This is without doubt my most favorite tv-show of all time. I rewatch The Sopranos every year. I read every book on The Sopranos that there is to find. I myself work as a psychiatric nurse, and from a professional point of view this show is so deep. But what makes The Sopranos stand out from everything else, and why do I call it the best tv-show made in history? It's not an easy answer. But I believe that there is something for everybody in it. It can be very shallow for the non critical viewer, who just wants to have a good time. And it can be so deep you almost need a few experts to explain you everything. But in the end both of the type of viewers will have the feeling they watched the same show, even if they understood it on a whole other level. This is wat makes this show stand out from anything else. Never have I watched a show that could do this. Either they are very complicated and need your full attention, and they will not speak to ordinary Joe. Or the other way around. This is the big secret of the succes in my opinion.
I had high hopes for this documentary, because the topic is something that has always sparked a great interest in me. I must say this documentary was shot very well, visually this could have been a 8 or a 9. But it all went south on the angles they decided to follow in this story. This is a perfect example of a documentary that just wants it all. It wants to give you an insight in the suffering of this people, what cryonics is all about, how the son is getting involved in the science to bring back his sister. Especially with the son, it's clear from the get go this is an exceptional smart kid. But there is no information on his background. You see him sitting behind a microscope "working" on bringing back his sister. But it just feels so pretended. There is just not enough backstory on this family who is clearly very rich, which gives you quickly a privileged taste that never really goes away. In the end when the credits are rolling over your screen, you just felt like this was a rich family who could afford to never let their daughter go. But by doing this they have denied themselves the right on grieving.
On first sight I thought this would be the sort of "mockumentary" that would deliver a monumental personality that everybody can hate and laugh at. I couldn't have been more wrong. After a few cringe/awkward moments, slowly Ronnie's personality starts to develop. And the picture that you get is of a person who is realizing his time on earth is coming to an end. He contemplates on life and by growing older also feels he's getting every day less visible. In an effort to get back a grip he starts telling this cleary exaggerated stories te any stranger who wants to listen. It's clear (even to him) that many people don't believe him, and if they believe him they only want to use him for their own benefit.
This man is a very lonely soul and clearly extremely narcistic. His social skills are sad to witness and he never really learned how to build friendships. He has a total lack of empathy and cannot listen to anyone else except himself. It would have been very easy to picture him in such a way he would only have been an asshole. But by portraying him in the way they did, you could feel empathy for this man, and in his own way there is a lot of suffering in his life. He was a victim of his own upbringing, that same upbringing he uses to be seen by people, but by doing this he's actually erasing his own chance to ever become a "real" person.
Today I decided to revisit one of my most beloved series. As it's been a long time I rewatched the whole show, I decided to take a closer critical look at it. It's been almost 20 years since it was first released, back then TV shows were still the usual sitcoms. It was nothing that was taken too serious by critics, with exception of The Sopranos who was just getting started by then.
I must say this show has aged very well. Back then, when I watched it, I had never seen something like this before. The messy shooting style was something I was blown away by. (still am by the way) Character development is almost perfect. Every actor is on point and is so believable, it's as if you are sharing a foxhole with them on their journey. Every episode is a chance to get to know another character, without ever losing the bigger picture. It has some of the best writing to date. It's easy to point out that it is a very patriotic view of American soldiers during WOII. And to a certain degree I agree. But if it is made and produced like this? Hell, I'll take it!
"In thinking back on the days of Easy Company, I'm treasuring my remark to a grandson who asked, 'Grandpa, were you a hero in the war?'
'No,' I answered, 'but I served in a company of heroes.'"
I'm a 30 year old, cigar smoking, fully tattooed guy. I never cry. I cried through this documentary. Not because it was all romantic. But because it was so real. I was moved by the honesty in this documentary. It was about forbidden love, but also about letting go. Just one little remark was that Pat was maybe slightly portrayed as someone who wasn't always honest and authentic. I just saw a woman who always was used to be in control and was maybe jealous about the intense bond Terry had with her family. But you could tell she loved Terry with all her heart. She clearly had trouble with letting go of the control. I believe Terry knew this. God, thank you for sharing this beautiful story. I do hope the family is still in touch with Pat and still taking care of her.
This show is at his best mediocre, and then I'm really being a nice guy. The problem I have with this show is that it just doesn't stand out in any area. The story is what you can call at some times really confusing, time leaps that weren't explained. The special effects were not up to standars, compared to other big budget shows in the fantasy genre. I tried really hard not to laugh when I saw how they made the dragon look in this show. If it wasn't this sad, I would have laughed. Casting was in some cases very questionable. But what I am mostly concerned and shocked by is how many people rate this show so high. Are you blind? Don't you see what I see? I simply cannot understand how you could even think this show is worth a 9 or a 10. Is it so that everything that is fantasy just gets hyped these days, without even looking at the quality? I'm afraid so... And that means that my beloved genre of fantasy, doesn't have a bright future.
The problem with "The Last Czars" is that the creators couldn't decide on what they wanted this series to be. So instead of making a decision, they tried everything, and by doing this, they only succeeded in achieving mediocrity. The whole thing just missed some heart.
What they did wrong:
* You make it into a drama-historical serie or into a docu-serie. Both together work against each other. You lose all the momentum when you cut to historical narrators who give context to the story.
* English accents in a very Russian enviroment doesn't work for me.
* Dialogue missed depth. Had the hardest time getting invested in the Romanov's.
*Visual effects were very poor (few shots of explosions, ships or train were not up to standards)
* Historical correct! Costumes, sets were absolutely on point.
* A great story that needed to be told, but deserved a better translation.
In the end, if production would have been comparable to "The Crown", this would have been a great succes. Missed opportunity, what a shame! Nevertheless I watched the whole serie in two days. If you are interested in this kind of historical facts, this serie really deliver on historical facts. So I would still recommend watching it.
Great documentary, but host really need to shut up
Love everything about Egypt. But because of the host, Josh Gates, I just couldn't enjoy it. Just shut your mouth, let the experts do the talking and stop interrupting. You look like a little child who just has nothing interesting to say, but just keeps on talking. So annoying!
A laugh and a tear; can we have a SEASON 2 please!?
I must say I was a bit surprised that there was no real marketing around the release of this show on Netflix. What a great show about life in general. But most of all about the struggles of growing old. It has been a long time I saw such a great chemistry between two actors. Alan Arkin and Michael Douglas carry the show like the great actors they are. They were complemented by great supporting actors. The writing is just spot on. I catched myself laughing a few times out loud, which is something I rarely do. And just when you have the feeling it's a comedy, you are surprised with an emotional moment that really gets to you. What a great piece of work this is...
I really enjoyed the first three episodes. The quality was incredible, and the feeling was growing on me, that this could become one of those rare gems, that are hard to find these days. Episode 4 was the tipping point for me. It's as if the writers didn't know what to do with the story they created. So they let the lead character, who first was such a rational person, make irrational decisions. Episode 5 was even worse. The final episode I couldn't stop sighing and rolling my eyes. I couldn't hardly finish the episode because of all the stupid stuff they came up with. Because of the nature of the series I was expecting something that made sense. It gets a 3/10 just because the first three episodes were strong and really good story telling and acting. The other episodes were pure garbage, in my opinion. Such a shame, this had some real potential.
The most scary ghosts are the one who live inside of us
The haunting of hill house might look like a simple, cliché horror story, that will feed your appetite for being spooked. This could not be further from the truth. This is one of the most clever shows I have ever seen, and when it is finished... It will let you question life itself.
The show starts by providing you with a back story about every character that is involved in this story. Through some clever editing work they show you piece by piece the story, using flashbacks going over in present and back. What makes it work so well in this show is that you never really have the feeling you are watching a movie. Somehow they succeed in giving you the feeling you are watching a play, and the actors are in your living room performing. This is achieved by off the charts camera work. In the key scenes there are almost no cuts, so the actors have to go really deep and give their best performance. This works really well, and is something I haven't seen too much in recent years.
Now on the horror aspect of this show. If you are looking for some cheap jump scares, you won't be fulfilled with this show. I recommend you to keep watching movies like; Insidious, Conjurning,... Don't get me wrong. I was never spooked out harder, than by this show. This horror was so much deeper. As it adresses the true horror in people. Your own ghosts, who we sometimes choose to live our whole life with. This story is about accepting the ghosts in your life, and giving them a place. It's about being the best person you can be. About forgiving and about letting go.
I'm not sure if I can ever watch another horror series/movie, now I saw the true potential of this genre. Let us hope this inspires a whole new kind of horror. Because I'm up for it!
Before I forget! Don't you dare making a season 2. The story is told and was amazing. Just let it rest, as Hill House.
I have been a Freemason for several years. So I watched this documentary pure out of curiosity. It's not often you come across an honest depiction of what Freemasonry is all about. This documentary does something none other has ever done right, and it's actually there where they go completely wrong. When finishing this documentary you will have a pretty good feeling what it is to be a Freemason. But you will not know why you would even want to become a Freemason. They lack in providing you with some background history. I get it, this is not what the director was after. But being a Freemason is much more than what you see in this documentary. Sadly enough you cannot explain it by footage. It's something you have to experience. I would recommend conspiracy theorists to watch this documentary. So they finally can get a right picture about it. But for those who take an interest in Freemasonry, remember there is so much more to it.
Great story, but the animation might trigger epileptic seizures
Amazing story. This documentary is well researched. But my god, that animation is so damn frustrating. The shifting lines all the time are just too much. If you know that the documentary is 90% filled with animation. It just gets to much after a while. Nearly gave me an epileptic seizure. Shame.
A very good documentary, but not another Netflix GEM.
It's no secret that I admire the quality Netflix has been bringing out concerning docu-series. In fact this is were my love started for this whole new reinvented genre. The biggest gems in my opinion are: "Making a Murderder", "Wild Wild Country", "The Keepers", "Flint Town",... I do believe this one had the potential to make it right in that row. But just failed in doing all things perfect. Nevertheless this is a good documentary, you do need to watch, if you are in love with this genre.
The beginning is quite spot on, and really powerful. Especially the scene where you witness the bombing of the hostage. It was raw, and portrayed in that way that immediately made you feel sick to your stomach. From that point on the story starts. Episode one is quality wise the best episode. You feel that the director is building up to some things. But the following episodes he fails on delivering, in my opinion. It has all to do with the pacing, which is so important in this genre. It's actually the building up that is not always right. It is as if the director knows what he wants to tell you, but got lost in all the details, and doesn't really know which parts of the story deliver suspense, and which just slow down the story in general. Generally this make the plots not as powerful and as surprising as they could have been made.
The second thing where it fails on delivering is really getting an understanding of the persons involved in this. The two lead criminals in this story are obviously Diehl-Armstrong and Rothstein. Every episode consists of a lot of footage of Diehl-Armstrong, who is obviously a wounded narcissist woman, talking gibberish. What's the value of this footage? It's quite clear this is a very sick woman. But it doesn't provide any added value, unless it could show another side of this person. The same goes to Rothstein. I do feel the personal relationship with Diehl-Armstrong and the director got in the way. As he believed she was the key to the truth in this story. Because of his time investment in this relationship, a big part of the story is only told by her. Without adding any more value to the story that must be told.
Because of this the plot, and the building up to the end - which should have been a real climax - goes way to fast. And all te discoveries the director make, don't feel as important as they should have felt. Nevertheless, this is a great documentary with a story full of plots that may really surprise you. And I'm happy this story got told.
I'm from Belgium, so I never really experienced the scandal as Americans did. I can vaguely remember that it even made the newspapers here. I must have read this article years ago. When I opened Netflix I recognized Rachel. So I started watching.
This documentary was actually better than I thought it would be. The main focus is clearly on Rachel herself, and how this scandal affects her children, family and in general her whole social life. From the beginning you get the straight feeling that this story is not an easy one to tell. There is no black and white (get it!? ;-) ), with a big lie in between. This is obviously a woman who has been struggling with her identity for many years. You do start to feel she cannot be categorized as a liar. That would just be to simple. I think Rachel does believe that she never really lied. Perhaps she was just really creative with the "truth", so she could continue being the person she loved the most. But when you ignore a certain part of you, it will come back to bite you. That's exactly what happened. Towards the end you do feel Rachel is pushing it. Her family is clearly crumbling, and trying to get away from her. I got the feeling she did see this happening, but just couldn't help herself. Her son was actually quite spot on: "You can't tell my mom what to do". Clearly frustrated. This kid just wishing for life getting back to normal. She's like a dog being hit with a stick and coming back for more. All this for acceptance she will never get.
Being an European I do watch at identity a bit different than most Americans do. And I do feel this woman was born a few decades to early. Whether you like it or not, we've gone from a world to a little village in a few decades. Soon there will be no more "race". So identifying yourself with a certain culture will be a social choice. In that way I think the black community, understandably very hurt about the struggle they already had, made a big mistake here. Instead of demonizing this woman, they could have joined this idea. Making acceptance a universal thing. Not just related to the way you look and your skin color. Isn't this what they have been fighting for? Not being judged on the way you look, but who you are? Equal opportunities? Doesn't that go for a person, who is white but feels black? Or maybe it is just all very black and white. Who am I to say!?
With the astonishing rate of produced documentaries by Netflix, which were almost all - one by one - pure gems. I obviously had high expectations for this one. We all know the Donald from the gossip magazines and tv shows. Even for someone like me who was born in Europe, Trump was a familiar name. Sadly enough this docu-serie was simply not living up to that quality that was coming out in all of those months.
The summary was actually really promising: Friends, associates and critics reveal the truly American story of Donald Trump, the brash businessman who defied the odds to become U.S. president. So I gave it a go and watched the whole thing in one day.
Was this finally an in depth insight in the - at times - very bizar personality of this man? Are we learning more about Donald's childhood? I hate to disappoint, but that's exactly the key word to describe this documentary. One BIG disappointment. First of all if I wanted to know all the gossip that all the newspapers wrote about him right from the 70's; I would have gone on the internet or the local library and searched all the articles that were published in all of this years. I don't need 4 episodes filled with an hour of chatting about all the things we already knew about him. There was just no straight line in this documentary. What are they trying to teach me here? That this guy is one of the most bizarre persons that ever walked this planet? Sure I think we already knew this.
In short: If you are hoping to understand more about the person Trump is, how he seems to get in to the heads of people and why he ever could have become president. Don't watch this documentary. It just doesn't know what it wants to tell you, so it tells you all and nothing at the same time. Such a shame!
I grew up in a Cult as a child. This is portrayed perfect.
The last two years I've been absolutely astonished about the sheer quality of docu-series Netflix has been bringing out. "Making a murderer", "Flint town", "The Keepers", to name a few.
But this one was especially on some level really emotional for me. As I myself was raised in a Indian cult. Not this one, but many aspects are almost identical. I am now 27 and I still struggle on a daily base with many things that were taught to me at such a young age. What struck me was how well portrayed this guy was. The almost hypnotically way he could look, and even walk, got people in some sort of a trance. I myself experienced many times where we saw our "Guru" talk, and he had the same aura that also Baghwan has. The other aspect that struck me was them talking about following, but you could feel they actually were all deeply in love with him. A cult leader is not someone you follow, you fall deeply and madly in love with him. This happened to my mother and even after leaving almost 15 years ago, she still can't stop looking to this new love. She never became a stable person again in her life.
The docu itself should be an example to future docu makers. The pacing is nearly perfect. The interviews are well paced, just a few people on different sides, and somehow you all get some sort of attachment to their side of the story. You strongly get the feeling from episode one that nothing is black and white. And that all of these people strongly believed in their cause. There is no one who had the complete truth or did the complete right thing. And Baghwan is equal mysterious in this documentary than in real life. Somehow they don't try to explain the person Baghwan, because you simply cannot explain him. In that way his followers were absolutely right. He is a one of a kind person, and to others he was a con man. For me? He is something in between.
What a shock when I saw how few reviews this got. My god, I wasn't even planning on doing any effort in writing one, but this drew me over the line.
I'm not a citizen of the USA, but as a European born in the '90's it's hard to not have heard about O.J. Simpson. But that does not mean I knew the full story. Occasionally I read something about it, but I never got the whole history. This show gave me that opportunity. And boy, what a ride it was.
There are few shows where the creators do so many things right. But there are two things in particular that stood out from all those other shows. The first one is the acting. John Travolta, when he comes in, he draws you right in to the show. This is easily his best acting role in his recent career. The narcissism, arrogance,... Just for his acting performance it's worth to watch this show. But also the other lead characters are amazing. I'm just not sure if I found Cuba Gooding Jr. the right O.J. Simpson. Perhaps not completely. Some things just didn't feel quite right with his performance. In the beginning I found his acting quite spot on. But during the trial that changed in my opinion. I cannot quite finger point exactly what it was. Just an offish feeling I guess.
The second thing that is done brilliant is the pacing. You never feel bored. Every episode has his little what-the-f**k moment. The way they mixed original footage with the footage of the show. It's done so well, as if you are back in 1995.
Why not a 10? I just completely missed the story of the family of the victims. I get it though... If you make this kind of show, you want to make a point. And you can't focus on everything. The story writers chose to concentrate on the influence of the media combined with the frustration of the Afro-American community. Which lead to a completely irrational outcome in this case, lead by emotions of a hurt community. Sad.
First things first. Yes, I believe that there could very well be living Sasquatch out there. Now we've got this out of the way, let's focus on this "documentary".
The introduction goes almost on for 10 minutes on how well Todd (the film maker) is trained in everything, while you see him running in full sniper camouflage gear/suit. This all topped with some cheap music to create some false suspension. I was crying and laughing at the same time. At times I just wondered if all of this was one big joke, and some college kid made one of the best parody comedies ever. I wish...
This documentary is based on some bad crappy footage of supposed to be Sasquatch. And some close ups who look very real (I must admit) and actually could very well be something significant. This said and done, you would expect the documentary maker would take his claims further and will try to hunt for better footage than he already has given. Wrong. What he does is take you on a boring 1 hour 30 minute journey, showing you every footprint he claims to be Sasquatch. Suddenly every noise that was made, is produced by a Sasquatch. And when you think this couldn't get any worse, he starts talking about how he is supposedly being followed very close. And he even starts to draw out paths, and even describes how many Sasquatch are following him, and how they look like. Sadly for the viewer, not one shred of film footage is given, backing this up. To back up his claims he involves two professors. Everything he does is just put pressure on this two people. Just at the point it's not even funny anymore. He lacks total healthy self criticism. This documentary is clearly made by a fan boy, desperately trying to prove that this things exist. Nothings else matters.
Todd is probably a great guy. And I believe he is a great enthousiast, and I hope he will one day find the smoking gun, that for once can proof their existence. But for the love of god, never again make a documentary. Please?
It's easy to recognize the parallels between "Stranger Things" and "Dark". Sure there are some: the disappearance of a little boy, 80's influences, dark soundtracks. But in many ways it does the opposite of what "Stranger Things" does. It doesn't work with likable characters. Nostalgia is not something you will find here. It's just a deep dark show, which has much to offer to people who love psychological horror, without the gory parts. This show is not for everyone. I think the best comparison to make is with "Twin Peaks". A show that leaves you behind every episode with a big what-the-f*ck feeling. The constant eerie feeling, as if someone is constantly playing with your thoughts. My god the creators do everything so right. It has been a long time since I have seen something so original, and executed so well.
I'm pretty sure this show will live up, and will be right there between the greatest cult classics.
Really worth your time, even if some things could have been done better
I was somehow shocked when I saw the ratings this movie got. Sure, this movie will not win big awards, or anything like that. But I actually truly enjoyed this picture, as an interesting movie about a historical fact that I didn't really know about due to my young age.
The movie doesn't lose time on futile details. It's an honest depiction of what happened over those six days. It starts immediately with the hostage. The movie feels genuine, and not meant as a brutal action movie.
Keeping details true to the facts is of course a good thing. But somewhere on the line, they forgot about character development. There were some key characters, but without being really key characters. You could feel they were somehow important to the story, but you never really got a back story on them. The best example is the woman of the BBC. I didn't grew up in the UK, so I never heard of her. After the movie ended, they explained who she was. I think they could have done a lot more with the characters. You just didn't feel an attachment to any of the characters. Same with the terrorists and the negotiator.
To be fair, it's not easy to do all this in just 1 hour and half. I genuine feel this movie needed some more screen time. If you enjoy movies based on true stories or historical events, you won't be disappointed.
Hoping this would be somewhat in the league of "An idiot abroad", which I found truly funny as f**k. This was somehow disappointing. Actually it's Jack Whitehall himself who I was bothered with. The dad had a sort of flair over him that in time was really funny. Jack himself just wasn't interesting enough as a travel companion to keep me entertained. Just to obvious, and of course scripted. But when done in a good way, this could have been an entertaining show. Shame.
Calling this movie "horror" is not understanding the message from the director
This review is most of all a reaction to all those people who are reviewing this movie as a "horror" movie. Shame on you.
I was completely not planning on writing a review on this movie. As so many have explained why they love this movie in a much better way than I ever could do. I must admit that I was heavily triggered when I read the reviews and saw many people describing this as a great "HORROR" movie!? My god did you even watch this movie? Did you even understand what the message was all about?
It has been some years that I've watched this movie. And the best movie you can compare this movie with is "The Elephant Man". David Lynch was obviously very influenced by this picture. Both of the directors made a movie with meaning behind it, that was way more important than the movie itself.
In my recollection the movie starts with a long message from the director about why he's making this movie. Back in the 30's it was still common' to go the circus and laugh at people who had it way worse then you. Ahead of his time Tod Browning was one of the first ever to make people question their views on what should be acceptable. Is it okay to dehumanize somebody just for the way he looks? He took his greatest gift and made a movie to honor this people. But not only honor them... No he made them back human. He did no effort what so ever in making them look better than they were. He portrayed them just the way they are, and made a story about friendship, love and sacrifice. And he succeeded. Nowadays nobody would even think about banning this movie. But because of the horrific images of the people (actors) who were in it, this movie was banned for 30 years in Great-Britain.
This review is a homage to the man who dared to question society's accepted standards. And nowadays it's impossible to even believe that something that was so widespread would still exist today. By portraying this movie as "30's Horror movie", you are not much better than society back then.
I don't even know where to begin. This movie moved me from the first minute to the last minute. I got sucked in to the story and it didn't even let me go after I was finished with this movie.
This movie is the best example of how to make a movie that shines in authenticity. I read the review of the director himself on this page. So I knew how much work and research went in to this movie. There for I thank you Harry Bromley Davenport. Because this is a story that had to be told. I thank you for staying true to the facts and portraying this movie in such a way that we all could feel how emotional involved you were in this case.
This brings me to why I liked this movie so much. At first I was a little bit surprised by how low budget this movie really looked. Instead of making it a disadvantage the director made a really clever good paced movie. The movie doesn't tend to stick to long in one period. It's a linear told story. Which really helps to get sucked in to the story. Not overly made complicated with a lot of flashbacks. Just an honest good told story. You really start to bond quickly with the characters. I must say the acting was really well done. Tarra Steele does an amazing job, the role she plays is exceptional difficult to portray in a believable way. I looked her up and came to the conclusion that she didn't act in any other movie. Shame! I was equally impressed with the actress who played the mother. She plays the role with the little twist of social awkwardness, very subtle. The actress who plays Sandra does an amazing job as well.
The director of this garbage deserves his name in the Death Note
I don't even know where to start. First of all, i've never seen the anime or the original Japanese live action movie. That's something I regret. The truth is I love manga and the reason why I yet need to see "Death Note" is because I simply watch to much, and have to little time. But it's one of those titles that is on my to do list. I guess this gives me some sort of advantage over those people reviewing this title with the worst reviews ever. Claiming this is the biggest garbage they have ever seen, and does not honor the original.
I cannot agree more with them. This is the view of someone who hasn't seen the original. But let me tell you this: it doesn't get worse than this. I don't even know where to start. Everything was just so off. The casting was ridiculous. Every character except Ryuk was just completely off. Acting was terrible, dialogues even worse. I can't even figure out how fake the character L. was. It just made me feel like crying, seeing how he took this role. It was so bad that I was asking myself at one point if I wasn't just watching some amateur high school movie made by students. My god... I could go on for ages about how terrible it was, and how much I am traumatized by this.
The only reason I rate this movie a 2/10 is because I really liked how they made Ryuk. He actually looked really good, and was the only thing that kept me watching this movie.