Loving_Silence

This is the first time in my life I ever walked out of a theater. This movie is total garbage. Both Will Farrell and John C. Reilly (both of whom I've liked in other films) humiliate themselves in this. I didn't chuckle once! All I was did was cringe at the dumb jokes and idiotic gags. The story was one of the lamest things I've ever seen and the acting just awful. This movie is simply unwatchable. Please do everything you can to avoid it!

Let's be honest every Transformers movie other than the first one has been bad. The 3rd one had a great third act in Chicago but that's about it. I went into this with extremely low expectations and was really surprised. I can finally say we second good Transformers movie with this standalone Bumblebee movie. This is a movie with a lot of heart and that's not just due to Bumblebee but also with the human characters. They finally got a great lead with Hailee Steinfeld who gives a damn solid performance in this. The entire cast was good no one seemed like they were phoning it in for a paycheck. The action in this movie is a major step up from the sequels, you can actually tell what's going on and the visuals are beautiful and detailed. I was ecstatic to see they went back with the first generation designs. The Transformers are characters and you feel for them. If you're a Transformers fan you have to go see this movie.

One of the most dumbest comedies I've seen in a while. Literally nothing made me laugh. Tiffany Haddish and Kevin Hart are just doing their tired shticks. The story in this is completely laughable and cliched. I've seen this story done 100 times and way better told. All of the jokes in this movie do not land, I just cringed half the time and sighed the rest. Please don't go waste your money on this lazy, dumb and completely unfunny garbage of a movie.

Into the Storm was not a movie I had a lot of expectations for. I just wanted to have fun seeing huge tornadoes destroying everything in their path. And that's what I got for the most part in this movie. The first 15 minutes of this movie was so bad, the dialogue was atrocious, the characters were annoying and the writing was completely abysmal. But as the movie starts to show more of the tornadoes, it got really fun really quick. the movie got so much better.

One of the best aspects of this movie is how close you really get into the tornadoes. You go inside it and it looks frightening and beautiful at the same time. The visuals look amazing when you're in the movie theater. This is definitely a movie that should be seen in your nearest theater, because it was such an experience seeing the tornadoes, hearing the train-like noise when a tornadoes comes barreling towards the cities and cars. It's just so awesome.

One of the weakest aspects of this movie are the characters, we just don't care what happens to them in the movie. But the tornadoes are terrific and they keep coming on at you every twenty minutes or so for two hours. Now this can be a little tiresome, but "Into the Storm" does stop itself just in time before it completely overstays its welcome.

In the end, it's not a very good movie by any stretch of the imagination. Again, this is the film that one will either like as a guilty pleasure, like me, or you won't care for it at all. And even if you do like the movie, there is still one big lapse in the whole thing that you realize at the end. If tornadoes really did show up as often as they do in the movie in the same general area, there would be nothing left standing in the Midwest anymore. It would all be leveled.

Guardians of the Galaxy is nothing short of an amazing movie. If there's anything I can say, it's that it is the best superhero movie I have seen. Not only does it have the impressive set pieces and enough action to last you a lifetime, it has an emotional core and you actually get to care about each and every single character. Overall this movie is filled with all the required thrills and spills and is a first class action movie. It also has a great mixture of comedic value and a deal of seriousness.

The film's unlikely hero is Quill (Chris Pratt), an eccentric gunfighter in the Han Solo mould who we meet stealing a metal orb coveted by the evil warlord Ronan. When he dispatches his top assassin, the green- skinned Gamora (Zoe Saldana), to recover the artifact, the pair find themselves locked up, along with the galaxy's most unlikely bounty hunters – a gun-toting raccoon (Bradley Cooper) and his sidekick (Vin Diesel) who just happens to be a walking tree. All the actors do a great job at portraying there characters, they feel real beings. You get to know about them and their struggles and you become attached to them. Every character in the movie got their time to shine, especially Rocket Raccoon who is voiced perfectly by Bradley Cooper. Everyone is pitch perfect in their roles even Batista!

For those that want specifics: effects were top notch, acting was excellent, story lines were compelling, the comedy was perfect 99.5% of the time and surprise there were a lot of one line typical superhero zingers that worked really well. What really can't be stressed enough is just how insanely fun and entertaining Guardians of the Galaxy is for literally its entire two-hour-plus run-time. I still have a hard time wrestling with who was my favorite actor in this. all in all, the film is brilliantly well done, action scenes are engrossing and genuinely done, you genuinely worry about certain characters and I for one was thrilled with it. Go see this.

Transformers: Age of Extinction is the fourth film of the Transformers franchise, a franchise that's known for being explosive and action- packed and kind of dumb. This film is no exception, it follows the other films like in the exact same regard. But I do think this is an improvement from Dark of the Moon and a BIG improvement from the horrid, Revenge of the Fallen. The film takes a bit more serious approach, but don't get me wrong it still has some stupid humor, just not as much as the previous films, which is pretty refreshing.

The action scenes in here are pretty outstanding and it actually has much more wide shots than the previous movies. You can actually see the large scale of these giant robots in breathtaking detail. The visual- effects are fantastic as they usually are with these films, it definitely delivers in that department. However as usual there are numerous problems with the script and story, it's senseless as usual, but not as annoying as "Revenge of the Fallen", the dialogue is weak, but at least it's not mindbogglingly stupid. Also the Autobots and even the Decepticons have more of a personality than they used to. Grimlock is a fantastic addition in this film, but I would have liked to have seen a bit more of him.

For those who didn't care for Michael Bay's past Transformers films, you probably won't like this because it has even more mindless extravaganza action packed scenes, just like the other films did. However audiences who are game to board the extravagance train will find that Age of Extinction hits all the notes that a Transformers movie ought to. So if you didn't like any of the other past Transformers movies, don't bother watching this cause you'll probably won't become fan after this. If you liked the other ones then you'll most likely be in for a fun ride like I was.

I just want to start off by saying this is an amazing film about young love that is actually honest with its audience. There are countless of films about people falling in love, but when you see "Blue is the Warmest Colour". You realize just how rare films are that make a sincere attempt to catch what it really is like to fall for someone, without sentimentality, forced cuteness or cheap emotional manipulation. This is the rare love story that has real emotional truth about it. The fact that it is about two women who fall for each other is almost secondary to the way the film catches the universality of what it is like to fall in love and maintain the relationship. "Blue is the Warmest Colour is a naturalistic and touching film, whether you're gay, straight, bisexual, or whatever orientation. This is a film that can give you relationship advice and life guidance no matter what your orientation may be. It isn't an indulgent film bringing only a unique gay relationship to light and nothing more, and it isn't an ode to "coming out" and stockpiled clichés of "being different." It shows how an interaction with a person can have a truly provocative impact on you as a person.

The struggles between the two lovers is depicted in breathtaking detail. The director masterfully captures all of the turmoil and hardship going on between Adele's and Emma's relationship. The movie's long running time does not effect the film at all because you are so immersed into their characters. The sexual realization of Adele is perfectly shown in the movie. She is confused and doesn't know what she wants, it is a typical teenage problem. This movie is ultimately about Adele and her struggles to find her true self. The transformation that she experiences is utterly engrossing to watch. The film's nearly three hour running time is devoted to showing the growth of her character and it is absolutely amazing to watch it unfold right in front of your eyes.The intimate scene's between Adele and Emma are nothing short of miraculous in their depth and their honesty. The conversations are heartfelt, and the pain is evident and shared. It's realism of the world we live in is honest and raw.

The movie owes so much of it's emotional power to its two fantastic actresses. They really bring it their all in this. I've never had doubts of these two performances, the characters felt like real people and you felt so much for their relationship. Their emotional hardships feel completely real. The character's flaws and insecurities feel so authentic because you actually believe them as real human beings. We never lose sight of their chemistry and devotion to one another, even in the most difficult of times. The two of them are like fireworks, waiting to explode out. I cannot recommend this film enough to those of you out there who are interested in seeing this. This is one of the wisest and least condescending films I've seen this year. I congratulate the director, Abdellatif Kechiche and the two actresses, Adele Exarchopoulos and Lea Seydoux for an emotional and spiritual journey that had me compelled to the screen for 179 glorious minutes.

Texas Chainsaw 3D (2013) is a sequel to the original classic "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" (1974) even though there has been other sequels, reboots, and a prequel, mind you. So to call this a sequel would mean to forget the other 5 films that were made way before this. Oh well, I've seen more offensively manipulative marketing before.

So was the movie good? Of course not, it couldn't even surpass my ridiculously low expectations. The movie is completely unoriginal and filled with more clichés than there are craters on the moon. The plot of the film has been done to death in the horror genre. A group of young hot teenagers go out and encounter a psychotic killer. You already know what's going to happen, who's going to get killed, etc. The movie is completely devoid of suspense and any true scares because it is completely predictable from start to finish. Any movie that relies on cheap jump is a big NO-NO for me, but even those are utterly predictable in the film.

The acting is pretty standard to that of other horror movies, completely and totally unremarkable. Don't even plan on watching the film on 3D because it adds nothing to the film and is a complete waste of money. The movie made no attempt at trying to be original and actually try to genuinely scare me. At the end of the day, the movie had no reason to exist at all, it rehashes the same boring plot lines of countless previous horror movies. Why did they make this movie, there are 5 other sequels (albeit kind of bad) that came before. The answer is because all that Liongate cares about is to make money and that's it, I don't hate them for it, but next time try not to make it so obvious.

-------------READ THE REVIEW, BEFORE YOU RATE IT ---------------------- It's just boring as hell. But I've seen much worse Lifetime films, although its nowhere near a great film. Some scenes were quite enjoyable, but the film is too long even though its 88 minutes. The direction is pedestrian and the film itself is filled with so many clichés. The character of Elizabeth Taylor in this film was so unlikeable and a bit all over the place.

Lindsey Lohan was surprisingly not awful, just mediocre. She doesn't look like Liz Taylor, but she's okay in some very emotional scenes. I think she has an opportunity to grow as an actress by accepting more meatier roles in the future. I'm just glad that she is at least trying to give a good performance, even though the outcome can be left to interpretation.

The rest of the cast was highly forgettable, but there were some performances that did not work on any level. Grant Bowler as Richard Burton, Andy Hirsch as Eddie Fischer, were pretty bad. There were too many WTF scenes with them. The whole film was pretty forgettable and a bit too soap-operish for my taste, but it's nowhere near the disaster some are making it out to be.

It's ultimately hollow. The art direction, set pieces, cinematography, costume design are all superb, the film is a technical marvel. But my compliments for the most part end right there. Sadly, there were far too many themes for a two-hour film to broach. Unfortunately, "Anna Karenina" never hits any sort of stride where the narrative arc is concerned. The dark side of love is ruminated upon, sure, but there's never any real payoff. The film faces the dilemma of a thousand book adaptations before it – it's too small in scale to offer the epic rewards of the written word, but too large on-screen to hide from its glaring shortcomings. Solid visual moments aren't enough to sustain an audience, and Joe Wright's visual style isn't enough to salvage gaping wounds in the story.

In this bizarre version, adapted by Tom Stoppard ("Shakespeare in Love") and directed by Joe Wright ("Pride and Prejudice," "Atonement"), the tragedy unfolds in a huge, magnificent theater. As the curtain rises, the performance commences and various players fall in and out of love – with little moral meaning. On-stage, backstage and on catwalks, they change partners and pirouette, always self-consciously aware of the impression they're making. Thus Joe, a filmmaker by trade, sought to preserve the novel's mystique and cultural exclusivity by aping an altogether less inclusive medium; one that remains inaccessible to the hordes, and which, like Tolstoy's oeuvre, is considered to be a retreat, a sanctuary if you will, for the intelligentsia, who must endure the witless prattling and half-bakery of the mass at all other times. The film will undoubtedly be a big competitor in the Oscars in the technical categories. But Best Screenplay, Picture, Director, I don't think so.

6/10

What can I say about Beasts of the Southern Wild, that hasn't already been said. It's the most magical and imaginative film of the year, so far. In Benh Zeitlin's Beasts of the Southern Wild, the wild things are in a place known as the Bathtub, a remote stretch of the Louisiana bayou profoundly cut off from the rest of modern civilization. Beasts of Southern Wild is an unique vision that sweeps viewers away with energy, attitude and a full, vibrant, sense of life. Containing outstanding performances, great cinematography, and a fantastic score, the film is just so engrossing.

Hushpuppy feels her connection not only to nature and animals, but also to the prehistoric era, represented throughout the film by her interest in cave drawings and—more fancifully—prehistoric beasts called aurochs that have been released from the ice caps and make their way toward the Bathtub…at least in Hushpuppy's mind. The difference between what's real and what lives in the imagination of our six-year-old heroine is not always clear, but it's all delivered with a beautifully assured sense of wonder.

Beasts of the Southern Wild unfolds through Hushpuppy's eyes, and it's a sight to behold: sometimes wondrous, often disordered and dysfunctional. It's hard not to see the film through a political lens even if you're apolitical. But there's no stridency here: Fantastical moments and a fantastic script manage to juggle so much with grace. As Hushpuppy says, "The entire world depends on everything fitting together just right." But her world is one where wealth and squalor co-exist all too easily, the discrepancy painfully obvious (even though we don't really see the other world), the puzzle pieces not equal in weight or importance. Yet the hardscrabble people of Bathtub still find a way to channel their joy, even though they've been forgotten.

It's all the more impressive that such a confident and resourceful film comes from a first-timer; writer-director Benh Zeitlin previously impressed Sundance audiences with the Hurricane Katrina inspired short "Glory at Sea." He collaborated on the screenplay for "Beasts" with Lucy Alibar and worked with a cast and crew of mostly non-professionals (both Wallis and Henry make genuinely astonishing screen debuts). That freshness may very well be key to the film's creative success. There's a feeling of genuine enthusiasm and ingenuity in their work here, as if everyone involved was truly discovering the power and potential of filmmaking for the first time.

The Amazing Spider-Man is one of the best movies of 2012, so far. Great chemistry between the 2 actors, fantastic visual effects, memorable action scenes and a a new level of emotional depth, not seen in a Spider-Man movie. The movie constantly delivers on character development and thrilling action sequences. My low expectations were obliterated, what a surprise! Aside from the 3D animation looking fantastic and the film having a dark, complex feel to it that makes it feel more grown up, the primary reason worth watching is Andrew Garfield.

Andrew Garfield was terrific as Spider-Man, he not only looks like Peter Parker, but he embodies the character. Something only a few actors are able to do. Emma Stone is, as always very charming and effective in her role as Gwen Stacy. The chemistry between them is so well done, and performed. The scenes between them truly elevate the film, as a whole. Uncle Ben, played by the veteran actor Martin Sheen. Sheen brings the intrinsic qualities of family love and togetherness to the movie. Rhys Ifans is great as Dr. Connors, although I felt he was a bit underused. Everyone works so well together, the cast is by far the best out of all the Spidey movies, yet.

In many ways it represents an improvement over the Raimi films, particularly the misbegotten third installment, especially in its emphasis on the adolescent nature of its protagonist. Though Garfield is 28, he makes a credible 17-year-old - although Maguire was a year younger when he first pulled on the tights a decade ago, his Parker seemed conspicuously adult. The action scenes and the visual effects are totally exhilarating, believable and totally engrossing. Even though this reboot may be unnecessary, now I can't wait until The Amazing Spider-man 2.

I sort of hate comparing this to the original trilogy because it is trying to be its own thing, but you can't escape the fact that it's such a recent reboot. However the movie stands on its own, as great reboot and a pleasure to watch! "The Amazing Spider-Man" has everything you could ask from a summer movie. Action, romance, imagination and smart writing.

9/10

I had the honor of watching TDKR during a screening and was completely blown away! Christopher Nolan's third film in his Batman trilogy doesn't disappoint. The movie is incredibly well made, its huge production is quite breathtaking to view. This is a true cinematic experience, to behold. The movie exceeded my expectations in terms of action, and entertainment. The movie's score high-lites many of its incredible scenes, and at times, it takes your breath away.

The film featured excellent performances, by all the cast. Christian Bale, as always is great as Batman. Anne Hathaway was completely engrossing, she became "Catwoman", just like Michele Pfeiffer did, although their interpretations were very different, both were equally effective. Tom Hardy was the main villain "Bane" completely shattered my expectations. One of the best superhero movie villains, I've ever seen. The terror caused by him, is completely believable and quite menacing. Marlion Cotilliard, Michael Cane, Gary Oldman, and others all did well in their respective roles. Now I know most will miss Heath Ledger as the Joker.(I know I do) I hope people don't compare Tom Hardy's performance to Heath Ledger's, its completely unfair and the two characters are very different. Just read the comics.

The colossal size of the film is a spectacle to behold, but surprisingly you don't get lost with all the explosions and extravagant action scenes, like in other films,(AKA Transformers, or POTC.) If one were to gripe, and I suppose there will never be a film made that one cannot find a point at which to grip, it is painfully long running time here. I found myself more worried about the pain in my posterior than the emotional final minutes after almost 3 hours that I had spent in a cramped seat, but that's just how I am. However the ending is just fantastic, so emotional and bring the trilogy to a very satisfying end.

Sorry if I'm being all fan-boyish and kissing this movie's behind, but I really admire it. It may not be among my personal favorites but generally this seems to be the movie event of this year. As a film though, this is amazing. A true lasting legacy in superhero story telling and summer-blockbusters.

Splice is one of the most disappointing films of 2009. When I heard the film's premise, I was really excited. It could have been an amazing Sci-Fi film, but last 3/4 of the film was ridiculous and very off-putting. Although the visual effects are great and the design of the creature throughout its formation was really interesting.

The movie started out solid, I actually enjoyed the film for a while, like I said, the effects looked great and very atmospheric, The acting was good and very believable, my favorite of the cast was Sarah Polley, who's always great. At first, I really bought the relationship between two scientists and the creature/hybrid, whatever you want to call it. But as the movie progressed, I thought it was becoming much more provocative and scandalous, not in a good way, though.

The biggest flaw in the movie, for me has to be the last 20% of the film, especially the stupid ending. It falls apart and becomes so clichéd at the end, it really bummed me out because it had so much potential and it could have been very interesting and really cool. It quickly dissolves into a run-of-the-mill monster flick. The ending transformation was so ludicrous and completely odd, that it lost me so badly, that I simply can't recommend the film.

Although nowhere near Woody Allen's great films like Annie Hall, Manhattan, Hannah and her Sisters and Midnight in Paris, To Rome with Love is still a charming, and entertaining film. Some have called the film, Woody Allen's worst film, and I simply don't agree. (His worse film is Scoop) The whole cast works nicely and all the performances are all around great. My favorite being Judy Davis, she stole the show for me.

I found some of the scenes rushed and haphazardly constructed and some of the dialogue overwritten and under-rehearsed. The film at times, felt very lazy and a bit fake, at times. At 112 Mimutes, To Rome with Love is a good 20 minutes longer than most Woody Allen films, and it shows. The movie was overlong and a bit boring at times. There weren't enough charming and funny scenes to compensate for it's running time. Some scenes should've definitely been cut. Woody Allen's latest effort is flawed, but definitely not a bad film, as most are saying.

7/10

Brave is a beautiful and moving new fairy tale that fits seamlessly into the genre; Princess Merida is a wonderfully multi-facted heroine; the film shapes itself around problems that are familiar and understandable and will be well-understood and appreciated by kiddos and parents alike; the supporting characters that are given the most attention are well-crafted (but too bad for those others that fall by the wayside). The visual effects are flawless, in my opinion, the best if all Pixar films.

Brave is at its best when it's smartly and charmingly changing what we think think a Disney Princess can be, but it wavers when it tries to somehow reinvent the Pixar wheel. The film lacks the trademark Pixar wit we've come to expect from the animation studio's productions, and some humor feels shoe-horned in for the sake of having some laughs; the directorial kerfuffle that took place in the middle of production is not overwhelmingly obvious, but there is a distinct laugh of singular vision driving the film and its tone wavers throughout.

It may not live up to the incredible standards of the Pixar brand, but Brave offers young audiences a lot of entertainment and adventure. Highly Recommended.

8/10

If you're expecting a masterpiece of storytelling and acting when watching, "The Turning Point", you'll be greatly disappointed. Don't get me wrong, the 2 lead performances are great, however the best supporting actor and best supporting actress are completely undeserved, they were okay, not great. The ballet performances are really good and breathtaking to watch. However, the movie, really feels like a made for T.V flick instead of a full-scale cinematic experience. They're were many other films that deserved a Best Picture nomination in 1977. The film has pretty much faded in the last 30 years, no one really talks about it anymore. If you're just looking for a film that showcases some truly great ballet, you won't be disappointed, if you're looking for something more, you won't find it here.

One of my favorite shows ever PERIOD! Nostalgia fills me up now, whenever I watch Dragonball now, it was a huge part of my childhood! The characters were so likable and relatable, Goku (AKA Greatest Animated character of all time) was like my best friend, watching him go through all these adventures, made me feel like I was there with him. Dragonball shouldn't be compared to DBZ, they're both amazing shows, but they're unique in their own individual ways, you simply can't compare them. What an amazing beginning to the Dragonball Saga, I've always said, a Show lives and dies by its characters, and Dragonball has simply fantastic characters! When I have children, I will definitely show Dragonball and DBZ to them. Hoping that they'll have the same amazing experience, I had when watching this show!

Martin Scorcese's new film, Hugo is one of the best cinematic experience, I've had in years. The 3D is just simply astounding and the best I have ever seen in a movie. The visual effects, cinematography, art direction, just technically superb. Finally a smart, awe-aspiring family film, which are really rare nowadays. A definite surprise coming from legendary director, Martin Scorcese, who's known for movies with a lot of swears, violence, drugs and other adult-themed subjects.

The acting was really good and completely convincing. Asa Butterfield delivers a very committed performance as Hugo Cabret, and he shows a lot of promise in his future career. Chloë Grace Moretz, also gives a fine and respectable performance. Sacha Baron Cohen is surprisingly very effective as Station Inspector. Ben Kingsley gives the best performance in the whole movie, he is just superb and deserves some recognition. Overall, the whole cast was top notch.

Eyes may be the window to the soul, but movies are the projection of our dreams, according to "Hugo" that is. Martin Scorsese's first attempt at a children's film might be over most of their adolescent heads, but this founding member of the "Movie Brats" might've just concocted a delectable cinematic treat that speaks to most film lovers' surrealist commitment to the big screen. In retrospect, it works, and this enchanting flick is one of the best of the year.

Steven Spielberg has assembled many fantastic movies, like Schindler's List, Jaws, E.T, Saving Private Ryan, etc. His new creation, War Horse is a stunning achievement. The film was professionally made, it looked amazing, sounded great. Legendary composer, John Williams crafted an amazing and beautiful score. It was one of the best, I've heard in years.

Jeremy Irvine delivers a very heartfelt and convincing performance, he's just great. The rest of the cast, Emily Watson, Peter Mullan, David Thewlis, Tom Hiddleston, etc were all great, as well. However the star of the film, The Horse was simply amazing, the facial expressions were all spot on. Its just great, how you see the movie, from a horse perspective. Steven Spielberg deserves a lot of praise for that, and I hoper he gets it.

The cinematography is as good as it gets, its simply astounding. The film's cinematographer, Janusz Kamiński deserves all the praise he gets, an Oscar surely awaits him. The movie deserves all the technical praise, it gets. The editing is well done, the art direction is spectacular, the look of the film is quite breathtaking, at times.

The film is uncompromisingly sentimental, and I wasn't annoyed by it. Because it worked so well, it made me care about the story, the characters, the horses. A good old fashion studio epic, I miss them and I'm happy Spielberg delivered one. There are a lot of powerful scenes in the movie, from which I cried. It was just so moving, it showed the true consequences of war. Some of the battle sequences were simply fantastic and astonishing.

I am happy to see, Steven Spielberg in his top form. He showed, that he's still one of the best in the business and I hope to see more of him in the future. It may not be his best film, but it certainly a wonderful film to watch. I'd recommend anyone to see the film, it will appeal to everyone.

Before viewing, "The Iron Lady", I didn't really know much about Margaret Thatcher. Other than she was the prime minister of England for 11 years, she was a very controversial figure and still is to this day. So I was really interested to see the film and I decided to visit the WGA screening.

Now let me begin by saying, Meryl Streep embodies Margaret Thatcher. She doesn't just look like her, but she talks like her, her facial expressions are spot on. Meryl Streep becomes Margaret Thatcher. I would be shocked if she doesn't win an Oscar for this performance. The supporting cast is good too, Jim Broadbent gives an excellent performance, everyone is just great.

However aside from the top notch acting, the movie had a few flaws. The story was uninteresting at times, the flashback scenes were a bit muddled and a little confusing. The movie felt a little too safe, it tried too hard, not to be controversial. Although I don't entirely blame the film itself for that. Margaret Thatcher was such a decisive person, that whichever side the film picked, it would be criticized by a lot of people. I guess the film ultimately achieved the goal.

I also liked the movie didn't dwell too much on the politics, but on the character of Margaret Thatcher. We see the human side of The Iron Lady herself, beyond all the partisan politics and rumors, we get to see a very personal and sad side of her. The subplot focusing on Thacther's grief over her husband's death, as the older version battles with hallucinations and an unwillingness to let go of her dear Denis are heartbreaking.

Overall the movie was really well done, but just shy of greatness. Meryl Streep's performance and the supporting cast, truly elevates the film into a great biopic. Although I wished a little more time was spent on focusing on her political life, the movie successfully showed a deep and moving side of the prime minister. Which a lot of biopics fail to do. Whatever your opinions might be on Margaret Thatcher, don't fault the movie because of the opinion. And I highly respect Phyllida LLoyd, Meryl Streep, Abi Morgan and others for trying to portray such a decisive and highly controversial figure.

I had extremely low expectations for Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011). I loved the original 1968 classic, but every sequel/remake after it sucked. I was surprised they were going to make a prequel of the classic and I thought it was a good idea. But still after so many bad sequels and remakes, I still had my big doubts. Also I didn't like how the monkeys were made by CGI/Special Effects, why not use a robotic monkey or a real one, it would look more real.

After my viewing of the film, I was pleasantly surprised and I liked it overall. But there were definitely flaws in the movie, no doubt about it. The characters were a bit uninteresting at times, there were subplots that went pretty much nowhere and indicated that there could sequels in the works, but it all depends on how much money it makes. The movie, at some points turned to an average summer blockbuster with all the action scenes and explosions, but it redeems itself later on.

However there are plenty of positive qualities, the movie has. Andy Serkis delivers a great performance as the lead ape in the film and is pretty much the star of the film. James Franco and Freida Pinto, both did a good job portraying their characters. The movie also poses ethical/moral questions, which I found very interesting. The movie is easily on of the most thrilling films we've had this summer. Finally a movie that pays respect to the 1968 original science fiction classic!

I am a huge fan of the Harry Potter books, they're all so great and magical. But I didn't think the film series were perfect at all, but they were still great movies. With that, I was extremely excited to see the end of the film franchise, and impressed with the trailers. So I had high expectations. And thankfully it did not disappoint, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II, blew past my already high expectations and I was enthralled!

The whole movie looked spectacular! The cinematography extremely well done, the art direction was incredible. The movie was beautiful to look at, the visuals were spectacular and truly Oscar worthy! The set designers, cinematographers really need to be awarded for their work, because it looks like they spend of time and money on the look of the film.

The cast of the film was pretty much perfect, they should all be applauded too. Emma Watson, as usual is and great and she'll have a bright career ahead of her. Rupert Grint is pretty much great also, he is a fine actor indeed. Daniel Radcliffe did an amazing job and was very memorable as Harry Potter. Although I think Ralph Fiennes was the star of the film, he did unbelievable job as the evil, crazy Lord Voldemort, I think he deserves an Oscar Nomination for his role. The rest of the cast were also great too.

We all grew up overtime with the series, we followed the adventures of Harry Potter for around 10 years, I think. It seems very weird that there will be no more Harry Potter films to look forward too. I will miss the franchise very much! However I am happy the series got an amazing ending. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II is not only the best film in the series, but it will probably be one of the best films of 2011. Everyone should see this film, even if they don't like past Harry Potter films.

Now let me begin by saying this film is not an amazing film. It is definitely not an awful film, like most critics are saying. I think critics might have raised their expectations due to Thor and X-Men: First Class. They should not compare the Green Lantern with those films. It is ranked now 24% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is way too low. It would probably be in the high 60s, if it was released before Thor and X-Men: First Class.

The acting in the film is good and not terrible at all. Ryan Reynolds is great as Hal Jordan and extremely likable. He definitely fits the role as Hal Jordan really well. Blake Lively is great and extremely sexy, she's not just a pretty face as most are suggesting. Peter Sarsgaard is a great actor and he plays the villainous Hector Hemmond really well and interesting. Overall everyone tries their best and at the end of the day do a really great job, certainly no Oscar worthy performances, though.

The special effects are pretty superb and extremely worthwhile to say the least. Although it sometimes feel a little CGIish, but it doesn't get too big of a distraction. I have to say I was a little disappointed how Parallax looked like, it felt a little fake at times, but it is not horrible in any sense of the way. Also the film did not take itself seriously which is kind of refreshing. Which could be the reason why critics disliked it so much. They want another sad, personal and serious story. Unlike Thor and X-Men, The Green Lantern is more kids friendly.

The main problem of the film was that they were trying to cram stuff in from the comics and the personal lives of the other characters. It seems that there could be so many sequels for the other characters. It did kind of focus on too many characters. Also the editing gets to be a little distracting at times, they certainly needed to have done a better job, but the editing is mediocre at best.

Overall the Green Lantern was a fun summer flick. Although it is nowhere near the realm of The Dark Knight, it didn't need to be. The 3D was actually really good and the special effects were memorable. No doubt, the critics were extremely tough on the Green Lantern and it is unfair. At the end of the day, don't listen to the critics. Make up your mind and see this film. At the end of the day, it should be only your opinion that matters to you. You might agree with the critics or you might not. However don't skip this movie because of the low Rotten Tomatoes score.

As a huge fan of the Transformers animated series, I like the first Transformers film. The visuals were spectacular and so were the fighting scenes When I saw Transformers 2, which is a HUGE mess of a film, I was really angry. I vowed never to see a Transformers film ever again. But when the trailer of Transformers 3 came out, I actually got a little interested. I mean the special effects were pretty much great as usual. But this time, it seemed they took off the annoying little robots and that annoying mother and replaced them with good old fashioned action.

When I went to an advanced screening yesterday, I still came in with relatively low expectations. I have to say, that Transformers 3 is an overall improvement from its predecessor, Transformers 2. The film was pretty much at level with the first film, though. The action scenes were highly extravagant and at times, pretty epic. The movie had a lot less lame scenes, which is always a plus. The acting was okay. Megan Fox's replacement, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley was okay, but she's certainly not a good actress, but a mediocre one, actually I liked her more than Megan Fox. I liked how the movie used the Apollo landing as a part of its story, like in Forrest Gump. However there were so many characters that were extremely thinly written. John Turturro's character was definitely not needed and some of the dialogue was incoherent and very messy, at times. The movie is also way too long, at 157 minutes, wow. I thought the last scene with Megatron was completely rushed and so was the ending. Although the last hour of the film is pretty epic at times, so I was fulfilled with the visual effects.

Overall I rate Transformers 3, an 7/10. Don't go in expecting a Best Picture winner/nominee. With the right amount of expectations, you will probably be fulfilled. A definite improvement over Revenge of the Fallen, which doesn't say much. But at the end, the great special effects and extremely extravagant action scenes more than make up its flaws. I'd recommend this film if you like the franchise.