j-jameson's reviews

I got really bored and it does not happen often. The movie totally fails building up any tension and there was no chemistry between main characters. Dialog was ridiculous and script is obviousky flawed. Made me think quitting my Netflix order as they should pay me instead for the waste of time on this one.

I saw this movie accidentally on TV yesterday and I found it really good. Comparison to nowadays movies is unavoidable and Im surprised to find myself admitting that drama was better 20 years ago than what it is now. I like the whole script even as it quite predictable. Some scenes have quite a shock value which I still found pretty realistic (in overall this movie is very realistic, which makes it so interesting). Dialog is solid interesting from the beginning till the end. Directing and camera work is pretty basic good drama, nothing tricky - but in this case this is a good thing.

What makes this movie so great are the three lead female actors. I really think they had an excellent chemistry and their performances in this movie are absolutely undervalued.

I hope Porttikielto taivaaseen will keep getting the views it deserves, because seriously - this is a quality movie.

Jules & Jim is a cinematic circus, an ancestor of later french movie Amelie. After first five minutes of the movie I was thinking that this an amazing movie, but after 30 minutes I was starting to get bored. This movie is boring because it lacks a decent plot and character development or a real character description. Storytelling is mostly absurd. Maybe people are rating this movie so high as an art-house film, but Im rating this just like all other movies - by how entertaining it is.

Jules & Jim had good actors and many extremely good lines in it, but thats about it. The filming is good if you are being impressed by just watching different type of camera work, however as 21th century moviegoer this no longer so much impresses me.

5/10

This movie was an awful wannabe copy of some more better sci-fi films like Independence day and War of the worlds. I have never felt as underestimated as a viewer and I can honestly say this is far the worst movie I've seen this year and it's already November. No I am not exaggerating. People were leaving the theater in the first 30 minutes, now I hope I would have just left too.

BUT also this movie has it's moment as I enjoyed every time Angel Batista was on screen :)

I am very happy to live in Thailand so I had to pay only three bucks to see this piece of -, but yeah that's big money in here. Please, please, don't let these guys shoot another living picture...

This just came out from TV and I have to say it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It has to be at least worst movie made in the 00's. I found all the possible flaws that a movie can have so it's really hard for me to review it. Just plain awful. Joel Schumachers Batman & Robin is really good compared to this. (Go look and see what rating it has.)

My girlfriend was wondering if there is anyone on earth who likes this piece of junk. I told her that I'm sure there are plenty at IMDb.com..

..damn this site never lets me down.. come on people.. just look at this movie.. are we looking the same movie?

Clash of the titans is indeed an action packed adventure and it definitely has its moments. Too bad those moments were all about the visual looks and nothing else in this movie is surprising. I went to see the 3D version and to be honest I wasn't really impressed by it. Only 3D flick I've seen before this was Avatar and I think the 3D technique in Clash of the Titans was very poor compared to that one.

Acting was poor too. However, Ralph Fiennes is quite impressive as Hades, he did a nice job and his role had much potential (too bad the movie didn't use it). Liam Neeson was quite good too like always, but also had too weak/small role to demonstrate his skills. Characters of Zeus and Hades were definitely the strongest ones in this movie so the movie should have focused more on those two.

The plot was boring and way too predictable from the beginning till the end. The plot is so old it wouldn't get a ten year old surprised. Maybe thats the main reason why people will find this movie really boring.

I saw this movie way back when it first came out and I found it really good back then (well, what can I say, I was younger). Now I happened to see this again and decided to come in here IMDb to drop a few lines about it.

First of all this movie looks a bit like all Finnish movies did back in the 90s. I don't know if the director is Finnish or how is this movie Finnish influenced, but I have to say its definitely way above the average Finnish movie made in the 90s.

This movie has its faults. From time to time it looks quite amateur made, acting is a bit bad in some scenes and the plot could be far more twisted. Anyways, Going to Kansas city had me hooked on the 2nd viewing as it did on first over 10 years ago. Well this is a test that only a truly good movie will pass.

I watch about 200 movies a year and Going to Kansas city was ones that really kept me interested from beginning till the end.

Man, has man made many bad movies. What if some of those bad movies are taken sublime later on because they are from certain era? Maybe we are taught to believe that these movies have some sort of a subconscious meanings in them? Maybe you didn't understand the movie and you decided to make yourself look wiser by telling everyone how good it is? I once heard a fairy-tale like this...

But what if... this movie is just not that good and the reason we might like it is because it strikes us, our feelings, for being something that we so much want to find in this age of movies... different.

Marie speaks about reality of life, when the movie itself has no reality at all, ironic? I think that makes this movie a reality show of the 60's.

Return of the jedi is the best one of three original Star Wars movies.

First of all New Hope is cool but it just gets a bit boring with the super long death star race sequence. Empire strikes back is definitely one of the best movies of all time and it really makes you want for more once you have gotten into the world. Then finally there comes Return of the jedi to reveal it all and kinda get the real star wars action going on... it looks like the first two movies were just made to introduce it.

I give all three movies 11/10 but the reason I'm saying this is because I think the order of these movies in the IMDBs top 250 is wrong. Sometimes when rating an adventure movie we tend to over think the deeper meanings in these films, when in a fact sometimes the truth lies in the entertainment value. But also thinking of deeper meanings I think Return of the jedi is actually the deepest on in the saga as it has the ultimate fight between good and bad.

Return of the jedi is a one of a kind adventure/sci-fi/fantasy movie. I really doubt there will ever be one to match it.

Every time I see this movie it reminds me that Masters of the universe was the best action figure series there has ever been or will be. (Can you even compare them to.. what? Turtles?.. OK they were cool.. but NO.) There could have definitely been a more charismatic actor as He-Man than Dolph, but he does it OK and definitely has the muscles required. Skeletors character works very well in this movie and I think it really did justice to the original. Some people even compare Skeleter to Dark Vader, the villain of all time, so there has to be something good.. eh.. evil in this character and after all what would have been Skeletor like if they would have done two more of these? If we would only have the first SW-film the Vader wouldn't look that much better from Skeletor would it? This is really a great fantasy classic all tho -like said- it could have obviously been much better.

I hear people saying a lot that it ruins the movie because it's set on earth - I have to disagree because this way I felt that He-Man was so much more real. Isn't that one of the reasons why so many of us liked this movie as a child (and still do;)? - Because we want to dream Eternia being a truly existing place.

Taking place in the Finlands civil war, "whites vs reds", a woman soldier of reds is captured by the whites. She is ordered to be executed, but saved by an idealistic soldier. Together they begin a journey to face the field court, which becomes the main stage for the drama.

All the acting is done with care. Main characters played by Vauramo and Viitala are easy to relate to. Eero Aho is also quite impressive in the role of judge Hallenberg, a talented writer whose ideology is ruined by the war. Judge Hallenberg is easy to see as the most interesting character in the movie, its up to viewer to decide if hes good or bad. Also a side role of sergeant-major played by Mikko Kouki is worth mentioning for. He seems to be just the right person to play this character representing absolute moral decay of war.

As Im not the biggest fan of finnish movies I was not expecting much but Käsky (translation:order) really impressed me. Director Aku Louhimiehi is one of the top directors in finnish movie and I'd say Käsky might really be his best work. The overall mood in the movie is a bit tense, usually dramatic piano and string music playing. Great filming and good nature shots make it exceptionally beautiful. The script has just the right twist to keep the viewer entertained. I really enjoyed Käsky for the philosophical side of it, thought some of the viewers might find this movie too shocking.

9/10