Lomedin

Vampires have become ridiculous. The "twilight" vampire, a term honoring that laughable saga made for shallow teenagers, permeates the entertainment industry, and it's hard to find one of these creatures not affected by it.

Luckily, we have films like this Swedish piece; full of little details which give credibility and overall "coolness" to production, it dwells in dark areas of the mind, away from the corny and cheesy spotlights of pre-pubescent fanbases.

It is not in-your-face explicit, while being more clear and straight than others, perhaps because of that.

Tired of sissy vampires and their ridiculous stories? Detox with this great movie.

(Oh, I don't think the English version was bad, but the original is clearly superior)

I was excited to see Moore, from the beginning, aggressively tackling the corrupted American system. Even when The United States were colonized by European people with little scrupulous and a lot of bloodlust and greed, the founding fathers had some good ideas about how to do things properly, and it'd be great to have them back instead of having this travesty of political and social system that is North America nowadays.

Unfortunately, not far into his "invasion", Moore disappoints extremely with his praise of the menu served in the French school. How in the world can a meal containing dairy, and in such ridiculous high amounts, be something to admire?? I'm just not talking here about what the dairy industry does to non-human animals, not even what it does to the environment, but how unhealthy is in any diet. Giving that amount of cheese and other dairy products systematically, in a daily basis, to children should be a crime. But, hey, it is not only the American FDA that is corrupted to the core, but also your average officially approved nutritionist anywhere in the world. After all, the dairy industry is powerful everywhere. Their propaganda doesn't know of cultural barriers or languages. Perhaps Moore should get his hands dirty with that issue, affecting millions all over the world, instead of saying that the menu of that French school is brilliant. Hm, maybe it doesn't suit him to do that, for personal reasons.

Anyway, I'm not one of those haters from Hollywood who wants Moore dead. I'm also not one of those trendy revolutionaries who think that Moore is the saviour of the world. I'm only an informed citizen as far as certain issues go (nutrition and health, in this instance).

Alas, after that incident, I watched the rest of the 2 hours documentary with a bit of suspicion, and opinion I read years ago about Moore manipulating facts came to mind.

In any case, the film is interesting and, somehow, inspiring, even when it only takes the real good stuff into account (Moore confesses this at the beginning), and doesn't really look at the big picture.

Anyhow, it'd be indeed great to have some (or all) of the ideas implemented in most countries, not only U.S.A. Without the lactose, please.

When I saw Justin Bieber's face first thing into the movie, I was afraid that all the bad comments about it were true. Fortunately, it was just one of the many little cameos. Then, straight comes Penelope Cruz, and she stayed during the whole movie. However, this over-glorified actress/celebrity doesn't damage the film too much, and she becomes bearable once you get into it.

For the rest, I was not once disappointed or bored during the hour and forty minutes I well spent watching this, an excellent satire of social standards and the superficiality and stupidity of the world we live in.

I love how it makes fun of the laughable fashion industry and its ridiculousness, similarly to "Bruno", although the latter wins if only because real models and designers (what fancy words for such talentless people) prove themselves how dumb they are. That tiny phone ipadwhatever joke, BRILLIANT! I've thought so many times that people will end up using something as big as their heads just to be "cool".

The whole ridiculing of the hipster-slash-trendy world, so close to fashion, is also brilliant. Take that "All" person, portraying how people are forced to accept transsexuals, pansexuals, and other -sexuals just because you must do it, without having the right to ask for explanations, particularly in the world of being cool and modern, where is so trendy to accept all forms of sexuality (and everything else!) regardless the little understanding of them or even real acceptance ("I really hate you guys, I'm so happy you are here", hahaha). And so, you will be stared down until you admit that any and A/all sexuality is good, destroying personal opinion in the process, just to make them feel better with themselves ("All is done here").

Stiller and Wilson shine again with this big joke, and the amazing Ferrell is WOW! It seems to be the reality check of the movie, and I love how he screams truths about the stupidity of fashion. Even that kid who looks like Beakman junior does a good job.

Oh, a note: the fact that you only laughed 5 times during the whole movie doesn't make it not funny. Your opinion is still that, a subjective vision, not an undeniable truth, pillar of all objective reality. Don't be so darn egotistic.

Once again, deciding to ignore people's reviews on IMDb paid off and gave me the chance to witness a funny expression of the idiocy of reality with all its silly big little made up worlds. Now go tweet that you Instagramed a picture of your new man bun fitting your manicured big hobo beard. Go on, faecebook it with your laptop size phone!

Being a fan of found footage, I was excited to hear about this. Man, was I disappointed.

First of all, the stories involved to present the episodes are utterly rubbish, clichéd, written by talentless and uninspired people. Secondly, the people involved in presenting the script (it'd be an insult to real actors and actresses to call them anything else) do a job beyond terrible in their attempt to give any credibility.

Furthermore, the special effects are virtually non-existent; noise, mostly, some recycle grunts and growls which, honestly, are laughable at times. The visual effects are found in the form of half of a second blurry shapes or extremely poor CGI of something that could be anything, so undefined they are (and I suspect is due to the fact that they are bad effects, not an effort to make everything more mysterious).

I didn't find this scary at all, but quite boring. It is pretty simple: the show contains no visual stimuli which could create fear, and the noises are ridiculous, as I previously said. Perhaps little children could get scared. The atmosphere and/or psychological factor are both nonexistent.

Finally, the real mystery and scary thing here is how in the world this trash can have a score of more than 6, and even individuals giving it a 10!!!! Seriously, the top score! They are comparing this show to the best possible works of art ever created for both the big and little screens. Although considering certain comments such as "the acting isn't always great" or "this show blew me away", we seem to see what standards viewers relay on. Coming back to "the acting isn't always great"... Well, no kidding! To say that the acting isn't always great is to claim that a pile of manure isn't always a divine vision.

It is pitiful that Animal Planet created and aired this, and even worse that they didn't even bother with a proper budget (any!), at least average actor/actresses or interesting plots.

If I have the strength, I'll continue to watch pass the couple of eps that I suffered, since perhaps the show could get better (wouldn't be difficult!), and in the hope that people's opinions still have a minimum of decency left.

We have here yet another pandemic scenario, this time narrated from a somehow different point of view.

The movie itself is not bad: the acting is OK, the story is alright... That said, I don't find that it builds up tension enough, and the pace is too slow for my taste. There's not much happening.

The female characters are portrayed as weak and victims; women might not have the overall physical strength of men, but creating a strong female character would have been interesting.

The ending is kind of open for a sequel, although I hope they decide to focus their efforts on something else.

Then we have the use of expressions like "they are not animals!", "that's inhumane"... Firstly, humans are animals. Secondly, if we understand that you are differentiating between non-human and human animals, are you implying that it is OK to treat other species inhumanely? Those expressions are, nevertheless, not only a sign of speciesm, but clear evidence of how much suffering we inflict on non-human animals, since they become a measure for what it shouldn't be tolerated. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that most of you don't care about this, since the vast majority is accomplice to the massacre. And, well, this is an opinion about reality, and who cares about that when you can discuss fiction, right?

Alas, watchable movie, but you can skip it and will miss nothing.

...right? I have to like clichéd, predictable movies targeted for that niche audience of female rebel wannabes and male who likes it dirty but still want to keep a corny soft spot...

So I am a hater because I don't find De Niro particularly funny, even if he's a good actor. I am a hater because I know how this movie ends within 15 minutes into it, once we are presented with the superficial and snobbish soon-to-be bride and her counterpart the rebel and independent chic who knows the groom from old days, when this poor actor, who is supposed to be somehow the main character but next to De Niro looks like a muppet, was still a dreamer who wanted to roam the world looking for adventures, something the grandpa doesn't take long to remind us within that first quarter of an hour, before the kid was pushed by his father and high class society to follow a more "down to Earth" career. It also doesn't take long for the alternative and open-minded chic to meet again this awesome boy now turned a leashed boyfriend, just when they are about to start their trip... Well, there you have it; the predictable ending is served.

And so I am a hater because I don't find the supposedly dirty jokes funny, but by-the-book "Along came Polly" humor copycats (at least I find Ben Stiller funny, as well as a competent actor).

Alas, this movie is unbearable, clichéd to the limit, and no amount of R-rated simple and easy jokes can change the fact of its null originality. Yet another run-of-the mill romantic "comedy" trying to be something that is not.

It's a pity that De Niro is recruited for these movies in shallow roles with the kind of acting that is not his forte. It is clear, though, that he was cast for this trash as bait.

Yeah, I am a hater; it's what hateful movies breed.

If you want well made R-rated humour with a pinch of real romance without being cheesy, go watch "Deadpool". Although that might be too much for female rebel wannabes and their suffering boyfriends...

I kind of like found footage movies. Granted, any idiot with a bad quality camera (and there are plenty of both) can release more trash to the world, and so the genre is full of rubbish, although, let's be honest, movies with ridiculous high budgets are also trash, mostly. Anyway, I've followed the VHS series and the franchise just gets worse with every new movie. The first VHS back in 2012 was some sort of new concept, and it was somehow interesting. The second followed the same guidelines, although it was worse than its predecessor, in all aspects. Some stories were laughable and the CGI was going down. Viral is just too bad. The acting is poor beyond words, particularly in the first/main plot (that girl, Iris, jeeeesus. Go back to acting school, will ya?), the CGI is shareware quality and the story is way too stupid. Likewise, the magician part is a show of (bad) amateur acting and it fails in the same points as the main one, basically. I'd say that the Spanish part is actually not bad, original and interesting enough, plus the acting is OK (in all fairness, both the actress and actor worked in a good few movies before). This Spanish section is the only reason why this is getting 2 stars rather than 1. Still, it doesn't redeem the rest of Viral; it'd have been better off as a separate short movie rather than being included here. The skaters' story is not 100% bad, but it is too long for its repetitiveness and the boys are annoying. The rest of the movie is pure garbage.

This is not even found footage anymore. That feeling is all but gone, even when they follow the "homemade" concept in most of the movie.

Another particularity is that, even though the sexual innuendo is still present, it has been dramatically reduced and, contrary to the nudity festival that were the previous films, there're no really breasts, vaginas or penises in the movie. Not saying that this is bad, or good, simply stating a fact.

Overall, a completely missable movie, even if you liked the previous ones.

Oh, and using Beethoven's 9th Symphony doesn't make it any better.

The premise of a mockumentary about vampires living together in a home in an urban environment is not new: the Belgian "Vampires" presented this to us back in 2010, also from a, somehow, humorous perspective.

However, I found this 2014 movie funnier and, overall, better (from a comical P.O.V., at least). It has got nice special effects, used mostly for humorous purposes, and the actors speak English with a funny east-European accent, something "Vampires" missed (well, I guess, since they spoke French and all vampires seemed native...).

So, "What We Do in the Shadows" is definitely not 100% original, but it contains more physical humour, more goofiness and overall more laughs than the 2010 release. And comedy is all this movie seems to aim for; mission accomplished!

Starting as some sort of wacky comedy, the movie gets a bit dull for about 30 or 40 minutes, catching interest once again and more or less staying like that until the DEPRESSING ending. Sorry, I don't mean to give away any spoilers, but people should know that, regardless the humour in the movie, the ending is depressing. Until the end, it is one of those movies that combine comedy, drama, thrill and a few other genres.

It reminds me a bit of "Platillos Volantes", particularly the end (which I didn't find so depressing in the Spanish film). And, well, the big difference of "P.V." being based on actual real events.

A watchable movie, although nothing really special about it (the plot itself is somehow original, but there's not so much brilliance once it is put into action).

This movie represents what is wrong with the whole hipster scene. It's the type of movie that those people visiting modern "art" exhibitions and wearing fur consider so intellectual and great.

"Hey, let's have little dialogue, shake the cam and sacrifice some flora and fauna for the sake of a stupid movie, we will have all the trendy bunch praising us".

No.

And, guess what, I couldn't care less about your opinion, so go crying to your elite friends about it. You'll feel better after discussing it over some expensive wine.

I hate superhero movies. I used to liked them, until I outgrown them or, maybe, until they started to become a show of cheesy characters in some sort of idiotic pose trying to spout cool sentences as empty as their heads. A sign of what is also going outside the big screen. The new Spiderman, Thor, Batman vs Superman, The Avengers, Iron Man, X-Men Days of the Future Past (which ruined the memory of the first X-Men comic I ever read, by the way) and, in general, every single DC and Marvel production (particularly the latter, banging out films/series like there's no tomorrow) has been a nightmare for people who, like me, are adults with a brain fitting their age.

That's why I love this movie. I can't get enough of the dark humour, of the jokes about X-Men and the whole clichéd superhero franchise so loved these days. I wish there were more movies making fun of superheroes and their stupid and silly behaviour. It's great to be able to watch something which one of its main purposes seems to be to laugh at everything, particularly at established and forced social patterns; and itself. So many people seem to miss that this movie, the whole thing, is a joke. Stop talking about a better plot and character development. You just want another clichéd superhero movie. Special mention to those claiming this to be the worst Marvel/superhero movie. Please, go watch Captain America profound psychological struggles and Avengers' heartfelt sacrifices and leave the rest of us with some serious (right!) fun.

I'll end up this review by pointing you towards some funny and silly "contributions" I noticed before starting my review. Let us take our friend Joshhanks777, with his 1/10 rating, 16 April 2016. This guy seems to have been so bored with the movie that he felt asleep, because he enlightens us by letting us know that "The main character is very unlikeable [...] and the other characters are not memorable at all, particularly the bland villain and his girlfriend who is a stripper" Erm... Wait... What??? Was I, perchance, the one asleep? No, that couldn't be... But then... How can this individual, who comments on the movie like he watched it all, mistake the main character (who is supposed to be Deadpool) with the bland villain? Because I didn't see any other stripper girlfriend but Wade's, although she wasn't technically his girlfriend anymore... Or maybe he didn't realise what Deadpool looked like without the mask and thought that he stole the girlfriend from Wade the bland villain at the end???? Or, perhaps, he considered the plot of this simple movie so twisted and labyrinthine that he got lost in the deluge of deep, emotional characters with complicated relationships... It couldn't be that he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about! That'd be impossible. Next, user mufcsince and his/her love for children's shows: "Barney the Dinosaur is more entertaining than this movie." There you have your mindset. And continues "if one wants to watch porn, they'd watch porn." You seem to be confused about the meaning of the word "porn". Check it out. Learning can be fun! Does Bernie not teach that? Moving along, you have to wonder what the francis a person is thinking when he/she writes a review that is, in fact, a summary of the plot, without even a single personal opinion (which is actually better, considering the shiny jewels people drop for opinions). Take the user GoodHandsomeLad, as an example. Review "Simply Excellent.", 13 February 2016. So much for brilliance, such genius and originality! Then we have muhammadwasim-40771 with his "Indecent movie" post entry (the title should say it all). I quote (untouched grammar): "Deadpool is a Marvel's super hero movie and is supposed to watch by more kids than adults [...]" This guy seems to be so sure of himself than he doesn't even care about reality! Superhero movie? Wake up! If kids watch R-rated movies, well, you are not doing a good job as a parent. "These kind of movies are destroying new generation morally and physically." Physically? Indirectly, or do kids hit themselves with new acquired Blu-Ray discs in a maelstrom of hilarity and decadent rapture of joy? Sure, they could not instead be destroyed by sending them to fight wars so the elite can have cheaper oil, or having to cope with irresponsible and alienating parenthood, or indoctrinating them with tales about some guy in the sky wanting to punish anyone who doesn't do as he commands. It must be, surely, this movie. Oh, and Marilyn Manson, of course. "[...] superhero movie should not be like this bcoz its a marvel character and kids don't understand why we r forbidding them to see the movie" Again with the superhero... Did you hear about the antihero archetype? Once more, you seem to be a lousy father, Muhammad. Perhaps you should have considered abstinence, particularly in light of human overpopulation and third world hunger.

Anyway, I finish here this, my homage to Deadpool and his disappearing lot. I hope you enjoyed it and didn't find it abusive in any way. After all, my only wish is for all of us to get along. Until our politicians order us to go kill each other in some remote land for a made-up reason.

Written by a Deadpool wannabe

I was happy to see the opening credits showing the craziness that is Christmas. That, added to the premise of the movie, made me expect some sort of anti-Christmas flick. However, sadly, the whole Christmas mockery is nothing but the means to push Christmas propaganda even further.

Also, I was a bit put off by Adam Scott (idol of some, apparently, for reasons I fail to understand), whose face I can't cope with too well, along with the cast of fat and ugly actors/actresses of all ages, giving rather grotesque aesthetics to the movie. I understand that they might be there with that purpose in mind, although that doesn't change the fact itself, and the truth is that they all end up being portrayed as great people anyway, so no real excuse.

However, if we overlook the Christmas nonsense and all that, we find ourselves with a witty movie that will bring us back to flicks from the 80s and 90s, it got such refreshing yet classic feeling to it, distancing itself from newer and rather mediocre productions.

I liked the fact that, even with the whole "christmas spirit" background, it keeps the griminess until the end, and it doesn't dwell much in cheap emotional moments, even when we will still find one or two there. There are more memorable moments though. Interesting how the movie lacks pretty much any blood and gore. In fact, the only blood I can remember is from a leg wound and it's not really flashy. I do not think this film is for children, despite its rating, due to the extremely dark atmosphere (even with the jokes) and the occasional "ahole" (ironically, one of them at least shouted by the 12 years old kid. But, hey, we all know the kind of society children are being brought up in, where the "christmas spirit" must be kept, no matter how many insults and such you indulge yourself and your children in).

Finally, I found the face of Krampus to be too fake, as if it was a mask. Not sure if, indeed, that was the case, since the movie doesn't approach the subject.

Alas, it is a film worth watching if you can go pass the underlying propagandist implications. If you want to love your neighbour, do it every day out of ethics or something similar, instead of buying the nonsense of a made-up Christian holidays.

What can you expect from the creator of supernatural and a remake of Frequency... The show has some sort of amateur feeling to it, and although the actors are not the worst there, they are not far from it. The plot is clichéd, boring and certainly made for people who think that supernatural is a good show, so quite poor in general. The whole "vampires are cool in a twilight way" is annoying, as well as the attempt of something they want you to think is humour.

I didn't watch the original UK series, but I will give it a try and see if it's any better. After all, north American remakes are not known for their brilliance.

Firstly, I don't understand the big issue with people being disappointed because they think this is a rip-off of other movies/series. Honestly, I love American Psycho, found Dexter entertaining and I liked Fight Club enough (not to the point of idiotic worshiping it is submitted to, but OK), along with other sources which Mr. Robot could have taken from, and that doesn't make me hate. Besides, while I was watching, not even once I had the feeling of witnessing something already made. Of course, there're people ready to jump at anything. I'm sure I could find similitudes between ANY series and previous movies/series, if that's what I wanted, but it'd be ridiculous to point out those and start shouting "rip-off!!" For Pete's sake, they even compare this to The Matrix... really, now... It's like you throw in a computer and a corrupt power and we have a Wachowski rip-off, right? I guess the real world must be The Matrix indeed... No mention of the cyberpunk material The Matrix "rippef-off", for example. But, hey, give the masses a big title and that's all they can focus on, everything else, no matter how far apart, is a rip-off. Even if I took it the same way those haters do and saw Mr. Robot as a rip-off, I still see a lot of potential and brilliance on its own. But, of course, that's hard to put in the mind of fanatics and maniacs... Hey! Why don't we include Anonymous, Sega, Dell, Isaac Asimov and Czech etymology in the "rip-off of" department, as well? Disgusted by this series??? C'mon, get a grip.

Moving along, after gaining the enmity of a few thousands...

Even though the series is filled with little, flashy mistakes that not even a non-techie, security aware person would commit (Elliot's laptop system, used for hacking, is named Elliot? Accessing root with real names/surnames, really???), and other flawed content, like why the heck revolutionaries of any type would support big corporations by buying and smoking cigarettes, this series is, by far, the best approach I've seen to the real deal. It is dark, without the idiotic "man-look-how-cool-i-am" characters found everywhere nowadays. It is bold in its approach to reality, by even naming real people as "evil" (I LOVED the iphone comment in the first episode). The use of symbols, names and organizations close to reality makes a smile come to my face. I personally believe that Christian Slater's character is bad written, or maybe it is a bad choice for an actor, or both, I don't know. Rami Malek, I find him refreshing, bringing moments which connected with my own life in many ways. It is a bit bad to see less screen time with him in it as we reach the end of season 1, although it is true that the rest of the cast do a good job, generally. The drugs issue is, perhaps, an unnecessary extra which takes away part of the relevance of hacking itself. That said, it makes the series interesting, nevertheless, and I think it should be up there with other mature series like Breaking Bad. Oh, and nice to have a bit of an independent vibe in this multimillion dollar industry. Pity about the censorship. Fortunately, after some searching, it is possible to find uncensored versions floating around. Oh, and by the way, the correct name for Tool's album is AENIMA ;)

Like many others, I've been following Studio Ghibli for decades. I always found its stories to be mature, as well as fitting for younger audiences. Stories for adults with a child's heart. I also liked the way they -almost- always offered some hope, regardless how dramatic or even gloomy they could get.

Unfortunately, this tale is for mature audiences only, I'd say, and it's rather depressing, overall.

There's nothing wrong with the film per se; the animation takes a very traditional approach and it becomes even simplistic, separating itself vastly from most Ghibli productions. The storytelling can get dull for people who are not into drama, with its 2 hours and 17 minutes in length.

Besides, this movie lacks also a certain sense of movement which other Ghibli films had, mostly in the form of unapologetic action. The pace is quite tranquil, with one or two rushy moments, without reaching the peaks achieved in previous Ghibli films (and no real action).

I liked other Takahata movies, like Pom Poko, Only Yesterday, My Neighbors the Yamadas and Grave of the Fireflies (being the latest pretty grim, as well).

Alas, it's a movie for the taste of critics for sure. Pity that their tastes do not have anything to do with the youth, and the message Ghibli delivers to them in other films is lost here to a more mature and disenchanted audience.

This documentary starts with a fat woman (likely obese) talking about not being a lazy and fat Christian and to do some fastening. The rest of the film shows us the same type of nonsense and contradictory facts being babbled and acted by those so-called Jesus lovers.

The documentary basically follows the life of this woman called Becky (or something like that), the summits she hosts, the bible camp she organizes and the children she, along with other adults, brainwashes and indoctrinates.

It also gives evangelist leader and Bush administration adviser Ted Hagard some of the airtime he loves so much. Not as much as he loves drugs and having sex with young lads, as it was discovered later.

1% of the film is given to a Christian radio show host to express how crazy is the behaviour showed in the other 99% of the documentary. That is, a Christian uttering how absurd other christians are.

Leaving aside the significance of this, the problem I find in this production is the lack of real criticism (or reason) of what is showing us. I'm aware that the documentary pretends to tell us how the fat woman and other delusional people are trying to mold children into what they are themselves, although it is annoying to have to simply cope with 90 minutes of stupidity and have to swallow it all raw without much of a word muttered clearly against it. Save the already mentioned radio host believer.

Now, these people are obviously either delusional or stupid beyond comparison. Probably both. Unfortunately, this is nothing new and the world is literally littered by millions and millions of individuals who think that there is an invisible being up in the sky who loves us all but will damn you to eternal torture if you don't follow his orders. Go figure. I have to wonder what all this belief is doing in the quantum world when it comes to mind over matter. There are other millions who believe that there are more than one of these up there, although the 3 big monotheistic religions are the most dangerous and absurd ones. We all know America is a world on its own and the cradle of nut jobs and fruit cakes, however things have been getting out of hands for a while now. I am not afraid of schizophrenics, psychopaths or child molesters like the people in the documentary, yet I can see how this is very, very scary. The kids showed in this film are unmistakably mentally scarred, traumatized or otherwise mind-damaged for life thanks to the idiocy of adults who find children -quoute- "usable" for their religions. However, I don't feel sorry for the kids. They will grow up and shall bring destruction and even more stupidity upon this Earth. If any pity should be felt, all my sympathies go to the near-future planet and the non-human inhabitants who will have to suffer the consequences of these highly disturbed people and their legacy, all for an invented set of absurd ideas called christianism copied and twisted from an even older set of myths.

If you are serious about learning how to fight back the imbecility of the world, I recommend Religulous, The Virus of faith or some other Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens work, for example. At least with those you see some active opposition to the "enemies of reason".

As a final message to all those evangelists, anglicans, mormons and related crazy folks: if Jesus of Nazareth had been a real historical figure, he would nail himself to the cross once he knew what a big bunch of lunatics say and do in his name.

I watched the Rurounei Keinshin OVAs back in the day and I found them excellent, both artistically and plot-wise. The seriousness of the work made it a perfect anime for mature audiences. Then, I started to watch the prequel series and I couldn't go further than the 6th episode or so. The series were a joke, a lighthearted anime for kids full of clichéd jokes and the typical ever so powerful enemies ala Naruto, Bleach or even Dragon Ball. I almost found it offensive to be a continuation of the OVAs. The story of Himura Kenshin should have been finished with those OVAs.

Now, this live action movie is based on the series, so you can expect what to find. Granted, most of the silly humour is gone, although it completely misses any sense of maturity found in the OVAs, since the story is that of the series. I literally dozed off through the first hour of the film, being quite dull and unnecessarily slow and lacking action. After that first hour, the action starts appearing and things get a bit more interesting. Not as much as to really give great credit.

Alright, you have good and fast swordsmanship in a couple of fights. That hardly count for over 2 hours of movie. And what's with the physics of that huge sword the brawler wields? Ridiculous.

We do have a few minutes long flashback about how Kenshin got his first scar, although it gives zero real screen time to the lady who gave him the second scar, and I find that outrageous.

Alas, you won't be missing anything if you decide to skip this movie. If you are a fan of the series, you might have some fun jumping around seeing your heroes in the flesh. However, I can only imagine that those who get excited by this fact would jump around with a set of keys being shaken over their heads.

This movie should be 1 hour shorter. Or based on the OVAs.

Welcome to the Hollywood big cliché (although with crappy CGI more often than not). Here you shall not find creativity, horror or imaginative writing. The acting is alright, pity that it doesn't save you from the lame story. The ending tries to be some sort of bitter sweet sentimental nonsense and, allow me to repeat myself, the CGI is laughable, most of the times. Hell, even the prosthetics are bad. I found myself laughing and smirking when the movie show us the girls running around in their fours at the beginning, when we discover the (supposedly) scary entity or with the priceless scene of the crawling wig. Honestly, is this a Disney production? I watched one of those parody movies before this (can't remember if it was Scary Movie 5 or what) and they are both competing for the title of most stupid comedy. The spoof could have taken scenes from the original directly and you wouldn't notice the difference.

A very annoying issue is that, lacking any real scary moments, the movie tries to do the cheap trick many other bad "horror" movies insist on pulling: use a sudden change in the volume of the soundtrack - due to the very low volume of the conversations, a sudden extremely loud noise will surely make your ears bleed; at least some reaction from the viewers, since the silly attempts to scare the audience like this will fail miserably. Unless you are in kindergarten, perhaps.

Alas, completely forgettable movie.

I can't stand shows that constantly talk about "innocent people". They assume, then, that there're also "non-innocent people". Furthermore, they see all other living creature as lacking innocence, apparently. It disgusts me how it is OK to kill any non-human animal while it's an universal crime to kill an "innocent" (human, of course). Give me a break, and stick back all those twisted Christian values where they belong.

Apart from that the show is somehow predictable, it goes down after the trinity arc, it has lots of continuity errors and flaws in details (which is not good for a forensic show). It's also interesting to see how everybody's sense of security, except for Dexter, is so extremely crappy, and how he doesn't seem to find problematic to tail somebody clearly while everybody else does.

Anyway, still the show deviates from the majority of trashy and clichéd material the industry spits on us. Then, again, that might just be another trick to make the show look attractive, rather than being an inherent quality.

I have to admit that I never watched ballet, particularly classical. The little I've seen plus the fact that targets high class people whose opinion of themselves is even higher while trying to hide obvious psychological distress (a mental picture of Fraser takes shape), makes me think of ballet as something to avoid if boredom is not your goal.

In any case, you can as well avoid this extremely boring movie. It seems like the director attempts to shock us with sex and mental delirium, something that bored me even more. Maybe he thought that taking the somehow worshiped "lolita" N. Portman and making her fall into a vortex of sexual deviations would act as a leverage for boredom. How pitiful.

He added some nice CGI to it, in order, no doubt, to boost the aesthetics of the movie. Still, boring.

No matter the director's play with the sexual fantasies of people towards Portman or the little CGI shown, this movie is still predictable and slow. So much, that I'm sure critics love it.

It's hard to believe that a movie like this has been made. I didn't read the book, although I guess it can't be far from it. The whole purpose of Atlas Shrugged seems to be the glorification of big companies, of those who -even when they already have more than enough- want to have more and more money. Throughout the 90 minutes of its duration, I was waiting for anything to proof me wrong, to actually defend the oppressed and the middle/low classes, but no. This movie is completely, utterly centered in those heads of corporations and the people with the big money and their "painful struggle" to get more of what they only care about: money. They even go on calling an individual owning an oil company a hero! A human who believes it is fine to destroy anything in order to drill to extract gas for just one goal: more money. They even go to the extent of accusing the government of "limiting" the power of the corporations!! When in reality it works the other way around: it is corporations that control governments.

This movie is not particularly boring, although its content is not for everybody at all. If we go into moral values, this film should be burnt and forbid. Only bourgeois and executives who don't give a damn about anything or anybody but themselves would enjoy this propagandist crap. Interesting how one of these people, in the movie, says that she never hurt anybody in her life. Yeah, right. I suppose they believe their money grows in the trees and no animal (human or otherwise) and/or Earth globally is not affected by libertarian rubbish, flawed way of thinking and its destructive and egotistic methods.

Freedom? Sure. Liberalism? Perhaps. Libertarianism? NEVER.

With a running time over 2 hours, I found this movie a bit slow and extremely over-dramatized. I mean no disrespect for the events that led to the China Revolution of the beginning of the 20th century, although trying to put too much drama into this by ways of overacting and continuously falling in a pit of drama is not helping much.

There are a couple of moments that shine, like the fight of the policeman with one of the assassins or, particularly, the apparition of the cleaned up beggar. Well, in fact, these are the only 2 real fights in the whole movie.

This movie could have done much better without so much drama and little less running time. In order to make people know about the Revolution, you don't need to make a mockery out of the real tragedy.

I hate harem. I started to watch this thinking that it was going to be a romantic comedy. This is rather a sex comedy.

Basically, the star of the show, attached to a huge pendant which seems incredibly painful to wear around the neck unless it's made of some cheap, light material (that doesn't explain why it can resist all sort of battering), is really the only male character in the series, apart from a friend of his, who doesn't even have much of a role anyway. More and more female characters are thrown in the show, up to a ridiculous amount of 9 or so (so far!). Interestingly, although they are in their 15s, they seem to have huge breasts. And, guess what, most of them are attracted to the guy.

Honestly, talk about male-focused perversions.

OK, I found the anime to have a few very funny moments, although they were not related to the sex comedy (they could turn down a notch the whole sexual innuendo, btw). In fact, the anime also have a few sweet moments, which happen when it centers on individual characters' relationships with the male, particularly Onodera, rather than having anything to do with the whole hentai polygamy stuff.

A lot of the series is based on extremely predictable moments and clichéd situations almost copied from other harem anime.

The drawing is mostly good or very good, although strangely, as it happens in many other anime, the quality goes down quite a bit sometimes.

Season 2 doesn't really add much to the plot (except for more female characters, of course), and the anime seems to just be dragging on.

A 3rd season is neither announced nor confirmed yet. I find hard to believe that this series will reach any credible finale, though, with so many girls interested in the guy and all that. Another let down of these harem anime.

I've always been interested in computers and anything related to them. I've followed cyberpunk trends for how it relates to the near future and how it showed a visionary capacity in its theories. I've been particularly focused on the evolution of artificial intelligence, and its effects on reality.

All this said, this movie was a HUGE disappointment. The documentary is basically a host (a bad one, at that) exposing what the future might bring regarding the birth of A.I.s with capabilities surpassing human intellect. Through the movie, he interviews a number of individuals and so-called experts in this and other matters that, in one way or another, might be affected by the singularity. These interviews and opinions are connected by a parallel fictitious story telling us about the birth and evolution of a "female" A.I. So, how would I put it? This fiction is one of the worst attempts at storytelling I've ever watched. The acting is beyond poor. It's sad, pathetic. The special effects are worse than a children's version of scify channel, the make-up and atrezzo seem to have been taken from a clown paraphernalia shop. And the dialogues come straight from a low budget scifi B movie. It's extremely boring and totally unnecessary. I reckon this was made to help the public understand the possible reality of the singularity, although it seems more like a useless distraction for toddlers than anything else.

Apart from that, most of the comments that the host states as realities are almost edging pseudo-science (it reminds me a bit of What the Bleep - Down the rabbit hole, although I believe I found that interesting back in the day, contrary to this terrible documentary). The people being interviewed, except for 1 or 2, seem to have been taken directly from an "elite" of individuals who think that it's great to have thinking computers, and that software will have at some stage "human" rights (no matter how little rights humans still have at the moment). This is one of the arguments that bother me the most: they talk about A.I.s with "feelings" and "alive", which is all very good and sound, although it's clearly a problem how these same humans completely disregard the feelings and lives of actual living creatures. It's utterly absurd to be discussing how they can define a living A.I. wisely when they can't even respect what it's clearly alive at this moment in time. I'm pretty sure that, for these "geniuses", the fight for the rights of a computer program is worthy, even though they wouldn't even consider to give other animals any rights or happiness in their lives. Bizarre and extremely creepy. For Pete's sake, they even got in the interview a person whose living consists simply in gain as much money as possible, no matter where it comes from! The same person who says that he will do anything to be able to prolong his life or to be immortal... What kind of nightmare world is coming?

One of the few people (perhaps, the only one) who made sense to me was Bill McKibben, talking basically about how humanity is destroying nature and how we should actually take care of our home Earth rather than daydreaming about how fun will be to have a singularity.

Alas, this movie left me with a creepy feeling. It's scary to see people so enthusiastic about computers and other humans inventions with total disregard for the natural world, for the environment and for "real" life itself. And, bear in mind, that I DO find computers interesting! So you can imagine...

Our only hope is that the singularity occurs once and for all and decides to do the most logical thing with the human species. You think about it.

I'll be honest: When I saw my first episode back in season 1, I laughed like I rarely do.

I kept on watching, season after season and, while I laughed now and again, the funny moments seemed to be more and more distant in time. It might be that this gang with a ridiculous stage name is losing its spark.

Or it might be something far more dramatic and sinister: it seems that, in an attempt to squeeze out a laugh by any means necessary, they are recurring more and more to the use (or, rather, misuse) of food and other consumer's products. I really can't see how wasting food or any other resources in an absurd and ludicrous manner is funny, unless you are 8. OK, I'm probably talking to an audience here within the range of that mental age, but still, that doesn't change the facts.

Wasting food, wasting anything, while most of the population cannot even afford to get the minimum necessities to be able to survive is outrageous. I can't recall if this show was always like this, but I don't like that one bit. Being irresponsible and behaving like a clown playing with what could be another person lifesaver is but a grim distraction of reality, aimed to those who couldn't care less about the suffering of others.

Donating any sum of money to a charity doesn't take away those facts, by the way, but only adds to the hypocrisy and nonsensical reality society creates.

It's hard to believe that people, particularly young impressionable individuals, are exposed to this and even cry when they see the gang live. What kind of twisted system we live in, when a teenager cries because she is such a huge fan of these, rather mediocre, individuals? Well, I guess Enrique Iglesias and such achieved that many decades ago, anyway.

Finally, these people claim to be friends. Really? With friends like these, who needs enemies.