gp1-3

If you love golf, or movies about the Mexican-American struggle in America, you'll love this move. I don't have anything emotionally invested in either and so as usual, as a big movie and history buff, I couldn't but help pick out the problems with this movie from those standpoints. And there are some problems.

There were enough historical goofs and anachronisms in this movie that I ended up starting the "Goofs" section for this movie's IMDB page with a list. Go check that section out. Some lazy screenwriting here.

From a filming standpoint there were two main problems.

First, this movie was obviously not filmed in Del Rio or anywhere close to South Texas. The scenery of what is supposed to be Del Rio in this movie is filled with rolling hills, lush green grass, and lots and lots of deciduous trees. If you are at all familiar with the different regions of Texas, this area looks like the Austin area, home to a lot of film makers. The real Del Rio, and much of South Texas, would be flat, any grass not on carefully irrigated lawns would be struggling to stay green for much of the year, and palm trees would be as common as deciduous trees in the background.

Second, the cinematography was as modernistic as the film makers could get with their budget. Lots of sweeping shots across distances that are so common and easily done these days with drone cameras. Lots of moving shots of the actors with a handheld camera, from far away to closeups. Thankfully, they used either Steadicam or optical stabilization in their cameras and so these shots didn't have that jittery handheld look that can cause motion sickness from watching the movie (the classic "Blair Witch" vomit cam). But, obviously, these very modern high tech (and now relatively cheap to do) shots take away from the historical feel of what should be a period piece set in 1956, when the only motion shots that were commonly done were on tracked dollies, and two or three camera fixed closeups were the norm. There was a section midway in the movie where the shots were reprocessed to look like the old 8mm film from that time period, I guess to throw in some of that old period piece look, but, again if you're familiar with the look of 8mm film, that was a bit too obviously reprocessed. Real 8mm film actually looks better than that segment.

So, enjoy this movie as a golf buff or a righteous warrior for Mexican American civil rights. Or, actually you can enjoy it, somewhat, to spot the film making mistakes.

I ended up binge watching the entire series in one night - that is just how engrossing this streaming series is.

It's a voyage of discovery in a post-nuclear apocalypse world as a young woman exits from her underground vault in search of her father, who has been carried off by raiders who entered from the surface Wasteland.

There are some plot twists involving Evil Capitalists and flashbacks about how and why the entire Vault Tech network of underground nuclear shelters was set up in the first place.

The flashbacks are set in a sort of 1960s era fashion style which is also interesting.

All in all, this was a great show, and I'm looking forward to watching the second season already.

P. S. I'm not a gamer so I don't know much about the lore of the video game series this is based on, but having seen a lot of other movies and TV series based on video games, most of them don't come anywhere close to this level of quality, so this is a major plus.

Yes, this tale of a mistaken murder for hire, mixed in with a cheating wife, a professional killer on the hunt, and an overachieving private detective, all in a small dusty town in Texas is somewhat reminiscent of the style of the Coen brothers' movies, Blood Simple and Fargo, but is much, much better.

This movie flows better than those Coen movies, the characters are more sympathetically and realistically portrayed, and the story moves along at a brisk clip that takes you to all the logical conclusions of the original setting, as it also unwinds the mysteries and dark secrets held by these small town folks.

I never much liked the Coen movies as they tended to throw in way too many quirky slapstick stupid moments that seemed to mock the characters that they had created and just felt like not very funny comedic filler.

This movie doesn't do that - by the end of the movie it's possible to understand Ray's mind numbingly stubborn refusal to accept that his wife has been cheating on him - getting her, a beauty queen wife, was after all the greatest achievement of his otherwise utterly downtrodden and drab life.

His wife, Stacy-Lynn is forever reliving the greatest glory of her life, as the winner of the 2008 Beaux County Beauty Contest, and wants only to bring that feeling back to life again. The wide range of facial expressions she brings into this movie is hilarious on their own - from that brilliant beauty pageant smile to lips curled up in disgust.

Similarly, Skip the private eye, Harry the professional killer, and the LeDoux couple all have well fleshed out character arcs. Mrs. Le Doux in particular is a near carbon copy of so many other older Texas women I have met and just seeing her with her overly gracious hospitality interrupting the meeting inside the car in the car dealer lot was also really funny. Well played.

A funny and quite enjoyable movie to watch.

Nothing about this supposed US military Special Ops mission rings true from the air controller who has never made a HALO jump before doing it for the first time on a real mission, to Russell Crowe's 500 lb. Mission coordinator at the base, to the stupid wall phone in a TV recreation room that is the only way that the Special Ops team can contact him, but keeps getting its ringer turned off by a bunch of careless soldiers in the Rec room watching the TV.

There, I just gave away the entire plot of this Very, Very Bad Movie.

Don't waste your time with this one. It has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I have to say that when I first saw this movie in the 1990s as a VHS rental, I was moved to tears by this Japanese cartoon about a young boy and his even younger sister, a toddler, who become orphans even as they manage to survive the massive firebombings of their home during WWII, only to die of starvation shortly after Japan's unconditional surrender.

The story behind this movie was based on the real life experience of screenwriter Akiyuki Nosaka towards the end of WWII, when he was only some 15 years old and saw his adoptive father die during the air attacks and two of his sisters die of malnutrition.

We are 80 years removed now from that awful history. Nosaka passed away in 2015 at age 85. Many people watching this movie now perhaps won't notice or even know that those are American B-29s dropping the canisters of napalm onto Japanese civilians and their homes, or that those are American F6F Hellcats strafing the civilians. If you did know or recognized those details, you might think that, yeah, Americans are very much the Evil Bad Guys in this movie.

And that's what makes this cartoon movie, as true and tragic the story behind it is, not even half of the REAL STORY of what happened.

The FULL STORY would include the fact that shortly after American Occupation forces arrived in Japan after its unconditional surrender, General Douglas MacArthur recognized that a mass famine was underway in Japan, and urgently requested that large shipments of food aid be sent from the U. S. to Japan. This stopped the famine, obviously not soon enough to save Nosaka's sisters, but the Japanese military who had controlled the country had insisted on continuing the war well past the point where the country and its people were in desperate straits and needed to surrender (read - "Embracing Defeat" by John Dower)

The FULL STORY would include the fact that on the night before Emperor Hirohito's surrender speech was to be broadcast to the nation (it had already been recorded, on a wax cylinder), junior officers of the Japanese Army attacked the Imperial Palace, trying to locate and destroy the recording of the surrender speech, in a final desperate effort to continue the war. The general in charge of the Palace guard was killed when he refused to help the coupe attempt and the coupe plotters were arrested. This fact is important to remember for those today who just have no clue how fanatical the Japanese military leaders were that controlled the country at the time, and thus question whether whether the ferocious devastation of Japan by the U. S. was necessary to force its surrender (read - "Japan's Longest Day" and "The Day Man Lost Hiroshima").

The FULL STORY would include the fact that MacArthur and his aides would draw up a new constitution for the government of Japan, a constitution that gave Japanese women the right to vote, and limited its military to a Self Defense force only, to make sure that the military could never take control of the country again.

The FULL STORY would include the fact that five years after its surrender, Japan quickly became a trusted ally of the U. S., rebuilding its economy as a base of operations and a key supplier for the US military during the Korean War. Try to think of another situation in human history where a victorious nation would so quickly forgive a former enemy, after such a bitter, ferocious war, and then rebuild it in its own image as a free and democratic society.

Finally, the FULL STORY would include the fact that the horror of WWII had started over a decade before the U. S. was dragged into the war by Japan's sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, with Japan previously invading China, and then the rest of East and Southeast Asia, reaching even into India. An estimated 25 million people in these other countries died as a result of Japanese military attacks during this war, with widespread atrocities, and even more would have continued to die had the U. S. not utterly destroyed the Japanese ability to make war (read - "Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire", and "Tower of Skulls", both by Richard B. Frank).

The deaths of any children in war is tragic, but it's important to also know the full story and the aftermath of the story behind this otherwise very well made movie.

Just saw this in IMAX. Wow, what a well done movie, a terrific rendition of the second half of the book "Dune".

In many ways, the movie is an improvement on the book, making Chani's character a more realistic version of the tough fighter that she was instead of the pliable obedient 1960s era woman in the book. None of that "history will remember us as wives" ending.

The progression of Paul's gradual acceptance of the mantle of the Lisan al-Gaib is also fleshed out better.

Austin Butler stands out in his role as the psychotic Feyd Rautha. The portrayal of the world of Giedi Prime in black and white was terrific.

The sandworms and the sand trout and their connection to the Water of Life were all well done.

Some have criticized Stilgar's transformation from a tough tribal leader into a True Believer, but that was his character arc in the book. Javier Bardem showed this progression well.

The Great Houses refusing to accept Paul's rule at the end, thus triggering a devastating holy war, was another logical change from the book. I had always wondered why the jihad in the book still started when the Great Houses had accepted Paul as Emperor already.

A great movie, destined to be remembered as one of the best sci-fi movies of all time.

The story line of this series is pretty straightforward - this is the 1960s, and one brave, smart, educated woman overcomes the evil repressive misogynist times to find success.

The problem is that with Brie Larson, the series hired somebody with permanently frozen facial muscles (Botox of her entire face?) and an absolute inability to do any sort of emotional acting; the result is like watching a poorly designed not very human like robot going through the motions of trying to act.

I am unable to understand how Brie Larson has gotten so many roles and is still working as an actress. Her roles generally don't call for her to play a primitive robot, and yet, here she is, doing her best imitation of a 1960s era humanoid robot.

Larson has also become the poster child of the DEI, me-too movement, and has gotten lots of negative reactions for contributing, along with the likes of Rachel Zegler, etc., to the poor reception for recent Disney productions.

I don't know, I think she's just a bad actress.

The plot of this story is ridiculous. Yes, it was hard for educated women to make their mark in industry, science, or education, but many did succeed. I can tell you that having the personality of a robot and the emotional IQ of toenail fungus like the way Brie Larson portrays her character is definitely, positively, 100% going to make it that much harder for a real woman to succeed.

Joaquin Phoenix is a great actor, but whoever thought he could play Napolean just had no clue. The guy is 49 going on 65 years old and unlike other typical Hollywood actors like Tom Cruise (who is now *gasp* 61 going on 25 thanks to the miracles of modern plastic surgery, botox, and fillers), he's chosen to go au naturale, in regards to his face anyways, including the harelip birth defect scar that's been his signature look onscreen, which Napolean certainly did not have.

In contrast, for the period covered in this movie, from the Siege of Toulon to exile on St. Helena, Napolean was a remarkably young man, aged only 24 to 46. Portraits of the real Napolean during his years as a rising young star in the French Republican Army show a youthful and handsome man with hair to the shoulders. In his later years as Emperor of France and Terror of Europe, Napolean had shorter hair and a receding hairline. Phoenix was just wrong for the role, with neither the look nor the acting range to match the historical figure of Napolean.

This was a watchable movie, filled with realistic depictions of the horrors of late 18th and early 19th century combat, with cannonballs smashing into horses and people. The box formations of the British troops at Waterloo which defeated the final, futile charge of Marshal Ney's cavalry are well depicted. Napolean's adoration for Josephine, her infidelity, and inability to produce an heir for him, are all in the storyline.

Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of dumb and lazy screen writing in this movie, the worst being the absurd line that Joaquin Phoenix is made to blurt out at the British ambassador: "You think you're so great because you have boats!" Right.

All in all, this was a watchable and interesting movie if otherwise highly flawed in its execution.

This was a watchable if thoroughly unoriginal series that rips off every "James Bond", "Mission Impossible", and "Kingsman" trope ever made.

The use of amnesia as a plot twist device is on a scale normally seen only on soap operas like "Days of our Lives"

So many plot holes in this series, the story line pretty much stopped making sense in the first episode.

But, the brisk pace, the action sequences, and excellent acting kept this series going, and a decent watch and time filler.

One really big constant plot hole, a big pet peeve of mine, is that nobody does double taps (Zombieland Rule #2), which as usual just keeps some evil villains around forever until the end.

Flaw #1: John David Washington has the acting ability of the lumber section of Home Depot. I've seen him now in all three of his major movies - BlacKkKlansman, Tenet, and this movie, and in all three, I can only imagine how much BETTER all three movies would have been if his dad, Denzel, were in the movie instead of this flat, atonal, and wooden stiff occupying the screen.

Oh, and the kid playing Alphie also belonged in the lumber section.

Flaw #2: I don't know what writer/director Gareth Edwards was trying to do with this movie, but the whole concept of where AI and android - human interaction could go in the future could have been imagined in a far more interesting and plausible world than what was put out in this movie.

Instead, what ended up on the screen was this very simplistic, implausible, and heavy handed theme of:

West - Fears AI = Bad.

New Asia - Embraces AI = Good.

It's such a simple minded Hollywood trope to lump the entire Western culture and all the diverse and vastly different Asian cultures into heavily caricatured single unified entities that by the end of the movie I was flat out just offended.

The character of General Andrews - how many times have we seen this caricature of the Evil Military Mastermind in movies past? Couldn't Gareth Edwards come up with something new and original?

This is in the end, just a poorly thought out, badly acted and dumb movie. It could have been so much more.

And that is pretty much the movie. Something about Egyptian gods, mythology, etc.

And oh, poor Pierce Brosnan, who must be really hurting for money to have agreed to do this movie (remember, he used to have the glamorous 007 James Bond gig), has to wear a series of even more ridiculous outfits - a multitude of them in fact. Why is he always changing outfits for every scene?

Lots of fighting, people getting thrown through buildings and walls. The Rock is bullet proof, which pretty much ruins any suspense about who is going to win these fights.

I don't know, I've run out of things to say about this really bad movie. Save yourself some useful life and don't watch this movie.

That's just one of the many dumb non-sequiturs in the world building underlying this movie which wreck this sci-fi flick.

Zack Snyder hasn't made a decent movie in well over a decade, and I don't know why he keeps getting chances.

The basic plot seems contrived and utterly un-compelling.

The characters are all flat, the acting is flat, and whatever back stories the characters have are quickly ruined by the bad plot line.

Everything about this movie looks like it was patched together from bits and pieces of many other much better and more coherent sci fi movies.

There's nothing original about this movie and it's just a tired effort at filling in Netflix's insatiable need for content.

Yeah, like a lot of the other reviews said, the first 50 minutes were decent with intense action with apparently single take action sequences (from previous films that have done this, like "Birdman" you should know that there are usually planned breaks in the filming sequence that allow the sequence to be shot in shorter segments that are then stitched together with some CGI).

However, the plot definitely went south after they got on the plane and Yaz carelessly left out his satellite phone just so that Sandro, the conflicted witless boy, could steal it and call his uncle for no other reason than to prolong the plot for another hour of unnecessary violence. The full on terrorist attack on a skyscraper in Austria got to be a bit of a jump the shark moment.

The final plot hole that really messed up the movie for me was when Zurab and Rake (Chris Hemsworth) were fighting on the glass awning at the edge of the skyscraper and Zurab fell through one layer of the glass awning to land on the layer below, incapacitated.

AHA! Zombieland Rule #2 - Double Tap!

But NOOOOOooooooooo.... Rake just leaves the guy there, because you know there's got to be one of those last second, monster-you-thought-was-dead-rises-up-again-and-spears-A-Major-Character-right-through-the-heart moments. Followed by another ten minutes of a Final Showdown between Rake and Zurab inside a church.

How trite. I just felt it was such an unnecessary moment, so careless of a professional like Rake to do that and get his key operative Yaz, Nik's brother, killed that way. The movie left me feeling sad more than anything else for the characters Nik and Yaz, who had risked their lives to work so faithfully for Rake, but didn't have any of his Plot Armor, and because the screenwriters needed something, anything, to fill up the remaining two hours allotted for this movie, Yaz became disposable.

First and foremost, I thought this was a terrific movie, the acting performances were just outstanding. There are already plenty of reviews extolling the performances, and so I'll focus instead on some constructive criticism and helpful advice instead.

A few things are enough to bring this movie down from a "10":

1. The hype about watching this movie in IMAX was overblown. This movie has A LOT OF DIALOGUE, and lots of scenes of two people talking to each other, and so.... guess what, the bulk of that glorious 70mm IMAX footage is of two talking heads shot in glorious 70mm IMAX closeup. So yeah, unless you really enjoy analyzing the makeup progression on Cillian Murphy's face, from a callow youth with a clean fresh faced complexion and wild hair, to the beginnings of wrinkles and eyebags and a few gray hairs, well, that 70mm screen isn't really necessary, to be honest

2. Reading some of the history before watching the history will help a lot to understand this movie when watching it for the first time, otherwise you will be as totally lost as I was when watching Nolan's "Tenet". Once again, Nolan breaks up the movie into roughly 4 different time segments, and presents them in flashback and out of sequence jumbled order. As a history buff and having read a lot of this history already, it all made sense to me, but anybody else would get easily confused.

3. Subtitles would help! I've gotten so used to watching things digitally with the closed captioning or subtitles that I really wished there were subtitles available (I do plan to watch this movie again once it goes digital, with subtitles turned on). Even with the IMAX theater's speakers turned on full blast to an almost uncomfortable level, it was still hard to hear some of the whispered dialogue.

5. Nolan needs to bring Hans Zimmer back. I guess the two broke up when Zimmer took on "Dune" instead of "Tenet", but Ludwig Göransson's music just isn't in the same class of powerful memorable themes, and was even grating at times.

Despite these relatively minor complaints, this was a great movie. There were a few tiny almost cameo roles that turned out to have great significance as the ending wrapped up - another Nolan trait. Watch for Rami Malek - he is so instantly recognizable that I wondered what the heck he was doing there as an extra just standing there in the background in one scene, and fumbling a clipboard on Oppenheimer in his second scene, and then he appears as the surprise witness in the Senate confirmation hearings of Oppenheimer's arch enemy Lewis Strauss.

Go see this movie in the theaters, it's worth it. Then watch it again on digital streaming, with subtitles.

The CGI was still pretty good, blending well with the live action. So that's what the two stars are for.

Otherwise the plot was incomprehensible, the acting was awful, the current PC fashionable installation of minority black and Hispanic characters throughout the movie (hey, where are the Asians, albinos, dwarves, and pygmies? Why don't they ever get their fair share of representation?!!) was just grating as all heck, the dialog was ridiculously too much hip hop ghetto jive talking, or whatever it was the writers were trying to achieve, and ultimately the sounds coming out of the actors mouths was just so inane and painful to listen to that just to get through the movie I had to turn the sound off completely.

I guess they were trying to do the PC thing so popular these days and get away from the sexist stereotypes of the first two Transformers movies and so stopped doing the eye candy white female leads, instead went out and hired the least attractive minority black and Hispanic actors and actresses they could find. But then, think about it, why would their target audience of young adolescent boys want to watch this movie? What were they thinking?

Anyway, with nothing much to look at on the screen, even with the sound turned off, I couldn't stay awake and snoozed through the last half of the movie.

Ugh, ugh, ugh.

BORING!

I can't say this was a waste of life to watch because I fell asleep and got a nice nap out of it.

So, highly recommended as a sleeping aide!

Couldn't figure out the plot or what the purpose of any of the characters was about.

Gosh. I have to write another 333 characters for this review?

I really don't have anything else to say, and I'm not good at making small talk for reviews, just for the sake of a minimum character count... Hey! That worked! I'm down to only 110 characters!

Ok, so from the department of redundancy department, let me repeat, this is a BORING movie! Watch it only if you need a nice nap.

Well this is what happens when a movie studio controls a property and puts absolutely no one in charge who has a brain or a heart to make yet another movie in the series that is designed to do just one thing: rake in the profits.

I've seen this movie only once, when it was first released, and was immediately appalled when Hicks and Newt, the two most appealing characters from the previous Aliens movie, were killed off in the opening sequence when their escape capsule crash lands.

To make it worse, the combo four stooges credited with the screenplay and story then put in a scene where Newt gets autopsied - yep you heard that right, Ripley is afraid Newt got infected with an Alien and has her cut open! OMG!

Bishop the android, the only other character who escaped in the pod, gets thrown in the trash and then shut down. Woowee! The coast is clear now to totally wreck the franchise!

So the story is just this bizarre and grim tale of Ripley stuck on an all male prison planet while the Alien (which had early on implanted into a pet dog) rampages about and picks everybody off one by one. The End.

What an utter waste of time it was to have made this movie. I regret having seen this movie even once. If it were possible to unsee this movie and give this movie minus 10 stars I would.

James Cameron's Aliens is one of the best sci-fi horror movies ever made. I have the Blu-Ray and still watch it now and then.

This movie on the other hand just destroys the whole franchise.

The story, based closely on the novel, has two big plot holes. First, the idea that a young girl could live all alone in a house in the swampland and raise herself with no money other than what she can make from digging up and selling mussels, then later learn how to read and write and become a published author of nature books is about as fantastical as the origin story of Tarzan, Lord Greystoke.

The ending, which implied that Kya did kill Chase is also a problem, given how solidly her own lawyer had established at her trial how implausible the timeline would have been for her to have bused herself back into town, gotten Chase out of bed in the middle of the night and somehow lured him onto the tower to push him through the hole and then gotten back on the bus to meet her publishers in the morning, all within an hour.

Apart from the casting of the terrific JoJo Regina as little Kya, casting for other key characters was off base. Daisy Edgar-Jones is just too much of the well bred English lady that she is to pull off the role of a rough and semi feral marsh girl in the Deep South (and whatever happened to casting up and coming AMERICAN actors for a deeply AMERICAN character? A role like this, of a hardscrabble young woman in rural America, was what launched Jennifer Lawrence's career in "Winter's Bone").

Taylor John Smith also came off as way too preppy, well groomed, and with a body built by a personal trainer, to be the son of a humble fishing boat captain. Scenes between him and his scruffy looking father were bizarre, like, wait, these two are supposed to be a father-son pair?

Harris Dickinson was ok as the creepy Chase, but it was weird that although he was supposed to be the local star quarterback that he was less muscular than Taylor Smith as Tate.

Costuming and make up was also off. Too preppy for the guys. Too many nice clothes and too much nicely combed hair for marsh girl when she was still dirt poor before she started getting money from her books. It just didn't ring true. They did get the young Kya look down pretty well, though.

All in all, a movie that holds your attention but doesn't ring true in a lot of ways.

Well, this is my third try at writing a review for this awful series. The previous two efforts did not make it in.

Basically this is an unwatchable series, as it just consists of a bunch of people screeching insults at each other at a rapid fire pace and high pitched tone.

Hurts your ears to listen to this.

I'm pretty sure the only reason this show has such a high rating is that somebody is censoring and removing the negative reviews.

This has to be one of the worst TV series ever made.

Masao is an elderly Japanese-American dying of cancer and living alone in a shack in rural Oahu. He still keeps a small Shinto shrine to his long dead wife, Grace in his home, with her ashes buried under a giant tree nearby.

The movie slowly unwinds the story of Masao's difficult life. We are introduced to his three children, first an adult son who is with him at the clinic. This son seems to be struggling, possibly with mental disease, as he keeps seeing the ghosts of his dead mother and other ancestors. Later that night, Masao tries to call his other son, perhaps to tell him about his cancer diagnosis. This son had long ago moved away to the mainland US, somewhere on the East Coast probably, and had broken off contact with Masao. The son's irritated reply "Do you know what time it is? There's a six hour time difference!" before hanging up on him, pre-empts anything Masao might have wanted to say to him.

Finally we meet Masao's daughter's family. She is married, apparently to a Caucasian guy. She appears to have one son and one daughter, the daughter being married to an Asian man, and has young children of her own.

The story briefly introduces Masao's part-Caucasian grandson, before seguing to a series of flashbacks that recount the rest of Masao's life story.

At some point before America' entry into WWII, the young Masao has fallen in love with Grace, who is Chinese, and so is rejected by Masao's rigid Olde Countrie Japanese parents, who want only to return to Japan. Masao runs away from home to be with Grace, and so is ostracized by his Japanese parents and community. His parents then return to Japan without him. The war begins, Japan's cities are firebombed, and Masao's parents and family die in the firebombings. In anger and/or despair Masao turns away from his wife and family and begins a ruinous life of drinking and carousing with his buddies. Grace slowly dies of something that is not otherwise detailed in the movie. After her death, Masao sends his young children to live with their aunt (Grace's sister), while at the same time stealing Grace's ashes from her house one night and burying them at the base of the giant tree near his rural shack, to fulfill a promise he had made to Grace.

There the story ends, with the ghost of Grace narrating the last parts of Masao's story in these flashbacks, as Masao dies in his home.

It's a slow and sad but thoughtful story, not the usual dramatic Romeo and Juliet story of love clashing against families and cultural values, but far grittier and closer to the truth of how these cultural conflicts often play out. The interesting parts of this movie come from the reveals of Masao's past, which appear to be haunted by ghosts now.

The story is also not really about Olde Hawaii so much as it is a story of the Japanese and Chinese peoples on the island in the pre and post WWII era. Most of these people had been imported into Oahu as cheap labor for the pineapple and sugar cane fields that were the major industries there at the time. It's all different now of course, and this movie reminds us of that part of Olde Hawaii.

Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, and Mila Kunis are just terrific in this movie.

The post-apocalyptic setting is as spare as it gets, not the garish outrageousness of the Mad Max movies.

The underlying mystical power of the Bible that Eli carries in his travels infuses the movie with a supernatural spirituality that is just plain missing from so many movies today. The moody music seals the magic of this movie.

You don't have to be a Christian to appreciate the sheer poetry and beauty of Eli's final verses at the end, but they're just awesome, with the key lines from the words written by the Apostle Paul as he sat in prison awaiting death at the hands of the Romans.

This is just a fabulous movie, and Cruise and Emily Blunt have a natural chemistry that works great. The late Bill Paxton also has a terrific turn as a hard nosed sargeant who leads his platoon to battle.

Yes its an alien invasion and time loop movie, but it makes great use of all of that, unlike so many other bad sci-fi movies.

A must see.

It's obvious that the movie's themes resonate with a lot of people - lost opportunities in life, bad choices, wanting to change everything, or destroy it all.

I didn't relate to a lot of those themes personally, since these days I basically just go with OK, this is what you got into, so how do you move on from here? Yeah, there was a period where I looked back and reflected on a lot of things and how they could have been better, but whatever, time to move on now.

Anyway, I do respect what the movie was trying to say, as chaotic as it was presented. The flipping around between multiverses reminded me most of "Cloud Atlas", but magnified tenfold.

The charisma of Channing Tatum, Sandra Bullock, and Brad Pitt manage to shine through the predictable plot. This is basically a spoof of the romance novel and romance action adventure genre.

Daniel Radcliffe once again plays an eccentric character, the evil villain of this movie.

Not much else to say, this likeable comedy should just be watched without thinking too hard.

Yeah, somewhere in there is a woke message about dirty capitalism and how the rich will always be rich, and the poor will try to struggle out of their poverty but will end up crushed by the rich, etc.

Or, how about this alternative Olde Fashioned Message - don't steal somebody's cow, and maybe you won't end up dead.