sbsieber

I loved this episode. Where did they find that beautiful little girl, and how were they able to film scenes with a child so young that were natural and completely organic to the script? Miccuci is lovely and the scenes with her and the child were a delight; I was especially pleased that nothing awful happened - I held my breath when she gave the little girl a whole apple to eat, and kept waiting for a tearful and frightening scene in the emergency department of a hospital. But it all worked out well, (with the exception of the husband who od'd of course). How refreshing to watch the daily exploits of a young woman and a little girl that is happy and carefree. I would really be interested to know more about the mechanics of how these scenes were filmed.

Getting a little exhausted watching Dave Franco over-emote while grinning broadly. Yes, you have great teeth and great energy, but please give us all a break. This could be good acting though if we consider that the character he plays is a selfish, immature, man-child who cares little for his brother, wife, and child. His character refuses to listen to reason, consider reality, and honour the promises he has made to his family. Easily one of the most exasperating characters in this series, although I'm not sure whether that was intentional or not. Are we supposed to care about him and his dreams to make a coffee flavoured beer when other versions exist on the market and it doesn't sell that well? And wasn't he the one who convinced his brother to expand, or am I mis-remembering?

The parents in this episode are so kind and loving and the "punishment" they impose on their self-important daughter is mild and just, but instead of taking it like the grown-up she purports to be, she turns it on them and punishes them. She latches onto ONE passage from the Bible and uses it to exact her revenge on her parents and feels wholly justified and superior in the process without taking into account the hard work and motivation that they exhibited throughout their lives to enable her entitled existence. Rather than considering that perhaps SHE has been enjoying the fruits of their labours a little too much, and cutting back on some of the niceties of her own privileged life, she chooses to deprive and humiliate them. Whatever happened to honouring thy father and thy mother? So far I have been enjoying this series, but this is the one episode I truly despise.

Three points because I found the series compelling enough to watch in its entirety one evening. Otherwise, it's complete dreck. I came to absolutely despise the male lead especially, but also the female as well as the rest of the characters who were either obtuse or just plain evil.

I guess the main character could actually be "Obsession" itself as we watch it take over and destroy the lives of many people. It is a frightening mental illness that doesn't care what kind of destruction it leaves in its path.

The attempts to "wokeify" the series are pretty obvious with the inclusion of a mixed marriage, with mixed-race children, one of whom is gay. I don't really care about all of that, but it is such a clear attempt to pander to current cultural trends and while they don't really take away from the story, it is distracting enough to be irritating.

I watched episode four last night and found it painful, and unfunny. The situation is contrived, characters are irritating, and the actors seem to think that zany equates entertaining. It does not. I was especially irritated when one of the spouses scolds her father-in-law in the proper pronunciation of her twin children's names, giving them a heightened Spanish accent, and roll of the rrrrrs. Sorry, but I am not going to call someone 'Ferrrrnnado' just because you tell me to. 'Fernando' is just fine. In any case - not recommended.

This was a bad movie that makes me question the creativity and talent of the 'big names' associated with it. So many things were just wrong - from the endlessly whiny Abby, to Jane Seymour's strange accent that was definitely not Swedish, to the boyfriend who didn't wear a shirt while preparing food or eating at a table where everyone else is dressed, to the ex-boyfriend who conversely wore a jacket and scarf the entire time in spite of the fact that the action is taking place in California. This is a movie that appears to have been put together thoughtlessly, hastily, with no depth, and no reward whatsoever.

The Black and White is annoying because it seems like a pointless conceit. The movie would have been much more interesting and dynamic if there were rich colour tones, and the location looks like it is quite beautiful - why not show it in all it's colorful beauty?

I'm also not a fan of ad-libbed conversation. It is not natural, it just feels awkward and pointless - it feels as though the actors are stumbling around awkwardly trying to find a thread in the narrative. Perhaps the director thought that would feel natural, but my feeling was that these people really don't know how to have a conversation.

I couldn't watch the whole thing, lost interest in the characters and their story. Maybe I'll come back to it someday if I'm really bored and have nothing else to do, which means probably not.

In this movie, the featured couple is supposed to be in love but going through a difficult period because of a moment of indiscretion on the young lady's part. The tension between them is palpable and attempts to initiate intimacy between them always begin with great slobbering, open mouthed, hoovering kisses that end in disappointment when the young gentleman can't perform due to the images of his woman with another man.

They bicker a lot, in fact it was after a big fight that the aforementioned moment of indiscretion occurred. These two are clearly not meant for each other, and are too stupid and immature to have a healthy relationship with anyone. I've know this kind of couple - the kind that fight about nothing and then do something really stupid that hurts the relationship irrevocably. I don't doubt their strong feelings for each other, but I resented watching and hour and however minutes of the immature antics of what were essentially two contestants from an episode of Love Island.

This movie does not depict a real, believable relationship in trouble, and the couple clearly is not trying to work things out.

As for the thriller aspect, it sometimes delivers on the thrills, but mostly focuses on the creep factor. What bothers me most is the waste of a great location, and all the water from all the showers that were taken. All actors looked very bad in this - Mr. Paul is beginning to lose his sheen.

This is a terrible movie - really, really terrible - and all the worse because it stars such talented comedic actors. This is the sort of movie that proves that writing and solid material are what really count towards a good movie, and talent actually comes in a distant second. Also, you can tell this is a movie where the cast had a great time making it; this happens so often in comedies where most of the real fun probably happened off screen. This movie is an insult to both women and moviegoers. Not recommended/

I've just seen a few episodes of this show; my interest ws piqued by the issue of Jazz receiving her complete transformation by obtaining what she kept referring to rather obnoxiously as "my vagina". It sure takes a village to raise this particular girl, and it appears she is the center of attention wherever she goes. I feel bad for her other siblings although they seem to take it all in stride and they show a lot of love for her sister. I appreciate that Jazz's road has not been an easy one, and she approaches life with a relatively upbeat, sunny disposition, but it is also obvious that she is spoiled and self centered beyond belief. Her attempts at flirting with her new boyfriend are cringe inducing and she is forever bringing up subjects that really fall under the TMI category; she really has no filter, The whole family is kind of wacko. but I appreciate that they are living their lives in a fishbowl under unusual circumstances, so I guess I could cut them a little slack. One thing that really bothers me is that Jazz seems to be constantly lying down covered by a blanket, like royalty surrounded by her loyal subjects. I really wish she's sit up straight. Nothing wrong with good posture.

This is a highly unrealistic movie; I realize that most of them are, but this one is part of a trend that both annoys and depresses me. I don't know what the statistics are about older people and sex, but I find it very hard to believe that people in their sixties, seventies, and eighties are as hot to trot as portrayed in movies like this. Isn't it bad enough that we have to deal with the unflinching vicissitudes of aging, but now we also have to concern ourselves with being constantly sexually active? As a person in late middle life, I like to think I'm relatively vital, but I can say with authority that sex is not the first thing on my mind, nor is it with my contemporaries. It just 'aint there, and for good and reasonable biological reasons.

It would be so much more refreshing to see a movie concerning older adults who are dealing with the "ravages" of time with humour, intelligence, and maturity. Enough with the bumbling woman-child that is presented by Keaton in all of her movies, enough with the voracious sex-pot in her early eighties as played by Fonda, who admittedly looks amazing, but her limited movement and jerky delivery belies her age, and enough with the winsome sex-starved wife who stupidly. and dangerously spikes her husband's drink with Viagra. The only character who I found even remotely believable was Bergen, who's low-key, deadpan delivery was spot on - I would like to see more of her in movies in the future.

This was an ultimately silly movie that I suppose had its fun moments and a lot of beautiful scenery and good looking sets - it was slick, although the early photoshopping in earlier photos of the characters as young women was quite poor.

I don't not recommend Book Club, but I suggest that you go into this movie with the understanding that it doesn't present late middle age in a realistic light. You can still be a vital person who loves life and lives it to its fullest, and have strong, loving relationships, but we are not over-sexed adolescents anymore and to portray that in movies is an unkindness to viewers.

This movie really got to me. There were a couple of times I thought I couldn't keep watching ie: the nail in the step, and the baby in the box. It was pretty nerve wracking. I found myself creeping quietly going up the stairs to use the bathroom during a break. Had to remind myself that it was okay for ME to make some noise.

Well acted. Krasinski can grow a helluva beard.

I didn't really understand the issue between the daughter and her father though - that didn't make a lot of sense.

Spacey seems to be trying to remind everyone of what a dazzling actor he is and what we have been missing 'lo these many months. He even says "miss me?" at one point. He stays in his House of Cards character throughout the video, which seems a lot longer than just three minutes as he meanders ad nauseum, by repeating his mantra in various ways - basically saying, "I didn't do anything wrong, and if I did it wasn't that bad, and I'm just a lovable reprobate, and ya'll miss me dontcha?" The he hints that he could return to his role in the series because no one actually saw his dead body. I have never watched the show so I don't know if this is particularly important, but it seems to be he's seriously thinking he can convince people to give him a comeback. Very odd indeed.

This movie exploits the horrors of the Manson murders without making any attempt to be historically correct. While the names and characters of the real-life victims are used, the action is not true to what actually happened and devolves into a common thrasher thriller. I don't know why the movie makers would do this because there is nothing more horrifying than what actually happened. These people actually lived and died brutal deaths and if their story must be told, it should be done with respect and veracity.

I read somewhere that the screenplay for this movie was written with a woman in her mid-twenties in mind for the lead role, and Stone was considered for the role of the mother. Stone made the argument that the story would be more interesting with a more mature woman (her) as the lead. I don't know if it's more interesting, but that certainly explains why her character is so immature and why she is best friends with a young woman almost half her age, and two times more wisdom.

There should have been some extensive re-writing to make this story more believable, and Stone's character less irritating. Come on girl, surely you know this stuff by now!

I was very impressed with the actor who played her love interest - I loved his natural energy and intelligence.

I just finished watching the entire season last night. Some of the episodes are weaker than others, and I admit to falling asleep a couple of times, but on the whole, I recommend this series.

The writing, acting and plotting are all strong; the characters are interesting, flawed and real in their own ways. I loved John Stamos as the pot smoking therapist.

Some story lines begin strong and just trail off, and it is questionable that all of these "missing" people are just explained away by being in Europe or carousing somewhere in a drug-soaked haze. Surely there would be people in their lives who would question their long absences? This is the sort of plot hole that is necessary to move the story along, but is also the sort of weakness that ultimately brings it all down.

One of the ironies of the series is that the main character has enough appeal and good looks to be successful romantically even without all the stalking and evil machinations. He doesn't need to do what he does in order to get the girl; surely a certain degree of persistence is required in the case of Beck (who is really quite unstable, an emotional mess, and not worth all the effort), but it's doable, he's is a genuine and lovable guy in many ways, but his tragic flaw, to the tragic detriment of his love interests, is that he can't just let things happen naturally, he must control the action and the outcome. He is unable to leave matters to fate and the frailties of the human heart. He is his own worst enemy, and a danger to the women who stumble into his orbit.

I'm looking forward to the new season, but a little disturbed by how Season One ended. I'm not sure how he can come back from his actions, and how the viewer is still going to continue to indulge him based purely on his pleasant and seeming "nice guy" demeanor. I'm not really sure how we can go from here.

I could only stomach an hour of this movie before I had to bail. The thing about the classics is that they were/are authentic in a way that can't be reproduced, and the problem with movies like this - the "pretenders" - is that they are riding the coattails of a gimmick of some sort, in this case a vast cast of characters played by well known and beloved actors. This is a movie that was created with everyone thinking this is going to be a hit like Love Actually, and they try to hit all the right notes, only to come out sounding sour. And please, can we just put to rest some of the more annoying cliches found in this movie: the addled senior who speaks more truth than anyone else (there is nothing cute or wise about dementia sufferers), the foul-mouthed child who is neither adorable nor funny, the love-struck -angsty teen, the out-of-control dog who destroys everything in its path, and the idea that there are troops of Victorian-clad Christmas carolers around every corner at Christmas time. This is not a good movie, and is an obvious attempt to cash in on the spirit of Christmas movies past.

I was struck by the writing which I think was an attempt to make the dialogue more similar to the way people speak in real life. We don't speak in long perfectly-worded soliloquies; there are a lot of stops and starts; sentences begin and then trail off, thoughts are hinted at, but left unspoken. There is a lot of inference that must occur when listening to these characters. I agree that this presentation of human speech is more realistic, but it can become frustrating to listen to when presented in a dramatic platform; perhaps it is just after years of watching "professional" entertainment, there is a certain expectation that a program will sound a certain way, so I accept that the fault could be mine, but I found these characters frustratingly inarticulate and unable to get to the point. The one show devoted almost entirely to a therapy session with the main character was especially egregious. I understand that it is difficult for someone to fully express how they are feeling - that is what therapy is there to help a person to do, but listening to the dialogue in this session, just set my teeth on edge. I only watched it for a payoff of some sort, a revelation that would expose the reasons behind some of the character's actions and choices, but there was nothing remarkable beyond the relatively untimely death of a parent and the suicide of a patient. There are two characters in this series who are unable to cope with the death of a parent, to the extent that they become emotionally strangled in the rest of their lives. If this were the case in real life, we would all be a bunch of basket cases. But I digress...

I got sucked into this melodrama and binge watched all of season one and half of season two in one night. It has been a bumpy ride and my feelings about this series are all over the map, just like the acting and characterization.

Gemma as "The Woman Scorned" veers wildly between being the sane dutiful wife, mother and sensible GP to being a bad-ass chick who's got her revenge game on in a big way, only to devolve into a sniveling, drunken, insecure woman with questionable ethics and crazy eyes. I don't know who this woman is, but I am quite sure I would never trust her to be my physician.

Her estranged husband, Simon, also goes through a myriad of personality changes, first as a seemingly devoted family man, then a lyin', cheatin', sniveling bastard, only to become in Season two, a smooth, mustache twirling, evil genius mastermind. Who are these people?

The one thing I am sure of is that they are both terrible parents, and should have had their poor son taken from them early on, since the first time Gemma took him for one of her hair-raising, white knuckle car rides through the winding streets of a small(ish) English village. They talk about their son constantly; the name "Tom" is spoken ad-nauseum, they steal him away from each other, stalk him and his friends, invade his privacy, and expose him to adult situations well beyond his years, and then neglect him for hours on end. He seems to spend most of his time sulkily eating his breakfast cereal in the kitchen, or lying alone in his bedroom. What a sad and depressing life this kid lives, and most of it is his parents' fault.

Add to this sad bunch is a motley group of friends and coworkers who appear to have no loyalties or affiliations and are about as fake as fake can be.A Guilty Pleasure and a Primer on How Not to Raise a Child

The story of a simple farmer, always referred to as "The Farmer" by the baddies, who seeks to avenge his mother's murder. Along the way, he picks up an awkward and naive accomplice in an unusual fashion. Some flashes of humour, but basically a dark and violent story about dark and violent people who's tentacles reach far and deep into the underworld of Northern Ireland.

Good acting by the leads, suspenseful and interesting. Some moments where suspension of belief is required, but on the whole a good movie.

Subtitles recommended due to some very thick accents.

What a strangely empty, self-indulgent and ultimately meaningless movie this is. What poor use of a reliable cast. Bening is wasted in the role of a middle-aged, single mother of a teen son. Her strength is in her ability to use words - to speak; her voice. She has been given so little to say here; the script is almost non existent beyond the basics required to drive one pointless scene to the next. In the moments where there might be a confrontation of some sort, she chokes - stuttering and spluttering in frustration because she has nothing to say. This is so frustrating. This is an actress who needs words. Yes, she has an interesting face and is very emotive facially and physically, but it is her voice we want to hear.

Other actors are similarly wasted or misused. Billy Crudup who was wonderful in Rudderless (highly recommended) is reduced to nothing more than a quasi-romantic, handyman whose function is as a foil for the female actors and to spout occasional New Age nonsense. Greta Gerwig, another interesting actor is strangely muzzled in her role, and Elle Fanning is totally miscast as an angry, vulnerable teen who uses sexual promiscuity to act out against her therapist mother who appears to have no idea what is going on in her daughter's life. She is an actor I really don't get; she has the ability to seem vacant, and empty, and she strangles the life out of every line, using the wrong emphasis on words so that just about everything she says loses all meaning and becomes a monotone. I do not understand her appeal. The actor who played the boy was adequate.

The story - plot - whatever is beside the point in this movie. It is more a string of lightly connected reminiscences from a young man's perspective. It starts nowhere and that's about where it ends up. We do get an idea as to the trajectory of these people's lives, and that is interesting. It is a slice of life from a specific point in time. It is interesting to see the fashions and other accouterments of that period in history - I did like that.

On a final note - did this kid ever go to school?

I have never been a fan of Demi Moore - I didn't get her appeal and was never impressed with her acting, but interestingly she was the thing I liked best about this movie. She is quite lovely, and her voice has lost that husky quality that I used to find so grating. Her acting was natural and subtle yet effective. Unfortunately, I don't have similar positive things to say about this movie. Baldwin is his typical blow-hard self, and his transformation from a frustrated, angry, and damaged tortured writer is not believable. He is also not believable as a romantic lead. Maybe he has done one too many Trump impressions, because his appeal at this point is just - "yuck".

The plot is schlocky and predictable, and the addition of the young man who initially volunteered to assist Baldwin's character only later to become his house boy/protégé was weak.

Over all a pretty bad B movie with A movie pretensions. The writing was weak and the plot was often silly and superficial.

I loved King of Queens - still watch the reruns in fact, but that wonderful chemistry between James and Remini is non-existent in this new incarnation of Kevin Can Wait. A desperate attempt was made to salvage a show that was poor to mediocre in its first season, by killing off a very likable main character and replacing her with a character and story line that does not make sense, and is jarring in in its inauthenticity.

Just shoehorning Leah Remini into a failing sitcom with the hope that the show will improve was a stupid and short-sighted move. The biggest problem with the show is the writing, the tired characters and overdone situations; the self-centred buffoonish main character bumbling through life, lying and making mistakes, but somehow learning a lesson at the end is a tired trope and today's audiences are too sophisticated to accept that kind of pablum.

Remini seems to have lost her mojo as well. I would love to see her without all the makeup, long fingernails, and tight clothes. She acts constrained and uncomfortable, and she has ruined her face with whatever cosmetic surgeries she has undergone. Hopefully, it was just Botox, and some lip fillers that will eventually wear off. She is a talented comedic actress, but something is holding her back and muzzling her performances; very disappointing. James is still doing his old shtick, but it isn't as charming as it was when he was younger. Time for this old dog to learn new tricks.

American Housewife is a bad show. While I liked Kathy Mixon in Mike and Molly, in this show she is a bad-tempered bully, self-involved, and a very silly woman. She is the weakest link in this show. Her perpetual sullen frown grows tiresome and it is hard to believe her lovely husband could have the patience to deal with her ongoing miserable behaviour. There is absolutely no chemistry between these two and the family dynamic is unbelievable. The situations are frustratingly stupid and superficial and I have absolutely zero interest in how the latest "problem" will be solved. I have sat through about five episodes, so I think I've given this show more attention than it warrants. By all rights, it should be cancelled. Not recommended.

So bad. So very, very bad. The tale of a family is disarray; the mother an insipid up-and-coming author, the father a narcissistic, has-been writer, and their two pathetic and very disturbed sons. Painfully acted, despite a wonderful cast. Poorly written cringe-worthy scenes of shallow people behaving badly. There is a Woody Allenesque taint to this movie in the worst possible way. Painful. The only redeeming aspects are the street scenes of New York city neighbourhoods that are far beyond the economic reach of most people, which essentially amounts to nothing more than real estate porn. Everyone involved in this movie should be very ashamed. My advice to the writers, actors, director etc.: do not include this movie on your Curriculum Vitae.