Reviews (40)

  • I have read a LOT of material about this movie, much of it about how insightful Zimbardo was and how it really "explained" some abuses that have occurred since.

    Nonsense.

    What this demonstrated was how egotistical and arrogant Zimbardo was (and continues to be) and his willingness to abuse students for self-aggrandizing "research" to further his career in academia.

    Is the movie a good one? Yes. Is it for the usual reasons? Not in this lifetime. It exposed evil--in Zimbardo, and in Stanford, and the fraud that is academia.

    IIRC, Zimbardo's "assistant" got a bit closer at some point, and the principled professor left his wife. Putrid icing on a sordid cake.
  • A great cast presented with a terrible, boring script. If it's supposed to be funny, it fails miserably. If it's satire on the current state of academia, it's too realistic. What the writers intended is unclear, and the net result is, simply put, garbage.

    I have been a fan of Odenkirk since Breaking Bad and was very pleasantly surprised with Better Call Saul. I wasn't familiar with Enos, but hope to get familiar with her in other works. They can't rescue this one, however. The rest of the cast may or may not be worthy of attention, but the writing is so gratuitous it renders them caricatures as opposed to characters, and STILL does a poor job.

    You won't get the time you've wasted back, so don't.
  • To be honest, I, like so many others, had watched or read a fair amount about Johnny Cash and hadn't remembered Vivian other than she was the ex-spouse. Like some other posters, I remember her character in "Walk the Line," and while I didn't think it unsympathetic, after watching this I don't think that movie did her justice.

    I was and still am a Johnny Cash fan, and I didn't dislike June Carter. That having been said, that doesn't mean I have to like everything about them. This movie presented that side, and did so in a very reasonable way, without taking away from the main subject. The fact Vivian kept her dignity when Nashville openly ignored/erased her (see the "Tribute" footage) says more FOR her, and appropriately shames them without taking the effort to actually do so. Again, I am a fan of some of those mentioned in that part, but their mistake was egregious and they deserve to be called out on it.

    There are a few curiosities and minor questions that remain unanswered, but a film can't address everything on everybody's list. This one did address most of them

    Thank you to the Cash daughters for bringing this to us. We are better off for it.
  • For those of us who grew up in the 60s and 70s, there was no question this was a very loose Fleetwood Mac story. The music even sounded like them. Leaving the accuracy questions aside, the movie is mediocre. Parts of the story are campy and the scriptwriting could have been better. The cast did well with what it had.

    Camilla Marrone was excellent as the spouse and mother. Shoutouts to Tom Morgan as the producer and the actress who played the grown daughter/filmmaker.

    In summary, some of it is silly and unbelievable, but it wasn't a waste of time and gave a reasonable depiction of rock and roll in the 1970's. Watch it, but take it with a grain of salt.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Anyone growing up, living, or trying to do business in a small town can relate to this. Small town resident has invested wisely runs into resistance from pretentious governmental types and condescending upper crust residents. Other insiders got more favorable treatment. SOOO, he protests with an art form of his own, and wins big time in litigation.

    The arrogant POS Village official (who, of course, had to bring Trump into it) and smarmy "unnamed artist" make the opposition's point, the pretentious medical center CEO with his phony, scripted nonsense about how Hank's art interfered with recruiting medical professionals told me more about the non-quality of that health "care" system than it would want me to know.

    I stand with Hank.
  • Well, the Hypercritics and Overanalysts have spoken. I choose not to be one of them.

    I will acknowledge (and not disagree with) some of their points. I don't know if the show is a comedy with serious segments or a drama with comedic segments. Much of the story is unrealistic and I get the criticism some of the writing seems formulaic.

    I don't care.

    Fact is, from what I've watched so far, I'm entertained. I can find the meaning of life from sources other than Hollywood, though I take an occasional lesson from one show or movie. Those of us that work day-to-day experience enough of what matters to know what matters. It doesn't take some heavy opus to show me the way.

    At least they made Stallone what he is--70 something as opposed to 40 something, and he's acting in his zone--not overly deep.

    If you expect "The Godfather" (and I love it, BTW) with every mob movie/series, move on. If you just want to enjoy something for an hour away from the rest of the world, tune in (at least so far.)
  • Gave it a 1* because zero was not an option. The two lead characters were so predictable and never changed. Spoiled daughter of a well-to-do family who is involved in everything, knows more and has done more than everyone else in the room, and thinks everyone is waiting to know how great she is at....everything, meets birth father--a gay man who is every campy, bad stereotype homophobic folk love to hate. They spend the summer on a lake where he grew up traumatized by a straight dad, and meet up with a bunch of shallow UMC types and their stereotypically rotten children. As any reader will see below, I won't hang around to see what else in on the horizon.

    Forced myself to finish the first episode. Won't force myself to start the second. To simply state it's "bad" is unfair to some shows who make a sincere effort, but miss the mark. This one apparently tried to be pathetic from the start. It succeeded.
  • I was about the same age as the male lead at the same time (mid-70's). It was that fact that initially drew my attention to the movie. As I watched it, I saw a lot of things that did, quite accurately, remind me of my growing up at that time. That was where it started--and ended.

    I spent the entire time wondering what the story was, and where it was going. Truth is, I never figured it out. Were these two a couple?? Did they become one?? Should they have become one?? Where did life take them, individually or together?? Never found out.

    That having been said, I did enjoy the performances of the two leads. I will look for more of their work in other movies. The addition of other, more well known names did nothing to help this story out, and their performances were largely irrelevant. This one could have been.....but never was.
  • I was very intrigued when I first learned about the show, and loved "1883." It didn't take long to discover (1) it was nothing like "1883" in story or quality, and (2) each season is worse than its predecessor.

    I have enjoyed Costner in a lot of other work, and I will say "Field of Dreams" is one of my favorite movies ever. He has moments in this one, but anything positive he has to offer is wiped out by tremendously weak writing. So much of it is formula, and bad formula at that--weak "son" (not really a son, of course) of a strong father who can never get daddy's love/respect no matter how hard he tries or what trick he performs. A cross between Fredo Corleone and the dumb son (name forgotten) of Buford T. Justice. Skanky "daughter" who will cut anyone open to protect daddy, and marries an uneducated-but-wisely-philosophic ranch foreman (who is still a common criminal.) Topping that off is her acting is pathetic and her scenes are among the worst of a bunch of already bad.

    There are some bright spots, hence the 7. The locations are amazing. The story that doesn't involve the two kids I referenced isn't bad. The other son, who tries to make his own way has a lot to offer.

    The idea of modern day ranching in a high tech world was intriguing. Its execution was not.
  • I had recently read this was on a list of Ebert's "most hated films," quoting the usual sarcasm he was given to heap on movies beneath his standards, whatever they may be.

    I couldn't care less.

    This movie was released at a time when both my parents were in chemotherapy, and shortly before both of them passed. Contrary to Ebert's condescending assertion the movie somehow trivialized cancer, I found it inspirational and life altering. It gave me the strength to say goodbye, and to see the humanity within them. It also kick started altering my life to enjoy the time here, cherish those close, and not waste a single minute--all without subtitles or deep symbolism.

    Yes, the film gets a bit campy in spots, hence the "9." But it works for me, and is one I still enjoy seeing again from time to time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I saw this at a local festival. Previous employment often took me to Bad Axe. I lived for quite a while in a neighboring county--I often spent time in Huron County, so I know the area a bit.

    The film was very well put together. Many documentaries I've seen at festivals are semi-glorified home videos. This was a true film and very easy to watch and understand.

    The family story, from the father's fleeing Cambodia through the present was very well told, and the impact of the pandemic was communicated. The interviews with family members were informative and insightful. Other reviewers were more detailed, and I generally agree with them.

    The only negative I have about the movie is the political perspective. No, that does NOT mean I supported the moronic "Nazis" who showed up. (As an aside, having been to Europe and having toured a concentration camp, that word is something I use sparingly, as that experience was a very emotional one for me.) The family members who actively participated in the protest and spoke of it, Trump, or opponents of masking painted with an extraordinarily broad brush--not everyone who disagreed with them on the handling of the pandemic is a far right, Qanon devotee. Not everyone who supported Trump is a "Nazi," or even a person who likes Trump. Not everyone who wasn't for them was "against" them. Frankly, the dive into the politics took away from the story (though I still gave it a 9) Additionally, the daughter ripping into people who indicated the politics would lead them away from patronizing the restaurant in a negative light presumably presented a double standard--would she patronized an establishment owned by a Trump fan, or who disagreed with HER politics?? I tend to think not.

    Other than the value shaming in the politics, it was a fine work, and you should view it if you have the chance.
  • As far as the series itself goes, it was very skillfully and professionally put together. As far as the case goes, ANYTHING involving Mike Nifong is suspect, and when one adds an irrational alcoholic Assistant DA, and a corrupt "expert," the cloud darkens. (Yes, I know about Alford pleas, what they mean, what they DON'T, and why they often take place.) I don't know what "really" happened, but I know the circus that was the Durham County Criminal Justice system did nothing but hurt everyone involved.
  • I don't disagree with many of the other reviewers who are critical of how the film was put together, or how much time it spent with one sister as opposed to the other, or some other storyline/technical aspects of it. I wonder if, to some extent, they were limited in who they could talk to or who would talk to them (for example, did Sara have a boyfriend/boyfriend's family who would talk? Were there people who were "close" enough to Yeser and its herd to provide more info?) Having said that, when I finished watching this movie, I saw the sperm donor ("father" if we were talking about a human) and womb provider ("mother" with the previous caveat) as unmitigated evil and off-the-chart stupidity, respectively. I felt for the friends and relatives of the girls, and grieved for them and the girls. To that extent, this movie was an overwhelming success, and worth the 9 I gave it.

    I was aware Yaser and accomplices were recently captured. Thankful TX is a death penalty state.
  • I loved the casting--it was spot on when it came to portraying the series cast as younger people. Those actors were also spot on in their speaking and gestating.

    The story was a disappointment. That's why it was a 7 and not higher.
  • I first watched this a long time ago and had a chance to see it again (thank you, YouTube!). In between, I have had the chance to read more (still have some to go) and view a lot of old footage from news reports and other sources (watch "No One Saw A Thing" if you get a chance, but take it with a grain or two of salt.) Like many of the other reviews, I think this movie does a fairly good job of portraying the events (as best cramming years into a movie can.) It also reminded me of how wonderful an actor Brian Dennehy was and how much he should be appreciated and missed. If I have any criticism (and I hesitate to use the word), it would be of Marcia Gay Harden's performance. I hesitate, because she was great in her effort. If one has had occasion to see any video of the "real" spouse (Trena McElroy), one would see she was even lower, in my opinion, than portrayed. There are some who see the actions of the townspeople (or whomever) as no better than those of McElroy and his ilk. I disagree, and I'll leave it at that.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I was a middle school student when this trial was going on. At the time, I was very interested in law and government, and ultimately became an attorney. After the case concluded, I read a number of books about the trial, including many by members of the 7/8. I had the chance to see William Kunstler speak when I was in college in the mid 1970's, just a few years after the case. I would first refer anyone to the Facebook posts of Rennie Davis and Michele Dellinger (David's daughter) regarding the film itself. As I understood them, Sorkin did not contact any of the surviving members of the 7 or their families. This concerned them, though Rennie Davis was still positive overall. I would compare the movie to an abridged version of the case. Some dramatic license was taken, but the message was still communicated. I would recommend it to someone who wasn't around when it happened, as a starting point to learn more. The LBJ footage near the beginning refreshed my memory and made it clear the man was evil, pure and simple. I did have some concerns. Jerry Rubin was portrayed as a fragile, passive soul in need of a relationship. In reality, he was anything but. The writing and acting performance did not do him justice whatsoever. (I have since read the "Daphne" agent was not real--making it stupid and unnecessary.) Weiner and Froines were less involved, but not as UNinvolved as portrayed. I have been a fan of Frank Langella, and appreciate his performance, given the cinematic license necessary in bringing a story this complicated to the screen. That having been said, he gave Julius Hoffman more dignity than Hoffman ever had. As one who followed the trial, I can say he actually made him look BETTER than the IRL "Judge." Foran had political ambitions and threw racist comments around during his failed campaign. He was not a potted plant who sat there and watched wheels go round and round. In the interest of space, the other members of the 7/8 and the attorneys ranged from adequate to great. If you watch it, enjoy it (I really did), and use it as a beginning to learn more. If you don't you'll never know the real, and complete, story.
  • I was already competing in and training for distance and multisport races when I underwent triple bypass surgery. My friend, a retired nurse, found this movie and we watched it just after I was discharged from the hospital. I have a way to go before I'm back to where I was and/or beyond, but this started the path and is motivating me to get back on it.
  • 8 September 2020
    The tease for this caught my interest and is accurate insofar as it states what was INTENDED. That's where it ended. Historically false, poorly written, and a waste of otherwise good talent. Don't waste your time. Sheds no light on anything.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The basic idea was a great one--terminal father and his soon to be widow discuss who can step up as a father (not husband, btw) to the family after he goes. They come up with a novel idea. The interaction between the "dads" themselves is a great part of the story. When it focuses on family issues that would be common to all of us (grief, anger, when is it ok to start over, and the like) it's a great work. Now, the not so good. A number of posters have commented on the political nature of the show and I don't disagree with them. I wouldn't even mind if there were some occasional issues raised. However, every episode, so far, has had SO much on so many issues. I can get that anywhere. I gave this the title I did because I don't need a sermon every week on them, and by throwing in the proverbial political kitchen sink, the message loses any meaning.
  • Since I started watching this, I've started to read up on Isaac Wright, the real life Aaron Wallace and one of the producers of the show. They've taken some license with the IRL story, but not TOO much--it's still a great work. Great cast, good writing. ABC--more of this, less Shonda Rhimes. Please.
  • Apparently a number of posters felt this movie fell short when compared to the "original." I'll take them at their word but, to be honest, I couldn't care less. Cranston has come light years from his days as Malcolm's father, and is beyond excellent in this matter. Hart is as well. Kidman puts in a solid performance as does Margueles (sp??) as Lily. The rest of the cast are very good at worst. Worthwhile.
  • I had previously watched Sandler in a dramatic role in "Reign O'er Me" and was very pleasantly surprised, so I had hopes for this movie. Well.... I'll avoid any long descriptions of content, as the other posters pretty much have it , and I wanted to avoid spoilers. About halfway through the movie, after two couples had already left, I turned to my friend and said "Sandler's doing a good job with a (cleaned up for this review) terrible script." I waited a few days before writing this to see if I still believed it. I still do. Sandler's performance was the ONLY reason I gave this ANY stars at all. The script was putrid, the soundtrack annoying, and the remaining cast substandard to neutral. The fight scenes were often impossible to follow, the dialogue impossible to understand (one long argument) and the story itself cluttered with nonsensical BS. I have watched, and appreciated, Eric Bogosian in other roles, most recently in Billions. I have been a long-time fan of Judd Hirsch in a number of roles, most notably "Running On Empty." How and why they leant themselves to this fiasco is a mystery. Their respective stocks did not rise with this one. Thankfully, John Amos limited his exposure to a mildly humorous cameo. If Kevin Garnett was seeking to do some acting after a great b-ball career, this was not a good start. If he tries again, I hope his next attempt is in a better vehicle. The actor who played "Phil" was making his first appearance as well. He just acted himself into a career of cheap horror movies. Terrible. simple as that, Save your money and use your time for anything else--both are better spent elsewhere. Sorry Adam, your performance couldn't save this,,,,,,,work
  • Pure, unadulterated manure. There is not one positive thing that can be said about any of the characters. As for the "script," just another blah-blah tale of woe are us/nobody understands nonsense. Don't waste your time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I was intrigued by the idea behind this show, but the mystique is over. I have a family member who has been diagnosed with Asperger's (sp??) Syndrome, but don't know enough about it to venture opinions on the character in that regard. I simply have come to think the show is unrealistic, the plot predictable, and the characters overdone. Enjoy if you choose. I just do not find it entertaining or uplifting any longer.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    There was a time when I would have given this show a 10 (or more if allowed.) That was then. Some reviews have been critical of the politics. I can't say I disagree, but I can tolerate those. The show has always been held out as a comedy. I did appreciate the humor, and a little bit of family love that went with it. It's just not funny any longer, and since the humor's gone, we're left with people who are just terrible individuals. It seems every time they strive to break out of the "Gallagher trap," something will pull them back in. One has some smarts and a good heart, then gets pregnant, then overcomes it, then turns into a scheming snake. Another finds success in the military, only to be cast out and end up a criminal once again. One has an in to a private school, excels, and is done in by the usual "father" stupidity. Another is intelligent enough to get to college, but blows that. Any time you start to cheer for them, the reason is taken away. Macy is brilliant, but the exploits are predictable and no longer funny. Thanks for some good seasons, but I'm done.
An error has occured. Please try again.