Avaliações de steviegjd

I am not a real fan of the series. But this one looked particularly interesting and the reviews were good.

I have to say I enjoyed it. The main characters grew to be appealing. The action is fabulous, The special effects are very good. The story is solid. The bad guys are cold and driven. It's never boring and not too long, It was a great way to spend a couple of hours on a Saturday afternoon.

I loved the first movie, which came out when I was 19 or 20. Some of the guys I saw the movie with didn't even realize it was a mockumentary, which was funny by itself. The first film I saw in this genre was The Rutles: All You Need is Cash, which was on TV. That was funny too. But Spinal Tap seemed to open a door for the genre, spawning many films and inspiring many TV shows. Seeing the guys 40 years later (for both them and me) was a pleasure.

Like the first one, it feels very improvised It has a loose structure, but iys mostly improv. Professional drummers have fun cameos. Two music icons have great scenes. It's a lot of fun.

I laughed out loud several times, as did the only other person in the theater I saw it in. Not as many laughs as the first, and no iconic lines like "this one goes to 11". But laughing out loud is a pleasure, and so was this film.

I can't say i liked the movie. I didn't, But i appreciated the obvious effort the actor:writer/director put into the project. I saw it in a theater because of Eli Roth's connection with it. There were great grindhouse trailers before the film. The movie takes place in an apartment. There is an epic level of blood and gore. There are only two actors. There's a prodigious amount of drug and alcohol use. There are some clever budget special effects that are fun. The villains in the film are bad actors. Though I respect the effort, there's no real payoff and it just kinda ends. I thought it might have been going in a direction that it didn't go. The guy wanted to make a movie and he did. While I didn't really like it, I'm glad the guy got to make his movie and i'm glad I paid to see it. I wouldn't watch it again though.

I loved the series so much that I read the book afterwards. I loved the book too. Neither is for everyone. They're both told from the perspectives of various characters in different time periods. That makes following everything complicated at times.

Some people will think it's about Covid, but it's not. The book was written years before Covid and the series had already finished two episodes before Covid was a thing. But there's a very real irony because of what happened with Covid, one that the author could not have intended. But that still makes the pointa even more poignant.

Like Joyce's Ulysses, Hamlet is both thematically connected to one of the story arks, and the story has a play within the play, much like Shakespeare's work does.

The way all the characters and storylines converge at the end in a very emotionally satisfying way.is similar to one of my favorite books, "A Confederacy of Dunces". I strongly believe that Confederacy can never be made into a good movie. There's too much going on and too many side stories, even though that book is essentially about one journey. Station Eleven is quite a bit more complicated than that. Making this book into a great 10 episode series is incredibly artful.

The acting is excellent. The adaptation of the book is amazing. Seeing a post-apocalyptic world transform from present day to overgrown and dilapidated was technically brilliant.

There are deep thoughts at stake here. There are several competing philosophical traditions at play. Its view of the necessity of art and artists is beautiful. Maybe we should question our dependence on technology. There's no question that human interactions are more important - and that's a big part of this story.

People who want easy to digest and non-complicated won't have the patience for this. Some will find it slow. I get it. I don't agree at all. I loved it and I think I got it.

Most dystopian tales are about a place that could never exist. They exist in the stories and draw parallels to our time or serve as metaphors for our struggles. This movie is not a documentary, but it uses documentary to explain how the future will be created by what is happening now and by what's happened in the last 2, 5, 20, and 30 years.

It doesn't offer hope or answers. Answers aren't that easy. Hope may be a fantasy. What if this is all happening and there's nothing we can do about it? Is it too late already? "If we do not act when we can will we fall off the cliff?"

Will voting change anything? Will not voting change anything? Will continuing to consume and benefit from technological comforts yield any different result than going back to a simpler life that is unconnected to information collection?

These are not equations answered in this movie. But they're questions I have because of it.

I'm sure there many people who think this film is leftist propaganda. These same people don't see how bad things are in this country and the world. They're ok with making American great again. I'm not sure we are ever going to be ok again, neither is this film.

This is not for everyone.

This was an excellent series though it wont't be for everyone. It's like real life, which is more complicated than stories that can be wrapped up with a bow, where there is clear right and wrong, good and evil. It's also at times melancholy, sad, frustrating, insightful, and surprising. This is also how life is.

The acting is very good. The main character was 15 when this was filmed and he's playing a 13-year-old. It was his first part and he's excellent. The actors playing his family are also just great. The cops are fine, though not emotionally complicated or particularly deep. A court appointed psychologist is truly great in her section of this drama.

It looks great, is filmed well, and the story is captivating.

The final versions of the four parts were supposedly one complete take of that show. It's not obvious or showy like some of these editing experiments can be. It's a great deal like life. There are parts that are frustrating, sad, melancholy, and tragic. There's not a lot of joy here, and not a ton of hope. That may put some people off. The story evolves from the perspectives of different perspectives: the initial response to a crime; the investigation that proves it's not as simple as it appeared, the complications of the child's upbringing and experiences, and the impact on his family. But these complications and tensions are also what life is like.

There's not a ton of real closure. Things aren't all packaged up with a bow. You are left to speculate about many things. We have inklings of the truth, but do we ever get the truth? I'm not sure. But I'm ok not knowing.

Life is not simple.

I love this film. It is very long, even scheduling in a break. But it is beautiful, imaginative, challenging, and assembled with love and care. It is a melodrama with a conscience. The acting, writing, directing, cinematography,, and production design are uncompromising and near perfect, It's kind of a The Fountainhead with an anti-capitalist spirit,

I love art and architecture as art. I knew what Brutalitism was as an extension of the Bauhaus movement. And the main character is an architect whose designs are clearly part of this form. There is a sly double entendre with the title and another character, who is another kind of brute.

Even though it was long, I was never remotely bored. I know the length will put many people off. This is not the only film that has contrasts art and commerce. But it may be the best. The movie is so beautiful, it is amazing that it was made for 10 million dollars. It is not gimmicky. It is uncompromising. It is extraordinary.

I loved this movie.

It has a wonderful message of tolerance and unity. The voice acting is charming. The animation is very good, stunning at times. I liked the story, though I can see some people feeling it's too schmaltzy or corny.

In a world that is so divided, and a country that is seemingly hopelessly divided, it's very comforting to experience a story of characters coming together, being able to accept their differences, and building a community. Sadly, that's what makes it fiction too. But it's nice to dream.

The fact that the title character, and the character that inspires all the change, is the ultimate "other" only serves to make the point more elegantly.

I suppose some people will think it's manipulative and needlessly tugs at the audience's heartstrings. But that's part of the beauty to me.

I loved this movie.

This is not a good movie.

Cate Blanchett does a good job, but she feels too old to play this part. Jack Black tries hard as the voice of a robot, but his lines aren't that funny. Kevin Hart is not funny at all. The art direction is generally good, as are the costumes; it looks like a video game. There are many lines that will only make sense if you haven't played the games. But the movie is not true to the video games. That contrast demonstrates how little thought went into this movie. Nobody will be happy.

The action is directed and choreographed poorly. The movie is not shot well. The main story arc is definitely very video game in composition. That is an observation, not a criticism. The worst part is the script. The dialogue is poor. There is no real character development. The story is unconvincing and kind of obvious.

This is not the worst movie I've ever seen. But this is not a good movie.

MNS' films have been wildly inconsistent. This is one of the better ones. His first film was great. This one is good.

Josh Hartnett is really good in this part. He's excellent. Other than his daughter, no other character has any development The young woman playing.the singer, Saleka, is very good too. The daughter, Ariel Donaghue, also does ac good job. But every other character is nothing more than stereotype.

The premise is clever. The development of the story is entertaining. The tension builds nicely too.

But it eventually gets bogged down in false endings that never end. That starts to get silly: But Hartnett does a good job throughout, even when he's chewing up the scenes. It ends up being too self-indulgent for its own good.

I am not the target demographic for this film. I loved superhero comics when i was a kid. I waited for a good superhero movie or TV show for a long time, There were ebbs and flows with the quality of superhero movies. There were campy TV shows. Then we got the Tim Burton Batman, the Sami Raimi Spiderman, X-Men, and then Marvel. Not all of these films has been good. Some have been dreadful.

I really enjoyed the first two Deadpool movies. The snarky fourth-wall breaking character made for two pretty entertaining films. This new movie I loved. It was great. I laughed out loud many times. I was in a theater of people at the first showing on the first day in Imax. I venture to guess that everyone there loved it too.

I then heard reviews today. To be fair, I like foreign films and art films too. They're just different categories to me. But i know why critics in general won't like this film. To really appreciate it, you have to have seen the referenced films, TV shows, cartoons, and comics, and be familiar with their characters. For those who have that reference, this is great fun. If you don't have the frame of reference you won't get the joke. This is made for fans of the genre There are characters from TV shows, movies, cartoons, and many comic book references.

Another thing that critics won't like is that this movie is very meta on the movie business in general and this genre in specific. Other than that this is a buddy comedy/action film. This is not a new genre and does not have real deeper meaning about life. But it is a fantastic roller coaster ride.

This movie is pretty gory at times and very violent. There are lots of sexual innuendos that younger kids will not get and are probably not appropriate for them. But, I saw the original Star Wars movie.more than 40 times that first summer. I fell in love with snarky heroes, action, and great effects. This has all of that, plus offers all of us who love these films a chance to feel like I did when I paid 2$ to get into the first showing of Star Wars and watch the movie 4-5 times in a day. I'll definitely pay to see it again.

Being the prequel to one of the best action movies ever made is a burden. This movie is pretty good, but it's not Fury Road ("FR"). Seeing the genus of characters from FR is fun. The action scenes are fun and full of tension. The effects are generally well done.

Alyla Browne is really good as young Furiosa. Hemsworth is terrific as Dementus, who kind of outshines Anya Taylor-Joy. Dementus is much more flamboyant character. Furiosa emotionally is not that exciting. ATJ looks great. It's not her, it's the way the character is written.

If this movie has been made first, it would have had more excitement. But that's not what happened here. Still, I enjoyed it.

This movie is quite derivative of a few specific movies and genres. It's also very corny and silly at times. However, it's fun to watch.

The main plot turns on something it's hard to see coming. And when it happens you think so egging like "that's ridiculous". It also has several false ends that are a bit trying. Near the real end, one is likely to think "when is this going to end"?

The acting is fine in it. The action scenes are generally well choreographed and well shot. Smne of them are over the top. But they're fun too.

The film is shot in some neat places. The sets look good. Many of the actors were in the Kingsman movies, previously made by the same director. The film has the same tone as those films.

It's entertaining but not deep. It's set up for a sequel that dies not need to be made.

It's hard to review this movie without giving up any spoilers. But here goes.

There are many good things about this film. The basic story and interplay between the characters is great. As is the acting of the main characters. The climatic was scene is well-filmed and is exciting. All of the action scenes are well done. These things are all positive.

But the problems are glaring and practically overwhelm the good parts. And I think I know why the main problem exists: to not upset a certain segment of society. That may be about profit; it could be a choice. Though I recognize that some people dispute the main reason for the.1861-65 Civil War, it's clear to most people. There exists a great deal of conflict in this country about the merit of deifying the leaders of the confederacy. So this movie avoids any sense or morality and ignores the reasons for this movie's civil war. It also has "allies" who could never be allies here. That lack of reality, combined with the deliberate choice not to reveal the cause, makes the movie rather shallow to me.

Many people might call that bold. It was lame to me. But it will probably attract a larger audience and that's probably the goal anyway.

The original 1984 Ghostbusters was great for its time. The sequels and reboots varied greatly.

Afterlife gave me hope that there was something left in the tank. New blood mixed with nostalgia, layered in a kind of sweetness - with Paul Rudd. What could go wrong? Frozen Empire is gone wrong.

The new characters aren't given much to do. Paul Rudd looks lost. The nostalgia wears thin quickly. There was a guy in the theater where I saw this laughing loudly at things that weren't funny. Maybe he's the target audienc?

Bill Murray does nothing but smirk. It was funny in 1984. It's not funny anymore. Other original actors are treading water with a very poor script. While it's marginally fun to see these folks again, the narrative is so plodding and unfunny, you lose whatever nostalgic juju you might have for the material.

This is so bad that the powers that be should really consider letting this go before any shred of dignity has disapated.

There are many specific elements I could comment on, but I don't want to create spoilers, even though there is incongruity in aging, a disastrous cosmic relationship, and paltry few laughs - except for the guy in the theater who was having a 1984 time travel experience.

I don't know this from the comics. But I generally enjoy superhero movies. I came to this with an open mind. But this is not a good movie.

The story is convoluted. The script is poor. The editing is terrible.

I like the idea of the main character and the three potential sidekicks. I think it could have been campy fun. The acting was inconsistent. Dakota Johnson is kind of flat, as was one of the girls. The other two girls are better.

While it was entertaining at times, it is so inconsistent that as a whole it's pretty poor. It actually makes The Marvels look good.

That is not an endorsement.

I loved the first Greek Wedding movie. It was charming and poignant and had universal. "annoying family" appeal. The second movie was not nearly as good, though it was interesting to see what happened and it was nice to revisit the charming characters. That latter attribute is the only good part on the third installment.

Seeing the characters is pleasant. The story is contrived and much of the dialogue is silly. The conflicts all seem forced and fake. Some of the gags are humorous. Andrea Martin is still great. Many of the shots are poorly conceived. The beauty of the Greek isles is nice to see. But it feels a little like BFGW1 crossed with her Greek tour leader comedy "My Life in Ruins", but both of those movies are better.

I like Nia Vardolos.. I just didn't like this. Movie much.

One gauge for a story's rating is how you feel about it and the characters when it's over. Do you never think about it again, or are you immediately wanting to know what happens next? Do you not care what happens to the characters, or are you disappointed that it's over and there might not be any more?

When Special Ops: Lioness was close to ending, I immediately looked to see if there was an epilogue coming. I watched the final scenes and wanted to know what else was going to happen. I may or may not ever have those feelings satiated.

I really enjoyed this show. It took a few episodes to grow on me. But then it became a reason to look forward to Sunday. The cast and acting are very good. The characters' conflicts feel genuine. The emotions feel honest. The action scenes are kinetic and energized. I love that the three main characters are strong women.

This is just my opinion. But i want some more please.

This movie may not be what "Black Adam" fans wanted to see: He's not the guy from the comics. But Dwayne Johnson doesn't want to play a villain either. This movie is much more like Shazam than any other DC or Marvel film. It's kind of silly and simple. But it's also funny. My friend and I cracked up numerous tones. If it's taken on it's merits: good effects, silly and funny,, it's very entertaining. If you want a morbidly serious film, you'll hate this. If you want Snyder-verse melancholy, you will be very disappointed. It may be that this tone is not ideal for an Arab-centric, anti-white privilege, super hero trope. But i laughed a lot.

Clare Dunne is excellent in this film. Her vulnerability and trauma are palpable. The story, which she wrote, is a bit formulaic. But it's a worthy film. There are some corny and melodramatic moments. But the heart of the film is true.

This is not a great movie. It is caught in a time warp. I love Jack Black. But, when he is out of control, the movie can go off the rails and that happened here. This movie has a similar vibe to Bernie and Nacho Libre, both of which were better movies. This would have been a better film if his character was played straight, as opposed to the goofy character in The Polka King. The real Jan Levan stole real money from real people. He wasn't a sweet misguided immigrant. The story deserved a better vehicle for its telling. I do, however, find it ironic that a number of the super critical reviews here are by people who cannot spell, don't know how to use proper punctuation and have bad grammar. Draw your own conclusions.

This is a bad movie. It took years to get released and there is a reason for this. It is truly bad. The acting is terrible. Everyone in it is truly bad. It is filmed like a cable movie. Both the direction and cinematography are amateurish. Even the editing looks like something out of "The Room," which is the movie this most reminded me of. But where "The Room" became a midnight movie laugh fest, one which its creator now insists was intended to be a dark comedy, "Something Wicked" takes itself very seriously. Which makes it all the worse when you are laughing out loud at how bad it is. The only thing redeeming is the ending - and it is not worth the trouble of sitting through this piece of junk.