johnh22
A rejoint le mars 2005
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges2
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis68
Note de johnh22
Echo 3 is action thriller by Mark Boal, writer for Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty, etc.
Echo 3 is based on 'When Heroes Fly' a series from Israel, I think. The story centers around the kidnapping of an American scientist and the attempted rescue by her brother and husband, former Delta force.
Episodes 1 & 2 are not too bad, but later episodes drag, and it is clear this story could have been told in two hours or three hours. The story starts to stall around episode 4 or 5. Lastly, shoehorned LGBQ characters and narratives are injected into the story: totally contrived to fit into Hollywood's MESSAGE.
Echo 3 is based on 'When Heroes Fly' a series from Israel, I think. The story centers around the kidnapping of an American scientist and the attempted rescue by her brother and husband, former Delta force.
Episodes 1 & 2 are not too bad, but later episodes drag, and it is clear this story could have been told in two hours or three hours. The story starts to stall around episode 4 or 5. Lastly, shoehorned LGBQ characters and narratives are injected into the story: totally contrived to fit into Hollywood's MESSAGE.
Rings of Powers opening credits say it is based on Lord of the Rings, a prequel of sorts.
Two ways to review Rings of Power: 1) As a stand-alone artistic endeavor. Or 2) As an attempt to bring Tolkien's vision to life on screen,
1) As a stand-alone product, the Rings of Power fails as a stand-alone show. Editing and pacing are poor; the special effects leave something to be desired; costumes and make-up not great; there is yet no discernable plot. Characters are inconsistent.
2) As an adaptation of Tolkien. Whatever else the show may be, it is not "Tolkien"; nor is it (as the opening credits claim) based on The Lord of the Rings and its appendices in any meaningful way. This point must be driven home: the writers openly insisted that their principle was always to return to the book for guidance and inspiration; credulous critics have believed them. This is simply not true.
Did the show writers even read The Lord of the Rings? If they did, they fundamentally misunderstood it: in their hands, Tolkien's moral and imaginative universe is simply gutted. The Moral touchstones of Tolkien's world are piety, gratitude, and humility. In The Rings of Power, these virtues are absent; they are acknowledged only insofar as they are repeatedly rejected.
Two ways to review Rings of Power: 1) As a stand-alone artistic endeavor. Or 2) As an attempt to bring Tolkien's vision to life on screen,
1) As a stand-alone product, the Rings of Power fails as a stand-alone show. Editing and pacing are poor; the special effects leave something to be desired; costumes and make-up not great; there is yet no discernable plot. Characters are inconsistent.
2) As an adaptation of Tolkien. Whatever else the show may be, it is not "Tolkien"; nor is it (as the opening credits claim) based on The Lord of the Rings and its appendices in any meaningful way. This point must be driven home: the writers openly insisted that their principle was always to return to the book for guidance and inspiration; credulous critics have believed them. This is simply not true.
Did the show writers even read The Lord of the Rings? If they did, they fundamentally misunderstood it: in their hands, Tolkien's moral and imaginative universe is simply gutted. The Moral touchstones of Tolkien's world are piety, gratitude, and humility. In The Rings of Power, these virtues are absent; they are acknowledged only insofar as they are repeatedly rejected.
The prequel to Game of Thrones (GOT) has arrived. This version takes place 172 years before the first series and focuses on the Targaryen line of succession: a male heir vs. Female heir. Go figure, medieval monarchies just have not gotten the memo on equal rights - Don't they realize it's 2022?
House of the Dragon is not bad compared to 'Rings of Power' - a very low bar indeed - but it is a pale reflection of the original: It lacks teeth; it's tame; it feels more like a history lesson than Game of Thrones. Frankly, House of Dragon reflects the wave of political correctness that has taken over Hollywood. The show has race swapped white characters; while the show also has a contrived focus on childbirth scenes and tends to push female characters at the expense of most of the male characters - Daemon is the only male character remotely interesting. To make matters worse, the characters talk like people from 2022 dressed in costumes.
Grades:
Casting: Grade D+. Actors do not reach the quality of the original series. Casting reflects the latest Hollywood tiresome obsession: racial quotas and affirmative action type casting - when they ignore the source material. It's a distraction for purely ideological, not artistic reasons.
Story: Grade C. The story feels like an Eilzabeth the Tudor queen period piece (with a little Richard III and Hamlet mixed in.) The original Game of Thrones had fantastic elements, iconic characters, and engrossing plot twists: House of the Dragon is mundane in comparison.
Production: A. Sets, CGI, costumes are HBO quality. Slightly inferior to the original, but still pretty good.
Overall: C-. This series could have been much better: The show runners were clearly terrified of criticism from the twitter crowd directed toward Game of Thrones regarding race, women's roles, nudity, sex scenes, etc. - but apparently gore and gratuitous violence is still o.k. House of the Dragon deserves a rating of about 6 or 7. I rated it 4 because the inflated ratings of 10 skew the results.
House of the Dragon is not bad compared to 'Rings of Power' - a very low bar indeed - but it is a pale reflection of the original: It lacks teeth; it's tame; it feels more like a history lesson than Game of Thrones. Frankly, House of Dragon reflects the wave of political correctness that has taken over Hollywood. The show has race swapped white characters; while the show also has a contrived focus on childbirth scenes and tends to push female characters at the expense of most of the male characters - Daemon is the only male character remotely interesting. To make matters worse, the characters talk like people from 2022 dressed in costumes.
Grades:
Casting: Grade D+. Actors do not reach the quality of the original series. Casting reflects the latest Hollywood tiresome obsession: racial quotas and affirmative action type casting - when they ignore the source material. It's a distraction for purely ideological, not artistic reasons.
Story: Grade C. The story feels like an Eilzabeth the Tudor queen period piece (with a little Richard III and Hamlet mixed in.) The original Game of Thrones had fantastic elements, iconic characters, and engrossing plot twists: House of the Dragon is mundane in comparison.
Production: A. Sets, CGI, costumes are HBO quality. Slightly inferior to the original, but still pretty good.
Overall: C-. This series could have been much better: The show runners were clearly terrified of criticism from the twitter crowd directed toward Game of Thrones regarding race, women's roles, nudity, sex scenes, etc. - but apparently gore and gratuitous violence is still o.k. House of the Dragon deserves a rating of about 6 or 7. I rated it 4 because the inflated ratings of 10 skew the results.