Reviews

So the positives:

-they used Akira yamaoka's incredible score from the games -designs are mostly scary and accurate to the games

The cons:

-acting 😅

-plot. Yes I know the game is convoluted but it could have been simplified without falling into cliche horror tropes. Silent hill isn't about the Salem witch trials. However, that seemed to be the biggest inspiration for this film's plot.

-unnecessary changes from the game. When adapting a game into a film (a hard task it's own right), changes are bound to happen. However when those changes don't seem to improve the story in any meaningful way then we wonder why they exist at all. In the original game, Harry mason is looking for his adopted daughter. A father trying to find his daughter is compelling. Why did it have to be the mother instead? Why change the fathers name from Harry mason to Christopher Dasilva? Especially when the sequel establishes that he is in fact Harry mason? Also, of course pyramid head is legendary but he doesn't make sense being here or in the sequel. Pyramid head is a construct of james Sunderland's mind in SH2 and has nothing to do with Harry or Heather.

Let's hope Gans understands these flaws and goes harder on SH 2.

Who would have thought the creator of beavis and butthead could create a such a clever comedy!

No vomit, no drugs, no genitals.

Just well written comedy!

Where the first film had a simple plot which it used to its advantage, this film struggles to find it's footing. But by the midway point it does find its plot and the movie is more enjoyable than the first.

Because of the convoluted plot, the film could have dropped the extra 20 minutes it had compared to the first. The film feels long because it doesn't know where it's going.

If the first is a 7/10 because it had a simple plot that's elevated by Schwartz and Carrey, then the second one is 7.5 because of Schwartz, Carrey, and Elba.

Would have been a 8-9 if the plot was stronger.

A film that chose style and technique over story. Nolan dove head first into technical proficiency but sacrificed a deep engaging character-driven story. This is similar. A interesting style it has but a cohesive and engaging story it does not.

There are no main characters and no catharsis by the end. These are big "no-nos" in screenwriting 101. Nolan and Anderson both know this of course, because they are geniuses. But even geniuses can break rules in an attempt to bend them.

When they bend, they create cinematic masterpieces but when they push too far, they break them altogether and are left with spectacle and nothing more.

I'm not against live action adaptations but some mediums like anime are especially difficult to translate into live action.

I started this show before watching the anime. I went in blind. And immediately I realized a couple of things. The acting was VERY wooden. Almost like they went with the actors first take for every scene. This only added more cheese on top of the camera angles and music.

Then, watching the anime...I loved the angles and I loved the music. And unlike LA, anime can get away with more wooden performances, because we suspend disbelief. Real human performances are not allowed such grace.

Certain shots that work in anime, such as cutting to random set pieces during a dialogue scene works and is used because it saves time and money from animating the characters. In live action however it feels disjointed and serves no purpose.

Regarding music, the score is amazing in the anime and it's not terrible here either. However, anime allows us to suspend disbelief. We can hear jazz while watching a girl dressed like a stripper fight bad guys in outer space without flinching. But to recreate that in LA and immediately we think - cheesy porno.

The creators changed Faye's attire and rightfully so. It's too unrealistic for her to be wearing 1/3 of an outfit as a bounty hunter. Yet again, in an anime that's no problem BECAUSE we can suspend disbelief.

Ultimately, it's a doomed prospect to try and adapt an anime such as Bepop because too much of what makes it great really only works in animated form. Perhaps one could make a live action adaptation merely INSPIRED by the world of CB, loosely taking some elements from the show that would work in LA and leaving those that don't. Alas, trying to make a direct copy of said anime was always going to be an uphill battle. The hill was Mount Everest, however.

The one positive note I'll give is the actor for Jet Black. I appreciated him attempting to sound similar to the English dub of the character from the anime. It made him more tolerable. Cho, on the other hand was sadly miscast and just too old for the role of Spike. Spike has the energy of an 25-30 year old. Period.

This story has been done to death and has been done dozens of times more superior than this film. See the original and skip this one.

Also James Corden makes everything worse.

The film is an improvement over the first film in just about every way. The opening, the score, the acting, the editing, and especially THE ENDING are far superior to the first film.

The first film ends like a cheesy action movie with a loaded shotgun whereas this film ends with character growth!

Super original. Super engaging. No complaints. Many game shows can overstay their welcome and I'm sure this one could as well, theoretically. But it would definitely take a lot longer for this show to get boring compared to many others out there.

The movie is clearly a thriller but was misadvertized as a comedy because they saw Jim Carrey in the credits. This led to most viewers having completely different expectations than what they should have.

That'll ruin any film.

Bounty hunter and Co have to protect a small powerful green baby from an evil overlord trying to track it down?

As a huge Nolan fan (he's easily my favorite director of all time), I'm deeply sad to say that this is Nolan's first "bad" film. I use the term "bad" to indicate that the film is not enjoyable. That's the whole point of films, games, comics, books, etc right, to be enjoyable to the audience?

Enjoyment from a film can come in all forms. Some films are enjoyable because they speak deep truths about society and demonstrate a sense of catharsis for its characters to characters. These types of films emotional resonate with audiences. We can see ourselves in the heroes' journey, so to speak.

Some films are enjoyable because they are exciting. They stimulate the audience with huge action set pieces and comedy. They put a grin on our faces as we escape our own worlds.

Tenet, sadly fails in both.

The film gives us so little (virtually zero) character development in its main characters. So much so that the audience feels alienated and continues to ask themselves the question "Why?" "Why don't I care about any of these characters?" Whereas Inception gave us a deep emotional character study in Cobb and his demons, we know virtually nothing from the "Protagonist". He doesn't even have a name. Sigh.

Tenet fairs better on the popcorn side of entertainment, but falls extremely short due to one reason alone, technical proficiency. Yes, the film has some good set pieces and some really well done choreographed scenes. But these scenes are drowned out by a terribly mixed score that's blaring in almost every single scene. To top that off, the film cuts so quickly between scenes, that action set pieces mean nothing if we don't, A- understand character motivations and B-understand the extremely complex motif (inversion). We are left with nothing but loud action scenes that we don't understand and don't care about.

Inception and Interstellar both gave us complex plot devices in dream worlds and the theory of relativity/gravity/time. But both films were mixed better, had deeper characters who we cared about, and had a slower speed to help us catch up with what we just watched.

Overall, Tenet fails as a "film." For it lacks the "tenets" of what makes a "good"/enjoyable film. Perhaps it would work better as an expensive music video or short concept film.

Shyamlan is known for taking risks and subverting expectations well but he's also known for missing the mark...subverting at the wrong time or with the wrong characters.

This film is the latter, sadly.

Fans of Unbreakable will be extremely disappointed to see such a finale for their hero, David Dunn, and to see a weird arc for Mr. Glass. Fans of Split will also be just as bored with a film that has very little going on in it.

Disappoints in almost every area and only aggravates fans of both Unbreakable and Split, leaving both unfulfilled.

Incredible film which masterfully balances suspense, terror, anxiety, humor, and heart. Every facet hit at the right time and with the right tone.

Conceptually...10/10. Execution...5/10.

The film has a fresh take on Santa Claus. It sets up some interesting concepts. But sadly by the end, it doesn't flesh them all out to the fullest extent.

Perhaps a better writer could have taken this concept to the next level.

Overall, it's still worth watching and is enjoyable.

Yes even worse than Jack and Jill. Nicky has to be Sandler's most annoying character ever created. I could see this character as some weird SNL bit that could be funny maybe for a minute, but an entire film?? Naw. Not even close.

Kids might not love it but there's undoubtedly a nuance to this film that adults will certainly enjoy. Also it features the best critique of Christmas' growing commercialism.

I think the pure distaste people have for McCarthy makes them rate this film low. Which honestly, is understandable. However, the film is funny and I'd the jokes land about 70/30. The plot is simple but at least it's not convoluted.

Definitely a more comedic follow up compared to the first but still just as entertaining.

If they make a third one, I would try to put the leads in a scarier situation again.

Otherwise, decently entertaining film.

The greatest difficulty in adapting a comedy like the three stooges is time lapse. Comedy has changed a lot in 70 years. Therefore, this film has an immediate uphill battle. This means that any attempt to create new "three stooges" fans from a film in 2012 was a long shot. A very long shot. However, if you grew up or enjoyed the humor of a bygone era like the three stooges, this film is a fantastic homage. It's clear the Farrelly brothers truly love the three stooges and this is most clear in their choice of actors. Rather than trying to get A listers to sell tickets, they clearly chose the best actors. I honestly can't imagine anyone doing a better impression of the stooges than these three. At the end of the day, the filmmakers had two choices: make a modern stooges film that barely looks like the originals but has some famous A listers OR get some C listers, make it very faithful to the originals, and probably not win any new fans. The filmmakers chose the latter and I think that was the right choice.

Other than a couple of jokes not landing (peeing babies and pulling out nose hairs), the film is an extremely faithful and funny recreation of the originals, plus with a few improvements in editing.

This is one of the greatest and well crafted films ever made. From acting to the score. From the unique editing and directorial direction. This film stupefies it's viewers into a hypnotic state where they can't look away. Whether beauty or horror, you can't look away, your heart racing the entire time.

Nostalgic? Yes the film is very nostalgic. But is that enough to carry the film to the finish line? Well, almost. The kids are surprisingly relatable and start to grow on you as the film passes. However, the film ends with little resolution. No spoilers but the ending only hints at possible resolutions.

Also negative points for the kid having Shaun King as an older brother with his fake self trying to be thug.