acutaboveentertainment

If you've seen all three of the movie versions of the story (1980's TV movie A Murder In A Small Town with Barbara Hershey, Hulu's Candy with Jessica Biel, and HBO's Love And Death with Elizabeth Olsen), you've started to notice as I have that every story is just like the other one. The small details, the backstory lines, even bits of dialogue are virtually identical. That's not just because they're all based on the same book, but apparently the screenwriters are too lazy to add their own touches to it. So you'll notice literally copy-and-paste dialogue from a version over forty years ago in this most recent version. I'm not sure what Hollywood's fascination with Candy Montgomery is, but she isn't worth three different movies by three different actresses, all literally re-telling the same story with the same dialogue.

There is an important story told here. The fact that some of the original participants involved took part in the movie is admirable. These women are all brave. This all needs to stop - not just the perpetrator's behavior but the system that covers their heinous actions.

That being said, there are some big problems with film. It's all procedural evidence. Mostly through quotes and here say. It's gonna need some angle to give him a little more in media city animal statement, but suddenly there is none. There is an actual recording of an actual victim used in the film in a way that even low budget documentary is doing better. Many of the shots are either cluttered or static. Since the info is downplayed the action, being non-existant, is dull and tepid. This style also hampers the performances of the lead actresses, who do the best they can. Sadly, this film is not what it should've been.

The best advice I can give you is not to read any reviews by total amateurs. Unless they expand on why they like or dislike particular project it's just someone's opinion. (I know, I know! You might think it applies here, but I actually used to write reviews professionally.) The negative reviews here are from people who don't understand filmmaking, pacing, and the positives of silence. The lack of music gives it a realistic tone. Mel Gibson and Vince Vaughn actually have a good chemistry in this thing; I'd like to see them work together again. The supporting players all do their work well. I look forward to other projects from this Writer/Director as I've enjoyed his last two films.

I've been a fan of Ben Foster for a long time. He completely disappears into his roles. From his ferocious debut in movies like Alpha Dog to his role in 3:10 To Yuma where he upstaged both Russell Crowe and Christian Bale. Probably one of the reasons he's not a star yet is he's different looking and everything he does. This is no exception. This movie is like a cross between Schindler's List and Raging Bull, not only in storyline but it's very unique and somber look. But there is no way this performance can be ignored. If this doesn't land him and Oscar nomination, probably the award itself, and a long satisfying career after this then nothing will!

This is definitely not your typical Charles Bronson film. But it is probably the film he wanted to most do with his wife Jill Ireland. It's a romantic comedy, the last thing you'd expect from action star Chucky, which is personally why it's such a revelation. It also takes place mostly in one location so I've always wonder why it has not been staged for live theater. The ending is sublime. I recommended for this as a date film for somebody who isn't usually into Westerns.

None of these armchair reviewers I'm reading here know the difference between a low budget film and a truly bad film. This film is not bad. It's competently shot and acted, if not a little talky. Considering the limitations this is not a badly crafted film at all. It's just done on a shoestring budget, and for what you actually did it's not bad for the money.

I am writing a Broadway musical on the Tombstone story, so I am reading every book and watching every movie on the subject. Been to Tombstone, AZ twice already. With this film my expectations were not high, yet I was still profoundly disappointed. I guess Wyatt Earp Shot First remains as the worst on the subject! If this completely amateurish production can get made I have higher hopes about my musical data.

I wanted some mindless action on a big screen, but I can't handle it too them I've sworn off all Disney origin movies, so Cruella and Black Widow are out. No thanks on Forever Purge. And F9 looks as gawdawful as a big budget could muster up. So I saw this one. But this movie was dumb. D. U. M. B. Mind numbingly dumb. NATO the National Alliance of Theater Owners are begging for us to return. But they've got to give us something worthy of our money, time, and effort. This isn't even close. D-

Sure, it's Gaslight meets Rear Window, and I'm OK with that. But those are big shoes to fill. It's well enough directed and acted, but it suffers from one major flaw:

How could a supposedly trained child psychologist miss that she's being played by a 15-year-old? I mean, she even brags about her prowess at one point, so why doesn't her expertise and paranoia point right in his direction? It's a red herring that might pass in the book, but when translated to film seems more than obvious.

So the big mystery reveal feels false and unfortunately sours what came before it.

Horrid excuse for a film!

Seriously, this is the template for everything that goes wrong when you let special effects take over a movie. It's a dark, muddy, incongruous mess! There are no surprises to the plot or performances. Even the casting is predictable as hell with Wolverine Hugh Jackman as a werewolf, a latex clad Kate Beckinsale looking like Milla Jovovich, and Shuler Hensley from two different Frankenstein musicals on Broadway playing guess who!

Between this movie and the Tom Cruise reboot of The Mummy, Universal is halting their current onslaught of rebooting classic category films. If they're all going to be this horrible, why bother?

If your review starts with 'a crying baby'... then you seriously have no business reviewing films, not even on an amateur level. It was supposed to make you uncomfortable! Those of you who tuned out after a few minutes because of it missed a decent film. And you showed your whiny true colors along with a complete lack of film knowledge. Ignore all those reviews...

I can't say I agree with the other reviews. This isn't all that bad. Sure, it's low budget and mostly unknown actors. But the known actors are decent enough and the action is well filmed and quite credible. We don't watch these movies for the dialogue or acting. For what I tuned in for, I got my times worth.

That's right: Kerry Washington's performance is above these fools! I am only a third of the way through the series so I'll save my review until I finish it, but those hating Washington's performance clearly don't know zippo of what they're talking about. They're no different than some fat dude named Bubba leaning over the fence at NASCAR telling professional drivers and mechanics how to do their job. You guys wouldn't know a brilliant performance if it smacked you in the face! Oh wait look! One did and you didn't. Which makes me right...

Barry Seal is a lowlife and probably a murderer of two teenage witnesses in Arkansas. He's definitely a shameless drug runner. The casting of Tom Cruise in this role is a huge misleading mistake. There's nothing charming about this tool

You can see the boom mic several times throughout the movie. The little girl with a fake speech impediment is wearing a wig. The boy is wearing a fat suit. People don't behave or talk this way, even in a family film. Check out the directors other flops for hack verification...

Straight to video usually is the death curse for a movie, but being a bad movie isn't always the reason that happens. I guarantee I have seen far worse in the movie theaters on too many occasions to even count. This is not bad at all, the action is intense the story is simple and easy to follow, and the performances are all credible. These are decent actors they're using here. Bruce Willis isn't as small of a cameo as other reviewer's would have you believe. It's not a bad ride at all. Ignore the hate filled reviews, grab some popcorn, and enjoy as best as you can!

I was hooked from the opening shot; it showed a visual style and brutality that sucked me in right away. As the series progressed I got to know the characters and found all the actors fairly engaging; in particular Kai played by Iko Uwais. You can certainly tell he was raised in a martial arts family as his moves are practically flawless. Co-starring as his alter ego is recognizable character actor Mark Decascos as the Wu Assassin, an Byron Mann as our main villain Uncle Six.

Katheryn Winnick (Vikings) also costars, but the other female leads aren't very good actresses, especially the 'sprite' who guides Kai through his new adventure as the Wu Assassin.

The first half of the series is packed with great martial arts action and steeped in Chinese folklore, which I appreciated. But halfway through the series the story started to take several left turns. They introduce another villain and somehow soften the original one. There are several other diversions that only muddy the waters and confuse the plot.

The later inclusion of sturdy character actors Tommy Flanagan and Kevin Durand was a good idea, but by then the plot is so convoluted you probably won't care. They even gratuitously throw in a scene where the leads get to beat up a bunch of rednecks, which has nothing to do with the plot. By series end I was only wishing that they had stayed on the course the first half of the series was on. Seemed like a waste of potential...

I rated it as high as a 7 because of the martial arts action