reservoir_cats_1989

This series is as bad as Northern Exposure. Literally, it's a carbon copy.

Located in Patience, Colorado, not in fake Alaska (but everything looks Canadian). Instead of a stereotypical neurotic New York City Jewish doctor there is doctor Harry Vanderspiegelman, played by Alan Tudyk, who unfortunately is wasting his talents on this heap of garbage that is Season 2. And who knew, that "Firefly"'s Nathan Fillion would be reunited with Tudyk as a talking octopus. I loved Firefly, I loved Serenity, I love watching Alan Tudyk and Nathan Fillion in their movie characters. But not this humongous pile of mousecr*p! Nevermind poor Giorgio T. From Ancient Aliens got conned into playing a cameo here. This TV shows does not deserve its average rating.

That series is something different I had ever seen. It is brilliant, original, and explores themes never before touched and interwoven in that particular way. Anyone who spent a portion of their work life in the office, like I did for decades, should be awed by the plot and following action. The series is deep on many, many levels. Acting is truly superb.

My analogy is that series is a single "Black Mirror" episode turned into a series, and it gets way more mesmerizing as a series than a possible 60-minute piece.

Unfortunately, I feel that anyone watching this, who had had never worked in the office for more than 6 months, will not fully grasp the brilliance and originality of this show. But I am not saying this with certainty.

Without spoilers, the single phrase that describes this series is "work-life balance". You know what you heard from your boss about that. Watch the series and you understanding of the term will become a lot different.

One last thing I cannot forget to mention. Thanks to Ben Stiller for directing most of the episodes, but even more thanks to him for having chosen not to appear in them personally. That would have spoiled the rating.

I almost forgot the Matrix trilogy. For me John Wick series is a true classics when it comes to action movies. Every single installment has scenes, where i watched scenes never seen before in any other action movie.

If - by accident or truly unfortunate will of God - you kill someone's dog and steal that person's car - your life may be at an ending that goes very, VERY bad.

That line comes from M18 claymore mine, bearing.words "front toward enemy" etched on front. There is no single line to better describe this movie.

Gary Oldman is one of a kind in this episode. His performance with spitting his parts into Joey's eyes makes my sides split with laughter. But his "You wouldn't happen to have a really big fork?" just tops it all. Excellent episode!

First of all, if you're turned off by gory details of performing an autopsy, do not watch this. It will take strong will to have pepperoni pizza while watching this movie.

Once you're past that, the movie surprises you with tension and suspense you did not expect. The plot is very original and keeps you at the edge of the seat until the very end of the movie.

One of my best choices for 2016 horror movies!

It is a valid questions for lots of Christopher Nolan's movies. There are some of them you watch for the 4th and 5th time to get the details you couldn't notice during earlier watching. And that's how you appreciate many of his movies more and more.

This movie however departs from typical Nolan's fabulous plots and brilliant ideas in favor of convoluted action you can't keep up and with characters you can't relate to. The characters shoot out their sentences so quick no one in real world does that because it takes a second to a) understand someone's sharp talk, b) come out with some brilliant response on par with the other person. Add that to the phenomenon of time going backwards in parallel to time going forward in the movie's reality and you're likely getting lost in the first 15 minutes of the plot.

On the positive side, thanks to Christopher Nolan for not serving us sound version of "death by Hans Zimmer" (remember "death by Enya" postcards? you got the right idea - think "Inferno" for instance).

Overall go and see the movie for yourself. Your opinion may be different than mine, it's all a matter of taste (non disputationem de gustum). Enjoy if you can!

As much as I love watching Nolan's movies, this one is going to remain in the "great idea, poor execution" area, despite its pretentious grandiosity. It was created only because Nolan could afford the budget. No one else could convince any studio to produce it. For me it's a waste of money - we could have a very decent, way more watchable Neill Blomkamp flick! (missing District 10? me too!)

I see no reason why this movie was made, short of long awaited cameos from the original actors from GB1/GB2 (no Rick Moranis!!!)

There is no humor comparing to the original movies binding the events together. Chris Hemsworth's performance is a massive distraction and his participation meant only to attract his fans. He's no Janine. Actually I don't know who he is supposed to play given shortcomings of his comedy talents (adding a max. dumb character is supposed to be funny? ok, maybe in in

The whole plot was tired, forced, the humor non-existent (except for Erin at some parts, but no comparison to Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd or RIP Harold Ramis, or even Rick Moranis, BTW Cheech was missing). Just show me a single moment in this movie, comparable to "Go get her Ray!" - there isn't one.

The movie was actually lacking the plot so much that the producers attempted to cover this shortcoming with a LOT of special effects - which unfortunately got the formula even more difficult to digest.

If you're a fan of the original GB1/GB2, skip this one. And for Pete's sake, PLEASE NO ONE NOT MAKE A SEQUEL!!!!!!

This installment is just bad. Skip watching it. 2 stars for Sean Pertwee (though nothing close to his best performances). Nudity in movies about the metaphysical practically always signal the movies is bad. Ninth Gate may be an exception here.

Because of how weak this movie is, I consider mentioning nudity as a spoiler. Ha ha.

To the reviewer who mentioned "I've never seen an English man speak romanian like a real one" - you should probably watch Dracula with Gary Oldman. He's the only Dracula actor who learned to speak Romanian in the movie.

In this series, the less of Christopher Walken you get on screen, the worse the movie gets. It's just maybe a coincidence, but Christopher Walken knew when to withdraw from the series. Also adding naked chicks doesn't do the franchise any favors - when you see sex or nudity in a metaphysical movie, most of the time it just desperately tries to get the viewer's attention. This is a great example.

The series would have been great, but when Billy and Hughey catch Translucent and then with Frenchie imprison the Translucent, I immediately thought the series director missed something children would notice (but not the director). If you want to shot a Translucent man, why don't you spray some powder, flour or soot or anything else, so that you can see where he is first before you shoot him? Personally I downgrade any movie or series which could be directed better by preschoolers. That one is an unforgivable flaw.

While I was looking for another movie with Jason Statham, I came across this production, and boy, was it a waste of my time.

So the title is "the Meg", suggesting the movie is about the megalodon (and of course, possibly how to ward off its attack and stay alive for the crew, because what else would you really expect?).

Very, very disappointing. There are elements of psychoanalysis and a history of it among crew members (even relatives), yet this is junk compared to the "Sphere", already badly received by both viewers and critics movie.

I will put it simply, in numbers, what I do not like about this movie: 1) It is a kind of a spin-off between the "Jaws" and "Jurassic World", with no value added. I don't care about budgets (it was always the thing that ultimately put the directors in charge to the bottom of the food chain, so to speak in the shadow of this movie's theme). Difficult to beat Steven Spielberg, no matter how much money you throw at the filming team. And you failed here, miserably. 2) Jason Statham acts in a kind of psychological sense for the most of the movie time, and trust me, this particular acting angle from this screenplay is not his forte 3) The Megalodon has like 30 seconds screen time? for a 1 hour 52 minutes movie? Heck, the Jurassic World - the Fallen Kingdom had more action in it, and less of the little of pseudo-action and the max of psychological work by Jason Statham.

Unlike other reviewers, I have no intention to refer to any nations, producing or being audiences for the movie. It is absolutely unnecessary. The movie cannot defend itself, no matter who paid money for the screenplay, the acting crew, and the laughable CGI. (and I thought that "Deep Blue Sea" of 1998 was a bad movie).

This movie in itself is a MAJOR flop, no matter who financed it. I understand Jason Statham has bills to pay and that may be the only redemeeing characteristics in this situation, as long as barely anyone (excluding me) notices that performance as selling out for money. I understand the need, however I choose to review the movie using my criteria, impartial to actors, screenplay authors, or directors, and the final review score is 1/10.

This movie does not hold a candle to the original screen adaptation.

Taking into account Bruce Willis, the guy from Jurassic World and the plot, the only thing missing was a velociraptor. Bruce Willis was close though, with his bald head and mature face lines resembling a tortoise.

No version like the original one.

There are some cliches here. The leading cop character (Big Nick) is very good at his job (even going lawless because the job demands it), but his marriage and relations with children are way past being possible to repair. On the opposite side, Merriman is a typical bad guy, although one you root for - an ex-Marine with criminal history, set on completing a bank robbery job with his team. Although he feels best in shooting action, performed with military-like planning and precision, he also got brains, letting him think about strategy. Except, despite what he thinks, he's not the guy being on top of the main heist.

In this movie, you will find references to at least 2 other movies with cult-status. I don't know how much analogy you will find to Miami Vice (I did not find any), but you will recognize some parts from The Heat (with Robert deNiro, Val Kilmer and Al Pacino) - the shooting scene near the end. Obviously you will also find a reference to The Usual Suspects - of course I mean Donnie's character. I must say the tribute to those movies was solid, however there was no original contribution there.

Overall, a very entertaining movie, with some great moments. One of them is the non-verbal communication between Big Nick and Merriman at the shooting range - I have not seen this one before in any other movie and thought it was brilliant.

In summary, 8/10 is the highest rating I can give it - despite its lack of originality, this is a flick you may watch more than once and still enjoy it.

I have serious doubts whether AB had a chance to review the screenplay thoroughly. I mean there is rarely a movie so bad that I wonder - and advise - an actor/actress to avoid, but this is one of these... Unfortunately.

There is no way I can comment meaningfully on that movie. I do not believe I have to. The movie speaks for itself. It's just too ... weak in terms of screenplay, to use an euphemism.

A female organism "undergoes hormonal changes" and turns into a male. "Your first living hybrid and changes sex, how could you not notice?". "No more monsters". So a male creature is "a monster" to a female member of the company board.

"I am sorry, is rabbit considered a vegetable?" That's one memorable line. Oh wait, I forgot it after 2nd sentence. Perhaps it was the most memorable line. I don't remember it now anyway.

Normally I would not be a fan of movies that are romantic comedies about "gays" (hidden heterosexuals), and definitely not ones taking place in Texas.

Well, this movie is an exception. The plot has as much influence on this rating, as does playing their characters by William H. Macy, Ron Perlman, Steve Zahn, and Jeremy Northam.

Recall watching another "gay comedy" movie, "Birdcage"; situation was much different, yet no less entertaining.

I think "Happy, Texas" is at the same, highest quality movie level as "Birdcage" is, making you laugh, making you think, making you feel. Personally I am a heterosexual, but open-minded one, and I can put myself in shoes of most male-played characters and try to imagine what they feel. I deeply admire William H. Macy and Ron Perlman ("The Hellboy") for their willingness to extend their acting portfolio.

"There is an officer inside. What are we gonna do?" "Admire him, son. He's one big d*cked cop"

Not the kind of action you would expect in Texas. It's much more hilarious than watching ex-prez George Bush Jr fall down from a Segway. It takes a "special" talent to fall down from a Segway. It takes a genius to make a movie like this one.

I have watched lots of horror movies. In fact watching Poltergeist in 3rd grade of primary school left some years-long memories, causing fear of darkness and invisible evil. Later on, all the movies about zombies (including Shaun of The Dead, which of course is not a bona fide horror movie, but just a scary though absolutely brilliant comedy).

This one is a really good horror movie that does not involve gore seen in B and C class horror movies to amplify the scare effect. This movie does it the right way, the horror of extreme insanity of trixie victims is there without exposing viewers to too many unnecessary details. In real life, just a thought that your neighbor next-door could go nuts at one day, and start shooting everyone around without any rational reason, this is a thought that drives a lot of plot in The Crazies.

The real horror is being completely disconnected from the rest of society, being a subject of a "containment protocol", that you don't even know details of, all that happening because of an plane crash that was on route to the destination, where its lethal payload would be incinerated, but never made it due to an accident (pilot error? equipment error? who cares?), is terrifying. Suddenly the people who were supposed to defend you from enemy, become your personal enemy, and you don't have any idea why, or what they will do to you next.

It is the masterpiece of taking everything you thought you knew, you took for granted as known and friendly or at least predictable, and turning it into the unpredictable danger to your life and lives of the ones you care about.

I love the music score. The subtle themes that immediately recall pictures from the movie when I accidentally recall the music. The score that you hear in scenes leading to really scary events, the sound effects (scratching of the pitchfork on the floor), it's undeniably great and never failing to cause goosebumps.

Acting of 2 characters, David (the sheriff), and Russ (the deputy), deserve special mentioning. T.O. as the sheriff is awesome, I have not noticed many actors being able to convey the seriousness of situation by using their face muscles only. When T.O. has wrinkled forehead, everything is fine; when his forehead becomes flat, you know things are going to get very ugly, or close to ugly. Not many actors can do that, and T.O. is a better than good. He needs more movies to show his acting chops to be compared to my personal best of the best example of actors who only need mimics to set the mood - Jack Nicholson, who in Witches of Eastwick was absolutely brilliant, and no one, absolutely no one else, could play his role better. And of course, "The Shining", which I'm mentioning only to prove that I remember true classics. T.O. is getting there, but needs more movies, at least as ambitious as this one.

J.A. as Russ is awesome too. The way he finishes Peggy and Curt, and handing the gun to the sheriff, saying "just making sure", is about to become a classic, or it already is (it's soooo much memorable than a line "come with me if you want to live", and I don't want to mention the title of the 3 movies in the same series, from which this immediately forgettable line comes from). His acting, delivering his lines, given script for his character, is top-notch. So much, he deserves an Academy award. I am not trying to glorify any of his character's personal qualities, just precision in creating a psychologically consistent character, including remaining a "good guy" until the end (though with some carefully planned occasional jumping into the "crazies" behavior).

The 2 happy but deceitful songs enveloping the movie are increasing the contrast of the movie's plot and acting. And the tunes (like the one repeated over and over throughout the movie, and heard entirely when the credits are shown) are binding the unique musical score to the motion picture perfectly. Almost as much sense of horrifying mood is conveyed through the tunes as it is through the visuals.

I like this movie a lot, and it's one that can be watched over and over, which in my book, sets it in a "great flicks" category in the "horror movies" chapter. I am scared every time while watching it, but because I know what is going to happen, I don't jump in my seat, and it's also avoiding unnecessary visual gore.

Really good one.

I don't care if it's a popcorn movie by intention. It's still a darn good movie. One that I can watch many times.

"The characters are predictable". Someone took this as a negative, but the reviewer was quite far from proving his point. Well, in case of Rock Hound, you can't really say that, can you? And neither can you in case of Harry Stomper. Would you say that Colonel Willie Sharp was predictable? Or Dan Truman? Not so, sorry.

True, the story is a little far fetched. Then again no one remembers "Deep Impact", which was more or less about the same event, except written and performed so insignificantly, it felt into oblivion.

The jokes. The funny situations. The funny dialogs. "Gee, lady, I just came here to drill". "So did I!" This movie has the cinematographic equivalent of salt and pepper, and just about right mix of the laughing gas and tear gas.

For a long time I didn't know that, but I have been turning into a Michael Bay's fan. I saw him 2 times in this movie. He acted pretty well as a 2nd level supporting actor, but his real value is in directing and producing. I never expected Transformes to get my attention, and they did, which in itself is a big achievement.

"Secrets are not my concern. Keeping them, is."

"I can't guarantee the will not come after you. Your broadcast has weakened their regime" "I told them the Tams are no longer a threat. Damage done. They may listen. But I think they know I am no longer their man" "It doesn't bode especially well for you, letting us go and patching up our hurts. The next time I see you, I would like to kill you myself" "You won't. There is nothing left to see".

Do you think the assassin followed his own rules of "certain old civilized cultures, where men that failed as entirely as yourself, would throw themselves onto their swords"? Or did he find his own humanity, and only then used his own rules to justify his demise? Did he find his own will, or did he get stuck to his servant's duties and imposed code of honor, independent of universal human values?

I don't know the answer myself (because the answer is not clear about from the story). I am not even sure I want to know the real answer. But that's a question I am interested in hearing opinions about.

Hurt Locker is so much real, it is as shocking as Standard Operating Procedure, except it is about getting inches away of death every single hour, no one protecting you, because IEDs have no predetermined kill range.

anyone who has watched this movie, and watched Avatar, and still rooting for Avatar, is flying high in the sky with Lucy.

Avatar is an expensive piece of cr*p, produced by a 2nd grade director who was lucky to have succeeded with previous movies, but who has been riding on marketing more than art ever since.

every day i regret paying $15 for watching Avatar 3D IMAX.

Hurt Locker is a movie i would recommend only to a subset of my best friends, those who can handle it, and can differentiate between visually fattening eye candy and life.

the Academy may seem to be independent of the public opinion, but they are not impervious to be brainwashed or influenced by money, coming to them one way or another.

over 70 years ago, because tens of millions of people were attracted to visions of one of the most horrific genocidal lunatics in human history, it still does not imply he is worthy of remembering or recognizing. another lunatic attracted tens of millions to his megalomaniac production, and bets on populism to achieve undeserved honors.

popular opinion is an opinion of a mob. a mob is governed by a psychology of a mob. the psychology of a mob is by nature easily manipulated.

what Avatar does deserve, is a single nomination to FX category. nothing else.

since watching "Enter the Dragon", and Jet Lee's "The Shaolin Temple", this one shaped my imagination about martial arts movies and was very inspiring.

JCVD was the new hero, outside of being of the Asian origin ("Karate Kid" doesn't count as a serious contender in this category).

sure, the movie had a few bad scenes, but the choreography of fights was close to flawless.

i still think JVCD does not have the on-screen charisma or the skills of Bruce Lee. he can kick or show a dim-mak move, so what?

couldn't Bruce Lee do it? BL knew more than Wing Tsun, and he had exceeded his master, Yip Man.

i would have never considered her capable of learning accents so well. and definitely not an equal to Daniel Day-Lewis. he is fabulous, as usual.

i enjoyed appearance of Sophia Lauren, as movie aficionados can confirm.

i could not believe how good Nicole Kidman's performance was.

not to bypass Judi Dench's excellent performance. i do prefer her in James Bond series though, even if the main character is played by Daniel Craig (how about getting a single hairdresser on the set?).

overall the movie deserves recognition.

I was up to first 9 minutes of the movie.

Then I realized it would lower my intelligence more than months of drinking contests at the fraternity.

If I go to hell after death, it would be a cinema playing Final Destination 4, or any of its prequels. And I wouldn't be able to post a review of the movie, because it would be required to contain at least 10 lines.

What a horrible, horrible perspective.

By the way, the IMDb so called "coders", please look up the word "guidelines" in the dictionary. It doesn't mean MANDATORY, it means RECOMMENDED.

You are excused if you watched whole series of Final Destination movies though.

One of the non-significant Guy Ritchie's movies. You'll have to do better than that.

Very far from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, far from Snatch. Better than Revolver, which means it's not a complete failure.

Plot? Not bad. Humor? Below average of his movies. Characters? Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. are very good. I am glad the director finally decided to be more creative than just spending a life being a husband to a trophy wife (what a waste of talent; no offense, Madonna, you never had any talent, just overblown gender-related impulsiveness).

In my opinion this movie will never be THE Sherlock Holmes movie, like Peter Jackson's adaptation of Lord of the Rings captivated fans of the books.

Last minute: James Cameron nominated to Best Director?!?! How about best Best Marketing Person category for Golden Globes? I do pity anyone who thought that Avatar was worthy to be voted for in the top 250 movies of all time. You have been brainwashed real well.

Pity all of you who saw more in the movie than special effects. Avatar is like empty calories meal - you get satisfied, fat, and unhealthy. It brings NOTHING to the cinematography's history. James C. is a hack.

James C. is incapable of creating an original screenplay; he's good at exploiting of actual stories (Titanic, for example), but creating screenplays is his very weak side. He is not the "King of the World"; he is a B-quality director, not able to direct movies above B level. He just doesn't know what makes a classical movie, and yes, with my 20+ years experience as a movie watcher and real life experience, I could teach him a thing or two about directing timeless movies. Example: Peter Jackson and the trilogy of the Lord of the Rings - the original content (story by J.R.Tolkien, which I read when I was in 5th grade of elementary school), is a cinematographic experience 1,000s of times way above the over-hyped Avatar.

James C. stating he is the next Stanley Kubrick; he may as well declare himself the next Jesus Christ, and get the same level of credibility. He is a vain hack with overblown ego. Working with "yes" men has its disadvantages, measured in $ when the flick goes public.

I paid $13.5 for IMAX 3D version of the movie, plus another $13.5 for my company. I would like my money refunded since there was no artistic value, only marketing value that fell way under the created expectations. The movie industry will never refund your money for inadequate consumer experience.

This is the biggest problem with Hollywood these days - these leeches, considering self "kings of the world", will suck money out of you promising you everything including the kitchen sink, and grossly delivering .

Anyone voting for Avatar to let it be in 250 most popular movies is in my mind a person lacking ability of retrospective or simply immature enough to rate the movie where it belongs compared to other movies.

Poor victims of marketing machine and following the herd, a.k.a. the majority of society - the conformists, who would not dare to go to the movies to see this hallow flick, for the fear of being ostracized by friends and coworkers.

It's one of the movies I will not watch more than once. There are 100s of movies I can watch over and over again, but James C. just doesn't get the difference between the 2 kinds of movies. The difference it's pretty universal for all kind of audience. I could provide consulting services if they wouldn't hurt egos. I have watched 1,000s of movies in my life (25+ years), and I know what captivates the audience, and what makes the audience want to stare at a window for 2 hours without paying any admission money, and remaining with better experience than being a witness to as such painful and expensive experience as Avatar.

PS. Thank you for finding this review unuseful. You just proved to be oblivious to sci-fi movies history of the last 60+ years. If you think that JC invented something new with his "Acr*ptavar", you are the non-critical "i'll bend over and take it however you sell it to me" kind of reviewer.