RebelMe

The reason why the first movie was very good (I would call it even brilliant) was, that for first half an hour, you didn't know what's going on here. You saw Kutcher's childhood which was from time to time affected by blackouts and you didn't know what they are for there. As this is a sequel, the tension was missing and the guy even didn't have blackouts at all. Many times during the new movie I felt like watching the first movie and that the new one just changed a few things. For example, compare the prison scene and the scene on toilets. This movie lacks strong scenes, which are replaced by sex. Again, remember the first movie - burning of a dog, dynamite in a box, visit at Lenny's room in hospital etc. Those moments were breathtaking, quick and strong. What do you have in the second one? A lot of people hate the ending of this movie, but well...how would you end it? It would be a disgrace if it was pure happy-end and also, they couldn't do partial happy-end, if they didn't want to repeat themselves again. All in all, this flick is very mediocre and the comparing to the original movie pushes it even lower. I won't say "AVOID IT!", watch it on some evening when you want to watch TV but the only thing they broadcast is Big Brother.

If you want to see a film with the most real style of hacking, forget Swordfish, The Net and all these other films where "hackers" work in graphically superb programs and can hack government server in few seconds. Broderick, working in his text-only mode, using social-engineering and having good abilities handling primitive electric devices is nearest the real world's "hacking", at least in his period.

As thought that the film sometimes lacks tension, especially in the middle, it has its very strong moments. To be honest, I got most excited on the very beginning, I really loved it.

The performances are good, but I disliked and didn't believe the performance of the man, who should have played the wooden-head general. It seemed to be too overacted. He himself lowered my rating by one.

This film might not be so interesting for people, who aren't interested in computers, because, as I mentioned upper, the plot lacks some deeper crisis, but I thing that everyone else will like it, so if you match the upper criterion I can recommend you only one thing: Go and get it!

I've put Ocean's Twelve on my "must see" list immediately after seeing Ocean's Eleven. Today, I have to regret it. I expected some very good acting, but to be honest, I liked only Carl Reiner's performance. The others? Poor. Matt Damon as a silly thief-n00b, George Clooney and Brad Pitt with no style and elegance of professional thieves which were the things I liked most in the first movie. Yes, Catherine Zeta-Jones and her godlike-instincts were just another cliché in the film, but it was Julia Roberts who seemed absolutely worst to me - Especially in the part involving Bruce Willis. I only watched the TV and thought for myself: "Oh my god! The woman CAN'T act!" The plot itself is messy, many times leaving the viewer to ask himself: "WTF is going on there?". And the end? OMG didn't you all see this stupid happy-end hundred, thousand, million time before? Didn't you find the "surprise" in the end predictable? If you have seen Ocean's Eleven, avoid this film because you will start to dislike even it when you see O's Twelve. If you haven't seen O's Eleven, go and watch it, but every time your hands will be approaching O's Twelve in the DVD lender's store, remember me and take anything else instead. Have you seen The Godfather yet?