Apollo_11

I'm a movie lover and I own 1000s of DVDs from all eras, so I like to think I have an eye for a really great movie... So why am I scratching my head after watching this and seeing over 49% of 12,000 voters giving this a 10? I just don't get it.

To be honest, I found the movie pretty average. It has some great acting by Winslet and Carrey and the soundtrack is quite enchanting. I suppose the storyline does touch the emotional nerves of anyone who has been in love and felt pain from it, but nothing I haven't seen done better in other (mostly "World Cinema") movies. The direction and style of the movie is nothing revolutionary (contradicting a point raised quite often here).

I was wondering was it something to do with the general reviews of the film? One trend I've found on IMDb is that the vast majority of people tend to echo what reviews have said about a film, even if they (deep down) don't feel that way themselves about it? I'm not sure, I tend not to read reviews until after I've watched a film.

I gave the film 6/10 as I was feeling generous. It really doesn't deserve anything more than this.

Sydney J. Bartholomew Jr. should never be allowed to make another film again. How come people are giving budgets to people to make bad films when there are plenty of creative talented directors out there struggling to make their first feature?!

The only reason to buy/rent this film is if you think the Sprouse twins are too cute to pass on. Yes they are, and they don't disappoint here either. But trust me when I tell you, that is the only reason (and one other I'll mention in a moment)

The scenes are shabbily put together (everything looks rushed). They even used stills taken from the footage for coverage (UGH!). The music is crude with dialogue to match (this is little kid's entertainment?!)

A good director would have noticed Cole mouthing Dylan's lines in a number of the scenes and given him some coaching. If he didn't pick this up on set, it definitely should have been spotted in the dailies? Their double-takes in the scene with Cobi Jones' cameo were unbearable to watch. If I'd have been on set... Well, never mind! Two ADs too! Didn't they have a creative brain cell between them?

One little gem I spotted in all of this mess was a young actor, Tyler Hervey. Look out for him if you watch this movie. Character is "Mikey" and he plays an angry cop's kid. Got wonderful on-screen presence and would be wonderful to see him in a major role.

Anyway... Just for kicks gets 2/10.

I really enjoyed this movie. The suspense, the acting, the story.

Fate brings an unlikely couple together, and an even unlikelier outcome, but it works.

I was impressed with Morgan Marinne's performance and I was glad I didn't read about the plot of the film before I watched it. I think you need to see this film without prior knowledge of what it is about.

There are two things I didn't like about the movie. The first is the close camera quarters to the action. I don't mind it if it is used in conjunction with other, longer shots, but *all* the time can get a bit nauseating for the viewer.

The second failure, in my opinion, was the abrupt end. No third act to this film, I'm afraid. I found it disappointing that we never find out how the characters are resolved. It's fine to leave open-ended questions, but we had nothing to go on, not even a hint!

Overall though, I really recommend this film to movie-lovers. But if your cup of tea is restricted to Schwarzenegger action, or George Clooney eye-candy, steer well away.

7.2/10