Reviews (120)

  • This movie has no plot of any substance, no character development, nothing but gratuitous violence focused on automatic weapons that fire as if they are belt fed from an endless munitions factory somewhere (and none of the weapons are belt fed). Honestly one of the worst movies that I have seen in my life. Want to wonder why people think automatic weapons are somehow more dangerous than other firearms? This movie is the perfect example of dumbass movies made by people who are absolutely clueless. Just a mind-dead, waste of time for people who want violent escapism and are absolutely clueless about anything to do with weapons.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    1923 is supposed to be a predecessor to Yellowstone. It is Yellowstone. Different actors, but the same plot.

    1. One heir killed off early - check.

    2. One heir with military background away from the ranch and involved in a complicated relationship - check.

    3. Greedy businessmen trying to steal the ranch - check.

    4. An old man close to the end of his life and facing health issues fighting to keep the ranch - check.

    Add to it that the pace is much slower (too slow) and that some of the side stories are completely irrelevant and just seem to exist so that the writers can toss in some trivia about the era rather than advance the story and this series is barely watchable.
  • The style of this movie is very much as a documentary, and it is superbly done. Although there are some errors, and Jason Robard doesn't look much like Al Capone, the overall tone, pace and story-telling in this movie is excellent. One of the truly great gangster movies of all time about a real event and a real gang war. Although not full of A-list stars, the movie is filled with good actors who do well in their roles. Recommended.

    Filler to reach the character requirements of a IMDB review, there is really nothing else that needs to be said and the 600 character requirement is inappropriate in this case.
  • As a veteran and historian, the story of the 6888 Postal Service Battalion is a moving one. This movie is good, but the multitude of mistakes in the movie as well as the overprocessed look of the video grated on me for the entire film.

    The overprocessing look is a matter of taste, but the mistakes in military protocol and the battle scene were avoidable. First, the initial battle scene looked like a video game and was blatantly absurd. Second, "attention" and "fall in" are not interchangeable and the proper follow up command after "dress right dress" and "cover" is "ready front", not "ready two". In addition, the use of "eyes right" and "present arms" during the review are incorrect.
  • The best things about this movie are the actors and their acting. On pretty much all counts, surprisingly. The worst things are the garbage plot, the poor editing (resulting in a movie that is far too long for no good reason) and the poor special effects. This movie COULD have been good if it had reduced the bad fight scenes, actually spent some money on a good plot writer, and used better special effects houses for the sections actually required. Tim Miller was the wrong director for this. They should have got someone who doesn't work on comics.

    This movie shouldn't have been made. As it is, it's just simply a time waster.
  • This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. Not for the acting but for the lack of a direction in what it is. It seems to be trying to be an artistic tribute to the film industry - and it utterly fails in that regard to anyone but a serious student of the film industry (and maybe even then). It could have been a pretty good docu-drama about the early film industry, but it chose not to go in that direction, instead being a weird fictionalization of the early film industry that focuses mostly on drugs, alcohol, gambling and sex. Oh, and death.

    It could have been made as a bio-drama of someone like Clara Bow or Douglas Fairbanks... but they didn't want to be restricted to reality, it seems. So, they didn't do that either.

    This is easily the worst film I saw in the last few years. How this even got green-lit is beyond me. It's a Hollywood "see, we can talk about our awful past" movie that doesn't actually have any redeeming qualities because it isn't actually about history, but rather an entirely fictional story that happens to be set at a time in the past. It's not even historical fiction. There isn't a single character playing a historical figure. It's an alternate history.
  • This may be the worst "spy thriller" that I have ever seen. The film itself looks like a cartoon, it is poorly lit and over-processed to look more like a Marvel movie than like a gritty realistic movie. It has a good collection of excellent actors and their talents are wasted. The dialog is ridiculous, the plot is silly and the writing is horrid. This is a mix between a bad rom-com and a really poorly done spy-thriller. There are no redeeming features. The biggest question I have about this piece of junk is why did Halle Berry, J. K. Simmons and Mark Wahlberg agree to do this? They all seem to be just calling it in.
  • 12 March 2024
    Fundamentally, the casting just doesn't work. Tom Hanks doesn't pull off being Colonel Parker and Austin Butler doesn't pull of being Elvis. Olivia DeJonge does a great job as Priscilla Presley, but she is really the only major part that is done well. Also excellent performances by Kelvin Harrison as BB King, Atom Mason as Little Richard, Shonka Dukureh as Big Mama Thornton and Cle Morgan as Mahalia Jackson. There seems to have been more effort on casting for singing talent than acting talent when it comes to casting someone to play Elvis. Movie just didn't work for me, but I'm old enough to remember Elvis and Colonel Parker.
  • The UDT of WWII are the predecessors of the current USN SEALs and this film does a good job of illustrating what they did and the difficulty of it. The techniques shown and equipment used are accurate, and a number of the events are based on real-life events.

    There is a point in the movie where Richard Widmark's character explains why he made a decision that he made and tells the team that is what the Navy expects him to do - make hard decisions. Exactly right - that is what the military expects of officers - make decisions. Excellent movie - clearly made with the cooperation and assistance of the United States Navy and the Underwater Demolition Teams.
  • As usual, the fights are over the top (body armor may stop bullets, but the kinetic energy is still hammering into the body in real life). But I found the plot, the motives, the backstory all much more interesting in this movie than the first one. Also liked Idris Elba's appearance. As seems to be the norm for this sort of movie, we got to see a variety of exotic firearms, from AKs with no stock to M240s and M249s to RPGs, PDWs, mini-guns, sniper weapons, etc. Also as usual, the weapons have extraordinary effect (not sure how you could get 40mm grenades to explode that close to the weapon that fired them) although hand-grenade explosions do seem to be close to accurate (the RPGs fly more like AT-4s though - RPGs don't really fire that accurately). Lots of bangs, lots of bashing, lots of knives (and axes and shovels and pitchforks), lots of shooting... but the plot actually has a start and a finish (and an opportunity for another one).
  • Warning: Spoilers
    There is so much wrong with this movie that I thought they must not have had a technical advisor, but there is one listed on the list of the crew. I must assume that Dennis Foley was never at a BCT post in the timeframe that this is set in. The uniforms are pretty much correct, although the way they are worn is blatantly ridiculous as are some of the events portrayed. But a technical expert you would hope would get the nomenclature for the M16A1 rifle correct, or make sure the women could march in something resembling being in step. The cast is such that you really would expect the film to be better, but it's really just blah, blah, blah. Even the Article 15 towards the end is really not well done (maybe the Colonel was incapable of reading any lines). And the complete failure to take advantage of the existence of the Chaplin, both for the girl who attempts suicide and for the girl in danger of losing her baby is just silly.
  • The idea that certain stories all trace back to a single ancestor story is absolutely stupid. Today, we have multiple authors come up with similar plots or stories on a regular basis, the idea that humans would have done the same over and over in the thousands of years past (as well as that many authors have pointed out that there are actually a very limited number of plots that humans come up with).

    This is both insulting to humans and demonstrates that the people interviewed in these things are simply incapable of really grasping either creativity or what we know about the human brain.

    Aweful schock.
  • This could very well have been a great movie - all it would take is a little bit of effort to get the history right instead of inventing myth. The Agojie/Mino/Minon were a real part of the Dahomey Kingdom, known for their skill at close quarters combat and their aggressiveness. As far as I can determine, there was no tradition of a "Woman King" (but Dahomey did have Queens) but the Agojie were represented on the council that advised the King. However, when it comes to depicting just about everything else in the movie (including the speech given by Viola Davis's character before the main battle) are on the same level as Braveheart - myth with very little actual history behind it. Dahomey did not withdraw from the slave trade (at least, not for any significant period). Selling people was simply too lucrative.
  • First, we have a biologist who underestimates the potential danger of an alien lifeform. You would think that knowing about how dangerous Earth's liveforms are would have had some sort of impact, but obiviously not. Then we have all the stupidity that follows, which over and over again demonstrates stupidity that no astronaut should exhibit as well as a complete failure in command decisions - over and over again. This movie should be called "Dumb and Dumber go to Space".

    Add really bad acting, bad writing and a horrible plot.

    Awful movie, not even good for falling asleep to, and has some ridiculous special effects as well.
  • This "documentary" spends lots of time presenting interviews with various people who were involved at Waco (although a number of important figures are not included) and some of the tapes of negotiations and newscasts from the siege.

    What it fails to present are the trial documents as well as the FBI evaluation and the facts from it.

    For example, despite the claim that he knew that the Davidians fired first because he heard the M60s firing and the ATF didn't have any M60s, neither did the Branch Davidians. No M60 was recovered and an M60 barrel and receiver is not going to melt in a fire in which AR-15s survived.

    There are lots of other discrepancies, and a documentary should have covered them.
  • The more of these movies they make, the worse they get. Bad acting, more speed and utterly ridiculous plats. This one is by far the worst. The best view of this movie is that they are making a parody of their own movies. Unfortunately, it seems all too much that they are just milking the franchise for all its worth and making really bad Marvel Universe movies without the superheroes. It's got it all, the origin story, the actions that could only possibly be done by a superhero, the wooden acting, the superhero story arc, the redemption, the use of special effects instead of actual story telling or competent acting, and the use of name actors who are sleep-walking their way through the movie and are there just for name draw.

    In contention for the worst movie of 2021.
  • This film is insulting. First, for claiming to be a documentary. Second, for blatantly playing to irrational conspiracy theories and ludicrous commentary. Third, to the passengers and crew of MH370. The widespread focus on conspiracy theories that were completely out of touch with reality, as well as the ridiculous idea that a French court has any jurisdiction on the matter, and finally the denigration of what actual evidence there is. Honestly, this film can only leave you less informed about MH370. This film should be reclassified as speculative fiction, it is not a documentary. The producer and director of this piece of junk should never again get near any film making.
  • Music is awesome. Plot and acting are generally abysmal. Kept getting the impression that all of the actors were trying to play farcical versions of their characters. Overall, simply not worth the time.

    Typing this to fill out the character requirement because there is really nothing else to say about the film, it's not worth the words, so you've already read all there is of relevance in this review, asdgghkl;1233765089qwertyuiopzxcvvnm,./hjdhfslfkahbiuuneiuhnf;akunlshdsjfokiohteslnnfal;ghei;psjfhnoyhyqhjllkksukcuyjshjkdy7ubhhns7jioahogkau25416548ygt7auyifau7gypagie9psh9oguh7gpahhgpaufhsugtua\\

    And that's all folks!
  • Let's see, let's take a bit of Thor Ragnarok, mix in a bit of Roman mythology, toss in some Soylent Green and some bits of family misogyny and typical royal family. Add in bad acting, terribly dialog and absolutely ridiculous script writing - plus mix genres in a blender so it isn't clear if this is supposed to be science-fiction, fantasy, mythology or just basically stupid (it accomplishes the last). Oh, and the love story is absolutely absurd (as is the whole bee thing and a bunch of other plot bits). Oh, and I almost forgot - there's some TRON and some Star Wars mixed in too. This is truly horrendous.
  • There are some movies that just are amazing. Then there are some movies that have such bad dialogue, acting, plotting, etc. That they are just cringe. You can't watch them. Then there are a few movies that are so cringe that it can be entertaining. Sometimes, that's intentional, sometimes, it's not. Well, this is one of those movies. The dialogue is terrible, the acting is mediocre, the plot is ridiculous (and obvious), and the twist to set up the next movie is also obvious. And yet, it is entertaining. There is no question that some of the cringe was intentional, but a lot of it probably wasn't. It really is a typical SE Asia soap opera converted into a movie (clearly with the hope of being a series of movies).
  • Hancock spends way too much time looking for a SINGLE civilization as the solution to the mysteries he notes rather than applying Hanlon's Razor. It's a typical conspiracy theorist approach to a problem, connecting things by the thinnest of threads and not recognizing how irrational their approach is.

    Is it possible that their are civilizations that predate the time frame that archaeologists currently recognize? Certainly, and it is even probably that there were far more than one. The irrational part is to think that there was only one and the evidence of it is spread all over the globe. It seems much more likely that there were many.
  • This is not a good film. It is not an especially interesting film. It is a film that isn't really a filming of Maria Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front".

    What it is is a boring, poorly made bit of a movie that mixes themes and continually falls into tropes. In places, it is laughable at how poorly it portrays soldiers. This movie isn't a portrayal of WWI, it is a political polemic by someone who has is just making up a story.

    Stick with the version made before WWII. This one isn't worth seeing. It is certainly not worth 2 1/2 hours of time. In addition, so much of the history is so messed up as to suggest it is intentionally falsified.
  • 28 September 2022
    I have no idea how accurate this account of Marilyn Monroe's life is. I will say that there are some people in Norma Jean's life that, if this account is even close to accurate, are hopefully rotting in hell. This movie portrays a woman desperately in need of help who is tormented by many of the people that she chose to trust. A lot of "heroes" don't come out of this looking too good. Norma Jean comes out as a woman with massive insecurities and likely mental illness, who is abused and manipulated by many, many people, some of which claimed to love her, others of which simply wanted to make money off her,.
  • During the American Civil War, the Union offered captured Confederate Soldiers the chance to serve in the west against the Indians. That really happened. This story is a fictional account of a group of those Confederates and their actions in the west. Like the real-life Galvanized Yankees, these men choose to do their duty. It's a pretty good movie, even if it is a typical 1950s war movie, with lots of drama and some romance. Still, better than many others, and does illustrate a real historical circumstance - Reb POWs were given the opportunity to serve in the west in return for a pardon, and told they would not be asked to fight against the Confederacy.
  • It gets better towards the end, but it is a really silly movie and the plotting is ridiculous. It seems like the Marvel Universe is focused on parodying itself at this point. The entire GnR trope was twenty years out of date and the movie was mostly made up of worn out messages with no real creativity. The only reason that Marvel isn't entirely formulaic is that they keep introducing worse plots and poorer humor. Of course, Marvel fans still need to see the movies so that they won't be lost in the next one... or that is what Marvel hopes. Don't spend money to see this one. Borrow it or stream it.
An error has occured. Please try again.