dorukaelp
Joined Jun 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges52
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews6
dorukaelp's rating
Russian film adaptation of the Dumas' classic Three Musketeers is not the best of Soviet cinema. It definitely shows why it falls short while building up the story in the first half an hour. Characters are cartoonish. Story is of typical and acting is stagey -typical to the Soviet comedies of the time-. There is no interesting camera work or editing. Not all the musical scores are topping the charts, some of them are off key and offering mismatching tones for the song.
Of course its important to analyze the film in the right context, namely neutralization of the cultures and censorship in Soviet era. Film takes Dumas' worldwide known story and easily adapts it to a Russian speaking apolitical(!) France. Unsurprisingly, this simple story and plain adaptation wins the hearts of the ex-Soviet nations. Hence its high rating.
Unfortunately there are not many good things to tell about Russian D'Artanyan. I'm not sure if i would recommend this film to people who are not interested in Dumas' works or Soviet cinema. So don't get hyped by the high rating, in the end its an overrated TV film.
Of course its important to analyze the film in the right context, namely neutralization of the cultures and censorship in Soviet era. Film takes Dumas' worldwide known story and easily adapts it to a Russian speaking apolitical(!) France. Unsurprisingly, this simple story and plain adaptation wins the hearts of the ex-Soviet nations. Hence its high rating.
Unfortunately there are not many good things to tell about Russian D'Artanyan. I'm not sure if i would recommend this film to people who are not interested in Dumas' works or Soviet cinema. So don't get hyped by the high rating, in the end its an overrated TV film.
Just wow! I was tricked to watch this movie because of its high IMDb rating, nothing more. I reckon one-sentence positive reviews of the movie doesn't help anyone, so i decided to write a review to balance things out and give a fair warning to the possible viewers (assuming you can find this somewhere on the internet or cable).
Simply this is a TV movie with low budget, bad acting, cheap effects, poor scriptwriting and childish dialogue (plus the narrative). There is nothing interesting, original or crafty in it. It falls short in many levels, even considering the target group is 4-6 age group.
The reason behind the higher rating is presumably the accumulated voting from people who watched this piece of crap when they were kids. I can see why someone would like certain types of movies when they are young, but this doesn't justify a 10 voting.
I understand IMDb is more of a popularity contest rather than a film critic website, but it sometimes misleads people into watching low quality movies such as this one. I would suggest you watch this film (in youtube maybe?) and give it a fair vote to set things straight.
Simply this is a TV movie with low budget, bad acting, cheap effects, poor scriptwriting and childish dialogue (plus the narrative). There is nothing interesting, original or crafty in it. It falls short in many levels, even considering the target group is 4-6 age group.
The reason behind the higher rating is presumably the accumulated voting from people who watched this piece of crap when they were kids. I can see why someone would like certain types of movies when they are young, but this doesn't justify a 10 voting.
I understand IMDb is more of a popularity contest rather than a film critic website, but it sometimes misleads people into watching low quality movies such as this one. I would suggest you watch this film (in youtube maybe?) and give it a fair vote to set things straight.
I do not write reviews often, but this time i strongly felt the need to say something since this movie is ranked as the second worst movie of all times. And its a pretty big compliment for a mediocre project like this. I had to call Birdemic a project, not a film, not on the merits of production quality but for the ambiguous intentions of the filmmaker.
Its not fun, funny, cult or interestingly bad, its just rubbish. Big mistake someone decided to produce and distribute this piece of work. Filmmaker could be an attention seeking muppet or over-confident prick, but distributing, watching and helping others to watch this movie does not justify any of this.
Also people should be warned that this movie is not what it seems to be: a mockery of Hitchcocks' Birds, a criticism to polished film making or a tribute to B-movies (such as often mentioned Manos: Hands of Fate, rightfully labelled as one of the worst movies of all times).
Lets be clear, it is not one of the 'too good because its too bad' movies. Its downright boring. Amateur acting, constant panning of dull locations in establishing shots, lazy SFX and mediocre script. If it were to be extremely bad (or obviously tried to be bad), we could have a laugh. But not even that happens. I wont argue individuals right to disagree, and there is a bunch of people who find this movie entertaining. Educational, cultural, social and economic backgrounds create great depths between IMDb users.
However, the only thing that Birdemic got right is 'the shock and terror'.. which came from the boredom and idiocy it creates. Its a total waste of time, and does not stand to the buzz it creates. Im giving a 3*, because it doesn't deserve the lowest rating.
Final words: you have been awarned! Do NOT watch this movie (unless you are forced to), at least not pay for it. And also, do not watch any movie from anyone associated with Birdemic.
Its not fun, funny, cult or interestingly bad, its just rubbish. Big mistake someone decided to produce and distribute this piece of work. Filmmaker could be an attention seeking muppet or over-confident prick, but distributing, watching and helping others to watch this movie does not justify any of this.
Also people should be warned that this movie is not what it seems to be: a mockery of Hitchcocks' Birds, a criticism to polished film making or a tribute to B-movies (such as often mentioned Manos: Hands of Fate, rightfully labelled as one of the worst movies of all times).
Lets be clear, it is not one of the 'too good because its too bad' movies. Its downright boring. Amateur acting, constant panning of dull locations in establishing shots, lazy SFX and mediocre script. If it were to be extremely bad (or obviously tried to be bad), we could have a laugh. But not even that happens. I wont argue individuals right to disagree, and there is a bunch of people who find this movie entertaining. Educational, cultural, social and economic backgrounds create great depths between IMDb users.
However, the only thing that Birdemic got right is 'the shock and terror'.. which came from the boredom and idiocy it creates. Its a total waste of time, and does not stand to the buzz it creates. Im giving a 3*, because it doesn't deserve the lowest rating.
Final words: you have been awarned! Do NOT watch this movie (unless you are forced to), at least not pay for it. And also, do not watch any movie from anyone associated with Birdemic.
Recently taken polls
1,036 total polls taken