martyncymro

160 acres is a dirt farm more than a ranch, When the Aztec empire only stretched as far as what is central present day Mexico, to believe that the Aztecs were mining for gold in present day Utah is somewhat preposterous. In fact the whole show is preposterous, a load of twaddle and definitely not worth watching.

I may be wrong, but I think I can see where this is going. Life On Mars - the UK original version. Natalie Zea, who plays. Eve Harris, somehow survived the fall into the sinkhole and is lying there in a deep coma and what we are watching is the story being played out in her comatosed brain. Although the CGI could have been better, 'it's entertaining enough, but not quality TV, which is a shame, as I had been looking forward to it.

I like many of the films and TV shows Jim Caviezel has done, but this was weak. The basic message of the film is Christians are good. Iran is bad. If you are a Christian fundamentalist, you will probably enjoy this film. After having watched it I discovered that Dinesh D'Souza, a right wing conspiracy theorist and criminal pardoned by trump, was one of the producers. Had I known that before hand I might still have watched it, but at least I would have been prepared for the cringey Christian bias. One punch from a Christian blogger and a bad Iranian is knocked unconscious. Wow!

Numerous people have done reviews complaining that the series just adopted Lovecraft in the title to cash in on the name. Such people are clearly unaware of the fact that the series is based on a 400 page novel, 'Lovecraft Country', which was published in 2016. So ignore those reviews. Secondly, some of the negative reviewers are based on political bias, and not on the merits, or lack of, of the series. Why should you watch it? Well, because it's great entertainment. It's an HBO production, so you know from the start that it's going to be quality. The only thing you need to question is whether or not you enjoy the storyline, the acting and the direction. I thought all 3 were executed admirably and after one episode I'm hooked.

Basically a new angle on 'The Wicker Man'. Personally, I found the film rather tedious and the plot obvious. It may well appeal to those who have not seen the original version of 'The Wicker Man', but those who have , may well be sorely disappointed. The lead actor, Florence Pugh, who was excellent in 'The Little Drummer Girl' and 'Fighting With My Family', does her best but is unable to raise the film above the mundane, but fails.

Some reviewers need to be better informed before they put pen to paper. 'The Silence' is the film of a book, with the same name, written by British writer, Tim Lebbon, and published in April 2015. It therefore predates 'A Quiet Place', and is not a copy of it. The screenplay for the latter film was written by Bryan Woods in 2018, who came up with the story in the same year. One could reasonable argue that Woods stole the idea for 'A Quiet Place' from 'The Silence' That said, 'The Silence' is an enjoyable film of survival in a hostile world created by the appearance of creatures which hunt by sound and which were long entombed in cave. The actors performed well and the direction was good. It's failing was to give too much viewing time to the creatures, a factor which 'A Quiet Place' did not and which, in my opinion, added to the horror of the situation. That said, 'The Silence' is definitely worth a watch.

It's not going to win any of the actors any oscars, but it's an enjoyable post-armageddon romp. The actors play their roles well and I enjoyed it. 5/10. You won't feel cheated after watching it as long as you don't expect too much.

Set in modern day London, the series concerns the police's fight against terrorism and the criminal intelligence unit charged with gathering intelligence on potential terrorist acts. The lead is played by Paddy Considine, (The Girl with All the Gifts', 'Pride', 'Cinderella Man') as an experienced officer with a troubled past, and co-stars Bel Powley, ('The Diary of a Teenage Girl' and 'Wilding'), as a new officer in the unit desperate to prove herself, and newcomer to TV drama, Nabhaan Rizwan. as a young British Muslim man of Pakistan descent who is manipulated and dragged into the dark world of being a police informant. The intelligence believes itself to be in a race against time to prevent a massive terrorist attack in London and is prepared to go to any length in order to stop it. I found little to fault in the first episode, which I thoroughly enjoyed, and look forward to future episodes.

I had read very an extremely positive review in the Guardian (UK) newspaper, which termed it 'absolutely standout' TV show of the week, and decided to give it a try. I was not disappointed. Set in a small town in the Canadian wilderness and starring Tim Roth as the local chief of police - a former London detective and a recovering alcoholic, who had moved there to escape his demons. Little of what they might be, except for the obvious alcoholism are revealed in the first episode, but the affable, relaxed character gives hints that they may be something much, much darker. The tranquility of the small town is disturbed when an oil company, with a poor environmental record, no surprise there, builds an oil refinery near the town. The characters are well portrayed by an able cast if actors and the while the dialogue may have its faults on occasion, I found the first episode enthralling and am looking forward to the remainder. A second series/season has already been commissioned.

From an original story by Stephen King, the pilot grabs you and holds you after the first 3 minutes, which starts pleasantly with an interaction between 2 pleasant people waiting in line for a jobs fair to open and then suddenly shocks you with a senseless act of mass murder. Jump 4 years and then the main story begins. Starring Brendan Gleeson as the original detective on the case, now retired, the pilot centres on his gruff character, his life and what follows. Everything about it is good: the plot, the acting, the directing. Personally I can't wait for the 2nd episode and wish it had been on Netflix or Amazon so that I could binge watch it. I stumbled across this by chance and I'm very glad a did.

I was looking forward to seeing this film, especially as it had one of my favourite actors, Idris Elba and the director was James Watkins of Eden Lake fame. The film is set in Paris on the eve of Bastille Day and the plot for the film, while not being novel, was good with several twists and involved a covert CIA team trying to catch a supposed terrorist bomber, who happened to be American. However, why have 3 three main members of the CIA team played by British actors and why have the supposed American terrorist also played by a British actor. I know Hollywood is full of non-Americans playing American roles, but the poor accents made it hard to take the film seriously. It would have been far better if it had been the British security service and a British supposed terrorist. I suspect the American theme was done with a view to the American cinema market. Worth a watch if you have nothing else to watch, but don't expect anything special.

Sony marketing machine must be in raptures over North Korea's response to this film. You just can't buy the kind of publicity it's had. I wonder if they've sent a letter of thanks to Kim Jong-un. Having said that, I see that some newspapers are reporting that North Korea was NOT behind the Sony hack according to multiple security experts who discredit FBI findings and reveal that a studio insider named 'Lena' may be responsible. Hmm!

As for the film, it's not a bad film, but then it's not a good one either. I laughed aloud in some parts and cringed in others. The best comedy film I've seen in the last 20 years have to be '3 Idiots', and this is nowhere close to the standard of that. Everyone is guilty of overacting but then it's that kind of Hollywood movie. Would I recommend seeing it? Yes, as it's going to be the most talked about film in the next couple of months.

A film about FIFA, an organisation which is renowned for corruption and skulduggery, finances a film about itself. This should get the alarm bells sounding immediately. The basic plot is simple, football commences as a global sport, FIFA creates itself to manage this new international phenomenon. FIFA is amazing. The end. This is a film about an organisation in which corruption is rife, which pays no taxes, yet has 'billions' in its bank accounts, and which forces countries which win the bidding to host the World Cup to their change laws. FIFA were even allowed to edit the script to their choosing. If you like watching propaganda, then this is the film for you. Otherwise, I suggest that it is given a wide birth.

It's very strange that the one person here who has written a 10 star review only joined IMDb 2 weeks ago and must have done just to write a heavily biased review for this film.

It's very rare that I tell a friend that a TV show blew me away, but that's exactly what I said when discussing the 3rd episode with a friend. I've been watching the show from the first episode and after each one I sit back and think how special this show is. I watched 'The Wire' and 'Breaking Bad' in their entirety, but 'True Detective' surpasses them both. The performances of the lead actors, Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson is masterful. The personal failings of their characters is brilliantly portrayed as is the interaction between the pair. The plot is very interesting, but what really makes the show is the lead actors. Matthew McConaughey especially gives the performance of his life to date. I'd never considered him a great actor prior to this, but he holds the screen and enthralls the. viewer with his broken, but intelligent and dogged character I get board by long reviews, so I'll end, but if you like character studies, a good plot and great direction, then give 'True Detective' a try. You will not be disappointed.

I enjoyed the film. Having grown up in the UK with news stories about the civil rights marches on TV as a child and watching the news stories from Vietnam as a teenager, I found the film a bit like a trip down memory lane. The life of the butler and whether his personal story is true or not is immaterial. What is important is the struggle that black people have had to endure in the USA in modern times. Forest Whitaker gives an admirable performance, but why Oprah Winfrey was included in the cast I do not know. I guess just to get the armchair chat show crowd into the cinema to boost attendance and ratings. David Oyelowo was excellent and portrayed a very believable character. No doubt come Oscar time, because it portrays an aspect of American history and because of the theme of the movie it will receive numerous Oscar nominations.

Woody Allen films are a must for me. I always find them well directed and he seems to get stellar performances out of his actors. Blue Jasmine is no exception. Cate Blanchett is outstanding as a New York socialite fallen on hard times. The reasons for which are unravelled as the film progresses. In fact all of the cast give splendid performances. During the popcorn refill 7 minute intermission I eagerly awaited the film's restart to discover more about Jasmine's (Cate Blanchett) flawed character. That she (Jasmine) is not a particularly pleasant person does not prevent some feeling of sympathy developing for her plight. Did I enjoy the film? Yes. Was it extremely well acted and directed? Yes. However, when the end credits started to roll I sat there feeling that I had been left without a clear cut conclusion.

Do not be fooled by the people on here who have given 9 or 10 stars. If you check their profile you will see that this is the only film that they have ever reviewed. Sadly this is a trend which has become all too prevalent on IMDb in recent years. I really wish the site would sort it out.

The film itself is a well-worn and tired theme and the funny lines are not funny. My advice is to avoid this film at all costs unless you feel particularly like being angry with yourself for having wasted an hour and a half of your life. To be honest, I am not sure what the intended audience for this film is. I am not opposed to films about social, religious or national groups if they are done well. Mel Brooks was a master at this in his heyday. Borat was a belly laugh a minute. However this film fails on so many levels. Avoid at your peril.

Class! What an excellent series.

I've always liked Idris Elba - maybe it's because of The Wire or maybe because his screen presence is so compelling. When our TVs schedules are filled with so much dross to have this little gem of a series appear is so refreshing.

Luther (Idris Elba) is a Detective Inspector in a Special Crimes Unit who has just returned to work after having recently recovered from a mental breakdown due to pressures of a marriage break up and over commitment to his job. His relationships with his ex-wife, his new colleague DS Ripley and a psychopathic but brilliant young lady are central to the development of the series. Each episode leaves one wanting to know how the plot will develop. There are of course the crimes to be solved and Luther's unorthodox but canny methods.

I will not divulge any more but the climatic ending to episode 6 makes one want to know 'what now?' I strongly recommend Luther who anyone who appreciates 'quality' television drama.

Why, when the majority of the comments on this series are positive, is IMDb displaying only the negative ones on the first page and one has to delve deeper to find those that give the series praise? Also if anyone reading this looks closely at the negative comments and reads how many people found the comment useful, they will see that it's quoted as 5 out of 15, or something similar. Personally I found it far better than the big budget, typically glam, US production, Flash Forward, which, so I read on EZTV, because of low viewing figures may not be returning after the mid-season break. I recommend that you give this series a chance, you'll enjoy it!

I read the views which were all pretty good, but that didn't prepare me for what really was an 'excellent' film. It's a very political film. It is set in Jo'burg, South Africa and draws on apartheid and its form of 'separate development' with its black townships et al. Neill Blomkamp, the director, made a short (6 minutes), called 'Alive in Joburg' (2005) which I have yet to see, but I have a feeling that this film may be a sequel or at least on the same theme as that one, as it concerns an alien spaceship appearing over Jo'burg and the racist reception the aliens are given. In 'District 9' the storyline is good, the opening and closing docu-drama direction style is very effective, special effects are amazing, the acting is top drawer. See this film!

Everything about it says a movie made by college kids. I am loath to do down anyone or anything and usually look for the positives in all situations, but having just seen this film I feel I should warn anyone considering watching it. Don't! Everything is bad. The plot can best be described as weak, the twist, more like a slight turn, can easily be guessed at. The acting is unconvincing and I'm sure in places they were waiting for cues. The directing is poor, in fact rather than waste your time having to read further - avoid this movie as everything is so poor. There was 'one' jump moment and the rest of it was sheer boredom. My advice is buy a tin of paint, stick a pencil in it and watch it dry. It'll be far more entertaining.

What can be said about Life on Mars that hasn't already been said. John Simm is superb and the way his character adapts to life in the alien police environment of 1973 is enthralling and makes one smile when he adopts the mannerisms of the time. Having been a police officer in the 70's I can say that they have caught the period perfectly from station behaviour to job attitudes - especially to the WPC (Annie Cartwright) played by Liz White. The question of whether Detective Inspector Sam Tyler is insane, has been transported back in time or is in reality lying in a hospital bed in a deep coma is not resolved until the final 2 minutes of the last episode of the 2nd series. And every minute spend watching the series that takes you to that moment is enthralling. I guarantee that the ending will leave you sitting there in contemplation of all that has happened. Brilliant in every respect. Enjoy it or ... 'I'll go round your house and stamp on your toys'.

Great music, costumes, script and characters. I first watched the BBC series (both of them and then bought the DVDs) and am thoroughly enjoying this US version. Rather than just compare it with the BBC version I believe it best to view it on its own merits. The BBC version is pure class, as are most things containing John Simm. (I strongly recommend 'The Devil's Whore') Do not compare the characters/actors with the BBC version as it is certain to lead to dissatisfaction. The script isn't as subtle as the original, true. John Simm is a better actor than Jason O'Mara, true. However the series is very enjoyable and I may even buy the DVD of this series too. Just sit back and enjoy 50 minutes of good entertainment!

Why Philip Glenister chose the part must have been to move away from the Gene Hunt character with which he is associated. With its theme of good battling the dark side this show had a mountain of potential. Sadly, on the evidence of episode 1, it isn't even a hillock. The show had the style of children's entertainment, but the content of an adult horror. I don't know what audience the show is aimed at. It won't appeal to the horror or the mature audience as it is too juvenile, and many parents won't let younger children watch it for it's demonic content. Hopefully the 2nd episode, which I will give a try, will grab my interest, otherwise I'll be taking the dog out for a walk when it airs. ........ Well I gave episodes 2&3 a try. My dog is very grateful for the extra walks. If you watch it, you'll only get angry with yourself for wasting your time. You have been warned!