Reviews (221)

  • Perhaps viewing the show so long after it was made helps with perspective.

    We now know with a brief viewing what the 'agenda' of a show is and what roles and tropes are being used.

    This show is so left wing it makes Pelosi look like Trump by comparison.

    But it is made for people who want difficult subjects presented and resolved in neat little packages that they can feel good about, all while watching people smothered in facial creams. Nothing really offensive is allowed here. All emotions are clearly telegraphed, and reinforced by the supporting cast, so that even the laziest viewer can pick them up and know what they are expected to feel.

    Mind numbing.
  • A vibrant and exciting country is visited by a dull foreigner.

    That's really all that needs to be said. Six hundred characters are needed to meet some quota for verbosity. That might make for a longer script than is used in the show.. It certainly is more exciting and interesting.

    That's really all that needs to be said. Six hundred characters are needed to meet some quota for verbosity. That might make for a longer script than is used in the show.. It certainly is more exciting and interesting.

    That's really all that needs to be said. Six hundred characters are needed to meet some quota for verbosity. That might make for a longer script than is used in the show.. It certainly is more exciting and interesting.
  • This sits in that category of inoffensive viewing where everyone is 'nice' and comfortably off.

    It's also another variation of the odd couple who come together, complete with involved back stories, to solve assorted mysteries they chance upon.

    A photoshop'ed Queensland acts as the backdrop.

    Think of Death In Paradise as a reference.

    The two leads are familiar faces for the target audience. I found their van to be more interesting.

    We get an insight in to the campervan culture in Australia - which is sort of a land based cruising; continually being forced in to close proximity with total strangers while traveling far.

    Silly stories with timely resolutions and those backstories running across the series.
  • Well to be fair the intended audience appears to be young women and girls so my rating probably doesn't count with them. I assume that, other than those with financial attachments, they are the ones rating this higher.

    Everything about the show felt cheap, like in an afternoon 'kidult' show. Poor acting, cheap props, dire script, routine plot - or at least one where we can see the whole thing before it happens.

    One episode was more than enough for me.
  • As an adult I found it silly and boring and awash with box ticking.

    Perhaps the target audience is teens. It once was clear by the time of day it showed on television.

    Not for me.
  • Six episodes of Ewan looking out for a boy would require some quality writing and gifted actors to make interesting.

    Well they don't have either so it's cheesy acting and stupid stories involving girls running and men falling over.

    Well that was the first episode and there is no way I'll be watching any more.
  • 'Allo, 'Allo had funny french accents and was entertaining.

    Everyone in this light piece of work has a funny British accent. And it's not entertaining unless you want something made for mildly (dis)interested older folk while also being woke.

    I skipped through to the silly end of the first episode, and will skip it all from here.
  • In this fantasy based on some possibilities we get very pretty visuals and 'the voice'

    Unfortunately we get less of the boring stuff that is so important - the actual science and analysis of what is known, what is surmised and what is just filled in to make it pretty.

    A pretty introduction for those who know little about the subject.
  • It's a series of Batman movie tropes thrown together with mostly uninteresting characters.

    Obvious;y there are a considerable number of paid-for reviews clogging up IMDB, but it pays to always sort the reviews by latest to get to people who have actually watched a film with no connection to the production team.
  • Another take on the twist-and-turns genre with some mixed up aspects, perhaps because to young people it's all just 'old'.

    Here we have gangsters from the '50s acting like they were from the '30s with a plot using technology from the '60s.

    The acting, with one notable exception, and directing feels like a high-school production.

    As the story comes towards the end it gets a bit silly.

    But at least it was an attempt at a quality production and a hope would be that the parties involved will improve with experience - hence the supportive 6.
  • Firstly, the soundtrack is SO over the top. There needs to be a no-music version so that intelligent people aren't flooded with stupid melodramatic sounds.

    Here we have Chris (do I look like Brosnan?) Pine and Thandiwe (I'll show you my tits) Newton, who isn't aging as well.

    The story might have been fine in capable hands, but this cheapie with poor acting sort of plods along and you can tell by how long there is to go whether there is something else evolving to not care about.

    It's a straight-to-DVD calibre of movie that would be a time filler on a (very) long flight.
  • Adding to previous reviews, this load of tosh called the Hood some sort of technical leading weapon as opposed to a left-over from WWI that was so flawed the British decided NOT to build the other versions.

    Also, Germany did not start wars with Russia and Germany 'at the same time'.

    They started one, and were dragged in to the other - later.

    Perhaps we should look at all historical, and religious, artifacts and question how often we lose accuracy over time.
  • ... it is just the same dump videos you can find on Youtube or elsewhere.

    No Mastermind involved in episode 1. In fact, the complete opposite.

    Routine show.
  • Written using Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V this routine drivel of cliches has had 'diversity' forced in to the cast and ended up with poorly acted tosh.

    There is no need to watch it as you have seen it all before, just much better.
  • ... that my lifelong idol has this mediocre offering with his name on it.

    Perhaps there is very limited video of the real man available, or perhaps there were licencing issues. A video with other people playing his music just isn't good enough.

    Standard format used of people saying only nice things, limited coverage of his earlier years, and a somewhat awkward inclusion of his last wife.

    The parts with Oscar talking were great and there is nothing to compare with his actual playing.

    Perhaps a culled version of 45 mins would do it until (if ever) a better tribute comes along.

    But this is Oscar so we should end on a happy note. And that is done by playing one of his albums. I'd suggest something from the early '60s.
  • ... but felt too long and could have done with being 'tighter'.

    The new actors aren't that good and it means that it doesn't have the appeal of the original.

    But if this is the eighth time using the same basic idea then we could expect a fizzer which this isn't. It's OK as another go at the original story.
  • 30 mins is all the story really needed.

    The old 'I'm in trouble send me some money' scam - run on social media these days.

    They give the money away, so any retribution would be a challenge.

    What happens to him? - Skip to the end to find out.
  • ... which I only saw some 18 months ago.

    Firstly it was good to see a movie made in recent times where it revolves around the story rather than just filling quotas. But I started watching the movie without doing any research and part way in thought that it all seemed very familiar. That's when I realised it was a remake, or at least the same book (story) told again.

    The other had great actors and was a noir movie made in the period. This felt like it was one of those 'batman' movies given the style of CGI used.

    The actors are familiar and mostly do their usual characters. Nobody is stretching here.

    And that's really the problem. And I suppose that means is the fault of the director.

    So my scoring would be that it is one of the best movies of recent times, but less memorable than the previous version, and ultimately left an impression of mediocrity.
  • Irons acts well, as expected. Others - don't.

    The story is a far fetched significant variance from actual history, which is OK when producing entertainment, but the target audience might not be aware.

    Some tokenism thrown in as seems to have to be expected these days. Surprisingly, then, Hitler isn't played by a BAME actor.

    It does try hard to be suspenseful but, as noted, the acting is poor/middling and likely the budget was limited.

    Is it worth watching? Well remember the old saying about in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king? Not much to see these days.
  • It's like a dark Scandi thriller you've seen before.

    The settings are bleak, the story is stretched to 8 episodes, a woman becomes the main investigator and she has personal issues and old relationships, a man who seems bad turns out to be good - but most men are bad, and so on and so on.

    One difference is that while you read your English subtitles the voices will be speaking Russian.

    I skipped to the last episode to see if it got better. It didn't.
  • Another one of those movies that would have seemed like a good idea. It's a shame that the implementation is poor.

    Poor story telling, flat acting, and silliness without humour.
  • The basic story has been done many times in an endless number of westerns. Lots of cliches and tropes weaved together in like a very poor man's The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

    The difference here is that it is set in Australia and seems to be trying to weave in an array of 'diversity' with the ethnicities of the characters but the acting is poor and you'd have to have been born yesterday (or be madly woke) to consider this anything other than a b-grade movie.
  • Seriously?

    They tried to pass this off as prime time viewing?

    This was more like a theatre staged farce and could have had his pants falling down such was the tone.

    As other have said, more Scooby-Do than you-know-who.

    That politician who complained about a woman as The Doctor could add the people who put this story together as examples of how to lead young folk astray.

    More proof that 'different' and 'better' only have an occasional overlap.
  • Despite the scruffy guy with the dumb questions the 99% of this show is either Paul talking or music being played. And that is magic.

    The insights in to how music is made is absolutely fascinating for a record-buyer like me.

    Being delivered in 30 minute episodes keeps you wanting more.

    Best show of 2021.
  • Ended up watching this on a recommendation (which so often goes wrong) but found this to be a very entertaining and well made movie.

    While the zombies over-act, as expected of them, everyone else plays their role with a level of constraint. That adds to the quality of the production, along with the sub-stories and social commentaries that are provided but not rammed down your throat.

    It was fun. It has some tropes. It paces well.
An error has occured. Please try again.