ruffinelli_ro

The first installment in the Pirates of the Caribbean series, "The Curse of the Balck Pearl" is the best movie from the original trilogy. Since the creators consider "On Stranger Tides" a reboot, I won't mention it except for this time.

This film is about a blacksmith in some Caribbean island that tries to get his beloved one back from the pirates who kidnapped her. In the process he teams up with the eccentric but very likable Captain Jack Sparrow. We find out later that their stories are connected somehow to the mighty ship "The Black Pearl", that used to be led by Sparrow before Barbossa and the rest of the pirates took it over in a mutiny.

One of the best aspects of this movie is the plot, is not simple as you might expect from a Disney movie about pirates, it's really original, with the correct amount of adventure, romance, action and fun. I wasn't excited about this film when it came out, but when I caught on TV years after its original release, I was blown away. At this point, I watched all the movies from this series and liked all of them, but this is far superior than the other two.

It has some kind of magic, I was really excited when I was watching it for the first time, it made me feel something, and that is the reason why this one is better than the other two (They were not bad, but I think that they didn't match this one). It has many positive sides, like the outfits (I don't know if they were historically accurate, but they looked great nonetheless), the breathtaking scenarios, the dialog, and obviously, the actors.

Every actor was great. Bloom was convincing as the reluctant pirate, Keira was charming as Elizabeth, and she is beautiful, and the rest of the cast was great also. An special mention goes to both Rush and Depp who were extremely good in their roles as Barbossa and Sparrow respectively. Even if Rush plays the bad guy, is likable as a character because he was both funny and evil, and had a strong presence on screen. I won't even try to spend words to say what everyone thinks about Sparrow, nobody could possibly play that role like Depp.

But not everything is perfect in this movie. One of the negative aspects I found were some "funny" lines that felt out of place and little forced. On the other hand, it was a bit long for my taste. There are also some mistakes in the plot, but they weren't big thankfully.

I recommend it to everyone because is really entertaining , it has great actors in great roles, and it was like a real adventure. You won't be disappointed

The story of this movie is about a highly skilled man in the "art" of dream invasion. Somewhere in the future and with some unspecified technology, people can enter each others' dreams. The main character is a thief in those dreams but he needs a crew to do it. When the chance of going back home (He was extradited) in exchange for one job presented, he took it right away. The problem is that he is somewhat haunted by his past and that may interfere with his last assignment.

It is difficult to give this movie a bad rating because it is a great movie. Nonetheless, its current position as the number 4 of the "IMDb's top 250" seems exaggerated. I have no doubt that its position will drop down in a few weeks so I will give it a good score too.

The reason I believe its current position is undeserved is because of its many flaws, but we will get there later. First lets discuss its positive aspects. One of the good things it has is its plot. It is not very complicated, but not so average either. It develops itself in such smooth way that you feel involved. Obviously the performances of the actors help a lot. The cast was superb and everyone stands out. But I think Di Caprio deserves a special mention. He became a very talented actor. After some average movies around the year 2000, nobody would claim he was as good as he is now. He has done some excellent choices and now is considered as a top class actor.

The technical part of this film was great also. From the score to the photography everything was really good. The special effects were very well polished and very impressive. All those details contributed in the final product.

On the other hand, there are many negative things about it. For example, it has many contradictions. One of them is about the method of waking up. It is stated that people wake up when they fall or when they touch water, but in some part of the movie the characters were falling into the water but woke up when they touched it (They were falling first, so they should have been already up right?).

Other example would be the "dying" rule. If you die in a dream you wake up, except for the final job. Otherwise it wouldn't be dramatic right? It seems like the rules apply only when it's convenient, and I didn't like that. The last thing that I didn't enjoyed was its length. Some scenes were useless to me, specially the ones in the beginning.

To finish this review I will recommend this title since it is very entertaining despite its flaws. It has some great scenes with some great actors and everyone will enjoy it.

This film is about three bandits in the hunt of a map that supposedly leads to a treasure. But they are not alone and all of them have hidden agendas too.

It is certain that this movie is not popular in occidental countries. I believe that I'm the only one who knows about it in my own country. But if you get the chance to see it, then don't hesitate. I guarantee that you will enjoy it at least. Now lets move onto the review part.

Many people give this action packed film good scores here, but often complain about the lack of story or that the plot is weak. I believe that this movie has a very interesting story with many elements and twists, so it can't be categorize as weak for me. The characters were well written (Except maybe for role of "the good") and very well portrayed by the actors, specially the bad and the weird who were very believable and interesting. The scenes were outstanding with so much action (But not in the "nonsense action" style) and with the correct amount of quirky dialog and depth. The photography was incredible also, some landscape shots were really great and finally, the costumes were good as well.

On the other hand, this film is not perfect and it has some flaws. The first thing that comes to my mind is the "the good" character. He didn't felt authentic and had very little depth. It is the complete opposite from Clint's character in "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly", which is obviously one of the films that TGTBATW wanted to pay homage to.

To sum it up, this film is rare in the good sense. Almost everyone will enjoy it, and for that reason it shouldn't be missed.

Based on a true case, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is about a priest being accused of negligence when he tried to perform an exorcism on the title character but she dies.

I know that movie trailers must be entertaining and appealing so the audience will go to the theaters. But nowadays, those trailers show all the best stuff in the movies and leave nothing but the long boring scenes for the actual movie. The trailer for this movie was entertaining but contained all "possesed" scenes and left a long, tedious and boring trial that lasted 110 minutes. It was supposed to be a horror movie not a court room drama.

Many people seem to like this film despite its obvious flaws and that is OK, but this movie is not scary by any means. The script was bland, the acting was bad. Carpenter was the only decent actress in this film and she did a good job. It's a shame that the movie went nowhere so she ended up being overshadowed by this awful film.

The plot was terrible, I mean, why would you accuse a priest of medical negligence when there was a doctor present in the exorcism? That was just stupid. And the final "veredict" was like a kick on the throat. Many mainstream films feel the "need" to have happy endings, which I think is wrong but acceptable. This film forced that somewhat happy ending and the whole experience just became worse.

If you are a horror fan do not watch this movie. Go watch something else.

The third installment in the Shrek series is about the duties of Shrek and Fiona as prince and princes. The king died and Shrek must take his place. Obviusly, he doesn't want to do so. His only hope is to find the next relative in the line of the throne and convince him of becoming the king so he and Fiona would live happily in their swamp.

I don't know if it's just me or this movie is an entire (and cheap) rip-off of the first one. I mean both movies had Shrek reluctantly taking a trip to find someone so he could live peacefully in his swamp. The producers, directors were too lazy to make a "new" Shrek movie, but they had to do so in order to make more profits of this franchise so they took the first one, added a few characters (with awful character development) and this film was the result. The first one was good, the second wasn't that good but still was worth watching but this one is just bad.

There weren't enough funny moments and those moments weren't funny enough to make this movie good. I don't recommend this film.

This film is about a guy who seduces women in order to live from them. He was a parasite who didn't even had a job in his whole life. I think that the producers didn't take advantage of ideas like these (Even if there was too little to take advantage in the first place).

A friend of mine rented it and told me that this was a comedy. Even in this site is advertised as a "sex comedy". The result was the most insipid movie in the history of film making. But even if it was a drama, it would have been awful too. It wasn't focused, there weren't any concrete ideas in this film and painfully lacks direction. I was bored to tears right pass the middle. The movie went nowhere and it's a shame because it had potential to be a decent comedy, but the directors and producers didn't have a clue of what they were trying to make.

The acting was bad, but the awful script and direction were the real trouble here, so I will be a little less hard about the actors and actresses. What is intolerable is the way they portrayed women. This was the most sexist movie I've ever seen by far. It was actually far worse than Iron Man, which I think had the first place in objectifying women before I saw this one. Some of the characters were successful women with good jobs, lots of money, pretty houses, etc. and you might think that they are strong, independent and self confident enough to be smart when it comes to relationships. The fact is that this movie shows us those women as miserable persons that had such a low self esteem and self respect to fall for the (unlikeable) protagonist of this film. They support Kutcher's character beyond reason, even if he violated their thrust. I know that there dumb people in the world, but this was too much.

This film would receive a lot more attention for its offensive style towards women if it wasn't incredibly boring. The fact that it is almost unwatchable is enough to make it a disposable film. The final "redemption" was poor too. Overall, this film led to one question: why would a normal person wear suspenders all the time?. Stay away at all cost.

Citizen Kane is about the life of a notorious media mogul. Based on the life of an actual person, this film takes us through his life as he finds love, power,etc. Considered as one of the best motion pictures of all time and granted the tittle of technically brilliant.

To me this film was bad. It might have been brilliant in terms of art, direction and on a technical level but, all of those aspects make a movie great? The answer is no. I think most people pretend to like this film just because is supposed to be great. Don't get me wrong, I think I can appreciate its achievement in the aspects I mentioned above, but the merits of this self-indulgent film end there. It was really boring, the plot was just average and the acting was terrible. I really hated Kane's wife. Comingore was a lousy actress, her accent was bad and all the emphasis she put when her character asked questions was like torture.

As I said before, this movie is so self-indulgent that it almost feels like Welles knew beforehand all the praise he would receive in the future. What I can't believe is that this film is often compared to Casablanca (Well, compete would be more accurate) when people talk about classics. That was a great movie and there's no way this film can compete with it.

I don't recommend this title to anyone, unless you claim to be a film lover. In that case you should see it just because it is "the best movie of all times". You will judge if that is correct or not after you saw it.

This movie is about a man who finds cash in a suitcase after a drug deal went awry. But the villain (Who has nothing to do with the drug dealers) wants the cash too, so he started chasing our main character.

That didn't feel like a great plot to me. It was so average. I respect people who love this movie, but calling it a "masterpiece" is just wrong. It was entertaining but it wasn't great. The acting wasn't perfect. I think Bardem did good, but most of the praise he has been receiving is undeserved. Sure, he played a good character and did a good job, but I never ran out of breath when he was on screen like some people told me. The others were just OK. Nothing really memorable. Plenty of random characters were introduced with no apparent reason, like Woody. Jones wasn't good also.

Overall it was an interesting film. But the ending is important too and the directors forgot about it. I'm not giving it away, but I will say that it was unnecessary to me. If this movie ended 10 minutes before, it might have been a little better.

I don't really remember the first time I watched this movie. It was many years ago, but I do recall that I loved it. I don't know if this a very realistic movie, but it certainly feels like it is.

The story centers around a young boy from a favela called Cidade de Deus. We follow the growth of the main character as well as other really interesting ones. This boy wanted to become a photographer and leave the extremely poor conditions in which they live in. As the character meets more people he ended up in the middle of a drug war. There is of course the love interest, which feels very genuine.

The plot is very good. The script was great as the acting was. These Brazilian actors enjoy more renown in their country, but even if you don't recognize any of them, their performance will be remembered many years from now. I really liked this movie and I think that this is one of the few titles that actually deserves its IMDb rating.

You will definitely enjoy this film since it is very entertaining. Many people will love it.

I wasn't expecting anything from this movie. I rented it almost reluctantly when there was nothing else in the store. One friend even told me that this was just OK, so I was a bit hesitant. In the end, it turned out as a great movie. I liked it from beginning to end.

The story is about two guys who wake in an old and very disgusting bathroom. During the movie we see why they end up in there.

This is not a horror movie by any means. It is a suspense thriller. I wasn't scared once during the whole movie, I was amused instead. Some people complained about the lack of scary scenes, but this movie didn't use the same old and cheap tricks to keep the audience in suspense. The plot was brilliant and it was developed in a good way so the viewer might be interested. The script was good as well. Those elements were very well polished, even more than other high budget films.

The acting contributed a lot even if it wasn't perfect. There weren't any super famous actor, and that is exactly what helped this film the most. We were able to relate to the characters because of that. Another good thing I found was its length. I don't particularly love very long movies. This one had the perfect runtime for me.

The negative aspect is that there are many sequels. this should have been the only movie in the whole series, but the greed of its producers, etc. made them ruined this saga (Which should have never been a saga in the first place). I liked this one, so I just ignore the rest (I was excited about the second installment at first though).

To finish my review, I recommend this title. Almost any person might like it. There are some who felt it wasn't plausible though. They complained about certain aspects that weren't totally realistic. This is a movie people, so it shouldn't be too realistic.

Scrubs is about the problems that some doctors have to face in the surreal Sacred Heart Hospital. It might not be the greatest plot, but it works just fine for this show. To me, the show it's really interesting and funny.

JD is one of the main characters. He is the one that narrates the adventures of the rest of the cast as well as his own (In a few episodes he doesn't narrate tough). Braff (JD) plays the good/naive/silly guy, and does that pretty well. You can't help but to feel sympathetic for him. The rest of the actors are great also. McGinley plays a sarcastic doctor. The role fits him very well, it is almost as it was custom-made specially for him. The rest is good also.

I haven't seen all episodes, but I was able to follow the show through many seasons. That is because the problems presented in each episode are solved within a few installments (My kind of show).

Scrubs is definitely one of my favorite shows of all time. I think its worth watching. Many people might like it as I do.

I've watched this film because a friend of mine suggested it. I was doubtful at first since I've heard very little about this movie and Travolta was in it (Much of his work is expendable). Luckily, this turned out as a good movie. It was entertaining from beginning to end.

This is the story of the disappearance of a legendary Sargent (Jackson) and what is done in order to find the truth about what happened. There were so many twists in this film that make it leave a lot of holes. It was supposed to confuse you, but there wasn't a reason to leave the movie inconclusive.

The acting was OK. Sam Jackson is always good, but he acted in so many movies that it feels like he is not trying to hard anymore. Travolta was good also. The rest of the cast is average.

Overall, this is a good movie. It is entertaining, which in the end, is the objective. It successfully creates suspense. I give it seven stars, but this film is not for everybody.

When you think about "sandbox" games, GTA always comes first. This series had become one of the greatest and well renown video games of the planet. It provides a really immersing gaming experience, and adds new features every now and then making this game really long and difficult to beat, thus not making it tiring.

I've played the two previous titles (Vice City and GTA 3) and became a big fan of this series. When San Andreas came out I expected just more of the same. I was wrong. This game has many more features than its predecessors. I has a RPG touch by adding the player's statistics, which you must take care in order to beat the game. The map is now divided in three big cities, a countryside, a desert and some other areas (This is not necessarily a good thing. For instance, I've been only a few times in the desert and in the countryside). Every little building in every city look good, even if the graphics are not the best in the market. The cities are incredible, they feel like real cities. The A.I. is good also, although there some times in which the enemies or allies were stupid. And the fun and entertainment from the previous games are improved in this one. You can do almost everything (Including dancing, eating, which is necessary, playing video games, train drive mission, having several girlfriends, etc. with most of the side stuff really pointless, but thankfully, they are side stuff so you don't have to do them if don't want to).

The dialog is really good for me, as the voice acting was. It was really funny at times and it successfully portrayed the period of time in which this title takes place. The plot was one of the major flaws I found in the game. It is a decent story, but in another context. I mean, why on earth the player would feel blackmailed by the two cops? They try to blame him for the murder of a cop, but isn't CJ a reckless driver, a mass murderer thug, menace to society, armed robber and a lot of bad stuff too? Why would he care about that? He can just steal a car and run over those cops, but that way the game would be a lot less interesting, right? I think they could do better than that. The story might have been a little better. Those details contribute a lot in the experience.

At first it might seen like there is an overwhelming number of things you must do in order to beat the game, specially if you've never played GTA before. But as you progress you'll know exactly what to do. In the end, it is a very satisfying game. I definitely recommend this title.

I am a big fan of the original Half Life. I've beaten the game several times. It is one of my personal favorites. Now its sequels (Half Life 2, EP.1 and EP.2) are included among my favorite titles.

I really liked the episodes as well. They were too short though. The creators announced that in fact the three episodes (With the third one not released at this point) are just one long game. Of course that brings many negative aspects. For instance if you want to play all three of them, you may want to install them simultaneously, resulting in some big portion of your memory being occupied. But there will be plenty of time to talk about these games. Let's focus on this title for now.

This sequel had a lot of work. It had to surpass the original game. Half Life was a unique game. It has an amazing story, great characters, and was really entertaining. It also had a certain kind of "magic". It became a classic almost instantly. Its second installment kept a lot of the great details that made the original so good and improved them with other features that helped to create an immersing gaming experience. Half Life 2 is as good as the original.

The old characters returned, but with better skins. Some new and interesting characters are introduced. There new and cool enemies (Whose A.I. is good). The graphic detail is incredible. The water effect is by far the best I've ever seen in a game. They took a lot of time polishing this features and it shows. The only negative thing I can say is that this title is shorter than the original.

The plot is great also. It is almost too linear though. We now follow the adventure several years after the events of the first game. The population is being enslaved and is our duty to help them before annihilation. To make the game even more appealing, the creators added the spectacular gravity gun, which is an extraordinary weapon (Well, not a weapon per se). It has the power to lift heavy objects and neutralize their weight. This weapon is almost as important as the characters. We wouldn't be able to solve some of the most interesting physics puzzles without it, and is extremely fun to use. And I almost forgot, the physics are great.

It was extremely difficult to reach the first Half Life game in terms of quality, but I think that this game pulled it off. It has that certain "magic" also. And is highly enjoyable. I recommend this title. It might not disappoint anyone.

The story of two moles. One in the mob and he other in the police. "The Departed" is a great movie with really great characters. At first, they might seem a too many, at least for me, but in the end you know that they all were important somehow.

The acting was great. Nicholson is one terrific actor, he is always great in his movies. Damon is pretty good as well. But DiCaprio really surprised me. He turned into a great actor as well. I now consider him as a really serious actor with more potential than I originally thought he had. For instance, he was in Titanic. But that's just old news.

The plot was really well polished. I think it was smart enough to make this film a good title. And just like the story, the script helped a lot. But considering that many things were ad-libbed, the price goes for the actors.

In the end I recommend this movie. It might enjoyable for everybody. Even if this is not the "original" movie. I haven't seen the original film "Mou Gaan Dou" though, but now I'm definitely want to watch it.

Put De Niro and Al Pacino together in a movie (Well, actually acting together since there weren't any scenes like that in "The Godfather: Part 2") and it will definitely be a great movie. For me it wasn't the case.

I don't know where all this praise about this film come. It is just a average good guy/bad guy movie. The plot isn't incredible. The supposedly "greatest action sequence in the history of movies" wasn't that good also. The script was so ordinary and neither Pacino nor De Niro were great in their roles. Their characters weren't really memorable, but the average performances contributed a lot. I know they could do so much better. They are two of the greatest actors of all time for me. I'm still waiting for an excellent movie with them in it.

Still it is a watchable movie. Perhaps it gets better the second time. I have seen it just once, so I don't know about that, but I might actually give it a try.

The film follows the story of Yuri, a anonymous person turned into a successful arms dealer. He participated in some of the most iconic moments of the past few years (The cold war, third world countries oppression wars, etc.), selling guns to all parties, it didn't matter if they were his friends enemies or allies. The money was the only thing that matters.

Yuri was a remorseless, but successful merchant. When it came down to business, he was certainly good. But his successful career took tolls on his family. We see that and many other events in Yuri's life through Nick's narration.

The story was really good for me. The acting too. It was a smart move to hire Nick for this movie, and Jared, Hawke and Bridget were pretty good as well. On the other hand, the script felt a little tacky for me, but it was good. I felt entertained during the whole movie. There were plenty of good scenes, and overall the movie was very amusing.

I respect Cage a lot, but he played some really bad roles in the past few years. Nowadays it seems like he tries to be part of bad movies. This is the exception (National Treasure was good also).

This movie might not be the most accurate motion picture in terms of reality (There aren't Interpol agents that travel in third world countries to seek relative small arms dealers, etc.), but as entertainment, it was great.

I recommend this film because of its good storytelling, good actors and pretty decent plot.

I am not a big fan of westerns. The good guys were plain old good guys and the bad ones were bad just for the sake of being evil. That is precisely what the "spagheti western" genre is against. I feel more involved in a story if either the main character or one of the supporting roles is authentic (Of course, it will be better if both are). That's why I like most of Leone's work.

This case is not the exception. The characters were really great. I think that the great actors were an excellent choice. The plot was complicated and smart (Which I look for in a movie). The script was pretty good. The photography was great also, even for a movie this old.

Despite its long runtime (I'm not precisely a big fan of long movies), it felt all well focused. The plot unraveled in a really interesting way until we see one of the most tense scenes in westerns (The climax of this film).

Overall, this film is definitely a masterpiece. It's one of those movies that let you thinking about them long after the credits rolled. If you liked this title, then you should check out other Leone's films.

Zombieland started as good movie. I like zombie related stuff, so I wanted to watch this film. The first scene was interesting, but the main character was stereotyped and not so funny. The set of rules were some kind of original but got tiring eventually, just like the excessive voice-over. In the end, this movie turned out average.

The acting was not so good. Woody is not the best actor of his generation precisely, but he isn't the worst either. And he showed us just that. He is somewhat good. I think his character was funny in some scenes though. The rest of the cast was the problem. They just weren't memorable. Perhaps this has to do with the terrible script.

I won't remember about this film in a few years because it provided me with just plain entertainment. I don't know yet whether to recommend this title or not. It was a little amusing, just not memorable.

I went to the theaters with some friends to see this film. One of them wanted to watch the movie in 3D. I knew it was a bad idea considering that Avatar turned out the same way with or without the glasses. Yes, I know that the whole 3D experience is used to prevent piracy and make theaters more appealing to people. But now it is just a shameful method to charge more. In reality, I wouldn't feel so upset to pay more if both Avatar and Clash of the Titans were actually 3D movies, but they weren't. There were no differences when I took off those annoying glasses. It might work with other movies but it felt like a rip-off.

Now, onto the movie. It haven't watched the original movie, but I'm familiar with Greek mythology. I know that it is not possible to put every detail in a movie, so I expected a lot of differences between the actual stories and this movie. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but in this case the plot was not able to stand for itself. The movie turned out to be very weak. It was mostly consisting in some not so well done action sequences between some of the most forgettable characters in the world. Well, that is mostly due the lack of competent actors. If you ask me about this movie in the future, I will most certainly forget it before I'm able to give you an answer.

The script didn't help either. In fact it made this whole experience worst. When some characters were in Medusa's temple. the main character said: "Let's kill that b*tch". It felt like a kick in the throat. I know that they weren't supposed to speak ancient Greek, but come on.

It's a shame that this the first time that Ralph and Liam got together since the great "Schindler's List". They weren't really good in this one.

It is certainly hard to find mainstream movies with some depth or with some little accuracy regarding the period of time they're trying to portrait. I think that if a film takes place in japan (And it's not made there), the actor should try to speak Japanese at least. But the target audience is too dumb and lazy to even read subtitles.

This is another mindless mainstream film. Some might love it, but I don't care for it.

I consider Eastwood as a top class actor and director. But even he had made some mistakes. Blood Work and this film are two of them.

The Unforgiven is really bad directed, which is a surprise because Clint directed it himself and he has done some decent direction work. The plot was below average. Its premise was overused all over the years. The main character reluctantly takes on last job routine is really tiring, and it surprised me that Eastwood used it.

As for the acting, it wasn't terrible but still felt forgettable. This is not by any means, a western classic. It is one of the most overrated western films. In the end it gave you nothing to think about. Even the friendship between Clint and Freeman was a little shallow. It had some moments though, but overall it was a bad movie.

If you're into western I would recommend any other films. But the top are the last two in "The dollars trilogy", "Duck, you sucker" which is not a pure western, "Once upon a time in the west" or even "Bronco Billy".

I can't think of movie that's more unfunny than this one, not even dramas. It was just plain old bad.

Some friends, consider this film as a classic in the comedy genre. I personally don't understand that decision. I couldn't laugh once. The acting was bad, but I will be a little less hard on that issue since this is a low budget movie. But, one thing you can do without counting on some big money, is actually work on the script. It was so uninteresting and it didn't even had a direction that it almost hurts.

To finish my review, I will say that this another overrated movie from the past few years. Avoid it if you you're not that into very shallow humor.

Everybody debates whether this movie makes sense or not. But, if the movie does make sense, is it automatically good? Well, the answer is no.

I think this movie is about some girl that wanted to become an actress. Later she met other girl in some random set and falls for her. But when the girl got the part, and cheated on her, the main character enraged with jealousy and envy hired a hit-man. She then felt guilty of her girlfriend's death, so she started dreaming a different and somewhat happier development of events.

Even if this was supposed to be a girl's dream sequence or something completely different, I felt it was a boring movie. The way the plot is being presented didn't work for me. But don't get me wrong, I love clever movies with smart plots and non conventional characters. On the other hand the use of a "complicated" plot presented in a confusing way in this case, seemed just like a desperate attempt to make the movie look smart. This film was even more presumptuous than Blue velvet, which I think was another bad film that tried too hard to become a transgressor of movie standards.

I recommended this film before I even saw it, just because it has a high spot on IMDb's top 250. I will never do that again.

This was a decent concert with some random stuff in the middle. It is hardly a movie. Nonetheles, I think that they are the greatest band on earth, and almost any of their concerts are good.

I have discovered Led Zeppelin not so many years ago, because I'm still young. But that didn't "cut" my perception of them. This comment is mostly about the band and not so much about this "movie".

In my opinion, they raised the bar too high for rock bands and that is quite an achievement. With unforgettable songs, they proved that creativity outruns mediocrity. You might never find a band that is as influential as this one, and certainly not as great.

As for the movie, I particularly don't care much about their "dream sequences". Perhaps if I lived in that era, I would have been able to get it, but in my case they are just some random stuff that don't contribute in any way to this concert. In fact, it might worked out better if they just released as documentary than as a film.

Depp might be one terrific actor. But not all of his movies would turn out great because of that. This is a clear example of that.

I didn't even watched until the end. It was terribly boring. There weren't action sequences. The acting was bad, even Depp was lousy. I mean, he only acted as the bad guy/smart villain/hero and that was pretty awful. Bale was OK I supposed. He isn't a terrific actor but he certainly shows effort. But I blame all that on the awful script. Not to mention that was poorly directed.

The plot was really bad, and it developed in such a slow-paced form that bored me to tears. It was so supposed to be about bank robberies, but I only saw two of them, and they were both uninteresting. The dialog was bad as well. I didn't feel the connection between characters, so right past the middle I turned the DVD player off and began doing something else.

The other aspect that I disagree with is the glorifying of Dillinger. He was depicted almost as a hero, and he was nothing but a criminal. That was a bad call if you ask me.

I don't know if the ending fixed the terrible first hour and a half. But if the ending is the only good thing, I prefer to watch something else.