Reviews

Shadows and Faces is the first and only film I watched depicting the ethnic conflict between Cypriot Greeks and Cypriot Turks in 1963. I must say it was a little different from what we had been told and taught. I liked the film for lots of reasons but one of the most important reasons was how they handled this delicate issue with a relatively objective manner and without much nationalist propaganda. The title is perfect for the film implying some people seeing ever-growing dark shadows of other people instead of seeing them as they really are. The shadow puppets and puppeteers are also perfect metaphors artistically used in the film. The very shadow play called "Karagoz / Karagiozis" is a great choice as well since it exists both in Turkish and Greek culture. As for acting, I especially liked Hazar Erguclu's Ruhsar character and Popi Avraam's Anna character. You could relate to many people in the film and character development during changing situations was worth watching. I recommend this film to everyone interested in the changeable human nature.

This film has almost 8/10 rating and 66% of users gave it 10 stars but this doesn't make it a good film for several reasons. First of all, there is no character development and you cannot relate to any of the characters. Secondly, acting is horrible, even laughable at times. In addition, there are zillions of all sorts of goofs (mostly anachronisms and factual errors). Finally, an important historical event is unrealistically told while using too much propaganda which casts a shadow all throughout the film. A far better acting, a much bigger budget with superior visual effects, a way more realistic narration and a lot less propaganda could have created a great film. Now, why does this film have a high rating? It is hard for me to answer this without offending my fellow Turkish citizens. All in all, this film is an insult to the art of film-making and a hundred years of Turkish cinema. If you want to see a good Turkish film, you can try this year's Palme d'Or winner "Winter Sleep" by Nuri Bilge Ceylan.

I wasn't the biggest fan of Merlin but I admit I liked the series. When Atlantis was announced to replace the time slot of Merlin, I expected something similarly likable. Oh, God I was never this wrong! Cheesy says it all about this abomination of mythology and fantasy but I want to say more. I've just watched the first episode and there was nothing, absolutely nothing worth my time. I'm not a British citizen but I pity for those who pay their taxes for TV series like these. Speak out! Stand up for your rights and dignity for God's sake!. Please do watch the premiere and see what I mean. Five out of ten is only for the not-so-cheesy CGI of the two-headed lizard and the minotaur (and for the upcoming episodes).

It's never worked so far. Try bearing Coupling US remake, Being Human US remake or this Primeval Canada spin-off. They've never been better than originals but for an unknown reason they keep coming. Casting is usually worse (therefore the acting is far worse), character development is poor and special effects -if there are any- are generally cheesier. There might be high expectations when it's a remake or spin-off to meet the original's standards and it's clearly a downside of remakes and spin-offs but it's a goal easier to achieve if you're doing a remake or spin-off of a North American original-North American remake / spin-off (as in Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis) or UK original - UK remake / spin-off (as in Doctor Who). Primeval New World is a bit like watching Stargate Universe after Stargate SG-1 (skipping Stargate Atlantis). I liked Niall Matter in Eureka but here in Primeval New World -even if he tries his best in this poorly-written spin-off- I don't believe he can save the show. I liked Amanda Tapping as an actress in Stargate franchise, Sanctuary and Supernatural, but as a director in Primeval New World, I can't pay her a compliment. All in all, I wouldn't recommend you to waste your time watching this show or other remakes / spin-offs of UK TV series made by North Americans.

I'm a horror fan and I had been waiting for this film for some time trying to keep my expectations low (since the film was advertising itself as 'the most terrifying film you will ever experience' which actually meant 'it might be a good idea to check it out' to me.) So I watched the film with four friends at the cinema today and after the film I was the only one who didn't regret watching it. Although one of them said 'at least we did something different' but he was most probably referring to going to the cinema. The original film was one of the first horror films I saw as a kid and it really did terrify me then but this one was just a horror-flavoured blood bath (almost literally in some scenes) and kept me on the edge of my seat for quite a short time. Nevertheless it kept me watching and I didn't get bored. I don't think this film is underrated or overrated but generally speaking, even the best horror films are underrated. No horror film gets a 10 or even 9/10. All in all, I recommend this film only to horror fans.

Stargate Universe is not an abomination as a lot of people would like to see it. It's just a different show. It was intended to be so and it was also intended to be successful. The latter didn't happen and lots of hardcore Stargate fans and some newbies have been quite enthusiastic to confirm it. Now there's a "but" coming. You can't consider SGU as a non-canonical show. It was a part of the Stargate franchise even though it couldn't fulfill its intention to succeed. So, what's the conclusion? Stargate had to end somewhere and it needn't have done it this way. I just can't believe I was happy to see even Dr McKay on the show. I admit I liked seeing General O'Neill and Lieutenant Carter and Dr Jackson as well but even they could not save the show. All in all, it wasn't a waste of time but it could have been much better.