of it does hit.

Other parts kinda feel lazy also, in the sense of Amelia who they are searching for and you might think there could be this huge showdown in the hotel which doesn't really happen and just suddenly she appears to them without any type of effort. As well as being held at gun point while they were searching for the film and one of the villain's goons suddenly trips over coffee.

And while I'm not trying to take the movie too seriously, I can't let go of certain aspects of it such as the justice department being behind all of it. Perhaps a different person to portray Kim Bassinger's character? Normally in these buddy cop movies, there is a main antoganist which in this case, there isn't one. Just a sleuth of bad guys that get some screen time in parts of the film.

So in conclusion, the chemistry is great between the three main protagonists that saves a below average comedy action film that has a plot with too many holes in it and with no main villain.

I'm pretty sure the book is really good, this movie is so so. I think the plot twist at the end does help the movie; HOWEVER, there is too many holes in the story. I don't understand the motive of the first kidnapper. They make Morgan Freeman's character as this broken cop, but there is little evidence to that. I mean, Dr. Cross is a profile as I understand, but it seems like he's as wit as the detective from Knives Out. The clues that Dr. Cross were suuuper strange and unreal to discover.

At first, the Secret Service agent seemed awful at performing her part, I suppose it was because she was the bad guy at the end???? Her part wasn't at all acted greatly. Also, the whole way they get involved in kidnapping her from the kidnapper just seems too convoluted. Perhaps the book explains it better, nonetheless it makes no sense on how they portray it.

Morgan Freeman has good parts, but I feel he is handicapped with how the plot goes. I think this could be remade. Anyways, it was ok.

I had seen this one, but mostly forgotten about it. Seeing it this time with fresh new eyes and almost new to the plot, the whole ambiguity of the story makes this movie really great; even if the director didn't intend it that way. It's impossible to know whether Bateman actually murdered the people or not. Bale gives a masterclass in acting on this relatively complex character.

The whole world Bateman is a part of is simply too obsessed and narcisistic to observe what Bateman is doing as he's clearly trying to open about these homicidal tendencies in not too subtle ways.

The music monologues he gives out to his victims seem like a way for him to try to blend in with people as what he states to his girlfriend, "I want to fit in".

Overrall, the movie's comedy and satirical view up yuppy culture, consumerism and such seems still up to date (now that we can post our foodies in Social Media). Great performances and the he did / no he didn't commit the murders makes for real good conversation with people who've also saw the movie.

Extremely dull. Too much buildup for nothing and the overrall plot doesn't give much to work with. Bad movie.

The setup is good, although I don't feel the actors provide the best performance and therefore isn't impactful.

The film overrall expands through the story of the murder of archbishop Gerardi. Growing up all I heard were theories about who dunnit or the context behind his murder. I believe this feature put those hypothesis to bed specifically from everybody involved in the investigation, people close to Gerardi, journalists, etc.

It's a reminder of how the army is ingrained in the Guatemalan government, politics and how it manipulates to this day the guatemalan society.

I can be biased, but this movie holds up even in 2021. It is my favorite horror movie. It was the first one I ever watched.

Now 5 movies in, there is still a certain mystique from ghostface killers Stu and Billy. I'm actually glad they don't appear in the next 4 movies. It gives more creedence to their performances and motives. The movie itself doesn't present much jump scares, however the psychological disturb mind of the killers does make me feel uneasy whenever watching this. It doesn't feel far off from the violence we see from kids nowadays.

The who dunnit piece along with the awareness the moie shows off is tumeless. Fantastic film.

The whole idea of this movie is to showcase how a band of thieves robbed millions of dollars from a bank in Argentina. The film does a good job in showing you how the heist goes down, which feels ocean elevenie in the call up of certain characters and the heist itself.

I think there were some dramatic scenes that elongated the movie unnecessarily. Francella and his dynamic with his daughter (who is Francella's daughter in real life), some of the weed stuff which in ways was a comic relief for the film.

Good plot and good acting by all involved. Argentian movies provide great dialogue and dramatic acting. Recommended.

The first thing that caught my eye was the star studded cast. Momoa, Carrey and Reeves in a film took me off guard as I had never heard of the film before. Nonetheless, I decided to watch it due to that solely reason.

First 20 minutes, sets the tone which gives an omen of what to expect, which doesn't live up to it at all. The scenes are too long with little to no dialogue whatsoever, the acting is really poor and the plot in general is extremely flawed.

Not sure whether confort was supposed to have the facade of a great place, but didn't dive into it as much that made you feel the primary character had to feel a certain way about it, specially considering that the other place tore her arm and leg apart.

Overall, a huuuuge waste of talent for such shallow plot. Perhaps the idea is relevant, but the execution wasn't.

I honestly didn't know what to expect, but this film is superb. Darín and Huang give really great performances and make you feel frustrated for Darín's character when he can't understand what Huang's character says.

It brings full circle how life can be beautiful in so many ways and how if we want to understand it, it would be best to not worry about that at all.

Great movie overrall. Recomended to anybody reading.

I remember being terrified about this film. Rewatching it like 15 years later, I'm surprised how well it still holds up. Of course, Arnolds and the rest of the cast (except satan) don't provide engaging performances, but the story in general is really good. And the tense situations throughout the film keep your eyes glued.

Even though the story seems made up by taking a few passages here and there from the bible, it can be daunting the thought of the devil walking amongst us. Some of the graphics really don't age well, but hey it was a movie made more than 20 years ago, so I'll let that pass. 7/10.