Even this movie is straight into the DVD bin in the Wal-mart. Brain dead screenplay, hollow plots (is there any?), terrible directing (is there any? A crappy movie with a brain dead screenplay needs a director?), the slowest tempo to push forward a movie like this one? Ever had the experience your car suddenly died in a deserted road, you tried to push it forward, hoping suddenly put the gear into Drive, the car might get a jump start? Dream on, man. This movie is THAT DEAD CAR, man.
At a first look of the cast, you've got the cool young son in "Yellowstone 2018", then you got the cool sheriff actor from "Longmire", and couple of veteran supporting actors, you thought, well, why not give it a try. But Jesus, never could imagine a movie could have turned out so bad, man. I've already wasted time watching it, I don't want to waste more time to review this crappy movie no more. I'm out~~~Adios, amigo.
So this young woman is invisible, right? Does it mean that her body, her physical being is invisible, but the clothes she wears, the cell phone she holds, the shoes she wears and .....so on, all become invisible too? If her body is invisible, it means that all the stuff on her would be still visible. There's no way if she's invisible, things on her would become invisible accordingly. What we see in this absurd movie is she and all the things in different materials would all become invisible. She shot a picture of the man who's the only person in the whole world (or the whole Galaxy or the whole universe) can see her, not even God would have the power to see her, having a spur-of-the-moment affair with another woman, the cell phone with the camera lens was invisible, the sim card, chips and all the circuit board inside of her phone was invisible but all functional. The food she eats, the water she drinks, swallowing or gobbling down throw her mouth to her stomach all would immediately become invisible. Her crap and urine would also be invisible.....Jesus, you guys who made this movie, the screenplay writer, the director, and whoever involved in this ridiculous movie could at least give me some basic logic?
But fair is fair, other than the stupid poor logic is missing, this absurd movie is seriously shot, but if no logic could be found, it simply becomes a ridiculous and stupid movie.
Some of the songs were just terrible or barely and marginally okay
The first two songs were just terrible, then some of the songs later were okay or not bad, but most of the songs were just not interesting enough, some songs seemed to rant the relationship between two people (definitely male and female, not odd couples) turned sour and estrange. But one thing could not denied, Adele is a very talented singer and artist. I also found she was smart enough to speak and talk to the audiences between songs, that actually could relax her throat a bit, because talking would loose the vocal mechanism in the throat, the neck, the heartbeats. But, there's a big drawback of Adele's concert(s): She couldn't help not implementing the F*** word, again and again, on and on. This habit only showed her root, not well educated, maybe even came from a poor family, not quite happy childhood with bad memories.
Her weight, weak legs, bad spine and bad back waist forced her to sit down to sing, she could only periodically stand on her two legs to sing couple of songs. Her trademark stiff cardboard like hairstyle is like Donald Trump's that might be remained the same in the place during a hurricane. The constant using the F*** word, although showed her true down-to-earth common citizen root, but it also downgraded the meanings of her songs: Between the romantic and passionate songs, she inserted lot of F*** words one after another, that just didn't feel all right. Lot of the songs she sang were just boring or with terrible melody. A very good singer, a very gifted natural talented middle aged MammaSan.
This movie is just too absurd to review. Seth Rogen's exaggerations and completely unbelievably pretentious performance only made it worse than an average bad farce. This is not a comedy or dramedy, it's garbage not even worth recycling. He played a role so annoying, so dirty and so shallow. A ridiculous screenplay, so ridiculous that pained me to see Charlize Theron would accept to play a role and having sex with this dirty, crazy, non-talent yo-yo, it just made me sick. This pathetic movie wasted a lot of budget on so many localities with so many manpower for what? Nothing. Terrible scenarios, plots, dialog, supporting actors around this guy only made it become on of the worst movies in motion picture history. Rating over 7? There obviously got lot of viewers and reviewers as silly and annoying like Seth Rogen. I didn't finish it, just bailed out after 40 painful minutes. Rogen is a poisonous element, only making Hollywood look even pathetic.
What makes me think this movie is one of the best Western are as follows:
1) No overplaying exaggerated over-the-top annoying soundtrack as most the formulaic Western movies that usually bombarded non-stop.
2) The costumes these guys wore in this movie were more realistic than most of the Western genre movies. The clothes they wore were dirty, out of shape, looked more realistic and genuine, unlike those John Wayne's movies or others, custom tailored, iron pressed, dry cleaned, even the hats they wore in this movie looked more genuine; dirty, ugly, no custom made. When the woman cursed Peck he stinks, smell bad, his sweating stunk almost could be smelled off the screen.
3) No exaggerated staging duel-in-the-street scenes at all, just a bunch of normal lost guys shooting randomly and badly. Look more realistic than the usual Westerns we used to see, everybody was a sharp shooter and quick hand.
4) Great camera work, amazing sets, the deserted ghost town "Yellow Sky" looked so real. Great cinematography.
5) One of the very best Western director who made the screenplay vividly alive.
6) Absolutely down-to-earth screenplay with simple and less dialog.
What is the purpose of making this deadbeat movie?
Who were the movie producers? Did they ever read the going-nowhere script? Did this dead like a door stopper movie really needed a director?
After we saw "Remember Me" and "Water for Elephant", we all agreed that Robert Pattinson is one of the new talents that would make movies a more hopeful brand new world. But then, he seemed to go off the right path and signed on two horrible movies, this godawful "High Life" and the weirdest pointless "Damsel".
Mr. Pattinson, be fairly warned:
If you continued to choose lousy screenplays so carelessly like these kind of braindead lousy movies, you'd be marginalized to a B-movie actor. If you don't take care of your future and choose scripts and characters wisely, you'd become a box office poison and will be rejected and dumped by audiences gradually. We're gonna try another one, "The Rover" later, and that'll be our last straw to save you. If it again, turned out to be another bomber, then, Adios, amigo! We'll never waste our time on any new movie with you in it.
Terrible screenplay, bad directing, horrible supporting actors, especially the old guy pretended to be a famous opera singer, and his presence making this hollow movie even more shallow. The storyline is like a animal blazed trail in the wilderness, if you don't pay attention, you don't even know where it is. There's nothing in this movie except some so so songs. Because of the awkward script, Elle Fanning was forced to play a boring and hollow character. There's no way a person like she played could sing from the heart. I rarely found a movie with such huge nothingness to tell. Horse, goat, sunset, stage lights, some young bimbos in high school, plus a loner, an outsider, a poor farm Polish girl on the Isle of nothing. This is one of the most awkward movies in recent years, with nothing to tell, just throw in several teen songs to make up a movie. Jesus....
This movie was completely ridiculed by its cast. Let's see what went wrong:
Suppose this movie was released in 1966, by that time when Lana Turner played this role, she was already 45 years old; and John Forsythe was born in 1918, so when he played the "Mamma's Boy" character, he was already 48 years old; then Constance Bennett who played the mother of John Forsythe, was born in 1904 and was already 62 when played the mother of Forsythe.
What we saw in this movie is a woman who's already begun the menopause process, her face and body were not as attractive as her early age. A 45 year old woman married to a 48 diplomat who still lived with his 62 year old mother under the same roof. I don't know if both of these younger couple already had their first marriage or not, but when the plump almost a bit puffy and fat Lana Turner would have to be comfortable calling the in-law "mother" like her husband did. But both Lana Turner and John Forsythe were too old for these roles. A 48 years old guy still lived with his mother?
Besides, Ricardo Montalban's heavy Latino accent would have allowed him the social position to mingle with those white high society. All of these wrong ingredients in this 1966 movie simply made me feel awkward and embarrassed to accept what it was as this movie spooned fed to me.
Why we want to be bothered by a movie that only showed us a bunch of miserable people trapped in a wide wilderness trying to get by without any hope? Why we have to know these peoples' pathetic day in and day out struggles. The mother and the sons are constantly in fights with harsh words and violent behaviors among them and to each other. There's no love at all in this so-called "family" but completely dysfunctional. They lived like pigs, the rundown shabby house is a dump. They hate each other. The bad boy comes home with dishonored charge from the military. He's dumb and angry and his brother is even worse. The mother treat them differently but also indifferently. The rancher is the only sane person in this wildness, but I just don't know how he could make a living just by owning some horses? Why we have to waste our time to know these peoples' lives? There's no way to show us any hope that we could make America great again with these kind of pathetic citizens. The rural America is in a terrible condition. This kind of movies only deepen the hopelessness and the fact that America is really in big trouble.
"I just couldn't buy into this at all. Contrived, silly, repetitive (how many times do we need to see depth charges exploding in the ocean).
The music is overbearing. The dialogue over-scripted. The characters contain very stereo-typed good Nazis or Germans. The Americans are the eternal good guys. It all seemed rather lame and unconvincing. Weren't destroyers supposed to be part of a convoy system. So why was this ship alone at sea? Best to watch a documentary to see the real battle of the Atlantic.
The ending is absolutely ludicrous with everyone lending a helping hand. You almost expected them to all have a group hug - Germans and Yanks. The ending lowered my rating to a meager 2/10."
Fighting German U-boat on Atlantic Ocean? Dumping mess hall's garbage to feed sharks? This US Navy battle ship was supposed to be on constant alert to either hunt Nazi subs or hunted by the U-boat, yet all the crew on the battle ship were either playing poker or wisecracking each other on the deck. There's no sailor on duty on the bridge or on the highest point to look out to the sea for any possible sighting, even they had RADAR. And all the senior officers were playing poker non-stop, the captain was in his cabin in deep sleep, lot of the crew slept too. A funny looking so-called "Doc" chewing his pipe walking around then join the poker crowd later amid the ship. And the dialog among the Americans on this battleship was just so ludicrous and amateurish. This movie simply looked funny, pretentious and unreal. I couldn't go on watching it even I turned off the audio to block the horrible soundtrack and made it as a silent movie.
The stupid, over-the-top soundtrack, absolutely irrelevant to the situations but continued to bombard our eardrums with deafening volume; a typical Hollywood studios formulaic arrangement for all the military and the Western genre movies, non-stop soundtracks on and on, riding on horses, galloping, climbing up or down the ladder.....whatever movements on the screen, there's loud music to help sync them. Walter Disney's cartoons used dramatic and exaggerated soundtracks to match every cartoon character's moves, gestures, behaviors and actions, and movies in other genres just blindly followed this formula, hiring composers, conductors, orchestras to make music as the soundtracks for all kinds of movies, but the music simply became so annoyingly loud, irrelevant, dramatized and exaggerated, and most of the time, it's just so unnecessarily overdone and overplayed.
Then The United States of America won the WWII, Hollywood jumped on the wagon to make military movies to describe the greatness of American forces on the ground, in the oceans, and in the air, to extremely glorify the American military power. I don't know if Donald Trump's slogan, "Make America Great Again" means the American glory after defeated Nazi Germany and the Japanese Imperialism military forces is the real greatness or, made the Soviet Russia dismantled after the Cold War, I just don't know.
What is love? It means that once you fall in love with someone, the feeling is not just a temporary emotion, it won't change unless the one you love turns out to be unfaithful and fickle. Love someone means the whole world only that particular one you deeply care about and really care for, no matter that person is not at your side 24/7, you only focus and concentrate on that person. If love is so easily changed like what we saw in this movie, a one-sided faithfulness is meaningless and it's not love. Love is a reciprocated giving and taking to each other, not just one-sided giving but not receiving. The love in this movie didn't resonant, didn't prolong enough, didn't even pass the test of time; it's a temporary encounter, a short-lived relationship. It's just a shallow emotion, it can only hang on by seeing each other daily, not even "often" seeing each other could be ensure the steady growth of love.
As to the cast of this movie, both male and female were not an ideal choice, and the female cast was even worse. She got bulging eyeballs, three permanent deep wrinkles on forehead, lot of horizontal folding wrinkles around her neck; so young but almost looked a bit old. The male one, well, didn't look a bit like a seasoned "Special Force" guy but a regular grunt or a jar-head. Sparks and the director of this movie obviously got no knowledge of any military stuff.
Wife is a die-hard romance addict, but after watched this movie and "The Vow", she suddenly got so tired of this romance genre. Why? I asked her. "Well, both movies were shallow. It never touched your heart, never gave you a deep feeling to those two characters in both movies. Watchable, but too tiresome to watch such shallow love of the younger people. There's no depth in both movies and it just ruined the interpretation of matured love and romance."
What a load of crap, even it's scripted as a comedy
I simply couldn't put myself too engulfed into this movie, because I know this movie was dramatized to have some kind of comic effect. But I just can't to compare it with the realistic "Foster Care System" that this country had created. When anytime I heard "Foster Home", it immediately connected me to "Food Stamps", "Single Parent", "Child Support", "Welfare".....Because as far as I know, foster care and foster home have already become a money making business for most of the people who are doing it. Every kid you take in, the American welfare system will send a check to you every month. Parents who are doing this kind of business rarely really take care of those kids they foster at their home. Genuine loving care foster parents only existed in the movies but barely found in the real world.
To me, this movie is just too pretentious to be true, and I just felt being fooled by another illusion made by Hollywood. I didn't feel funny at all when watching it. Hollywood movie makers are just trying to brainwash our moral standard and viewpoints to many things that usually and traditionally not acceptable to many normal people. You think being a foster parent is fun? You think you've got too much love that you could spare to share? Tell me, when you made a choice to pick up some kids from the org , went through those kids photos one by one, it made no big difference from when you tried to pick a dog or cat from the humane society. The only difference is foster care of a child or several of them, the government would regularly mail check or checks to you, but when you decide to take care of a dog or cat or whatever, giving them a home, you're making America great again, because you'd give a lot business related to pets, every penny is out of your own pocket and, it's not cheap.
The 2nd Season is even better. The 2nd Episode is simply better than fantastic. There are several subplots that run in this specific episode and I deeply appreciated: Father talking to his prodigal son about his realization that he could live again and not dying. The death affected his decision makings. The the great scene in the classroom of the university about the American history, about the power and the innocent, about the terrorism since 1492 when Columbus discovered America. The 3rd one is the power shifting from the head henchman to the son and how it was arrangement. And the forth one is how the sister advised her brother to face the reality of Yellowstone's legacy and inheritance.
The great find in this episode is how the screenplay finally allowing us to see the real capacity and ability of the sister's genius-level business management that completely changed my original view of her.
While there are several actors (I'll save the name calling here) when showed up in the movies cast who were always certified the movies to be below B-level or even worse, but Kevin Costner is just the opposite. Any film he signed on was either "Very watchable" or "Simply great to watch". This "Yellowstone" drama series further proved my belief about his contribution to great watching experience.
I don't even know how to review this French crap....
I totally agreed with what FrenchEddieFelson22 commented on February 2019, this French sub movie was nothing but a joke.
The first 20 minutes of this movie, if it's true to the fact, this French sub
was poorly organized inside and most of the crew were badly trained and they were not seriously carried out what they should have done and their attitudes among them and toward each other were so amateurish and abject. The sub looked like a teenager's bedroom, unlike a nuclear sub should be. The other unbelievably scripted scenario was those 4 French Special Forces team. Why the guy with the bleeding hand would do the job to close up the dig-in cache? They already saw the enemy got the dog, and how a well-trained guy would leave lot of blood to expose their secret cache? When the sonar guy detected the Iranian frigate and then detected an unknown 4-blade sub, the whole French crew were like a bunch of amateurs, shouting and yelling to each other, everybody was so panic. And then the mist-cast captain brought a lock-up RPG launcher up to the con....what a laughable scene, Jesus...The clueless celebration afterwards, everybody self-claiming they got the best captain and the best crew were also laughable like a farce.
All I can say is this:
All the cast in this movie were bad or wrong choice, except the acoustic sonar young guy. He's the only one who played the part appropriately. Omar Sy's role was extremely unfit, just look how he wore his French Navy shirt, he didn't even bother to wear his white shirt as an navy officer should be and, he played a sloppy D'Orsi role so unconvincingly poor. Then another fatal wrong casting job, Reda Kateb who played the Grandchamp role as a sub captain, but didn't look a bit like a capable guy who could command a nuclear sub later before he's a captain of the Titan sub. He's one of the worst French actors I've ever seen so far. Also, the American voice-over that replaced the original French dialog also sucks big time, poorly sync, most of the time, the American voice-over failed to match the lips of all the characters, that also made the whole viewing experience so embarrassed uncomfortable.
I would say, if this is not a movie but just a screenplay or a printed novel, it would be ten times better.
But just like what I've commented on other unfunny stand-up comedians' shows, the audiences would have still tried their best to laugh at almost every lame joke he or she said on the stage. It's a weird grouping effect; if the people sat around you laughing at something not funny at all, you'd try to laugh anyway, showing that you've got the funny bone like them. In order not to make the money you've stupidly wasted on the ticket fare, you've got to laugh very hard to make every penny worth.
This Adam Devine's talk show is one of the most boring, unfunny, childish, shallow shows I've ever encountered. It's extremely boring. Just terrible. His popularity and how he survived in this cruel FUNNY world is beyond my logic could fathom.
This movie is just terrible to watch. Totally unnecessary scene after scene. Don't even know how the lame script would get a nod from the investors to waste their money for nothing. This is a below B-level movie which is further certified the involvement of Eric Roberts, because any film with him in it is doomed to be with bad screenplay, bad directing, bad actors who are most unknown and without acting talent, anything except "Suits", all certified too bad to watch. He's one of the brand names of bad movies. And this time, I wasted about 25 minutes until the realization that I was watching a totally pointless and boring movie. "Inspirational"? as the other reviewer praised? Well, I think watching the ants doing their daily food collecting chore would be more inspirational.
A Sci-Fi movie with many messages but full of flaws
This movie has raised a lot of questions about science, human race, morality dilemma and standard, humanitarian guidelines, love and whatever that you might be thinking when you watched this movie. The young actor who played the sole human being was quite talented, she showed how she compiled herself into that role who gradually developed her own way of thinking, her own logic, and her own morality standard. A robot programmed by the annihilated human race to play the role of a mother was pretty creative idea, but it also raised a question: No matter what, does this robotic mother can really replace a real human mother? The robot mother in this movie also represented the "single parent" role in our human society, or should we narrowed it down to just the nowadays modern societies, an unstoppable damaged social infrastructure, broken families everywhere? Gay marriage now allow the couple to adopt orphans, and reared them up in a somehow abnormal and weird environment. Does the lesbian couples are more appropriate to play the role of mother than the male gay couples? The lesbian couple at least still has one that is the pure and natural feminine who could easily melt into a mother role, yet the male gay couple, even one of them is supposed to be a female gender, but how could it possible not to look at the supposed-to-be-feminine gender gay in the form of a real woman? So, do we ever seriously think about whether the kids growing up in a gay couple would be as normal as them reared up by a lesbian couple, because there's at least one real feminine gender, physically and mentally, the outlook and the inside, is still 100% womanly?
The robot mother in this movie no matter how it was programmed to play the mother role is still a machine, a technology mechanism, no matter how it was programmed to do the hugging of the child, there's no warm body temperature, no heart beats, no soft female skin to contact and transfer all those only a human being mother could deliver to the child. The kindness and caring thoughtfulness were all programmed, while a real human mother's responses, movements, behaviors, reactions, the talking and speaking to her child were nature and not pre-programmed. When the young girl gradually growing into a matured female woman, a natural genuine human being, her constant receiving real shows from her iPad, "Here's Johnny" would inevitably showed her what a real woman, a real female mother would be and should be, the way of her logic thinking would be developed into another form and level. That's why she felt energized when she found and caught a mice, and felt sad and cruel when her robot mother burned the small creature and then started the process of the cleansing.
That was also the moment the young woman started to doubt everything taught by her robot mother.
All these complicated thoughts were what I've watched this movie when the tiny little mice was burnt. I don't know what would follow and develop, but only with such short period watching, those thoughts as I've mentioned above just rushed in, and I have to stop watching it to collect those thoughts first.
There were so many flaws in this 2 human being and 1 robot storyline. The ending is kinda weak but there was no way to continue.
What's the purpose of making this film? A movie sponsored by Thailand Tourism Bureau? A mediocre guy suspected his wife cheating on him, so the pre-arranged anniversary romantic tour to Thailand became a reunited old pal travel? The whole film just felt tasteless through and through. The screenplay was so contrite and boring. The usual activities and scenes that young foreigners would do in some tourist traps were all included here, including.....Well, do I have to list them one by one for you to check out one by one? Boring acting, boring storyline....a big yawn, man. Absolutely unnecessary wasted money on airfares, traveling, exotic hotel, sightseeing, blah, blah and blah.
The 5 members the GIGN in this film were like a bunch of amateurs. The team leader wore glasses covered in dust. The most part of this film was wasted in small talks, jokes, insults among them. The so-called General was an arrogant jerk. Non-stop blah, blah and blah. The five member team carried one aluminum water bottle without any food when they sneaked out into the wildness, and these morons drank up their limited water supply without any idea how to only sip their water periodically instead of gulping down. These morons just made me sick. There was only one guy who was quite and looked more serious to carry out the mission, and he was the only one kept cleaning his weapons anytime available. Love the female actor, a very talented one, not just pretty. All the roles she'd played were great and quite believable.
This is a loosely scripted lousy film, not just insulted the GIGN but also the audiences. I pity those kids who had to play the hostage under the harsh desert sun in a metal bus.
Oh is not very eye-appealing at all, so watching this 2-season series is not a comfortable experience. She might be among the ugliest women that I've ever seen so far in my 72 years life. But her great acting really compensated a lot to watch episode after episode. There's an obvious check and balance by casting Jodie Comer, a beautiful and very talented young female, who allowed us to keep the patience and tolerance watching this drama series. But I have to say that whenever Oh was on the screen, that face was just so painful to watch, and I have to confess that sometimes, I couldn't help myself removing my eyes from the screen. I don't know why all the men in this drama series thought her beautiful and sexy, maybe these peoples' eyeballs were different and I was among the few who were not normal.
The screenplay was very amateurish, it's very typical when the British tried to write murder mysteries or adapted them into movies and TV dramas. There were so many scenarios and plots simply too ridiculously British, but again, it's Jodie Comer who kept me from not watching. Oh's face actually gave me nightmares couple of times already. I never had bad dreams before even the "Night King" and his zombie army didn't give me nightmares. So you might understand what I'm talking about what Ugly means. There's no discrimination here at all, because other than that, I have to say that her acting was impeccable and looked quite real.
I couldn't even watch the 1st episode of this mini series, because it's more than what I could bare. I don't know how HBO and the production team did it, but it just looked so real, I really don't know how they did it. The heartless bureaucratic administration officials of this nuclear power plant, their poor knowledge and naive understanding of the radiation, those fatal firefighters and those poor residents who lived in the neighborhood around the power plant, their stupidity lured them to go near to watch the burning of the nuclear power plant, with their kids playing in the radiation ashes, even infant was carried by their parents to watch the horrible phenomenon, and commented on the burning scene "beautiful"....
That's when the senior fireman approached those firemen, ordered them to climb up the explosion debris to spray water from the top, I decided to quit watching. Jesus, It's just too real to watch on. I might have to pump up my courage to continue watching this mini series, but I'm not sure when.
I read a report yesterday which told us that after the 9/11 Twin Towers were hit by those two airplanes, when buildings crashed down, the flying dust carried lot of fatal particles in the air, those who were not in those burning structures, those who had survived on that horrible day but nearby, many of them are dying since them, because they had inhaled those cancerous dust particles. So the number of victims of 9/11 is still accumulated day by day and day after day. If poisonous building materials would cause fatal cancers, think about the nuclear radiation's killing power.
If we compare the incidents at Fukushima Dain nuclear power plant accident causing by the earthquake and the Tsunami with the Chernobyl disaster, the Fukushima one was like a child play.
Scientists and those bureaucratic of many governments still claim that the nuclear power plants are safer is just like telling people that airplanes' accidents are less than what happening daily on the freeways. Well, nice try, Airplanes and vehicles crashing sites can be cleaned up within days or even hours, but when a nuclear power plant accident happened, it's so deadly that could prolong half century or even longer.
But sadly, there's no way we could avoid nuclear power since it's still the most stable energy source on earth. Burning coal or oil, relying wind to blow the turbine fans to generate power are still either deadly to the environment or unstable. Using dams? Don't tell me that you don't know that our rivers are either drying up or already disappeared. So what else we could get power? Solar energy? Yeah, right, I've tried to have solar power on my home's roof, but after I've contacted many solar contractors, we had decided not to install it. Leasing or owning the solar system for two old farts, either way, simply is not practical at all.
Sorry, guys, I still couldn't sum up enough courage to watch this HBO mini series....
A "beautiful" woman awaiting in his P.I. office? Define the word "beautiful", a woman already past the prime with a disgusting absolutely unnatural botox upper lip, wearing a low-cut cheap cocktail black blouse...and you dared to call her "beautiful"? GiveMeABreak #1. Morgan Freeman got a pretty singer daughter who didn't look a bit like him; there's no need to check them really related, 'cause by looking at them, there's no least resemblance at all, that's GiveMeABreak #2. So the scripted screenplay and the cast at the very beginning already shown fatal causes to doom this lousy film, albeit the thugs from the bookie tried to beat him up and he easily avoided and escaped as predicted when the movie began, and there's already a new job suddenly so readily available for him to skip town for couple of weeks, gee, that's a lousy scenario already used maybe thousand times. That, I have to say, is the #3 GiveMeABreak cliche.
So far, before this movie went along further, showing JT in his shining impeccable red classic car (why all the down-and-out P.I.s always got a car like that? Definitely another stereotyped cliche) , driving all the way from the LaLaLand to the Texas town where he was born and raised, there were already too many cliches to be digested by me. Do I need to tell you that pathetic hospital scene and so on? Nah.
Beautifully made, but with a one-sided biased controversial logic
This is such a beautiful film about the relationship between human beings and the eagle, a predatory flying killer and hunter to other weak defenseless creatures.
In this movie, we saw how the tribal people sublimed the eagle and treated the eagles a totally different species that separated them from other animals. In these peoples' mind and their inherited belief that they have the duty and obligation to treat the eagles as the ultimate sacred creature and superior to any other animals on earth. So they treated the eagle as something between a pet and a respectful friend, in the meantime, a guest that should not be detained by the master too long. There's time frame that they could keep their eagles, but when their eagles are well-trained, matured enough, they don't have the right to keep them, they should let go of the eagles. Before setting the eagle go free, a cruel ritual would also implemented by killing a sheep or goat, cutting meat from the sacrificed poor animal to feed their eagle.
This ritual and procedure to treat the eagle so differently somehow in my opinion is just so ridiculous, illogic, controversial and so self-righteous. Why treat the eagles and single them out from other animals? Why when the time comes, you'd willingly set them free? Why you have to kill a creature to feed another? Why eagle is superior to sheep or goat or even a horse? Just because it can fly? Where's the sublimity come from? Who said so and who told you that?
Such a ridiculous self-righteous logic can also be applied to the animals that we take them as humans' pet and friends; dog, cat, or horse. Like the eagle, they are by no means superior to other creatures, chicken, duck, rabbit, sheep...so killing them and use them as food is perfectly legal, while killing a dog or cat or treating them unkind is against the law. This kind of generosity, fairness and love to peoples' pet are just so illogic and one-sided biased. Why these tribal people would treat their eagles so differently is such a funny inherited hearsay. Just because eagles are their pet, so they treat them so differently?
But of course, this movie is a fascinating story about young girl and her eagle. Yet the paradox of treating an eagle as a sublime symbol, well, I could do without.
If this documentary is so important, why released in Bulgaria first not in the Land of the Broken Dreams? The poor guy was dead and buried, all he did or not did were gone with his death, why these people are still trying to mess up the majority human population. Abused or not abused, well, suppose M.J. was a very poor guy even he was declared bankruptcy, his leftover estates were still big enough to sue for a compensation. Suppose M.J. was a homeless, or a down-and-out like most of the majority seniors citizens in Trump Land, suing a guy like that was absolutely meaningless. The law suit would not gender any compensations for such alleged accusation, not even possible to make a case since all the lawyers in the world would not take the case and file a lawsuit in most kangaroo courts that have already been deeply damaged by the Guy and his lemming Party.
I am a neutral person who has limited interest in pop music, but I did appreciate the talent of M.J. on stage and nothing further. This one-sided boring and long flix not even qualified for the least entertainment. There's only one thought when I watched it: "A camel died from hunger is still bigger than an alive horse"; no matter what, M.J.'s after-death estate was still worth a profitable lawsuit, this Chinese old saying is exactly appropriate for this pointless mockumentary. Abused? Not abused? I simply couldn't care less.
I can't imagine and totally beyond comprehension, this messy film with a totally messed up Chinese history, absolutely ridiculous random jump-around mixed eras with extremely mixed costumes and settings.... and so on would have won some awards of some film festivals. All I can guess is these festivals, their judges and their attending audiences were just assembled by a bunch of brain-dead people who didn't know what was what, what should be and....to sum up: What's going on? They didn't even question themselves when they sat in front of the big screen to watch it: WTF!? Because this is exactly what I concluded after I've only watched about 4 minutes. This movie is like the American Chinese food, Chop-Suey, mixed all the leftovers of yesterday, the days before yesterday, maybe even over a week's foods in the refrigerator, threw them altogether into the wok, thus created a so-called messy Chinese dish: Chop means "randomly mixed", Suey means "leftover tidbits"; this God-awful movie is exactly what I'm trying to tell you, A randomly mixed leftover tidbits. I'm even more surprised that only one reviewer has warned that this movie was complete garbage. Maybe he and me have both watched a different movie? But I doubt it.