Alright. I get the show has a strong LGBTQ message, but what is the purpose of showing bisexual orgies in almost every episode?
This show is essentially sex, sex, gay sex, lesbian-trans sex and oh yes more sex. I have nothing against peoples sexual preferences but if I wanted to watch two dudes suck each other off in a bathroom I'd go to a porn site.
That aside, the idea of the show itself is horribly executed. Painfully slow and it just drags on and on. The plot line is also an absolute mess, I kept having to remind myself what the show was about to make sense of it.
This could have been a great if it was more concentrated on the actual story line instead of trying to pander to the audience.
Having been a huge Sci-fi fan all my life and hearing all the praise for this film, I gotta say, I had really high expectations. When I left the cinema I couldn't help but feel like someone had just conned me.
The basis of this film is great. An alien species arrive on earth and the various governments deal with it their own way. A linguist and a physician get called out to the landing area of one of the spaceships and are asked to communicate with the aliens. Up to this point I was on the edge of my seat.
Then the director decides its time to throw it all away. He gives some really poor explanation on how the aliens communicate, and the protagonist through a series of moments of heavy breathing (literally) and flashbacks somehow understands it all.
There is no science fiction in this, not one bit. It is pure fantasy and honestly a waste of talent and potential.
Throughout almost the whole film it felt like the ball was on the goal line, and you are waiting there for someone to just tap it in. And when they finally do you realize it's an own goal.
I recently picked this movie up after seeing the stellar reviews on IMDb. I knew I was in for a dialogue-filled 90 minutes but I was not ready for what I was about to endure.
I love dialogue based films but this one is different. The whole movie is just one big dialogue from start to finish. And it isn't funny or original dialogue, it's mainly clichès about love and lame anecdotes.
It gets so pretentious I laughed during some scenes. The characters try too hard to be emotionally deep and intellectually different, and it gets to a point where it's just plain boring.
The acting is good in some points and horrible in others, some lines are delivered with so little conviction you start to wonder whether some of it is supposed to be sarcasm.
Anyways I still give it 5 stars for the idea but I would definitely not watch it again.
When American Sniper first came out I ignored the film thinking that it was the usual war propaganda Hollywood delivers once a year.
After it received a couple of Oscar nominations I got a little curious and decided to go watch it. I am a big of Clint Eastwood and appreciate most of his work as a director, I am aware of his right-wing views and as I sat down in the theatre I was expecting a very patriotic story on the war in the Middle East.
But what I got was 2 hours of pure biased war propaganda. The story is supposed to be about a war hero, but what we get is a ruthless southern who kills "bad guys" because he saw some terrorist attacks against his country on TV. Not once are the his intentions questioned by either the character himself or others. The entire film just follows a one-track minded perspective on a "just" war. There is no morale to the story, there are no grey areas where the viewer is allowed to have an opinion and decide for himself what is right and what is wrong.
Now if this was satire, it would have been brilliant. The story of a redneck cowboy who after seeing some footage on TV about terrorist attacks decides he needs to protect his country by enrolling in the Navy and killing 150 people over 5000 miles away from where he lives, and without the slightest hesitation. But unfortunately it was not.
It is actually quite sad to see how low American cinema has stooped. The fact that people might actually believe this crap (and most Americans do) makes me lose hope for the future of a once great country.
There was a time when Hollywood war movies raised important questions on the righteousness of war (such as Full Metal Jacket, Thin Red Line, Apocalypse Now) where the viewer was given the clear picture that all war, justified or unjustified, is wrong.
Nowadays most war movies are just commercials to get the American public behind the idea that invading a foreign country is a God given right.
The fact that it got nominated for the Academy Award just shows how much a once acclaimed award is quickly becoming a pat on the shoulder to the most politically correct motion picture of the year.
This is a movie! Not a documentary... Most of the facts are exaggerated and most of the historical details are inaccurate. In my opinion if you go see this film without any bias its actually quite enjoyable and brilliantly directed.
Maybe it is propaganda, but what movie doesn't have a social/political message in it??(Lincoln & Django both about black oppression, both released before Obama's re-election and lets not even mention Bigelow's absolute crap)If you want Hollywood to depict history accurately you'll be disappointed 99 % of the time. For example, most of Hollywoods war films are complete garbage, only showing one side of the story and the American army being the mighty hand of God himself while the enemy is portrayed as cruel and ruthless.
Actually Argo doesn't glorify the US. It shows a critical political situation and a government that is failing to get out of it cleanly. A CIA agent comes up with a daring plan to rescue the embassy staff who survived without harming anyone... The mistake was not giving enough credit to the Canadian government who actually saved the day and took most of the risks. Iran was the villain so obviously everything about the people, police etc. was exaggerated to the extreme. But hell if you know a little about history you wouldn't give a damn.
Again Argo is fiction and it has to be viewed as such. The plot is great, the editing superb and the acting was decent. Affleck's directing is also excellent, giving a realistic feel to the movie and always keeping you on the edge of your seat. Worthy of an Oscar for Best Picture? Probably not, but the Oscar for editing was well deserved.
Watch this film without trying to understand the political aspect of it or taking parts and I am sure you will enjoy it.
I heard a great deal about this movie from some of my friends and having seen some of Soderbergh's more recent works, I must say I was kind of let down. The story in itself is kind of interesting but the characters (and the actors) aren't. Most of the characters felt superficial to me ie. the successful lawyer having an affair, cheating sister, repressed wife etc. I just think Soderbergh should have built the characters a little more. Other than that it is quite a decent film. Especially the different perspectives this film gives you on infidelity and dishonesty (and fetishes I guess). Not a movie I would watch again though... I'll just stick to Soderbergh more recent work (Traffic was brilliant).
I am a hardcore Tarantino fan and I must say I had great expectations for this movie. I can now honestly say that in my opinion Django Unchained is Tarantino's worst film to this day.
Lets start with the first major flaw. The soundtrack. Usually Tarantino has great taste for his soundtracks and on most of his movies (pulp fiction, reservoir dogs, kill bill) it actually is a fundamental part and complements the film. On Django it seems that Mr. Tarantino got Lil Wayne to choose some of the tracks. Hip Hop in a western?? Completely ruined the movie for me.
Second, the length of the movie is ridiculously long... Almost 3 hours. Usually films of such lengths have intricate plot lines and/or are made to tell an exceptionally long story. Not in this case. The movie could have easily been 100 minutes long. If it wasn't for the excessive and unnecessary dialogues, the useless KKK scene, the first 45 minutes of the movie which have almost nothing to do with the main plot line. The last 30 minutes of bloodshed serve to no use and I guess is just a fetish of the director. Mr. Tarantino seems to lose the sense of time and you can never tell where his ego ends and the plot begins.
Third, bad acting. Jamie Foxx is impalpable. Besides a few punch lines and some dramatic moments Foxx doesn't portray the slave from the pre-civil war era but mostly comes off as a thug from the hood. Di Caprio is too pretty-faced to seriously be the villain in this movie and if it wasn't for the horrors happening around the character (Candie) you could hardly tell he's the bad guy. Waltz and Jackson on the other hand with their excellent performances keep this movie together. I was really hoping Tarantino, with such an all-star cast, could have pulled off a both socially relevant and at the same time entertaining film, but again I was mistaken.