This movie was a torture, really. I watched it only because I liked the first installment and wanted to follow-up the guys' careers. The first movie was cheesy, yeah, but at least it had some heart and a storyline, it was enjoyable and you eventually started to like the characters, it made you feel good at the end. This one... well... it has no plot at all, it has a thousand of characters who don't really add anything and the worst fact is that it's actually a bunch of choreographies one after the other without any cohesive story. It's so obvious it can't be explained. At least in the first movie the dances were somehow part of the story, here they are not. The scenes where the 'Electro Rock' gang appeared made me laugh, because right at the end of the first movie those guys actually befriended the main characters. So what the heck were they doing now? 'the villains' were totally meaningless and forced. EVERYTHING was forced, even the use of little children. As if nonsense wasn't enough you get to know Kelly's parents who are VERY wealthy people! What's up with that? Overall it looks like there was no writer for this movie.
Now I understand why they made such a joke of the 'Electric Boogaloo' line. This movie is a joke in itself.
Pointless, depressing, dull, but with some very good acting!
The spoiler is actually almost at the end of my review and I will warn you.
I would really like to rate this movie higher because some of the actors/actresses did an outstanding job and deserve more, but I can't rate it any higher, and I will explain why. The problem is the script, the story, the lighting, the direction... Ok, filming one take each scene real time it must have been amazingly hard for the cameraman and the actors... It's an interesting and challenging job, not original but a good idea and... that's it! No more technical stuff to praise here.
What is this "Magnolia" kind of thing? This format is not something really original either. I have seen it done at least in 5 movies before and much better! In this movie, the problem is not the vignettes per sé, the problem is that you, as a director/writer, really need to decide if you want the vignettes to be connected or not. You CAN'T be in-between and expect the audience to understand. It must be white or black, no grays around! Here when the same actor/actress appears in a different scene it's done so bad that you are left wondering if they are supposed to be the same characters or not. It's so confusing!
From 9 vignettes only 3 (or 4) of them are good. The others are either bad acted, bad scripted, dull, or contain strange/stupid situations, which are not expected in this kind of movie. How on earth will you laugh if a man tells you he is sterile? For Christ sake, is that funny? Also will you burst into laugher in a funeral? What about having sex in the chapel? That whole scene is so absurd/bizarre that I can't even describe how I felt.
I must say the last scene is SUPERB and it's the reason why I rate this 3 stars, instead of 1. I read in another comment that Glenn Close was miscast as Dakota Fanning's mom, that she actually looked like her grandma. HERE IS THE SPOILER: Well, that's the whole point, because Dakota portrayed a ghost! She died and stayed 9 y.o. forever while Glenn aged! Maybe the director needed to be more obvious here showing name and dates on the tomb at the end. I loved how he chose to be more subtle, but I guess at this point most people were so frigging tired of the whole thing that weren't able to enjoy this last vignette. I would say it could have been a great standalone short. It was kind of wasted being part of this movie which I believe is dull, boring and particularly depressing.
I mean, if you watch a movie you want to be somehow disconnected 2 hours from reality, even if it's a drama. But this movie shows you 9 scenes of the next-door woman being suffering the unfairness of life with different characters. I am sorry but I can't recommend this movie, unless you want to be sad or get some sleep.
This time they did screw it up! Let me tell you I really had a hard time watching this thing. In fact, it was so disgusting that I had to watch it in several segments through 4 days. I mean this was so bad to swallow that I had to watch 30 min. one day and the next day other 30 min. and so on.
As a Terminator fan I felt totally insulted. Too bad the mockery seed was planted right at the moment James Cameron felt the need to add comic relief to his T2 and made a terminator force a smile. Then T3 and T4 came up to keep milking the cow and adding more and more nonsense with different directors, different cast and different BS like "Judgement Day is inevitable." or John Connor receiving a transplant from a cyborg or a mute kid trying to be Newt from Aliens. However, T3 and T4 tried somehow to keep the first movies untouched and followed a line of continuity. This time they did destroy what was left from T1 and T2. When I was watching Genesys I was thinking "Damn, they got to the point of no return." There is no way they could fix all the mess they did here. It's like when you see a celebrity that went through several plastic surgeries only to end up being a monster and not a person anymore.
I feel sad. This movie is not only unnecessary but also extremely confusing and BOOORING. The actors were incredibly miscast, ALL of them. The characters that were loved by us are now annoying as hell, you almost hate them! They have no soul, there is no chemistry! Instead there are jokes everywhere, Sarah takes a terminator as a "daddy" (Gee, John having uncle Bob was enough!), they keep aiming weapons and shooting at terminators while they perfectly know guns don't stop them... They also shoot at holograms. Isn't that stupid enough? And John Connor is a terminator now? Give me a break! How can you do that to a character who is supposed to be the savior of the world???
They not only copied or resembled the good stuff from T1 and T2 in a bad way, they even had the guts to copy ideas from The Sarah Connor Chronicles! Which was actually a good series. The bubble scene in the highway was clearly taken from there.
Believe me... the only good thing in this movie was in the closing credits when the melody of The Terminator Theme came back to life, after T3 and T4 totally overlooked it using only the stupid drums as a motto. I wonder if those people knew that The Terminator Theme has actually a melody, not only drums.
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen, not only because it has a terrible cast, bad writing, bad actors, bad CGI, bad action, no plot, but especially because it did everything it could to destroy a legend. If I could give it 0 out of 10 I would. Avoid it at all costs!
No wonder why people don't go to the cinema anymore
When it comes to bad movies I really don't know how to start a review. I wish I could be more forgiving about plot holes, storytelling, writing, cinematography, etc. but I can't forgive when they have this big fat budget and still come up with crap! Many but MANY old movies didn't have budget, special effects, known actors, but still they were great! Is it that writers and directors from this century are just lazy because they have too much money to spend in their projects?
The problem with this movie is basically the plot, the story, the script, which is the heart of a movie. Here it's not plausible at all. It starts nicely but then you find mistakes and inconsistencies here, there and everywhere. You can see the plot holes a mile away and the story is so predictable and absurd that makes you cringe. Why are the parents so rebel if their little doll is in peril totally helpless? Some of their reactions make you think they don't even care if she dies. The kidnappers are in control, you can NOT threat or torture them with a gun, a knife, a syringe, nothing. They die your child die, because their cellphone communication is interrupted. That's it. If the baby was so asthmatic why didn't she die from the handkerchief they put in her little mouth with sedative, or from so many scare shocks she has throughout or from all that smoke and dust at the highway? Oh my! Don't make me talk about that highway scene. Didn't that dad realize he produced a crash that could have killed his daughter instantly? I was wondering if the bad guys were actually the parents. And the scene also involved other cars and people who strangely didn't do anything at all even though the scene took several minutes with the parents and kidnappers running around, fighting each other, stealing cars, etc. Were all those other people in the highway just dummies or what? I will tell you, I re-watched that scene a couple times because it was unrealistic and confusing as hell, starting with the dad becoming James Bond. The movie drags on and on and nothing happens. The kidnapper assigned to guard the little girl is too sweet and kind with her so you are sure she will always be OK. There are no thrills, therefore this is not a thriller! The only moment you got some chills is when Dakota is having that asthma attack.
On the bright side of the movie I can say there are some really good actors involved here! And that is why I don't rate it 1. Bacon, Theron, Fanning and Vince were incredible with the poor script they were given. They are not the ones to blame. The rest of the cast is just forgettable.
The movie is still entertaining but not a good movie nevertheless. And this subject is already present in other movies with great results: Don't Say a Word (2001) and Ransom (1996) just to mention two. As a side note: Why directors insist on the shaky camera and sudden fast panning? It makes you feel sick for Christ sake!
Awww... I just LOVE Scarlett, but why oh why did she ever sign the contract to appear in this pile of nonsense? What a waste! I really don't know where to start. The movie is just stupid from the very first moment they say we humans use only 10% of our brain, a myth debunked many years ago, and this is stated right at the beginning (the whole movie is based on that premise) so we start the movie with the left foot.
However, the first scene is quite promising with great suspense and terror: Scarlett is kidnapped and forced to work for these drug mobsters as a mule. Then a moment later, when you see her in convulsions crawling on walls and ceiling as she was a girl from an Asian horror movie you know there is something wrong there. All goes downhill from that scene on.
I don't know why I kept watching, maybe just because I love that woman. Anyway she does not look that good here and her character is so empty and inhuman you just don't give a damn about her after a while. She kills lots of innocent people just because they don't speak her language, or because she needs a surgery, or because she is being late. And on the other hand she doesn't kill the mobsters who put her into this mess. WTF is that? Oh and while killing all those people she was supposed to get smarter! What kind of message is that? You get smarter, you kill people for no reason? Almost at the end Morgan Freeman's character says "I am not sure if humanity is prepared for this." Frigging A! Of course, we are not prepared, that woman is the proof! If you use more than 10% of your brain you will become a ruthless killing cyborg, not a human being! In fact, after she receives the "knowledge" she even starts speaking emotionless as the Terminatrix from T3.
The movie has lots of plot holes with ridiculous scenes, gratuitous violence, etc. It's so over the top that it's boring. At some point I thought I was watching a Japanese Anime with live actors, a parody or something, but the movie actually is meant to be taken seriously! All of a sudden being intelligent makes you able to morph, time travel using swipe moves in the air like John Anderton did in Minority Report and see "The Matrix" everywhere as Neo once did?
I am so sorry about this movie and I can't believe it was made by the same guy who made Leon and Nikita. My 2 points are only for the guys who did the CGI.
I like Van Damme, but this movie really stinks! It tries so hard to be a mix of Mad Max and Highlander with a pinch of The Terminator, but throwing in some characters taken from that Michael Jackson's video called "Thriller" with obvious paintings in the background.
The only redeeming feature is the roundhouse kicks in slow motion... Even the fights are pathetic, with stupid overuse of knives while they have big guns hanging on their backs. Oh, and guess what? The movie is called Cyborg but Van Damme is not a cyborg, nor his opponents! The only "cyborg" here is a second line woman who actually does not behave as a cyborg at all. She is just a woman with some kind of electronic implant in her head, an implant that wasn't even necessary to begin with. She could have had a device in her pocket and it would have been the same. The title for this should be "Zombies" since most of the characters look and act like that.
More about women... The Van Damme's buddy is an ugly whiny woman I hated from the start. I found myself cheering the moments she seemed to be killed. I didn't hate her because she was ugly, but because she was annoying as hell. Not even her gratuitous nudity is enjoyable. And what about that girl who is supposed to be Van Damme's step-daughter? She is about 12 in the flashbacks but later she is in her 20's and Van Damme looks exactly the same! What the hell? Van Damme doesn't age in the movie or what?
You will enjoy this movie only if you take it as a comedy. In any case, it is quite boring and slow with almost no dialogue. Oh! And be prepared for the tons of synthesized music that screams 80's and makes the movie instantly outdated!
This so called "eye-opener" is just a baseless pseudo-documentary. It has no base for what it states as a fact. It kinda tells you "Open your eyes. Do not believe what the establishment says because everything is a big conspiracy to rule the world and you will lose your freedom". But... isn't this a kind of terrorism the film is doing itself? To scare people to control them?
From the Chapter 1 which talks about Christianism, if you have ever read history books you can say the film lies to you big time, and not because you are Christian, but because they are clearly inventing false information. They compare Jesus with a bunch of ancient gods. In these lines, how can they say as a fact that Horus was born on Dec-25 if there are no records of such a thing? And actually there are no records saying that Jesus was born on Dec-25 in the first place! That is just an example of how this film lies. It is actually laughable. The last straw comes when they say that in a near future the government will implant you a RFID chip to take control of your life. Yeah, that ridiculous idea was something many religions have been claimed as the mark of the beast, for about 30 years!
The film rage against something it is itself! If they say everything is a lie, why should you believe what the film claims? A pseudo-documentary very well made since it has recruited so many people in their "Zeitgeist movement" using tactics of apocalyptic speech. It's funny and scary how people are so easy to deceive with good speech. I really feel sorry for the people who think they were "woken-up" by this.
The idea was good, the problem is that this idea was taken from other movies. This movie was a mix between Fatal Attraction (1987) and Poison Ivy (1992).
I liked the acting very much. I don't like Alicia Silverstone but she was outstanding, especially if you have in count this was her first movie. Maybe a little over the top at times.
The plot had some problems but I will not list all that here. I will just mention one thing: if the guy was so uncomfortable being stalked by that girl why didn't he leave? This guy was goddamn stupid!
It is a good thriller and it gives you the chills a couple times. Probably I have a negative feeling because the day before I watched Poison Ivy with a quite similar story (a developed evil teenager getting a crush on an older man). I don't think Poison Ivy was too original anyway.
Not as great and not as terrible as people say... but entertaining!
Quoting Allie "Some people say..." it was great, and some people say it was terrible. I'll try to be objective: It is not great and it is not terrible either.
The story is clearly divided into 2 parts: The first 5 episodes go through 5 decades jumping over years. You see a child character and in the next episode that character is already an adult. The last 5 episodes go in present time and each one takes one day or two. This means a VERY drastic pace change for the audience. It felt like going in your car at 120 and suddenly going at 30. The first half starts very interesting but it grows boring and when it's almost dead the story jumps to the second half where outstanding things start to happen. This is basically because each half is based on a single character. The first half is based on Owen Crawford (Joel Gretsch), the army officer who starts the UFO investigation in Roswell. The second half is based on Allison "Allie" Clarke (Dakota Fanning), the great granddaughter of the only alien survivor of that Roswell crash. These 2 cornerstones are obvious because they were the most developed characters and both actors were IMPRESSIVE. However, I must admit both characters were also very cartoonish, they were either 100% good or 100% evil!
Why the first half turns boring? Because Owen Crawford disappears. When it happens the story becomes weak and you pray for something to fill that empty space. Sadly, from that moment, it takes about 2 more episodes for Allie to show up and restore the energy... Why to depend on these 2 characters only? Why didn't they develop other characters as well? There were a couple of good performances: Ryan Hurst, Anton Yelchin and Desmond Harrington; but the other actors, especially Heather Donahue, were just forgettable. Matt Frewer was particularly annoying too.
Even while the most awesome events happen in the second half, at the expense of Allie, awesome events doesn't mean interesting story. The first half is more mysterious and twisted, even scary; while the second half has too much padding and drags on forever. Also there were many implausible things. For example, we are supposed to believe the Crawfords is a family of not only ambitious people but also killers! 3 generations of killers? And a military secret investigation stays in the family and goes from one generation to the other even though only one member of the family was in the army? There is an episode about a hostage situation and someone got shot, then the armed guy is NOT arrested and everything goes as if nothing had happened! Those are just a couple of examples.
But all the flaws are compensated with other things, especially with the aforementioned Joel Gretsch and Dakota Fanning. There are several touching moments you will love. There are some profound messages. There are good special effects and all the hard work with wardrobe and setting of the past years is outstanding. Also they made a really neat job aging characters. However, in some cases the casting was terrible for the child/adult switch: Physically, Mary Crawford adult is not a single bit similar to the child she was, and the same goes for other characters.
The ending could have been A LOT better too. As a matter of fact, the last episode is the weakest and leaves you in anger. I can take a sad finale any day but this one was dull and frustrating. All in all I am not disappointed and I recommend this mini series. Even though the story drags on sometimes you will be hooked, and you will probably forgive the flaws as I did.
Taken is entertaining and enjoyable. If you like drama and sci-fi mixed together there is no doubt this one is for you.
I admit I was wary about this film because it started as a typical made-for-teens movie in the school and stuff. So at first I thought I was watching a Beverly Hills 90210 episode, but since I love Kristen Stewart I kept watching and I am glad I did. The movie was very touching.
Some parts reminded me Carry by Brian De Palma, for example when the school director confused Melinda's name. Maybe it was a kind of homage? Kristen Stewart's acting was superb and made me love her character. I think only good actresses/actors can do that with the audience. Her acting is probably the 90% of this movie. It's a sad film but not as depressing as I had thought: Sometimes the Melinda's narration and the music lifts you.
This movie has a message about the rape, its effects on a girl and why is so important to talk, but there is another message also: There are so much people immersed in their own worlds who just ignore others or never have a friendly word and only say "He/She is a freak" while actually that "freak" is the person who needs help so badly. And I am not talking about Melinda only. I mean, it is also sad that most girls (like the ones in the movie) are prone to ignore hearts of gold like David (the only Melinda's supporter) and go after the Andy (the jerk) model instead, not knowing that the handsome one could be the most worthless person around.
It's amazing to see the rating this movie has or to read some of the other reviews here claiming this film was brilliant, realistic, etc. I don't understand how someone can give it more than 3 stars.
The plot is simple: One afternoon a guy next door meets the love of his life, at night he loses a date with her and accidentally he receives a call in a pay phone saying that a nuclear attack is going to happen in about one hour. He panics and goes desperately doing stupid things to find his girl and save her and himself.
OK. The panic in this movie was well depicted but there were MANY implausible things that made me laugh... Just from the start what would a normal person do with that phone call? Anybody would just hang up the phone and continue his/her life. A normal person would go after someone that met just a few hours ago while the world is going to end? These are just examples but the movie was full of things like that, one by the other. The decisions these characters took were far away to be realistic.
The movie was not boring at all, it is quite suspenseful but the characters behavior and the acting was pathetic. The only redeeming feature of this film was the music and the atmosphere. You will also smile when you see some of The Terminator supporting actors appearing here. This film would have been great as a comedy, but it was sold as a drama about nukes.
If you want to get some fun rent it. I think you will enjoy it if you set you up for a comedy/hilarious film. Now if you want to watch a realistic and chilling nukes movie go for The Day After, Threads or Testament.
Well, you know... Rutger Hauer and Robert Patrick both are really good actors. But WTF with this movie? The story was lame and the script was just terrible. The poor actors didn't have material to work with!
The DVD cover invited you to a flight action flick. You would expect something like Top Gun... Huge disappointment! The flight action in this movie is so cheap that makes you puke. The aerial scenes are clearly taken from documentaries and some other footage sources, not made for this movie. And they didn't even care about the marks or the fighters models, taking for granted the audience will not notice it.
As I said the story was lame. With a little effort from the writer and director it could have been very interesting. In short, it seems a B-movie made in the 70's.
I feel very sorry for these actors who put their names here. They sure must be ashamed.
It's strange this was a movie made for TV and it wasn't released in DVD yet! It was extremely good! The story was original and touching, the atmosphere throughout the movie was just perfect and don't let me tell you about the acting: EVERYONE in this movie portrayed its role exceptionally. I think the best were Bubba, his mother and the mailman, but as I said, everyone even the kid was just perfect.
This movie had several and tremendous creepy moments! It's interesting to see those moments were not based in gore or special effects. Instead, they were based in suspense, atmosphere and acting. That makes this movie better than many others of its genre. And the ending? Well... I will just tell you it's one of the most chilling endings I have ever seen. It's VERY haunting. The first time I had seen this movie was 20 years ago and today I still remembered it!
Recommended 100% for all horror and suspense lovers. You won't be disappointed! If you see the VHS at your club or library go for it!
The story involving the holocaust and the cloning experiments was exceptionally good. I admit it was very but VERY well written. Ethic about cloning was already the subject in the 70's movie called The Clonus Horror, but in the case of Anna to the Infinite Power the subject was even more interesting because of the connection with the WWII. It was also chilling the fact that Anna had those dreams and could feel the other girls. I think the story was quite original for its time. It was great.
Sadly, the acting was not on the same level. With the exception of Donna Mitchell and the woman playing the schoolteacher, the cast was just TERRIBLE. Horrible acting and also horrible editing! Also some flimsy and incoherent characters, for example, daddy.
There is no climax, the ending was quite bad, and there were several moments throughout the movie where they could have exploit a lot of suspense and horror, but those moments were wasted.
All in all, despite of the bad, this movie deserves a try.
I had read this was an experimental, controversial and interesting movie so I decided to watch it. What I found was a sick movie probably made by and for sick people. It's literally a torture. I don't mind about the nude children, but this was a bunch of stupid and random sequences put together. No writing, no direction... At some point I chose to put the x2 fast forward. At least I could get some laughs that way. Do film makers know movies are made for entertainment? And I don't mean comedy, I mean entertainment! And don't give me that "you didn't get the depth message" crap. I am sure even children in YouTube make better films.
Don't waste your time. If you want a good experimental surrealist film go and watch Eraserhead.
I am glad I didn't have to pay to see Dark Water. I got a huge disappointment watching it. It's not bad but I was expecting a HORROR movie! The trailers are probably the most lying ones I have ever seen. This movie was marketed as horror and surprise, surprise, it is a drama with a pinch of "ghost" salt. That's why I rated 2 out of 10. I hate to be sold a pig on a poke.
Other than that the pace is VERY slow, there are no thrills at all. Since it was marketed as horror you expect a jump throughout the movie. Well, the only jump is in the last 10 minutes. Also there are TOO MANY similarities with The Ring, and it seems they had a problem with the editor: Almost every scene has it sound 5 seconds forwarded and there are plenty of short and quick cuts that gave me headaches. The movie is also quite predictable.
OK, not everything was bad. The atmosphere was intense (it reminded me the atmosphere you got in Seven, based on stormy and cloudy weather) and very good acting with Ariel Gade almost outshining Jennifer Connelly. I have to mention that Perla Haney-Jardine portraying the Young Dahlia was a terrible miscast. She doesn't look one bit like Jennifer Connelly. And by the way, I am tired of creepy kids in movies. Give it a break!
The story was OK. The plot is a little screwed up because Jennifer character's own demons are mixed with the story of the girl's ghost who haunted her and her kid, so that is very confusing. Also the ending was frustrating and depressing but it's well done.
If you are looking for horror, this is not the movie. Now if you would like to watch a drama with a bit of a ghost story, go ahead, but be prepared for the depressing feeling you will left.
I should have followed my feeling when I saw this ugly photo montage on the DVD cover where they increased Kristen's cup size for no reason! But since I love that girl I decided to give it a try. The movie started with a good B&W sequence and an even better credits opening but soon after it became a terrible experience. Why? Because it was NOT scary! The reason? When you're too familiar with something that stuff doesn't move you anymore. The Messengers is a potpourri of a dozen horror movies you have seen before, including The Amityville Horror, The Shining, The Sixth Sense, The Birds, The Grudge, The Others and What Lies Beneath.
Not only the jump sequences were taken from those other films, but this movie was full of clichés: Haunted house in the middle of nowhere, family with past problems trying to start over, little kid seeing strange things, rebel and beautiful teenager being attacked, weird animal behavior, strange things in the cellar, cracking doors that open and close themselves, mysterious stranger coming to help, and OF COURSE the twist near the end (because nowadays it seems a movie without a twist is not considered a movie).
I have to admit the only reason I watched this movie was Kristen Stewart. She was OK, but not as good as in other movies like Speak. The twins who played the little brother were OK too, but the rest of the cast was wasted, and there was no character development other than the girl. Music, editing, direction were OK, nothing special. I must mention the music they used for the opening credits is clearly the same music from another horror movie called Desperation (2006). I wonder what happened there...
Anyway, the most important thing in a movie is the story and its originality (at least for me), and this story was boring... The Messengers is not a bad movie but it is only enjoyable if you are a Kristen's die-hard fan or never saw a horror movie before.
I really enjoyed it. For this Alice In Wonderland tale I think it would have been better to cast a younger girl but Cathryn Harrison was OK anyway.
It is a grotesque and funny ride full of surrealist images. I saw some people trying to find a "meaning" behind those images and since they cannot find it they call this movie ridiculous or pointless. Actually that is not how you will enjoy the movie. It's necessary to understand this is like a dream where EVERYTHING is possible.
MAJOR SPOILER HERE
If you still cannot disconnect and try to find something rational. OK, there are plenty of clue which tell you it is about a mental disordered girl and you see everything from her point of view.
When I started watching this film I wasn't expecting too much. I thought I was going to hate it according to what I had read, but I decided to give it a try. It surprised me! It was a really good film with a very original story. Being an Italian low profile production it managed to be suspenseful and interesting.
The acting was good enough, especially the actress portraying the mother. And I loved Simona, the kid, and rooted for her all the time. By the way, the piano score was very nice and followed the story perfectly.
I don't want to spoil the movie because I think it really deserves to be watched. So if you like good drama with an original story (something hard to find these days) go for this one!
Racist and flawed story. I expected much more from a "classic"
I had read a lot of comments saying this movie was a sci-fi classic. I watched it last night and I am really disappointed.
OK. I understand it was 1951 and people did not know much about outer space or space travel, but the story itself is very flawed. A rocket containing 64 people going to live to another world because Earth is devastated. Did they really think the other planet was going to have the same conditions as the Earth? LOL So from the start this was a flaw. Then it seems the only people who are concerned to find a way to survive are in US. Then these 64 people are all WASP. Oh, and there is a child! What made this child so different to be chosen? And these people just took the trip without any type of training. Don't make me tell you about the landscape in the other planet... Plus the acting and the script were horrible. The only good was the special effects. I mean, if you consider this movie was made in 1951 the FX were really great.
Now I don't know why so many people think this movie is a sci-fi classic. I would say it is a so-so postcard of its time, but not a classic.
Emotional and depressing but not your typical nuke film
I read many other comments comparing this film with The Day After and Threads, saying this film is more powerful or less than those others. If you make that comparison you are wrong. Why? Because Testament has a very different point of view about the disaster. This film is not a ground zero flick, it is not focused on blasts or Cold War exchange. Some people say it is more realistic. I don't think so. Some people say the others are more realistic. I don't think so either.
This film is actually symbolic. It was not made according to science knowledge. Otherwise everything would have been devastated, no trees, no sunlight, no water, no nothing. This film is focused on the family and their feelings, not in the nuclear disaster itself. In fact, if you watch it with a science point of view you will be disappointed because what it happens looks more like an epidemic, not like a nuclear winter.
Testament is intended to capture your feelings, not to show you shock waves or gore. It's drama, not sci-fi or documentary.
Don't let the controversy fools you. Let me tell you this movie has a lot more than nude scenes. Actually it has a VERY DEEP meaning: It's a perfect tale visually beautiful and with a great score.
This is one of those rare films you want to stop in the first minutes because what is shown goes beyond you, but for some reason you keep watching. It leaves a mark on you. This film is not for everybody, not recommended for those close minded conservative people who think kids are completely innocent creatures with no sexual desire, no bad intentions, no nothing. I mean, you have to admit they are human beings too. Then you will be able to see what is in the core of this tale.
The story is about 3 adolescents who spend their holidays in a forest. I can't help finding these 3 characters highly stereotypical, but this is necessary. Actually this is how the film works, because you can find these stereotypes in almost every person:
Laura (Lara Wendel, 12): the lovely, sensitive and naive girl who is in love with someone who doesn't love her back, the girl who will do ANYTHING to be with the others, even if that means to be humiliated to death.
Fabrizio (Martin Loeb, 18): the screwed-up boy who controls other people deliberately using his strength and self-confidence superiority, the selfish boy who doesn't give a damn for anybody, the guy who is bad and enjoy it.
Silvia (Eva Ionesco, 11): the dream blonde coming from outer space, the arrogant and malicious girl who is aware of her extreme beauty and will use it to manipulate other people.
The acting could have been better, but if you have in count these 3 kids were the only characters who carried the entire movie on their shoulders they were great. Personally I think it could have been better to get a younger actor for the Fabrizio character, someone closer to the girls age. By the way, from these characters Silvia is maybe the least important but on the other hand it is the only one who keeps its feet on the ground. Silvia is not so innocent as Laura and neither so nuts as Fabrizio.
I will not extend too much about the story, since other posters have commented enough, but basically Fabrizio and Silvia spend all their days making fun of Laura and tormenting her through cruel games until the point of risking her life. Just to mention a couple, the scene where Laura is tied and with a snake crawling over her and the scene where she is being hunted by the other two bullies using REAL arrows! There are also cruel scenes with animals. All these scenes are raw, graphic, and really disturbing, way more disturbing than the sex scenes most people talk.
As for the sex scenes, actually most of them are precisely to show the cruelty of Fabrizio and Silvia towards Laura, and not to show sex itself. Since Laura loves the boy, Silvia and Fabrizio make love not only to enjoy themselves but to torture poor Laura. This movie has been banned in some locations considered as child pornography, while actually it is not. Yes, I admit the sex scenes are disturbing and could have been done not so graphically, but they are not pornographic. They appear nude but you will not see genital joint close-ups, erections, things you would expect in a real XXX film, and their moves/poses are clumsy because they are unexperienced and obviously not doing it for real. The boldest thing you see is two kids lying down nude one on the other and rubbing or a kiss near the female pubic area. Most of all is left to your mind, out of camera frame. Even kisses in mouth are simulated with the position of the heads. In fact, this film is not even erotic because the sex scenes are made in a kind of an angelical dream, not trying to arouse the audience.
Sadly many people cannot see beyond those sex scenes and are not able to discover the real meaning of the story: the real evil teenagers can be. Even some covers I have seen of this film make you think wrongly that this is a shallow erotic film. Actually this is a story about cruelty. You will feel sorry for Laura because she is the target, she is the third party, she is the one who always takes the back seat and is being hated with no reasons. But somehow near the end she is cruel too, hiding something important.
But I will stop spoiling. If you have the possibility, give this film a try because it really worths it. In fact, I could even say the story is good for teens, maybe not the film because it is very graphic, but the story itself teaches you a lot about life and why we are so cruel as adults. After all, we all were children once.
I watched this movie with open mind knowing that it was French, therefore not expecting Hollywood plots. I know it was going to be quiet but I wasn't expecting something boring! It is about Mado, a 11 y.o. girl who lives in the countryside with her mother. Even thought the mother character is not developed at all we are told mom and daughter do not love each other. One day the girl is kidnapped by Francois, a mousy and lonely guy about 20, for no apparent reasons. It's strange that Mado does not put up too much resistance.
Francois does not have a good relationship with his parents either and he lives with them but apart in an attic, the same place where he keeps Mado locked. Then you realize that Francois kidnapped her just because he needs company. After a while Mado becomes his sister, his daughter, his wife, his friend, etc. They sleep and eat together and develop a love & hate relationship (oh, they sleep together but clothed so don't think bad).
The movie drags along with this and you start wondering if she DOES want to live locked there forever. At some point she has the chance to go away but she returns. The movie turns boring because you don't know what the point is with this implausible bunch of things. She stays days by days there with the same clothes, no bathroom, no school, almost no food, and she is not reported missing or anything.
If the director wanted to make a love & hate story about a lonely boy and a lonely girl I think there are many other interesting ways to do it. The strangest and misunderstood fact of this movie is its stupid title "La Drôlesse" that means "The libertine girl" or "The hussy". It could even been translated as "The little whore" while actually Mado is a lovely and innocent girl far away from that and has nothing to do with "libertine" behavior.
OK. It was a TV movie made in UK. Do not expect Hollywood fancy... but they didn't have an editor, a music composer, a screenplay writer??? Don't you know it's necessary to have people for those duties to make a movie??? It is sad how this interesting subject "child abuse" was wasted in this production. Editing and many other things were a disaster! OK. Probably low budget but what about the script? Don't make me talk about the script.
This production is supposed to be based on a real story. OK, but I think they exaggerated a little too much, and that made the movie quite implausible. Can you believe that EVERY SINGLE adult in this movie abused the child? father, mother, stepfather, parents friends, friends of the girl, etc. Can you believe it? No. Not every adult in this world is a child molester. So they showing this and saying that this is a true story makes you think "Oh, man, EVERYONE is sick! I am not saying that this could never happens but if 75% of the movie are a bunch of short scenes (no longer than 3 min.) where the girl is being beaten, being raped, being sold by a pimp, where the girl is unzipping man's pants, going after truck drivers by herself, "pleasing" her mom, etc, etc. what else can you think? They exaggerated as hell! I am surprised her teacher was not a molester too! They made this movie as if the girl had had an ad posted in her forehead saying "I am here for you to abuse me". This movie is NOT REALISTIC. This movie makes you panic. That's the mistake, because you must not panic about this subject. What you have to do is to become aware. There is a big difference between to panic and to become aware.
I thank for not having very graphic scenes, because that would make the movie even more "unwatchable". In any case, the abuses are quite clear, disturbing and well insinuated not needing to show explicit images.
There are a couple of good points anyway. I think one of the good points of this movie is that shows you a little and let your mind figure out the rest. And sometimes imagination is even more disturbing than the thing itself. The other good point is Brooke's performance. Better than some Hollywood kids of today. She was very convincing.
Oh, I hated they putting chalkboards saying this or that as it was a mute film. Come on, there are many other ways to do that, for example a narration.
Sadly this movie wasted this subject. It could have been much better. My 2 points are for the lead actress and the director not showing everything, the rest of direction is not good enough. The movie itself is a sad waste.
I didn't have any idea about the Predator 2 story. This film first came a long time ago and I had forgotten the hype. I watched it last night... so I was expecting something similar to Predator 1. Well, actually I didn't have high expectations since I found out that Danny Glover (?) had taken Arnie's place.
My first disappointment came just at the beginning when the first shoot is over a kind of forest. The surprise was that after that forest you see high buildings and the overprint "Los Angeles 1997". I said "WTF, Predator in the city???" OK, I accepted the fact, but then I realized that Danny Glover was portraying about the 90% of the same character he portrayed in Lethal Weapon! In fact, at some point I started to ask "When will Mel Gibson appear?" Come on! Danny Glover being the tough guy who will defeat the Predator? Give me a break. What they were thinking? I don't have anything against Danny Glover but they couldn't find another actor or what? I still had hopes because I had seen Bill Paxton was in the cast. How stupid I was! His character was like the character he had in Aliens! But worse, because at least in Aliens he was a marine. Here his acting was OK, but well, I was expecting a good backup for Danny Glover or something like that, not an annoying cop. By the way, why Bill Paxton's bullets didn't do anything to the predator???
And why latino gangs? Oh, yes. American films always with that racism. Before there were the blacks, then there were the latinos, now probably the gangs are semites.
The film is full of implausible things. Where is the police, the army, the authorities? If you know there is an alien killing people in the city probably you would order an immediate evacuation! And how the predator came to the city? This is something never explained in the movie! And there is NOTHING in connection with the first one, just a brief mention of the events where only 2 people survived.
I am not a die hard fan of Predator 1, but this sequel really stinks.