steel_arkangel

I thought batman vs superman was bad, but in comparison it was Oscar standard... Tired one liners, cliché after cliché, poor script, hammy acting, and the music was instantly forgettable.

I wanted to like this movie, but i was so bored that in the end i was rooting for the aliens...

I do realise that these sorts of movies aren't supposed to be terribly accurate re science, but it just didn't make sense.

I understand they are planning another... My advice... New writers, new cast, new director. Hopefully they'll be able to "adult" up the next one and that will go some way to making it more believable.

Lets say I am not the greatest Dr. Zahi Hawass fan - I find he conveniently forgets a lot about what the Egyptians did to their own antiquities (burn mummies for fuel for example), when he talks about how other countries have raped Egypt.

That said, I love Egyptology and am pretty much up for watching anything to do with the subject.

This however was just awful - from the start you could tell it was faked, half the people couldn't act their way out of paper bag, and they just did things that you knew people just wouldn't do.

After the first 20 mins I have to admit I just couldn't watch any more and switched it off.

I know films like Cloverfield, and Paranormal Activity have been very popular (I hated both of these two by the way), so I guess it was only a matter of time before we started to see these mockumentaries

Being in my 40's and a big Sci-Fi fan, it was really odd that I had never seen this movie till now - and I have to say, it wasn't worth the wait!

I wont argue that the film was very artfully shot, but the story was slow and just bizarre.

Of course bizarre is what film students and art critics love, so I'm not surprised that this is so highly thought of, and i'm sure they spend many an evening pouring over the plot, trying to find hidden meanings that aren't really there.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..... Sometimes a slow and dated plot, is just a slow and dated plot.....

If you watch movies, not to make yourself look intelligent, but rather (heaven forbid), to be entertained, give this one a miss.

Really liked the flooring in the house - I think they do it at B&Q (quite expensive, but well worth it)

Thats about the best thing I can say about the movie.

Why people seem to enjoy watching something that is filmed like it's supposed to be a documentary/real, when it isn't, is beyond me. Still I accept that not everyone likes the same things - oh wait she's screaming again (i'm typing this while I'm watching it - i'm that bored...)

Wait, thats it..!! it's over..! Probably for the best, as i'd have done to myself what she just did in the alternative ending - had gone on any longer... (I really like the fact that a movie that is trying to give the impression it was real has an alternate ending btw)

Still I think in all honesty this would never have happened if they'd had a duvet instead of sheets - I mean everyone knows that a duvet is like the shroud of protection. Silly rabbits..

So in summary - i've seen more evil in my cats litter-box, no really....!

I'm neither an insane sports fanatic, nor sadly under the age of 40 - but I really love this movie.

Yes it's hammier than miss piggy at a hog roast, but lets flag a cab and head for real street, what else was it going to be?

I agree that no one's acting in this is stellar, but Vin is entertaining & the movie has a great sound track. Things move along at a good pace, and you don't have to think about it too much.

So to recap, those looking for Oscar winning performances & a story that will leave you thinking about it for days, this isn't for you - but if you want something you can just switch on & not have to engage your brain, then this really could be for you.

So if you like the Running Man, Under Siege & similar types of movies - check it out & get yourself the soundtrack!

I've voted a 6, which is perhaps a little low - maybe 6.5 - 6.8, but for me this was a little disappointing. What I really liked about the first one was that it was serious, with non- forced humour. This one for me was less serious, with terribly forced humour - it's the difference between Star Wars a New Hope & the Phantom Menace. In fact the difference didn't stop there, as just as Lucas put in the awful Jar Jar Binks, Bay/Spel put in two similar silly autobots - the names of which escape me. And to be honest, on reflection, that was another issue - whilst watching the movie I had no idea which robot was which. In the fight scenes it was difficult to tell them apart, it all looked quite scrappy - unlike the first one, where each robot seemed more individual.

Now to my main bug bear - and yes I know it's just a movie.... However, the pyramids, the red sea & Petra are no where near each other!!! It would take days to walk from the Pyramids to the red sea, and even longer to walk to Petra - I know, I've been to all of them!!! In addition Sam seemed at one point to be running through Karnak temple??? Luxor is even further!!! Things like this just don't make the movie seem credible & it's sad to think that kids are now going to believe all these things are in the wrong place. I certainly get the feeling that Americans (and I am very pro American btw), do feel that if it's not in the USA, then it doesn't really matter about the accents/locations - I mean for them if it's in the same continent then thats enough - however I think if someone came out with a movie that had the star running from the Empire State Building to the Sears Tower, then they'd think that was very silly and unbelievable - and they'd be right!!!

Overall I did enjoy it - but no where near as much as I did the first one, and part of me senses a Batman-esquire similarity, where we started with a couple of great dark moody Gothic Batman movies, but then descended in to comic-book tripe (Batman & Robin.... yuk...!!) - before it was rescued by Christian Bales latest excellent movies.

Please don't let this happen to Transformers... Make it more serious, non-forced humour - no stupid/camp autobots - and I think one slow-motion shot of Sam running is perhaps enough for one movie.....

Tom Hardy gives a truly Oscar winning performance as Michael Peterson, in fact I would go so far as to say it was Eastwood (Gran Torino) beating. Sadly for me though it was really only his performance that carried the movie along.

I freely admit that I didn't know much about the man before I saw this movie, but most of the film seemed to be Bronson beating prison guards up in various different locations & not much more. I know he got re-married - where was this? OK he spent most of his life behind bars, but surely there was a bit more to the mans life than what we saw?

I've read that Bronson was quite happy about this movie & that it has given him some immortality, however I'm not sure that it really is going to leave people with the impression of him that he thinks. I certainly didn't leave the cinema thinking of him as a "billy the kid / Jessie James" anti-hero, but instead pitied him as a lost, out of control man who knew nothing but violence - more of a tortured soul.

I loved the first series - innovative, good story, slick cgi, great cliff-hangers. Sadly season 2 seemed to lose it's way (story wise), and it all started to get messy - worse still it was full of moments when you say "what the... why would you do that?!!!?!" for example, you've had a major fight within your arch nemesis & for once he's on the floor unconscious - now is your chance -finally! - so what do you do - would you a) pick up the gun on the floor and take the 2 seconds to shoot that person, or b) leave & then come back later..... let me see now...

Let me give you another example - you are a Dr, and the former most dangerous man in the world, who you know murdered countless people & almost brought the city to the edge of destruction, comes to visit - but you find out he's lost all his powers. He "thinks" you can help him get these powers back with an injection, do you a) give him the injection - knowing he'll probably be unstoppable & continue to murder his way through humanity, or do you b) give him an injection of something like saline, or even better some sort of poison - which he wouldn't have known you were doing as he had no medical knowledge??? Again, let me think....

Too many moments like this made it silly and unbelievable, which is a shame....

I think this movie probably tried to promise more than it could ultimately deliver, however if you go in thinking it's not going to be a blockbuster, then you'll probably enjoy it. To put it another way - if you have something like a Cineworld unlimited pass, go watch it - if not, then i'd wait for it to come out on DVD rental. On the plus side I thought the acting was pretty good, and the story was certainly more original than a lot of the other X-men rip-offs. I'd certainly say it was head and shoulders above "jumper". I think there is a lot of potential here, so I hope that they stick with this and make a sequel, although i'd prefer they left out the girlfriend, who I felt was a weak element.

This is one of those movies that Film Students will love, spending hours trying to decode the "hidden complexities of the story", in order to reveal the "true message of the director" (it's an attempt to make themselves feel superior to non-film students); well let me save normal people the trouble.. and use the quote "sometimes a cigar, is just a cigar" - or to put it another way "it is was it is". There's a fine line between creativity and rubbish, and this in my view is sadly the latter. Imagine you've got a faulty TV & it keeps switching every 30 seconds between Buffy and Casualty, and you get some idea of what you are in for. To be fair though, if the directors aim was to make the audience feel the same kind of despair and loss of will to live that the protagonist suffered from, then he certainly scored on this point. I certainly don't think I was the only person who tried to revert in to some kind of fantasy world, in order to try and escape from the present. There were yawns and giggles rippling through the cinema during the movie - not a good sign, and a guy walked past and said to me; "what the hell was that all about" - so no, it's not just my view I'm expressing here. It's actually left me wondering if the lottery film board paid for two different movies - neither of which they could afford to finish, so meshed the two together to make a whole one.

If you're looking for something creative and interesting, go see "push", or better yet, go rent V for Vendetta.

Just an additional note to the person who said "grow up" - YOU grow up and realise that not everyone in the world will like the same movies you do, and they have the same right to express their option as you do!!

The one thing i've noticed from the other reviews is that everyone seems to have a different opinion of Bond, so I guess the first thing I would say is you really need to see them all to make up your own mind.

I like this one because it feels like a half way house between the old and new Bonds, taking the best bits from both. There's more of a sense of grittiness about the action, - no where near the harshness of Casino R of course, but the opening sequence really highlights the shift in the way Bond is shown. It does however keep the things that make a Bond movie a Bond movie, and what in my view is sadly lacking in the new ones - namely;

Gadgets, Q, wisecracks, and the tough henchman.

I wouldn't say I love Toby Stevens, a little bit ott for me, but Brosnan is just so cool, is just so Bond!

I think overall that each actor has brought something to the Bond character, and to say any of them were better or worse than the other is perhaps a little unkind. I mean there is no way that when Connery played 007 in Dr No, that the audience would have liked seeing him play Bond in the same way Daniel Craig did - the times they have a changed, and so have moviegoers.

In summary I think this is a great addition to the Bond franchise, and for me I enjoy watching it the most out of any of them.

Not going to say too much other than I thought this was just awful. The script was terribly weak, along with the performances. In fact I would go so far as to say this was Ford's worst film ever.

However, this isn't surprising given it was a George Lucas production - never have I come across anyone in the film industry who has risen so high, and then fallen so low.

The only saving grace really was Shia LaBeouf, who did a good job - let's hope he doesn't use the others as a training tool!

I'll leave it here, except to say that if they do make another one, might be an idea not to make Indy walk like he'd poo'd his pants....

I'm not going to go in to detail, as so many people have already done this - however what I will add is from my perspective I felt that whilst the action was good - if not very samey (most of the action was just a repeat of either C.R or Bourne) - the story was quite weak.

Problems:

1. The opening sequence was very flat - what happened to the big Bond stunts?! 2. I thought there were going to be more gadgets?!! This is BOND!! 3. What was the point in introducing half the characters when you don't do anything with them?! 4. So you have a ruthless, evil, secret corporation, hell bent on world domination, run by cold blooded killers - the plan? Take over the countries water supply and sell it back to the locals at a hugely inflated price... Damn that could be any high street company (every little helps!) Weak... very weak... 5. Could M please not spend the whole movie complaining about Bond killing people - he has a licence to kill, not a licence to rough up a bit but keep alive. 6. Could she also not just assume that Bond is guilty of whatever the local police report back (I mean it begs the question, do you give everyone you don't really trust a gun?!) Perhaps I could suggest actually asking him for his side of the story?!? 7. Q? I don't think I need to say any more! 8. I missed the point where Bond took the hulk super strength potion - Pulling a steel door handle off?!! Do you have any idea how much force you'd need to apply to do this!!?! 9. Where is the super hard to kill henchmen? This one seemed more like he should be in changing rooms, looking at curtain swatches?!

There were a few things I liked - Craig's performance I thought was good - I like the body in oil, (tiping it's hat tip at Goldfinger).

My overall feeling after Casino R. was that they really wanted to make everything a lot more serious, and QOS took this even further. The problems is that what makes Bond, Bond, is that he is larger than life but at the same time cool, calm, and collected.

Now yes you can argue that this isn't the Bond from the books, but we've grown up with this reinvention, and we LIKE it!! We like seeing the gadgets, we like the wise cracking, we like him getting off with the ladies.

What you've given us is to be fair, a much more accurate Bond, but then isn't this really just Bourne, and so many others that have gone before?

I'd like to finish by saying, this messing about with Bond was tried before with Timothy Dalton, and it didn't work, nor did it last.

So please, please, please... Bring back 007!!!

I should start off by saying that I love the Mummy and the Mummy Returns, but having done some reading before I went in, my expectations weren't high.

Many people have commented that one of the reasons it failed was because of Ms Weiz's absence, however my feeling is that it went much deeper than this.

Every one of the actors in this movie seemed to struggle to deliver their lines convincingly. Don't get me wrong, the Mummy movies are supposed to be "hammy" but this wasn't pork, this was swill!!

Even John Hannah, who I have great respect for, just couldn't seem to pull off the character - it was almost like none of them WANTED to do this movie, and just went through the motions.

The sad thing is that the story had potential, and the CGI wasn't bad at all.

So to sum up, if this is the best we can expect from the sequels, then the Mummy needs to RIP!

Jet Li - understand why you didn't say much!

This movie certainly isn't going to win any acting awards (sorry Brendan), and the story is quite weak - despite it being based on a classic. That said, it's saved by the 3D which was excellent.

I would say however that it is quite possible that it is BECAUSE it was in 3D that the story was not great. In my mind I can see a room full of writers and a director saying, "oh wouldn't it be really good if we did this in 3D", and wouldn't it be good if we did that.... rather than "how can we do justice to the book"

Also whatever you do, don't expect technically accuracy.. so many things did not make sense!

In conclusion, I didn't come out disappointed, but then I didn't come out thinking wow!!

I guess the saying, everyone is different really is true. Whilst i thought that there were certainly some really good elements to this film, for the most part i thought it was actually quite boring.

In my mind it didn't seem to know quite where it wanted to take the story - there was the lead up to the other ship - then they found it - then they left. It was a real anticlimax to be honest.

People ask me - is it like Deep Impact? Definitely not, in fact i'd say it is more like - and this is going to see really odd i know, a thinking mans Jason X, rolled in with Event Horizon & The Black Hole (yes the Disney sci-fi movie!).

I noticed someone said it was as suspenseful as Alien!? - I'd like to know which part they thought wasn't obvious! - for example; how many times are we going to see the old, find the spooky garbled ships log?? To me suspense only works if it actually leads up to something big & a little unexpected - a major climax, whether it be a battle or a plot twist. In my mind this had nothing.

This said i didn't like Event Horizon either (also found that laboured and dull) - i much preferred the Alien movies (except 3).

I must also add that some of the film to me just didn't seem to make much sense - too many "why wouldn't you just..." or "why would you do that" moments for me.

Unfortuantley it is difficult to make sci-fi movies like this that don't contain elements of existing ones, but i would have gone down the route of; Ship fatally damaged resulting in having to dock with the I1 - theirs explodes leaving them on the original, trying to get it back up and running. One by one things start to go wrong and they being to suspect each other - but it turns out that the whole crew is still alive, and not happy about them being there. One however is on their side and tries to help them seal them off from the murderous I1 crew. They do this, but in the end he is killed by the captain of I2, who in fact is in with the I1 crew. All this is done because they decide they want to create a new utopia & discover that if they let the sun die to a certain level & then restart it, this will kill off humanity but not destroy the earth itself.

OK I'm not a writer, but i think this would have been a lot less expected than what i saw.