Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Soap opera already
Hey Little bud. Wtf.
This is dreadful. Cheapest of characters. Little girl with long hair is super officer. Cancer doctors. Cancer kids. Black people falsely accused.
What happened to the time travel.
Routine as hell. Assume budget blown on a few episodes or events. Will fallback to being filmed in someone's apartment.
Another half-assed show.
A bit bland
It tries to focus on people around Ted Bundy but this ultimately just dilutes the story. The characters it tries to focus on are just not that interesting and the low key approach, though held well by Lily Collins, is inconsistent with a smiley Zac hanging around. Real problem with the concept is how little association the killer side of Bundy has with his associates and the lack of charisma and engagement delivered by Efron.
So: Zac Efron is flat and should probably get back to Teeny Bopper TV stuff or possibly Love Island. He kind of stands around practicing lines.
In the end a mediocre TV Movie. Shame that a little more effort in the Acting and Directing departments and it could have been intriguing. But ultimately if you are making a film not about Ted Bundy then keep Ted Bundy out of it.
The Walking Dead: Omega (2019)
Minimal effort and expense. This was 15 minutes drag out to fill the time. Same as last week.
Time to switch off.
Doctor Who: Resolution (2019)
BBC has created a new Donkey
Well I think we can see why it was moved off Christmas Day.
Get some new writers. This is rubbish. It is juvenile. Get some new assistants. These are lame. Get a new Doctor Jodie does not look happy or know what she is doing. Drop the Sheffield element. Did they pay the BBC for this?
Only the BBC can spend £3.5B on mediocrity. This is entirely due to the free cash it is given from straight out of our pockets. By far the most expensive channels I receive.
Another trip back to the daleks. I am overwhelmed. So how did the dalek build that bullet proof shell? Pathetic.
Too Little content
This just dragged on. Nobody was good enough to hold it together.
Looks like the same as last series where episodes are 7 minutes long with repitition and filler to pad it out.
If it's dying let it dye.
Andrew Lincoln has nothing lined up and this show would not get him a part on a soap opera. If they are phasing the original cast out then just kill them all and get on with it. Carol fared no better, wearing a super hero outfit from a nija turtle kit and 'looking concerned'. Melissa Mc the same though, nothing extra lined up. This is suprising as they are both such international stars.
Milking the cash cow is going to alienate the fans across the board, coupled with the same situation for Fear the walking dead Season 4 (one story respun) and Game of Thrones (empty set scenes). Is this the end of the golden age of Television (Series)?
The Walking Dead: Time for After (2017)
This has collapsed faster than a zombies head from a blow of Rick's Axe.
Ok, it's never been the most cranial series but, a new low. I am writing this after watching next weeks episode, which is worse!
The cast are just not good enough actors to carry this. Will the next season get made?
The Walking Dead (2010)
Become a cash cow rip off
What has happened to this.
It is awful. I don't think any of the characters are really on set with each other. It is very difficult to care for any one or see any empathy between the characters.
It looks like they have slashed the budget, especially in the scripting and character development areas.
Just cut the costs and rake in the cash for the last two series. People pay for this. Shame.
The stupidity of the plot - they could have killed Negan in episode 1. Aside from that major goof is there any story at all here? Is Michonne dating Rick? In fact what is Rick doing - Is he making a film and cannot turn up? The same for Carol, a few long shots and bit of gun action.
What a rip.
The Magnificent Seven (2016)
Just doesn't work. Chris Pratt at his usual soap opera level - does he have friends in Hollywood? Denzel is Denzel. Ethan Hawke looks good for his part, could have been Doc Holiday.
The original works because of the play between the actors (less so the characters), you can sense the egos, it creates an amusing timing across everything that goes on. Here they may as well have filmed all their parts individually against stand-ins.
No, you cannot remake a cinematic feast as an updated story. Just call it something else and see if you can get funding.
Please stop making crap.
L'affaire Farewell (2009)
Super understated slow boiler (Spy Game Plus)
Farewell is a spy drama set in Moscow/Russia in the early 1980's. It stars Guillaume Canet and Emir Custarica, both noted directors in their own rights.It is based on real events with the basic story correct though the nature of the two leading characters and a few events are somewhat changed or omitted.
The plot centres around the leaking of Russian intelligence to the French government. Sergei (Canet) works for the Russian secret service but has been recruited by (or volunteered to) the French government to pass intelligence data from his office. Sergei is doing this for purely moral reasons arguing that it will one day bring the system down and give his son a better future. His contact is a French engineer working in Moscow, Pierre, coerced in to helping by the French government and operating as Sergei's dropping point. The story develops around the personal relationship between Sergei and Pierre and also that of their families. Sergei is confident and casual but ultimately a little careless. While Pierre becomes paranoid and with his young family in tow begins to feel the stress.
The data turns out to industrial espionage on everything from the Space Shuttle to the US defence strategy and even secret communication codes. When the American are shown the information by the French (in a neat piece of one-upmanship) it is only a matter of time before action has to be taken and lives are in danger.
The pace is slow and constant and never flat. Tantalisingly delicate, a very light brush from the director allows the actors to communicate in manner rarely seen in Hollywood films. Similar with the cinematography which is used sparingly and always to accentuate the story. Watch out for the early scene where they first meet which simply says 'spies'. Then the scenes of northern Russia in winter.
This is a very smart film with excellent understated performances from all the cast. Watch out for several more famous actors in cameo and small roles. Fred Ward playing Ronald Reagan looks positively weird though they get away with it.
If you arrived here before viewing be sure, it is well worth watching. Spy Game plus.
Battlefield Earth (2000)
rethink On a bad film
Read the others for a proper review - some aliens, the psyclos, have taken over earth. A long time later we have lost our society, skills and most people with the remainder slaves. The baddies are greedy and self centred and everything else that is considered poor in human kind. Anyway because of their greed they re-train a human, with their advanced technologies, to learn skills to operate independently from them to obtain gold in a radio-active zone (somehow they cannot cope with any level of radiation and have not figured banks are full of it). This eventually leads to their downfall after he figures how train to fly helicopter gunships and fighter planes that are about a thousand years old and teaches his mates the same skills.
Not a great film. But then it does not deserve the relentless criticism. It is just clumsy and fails to really run anywhere. Its nearly a morality tale but that's too much credit.
It is somewhat allegorical in the way religiously derived films intend to be. The short comings in the plot are not that important and really no different to Moses opening up the Red Sea in the Ten Commandments. Very loosely, it has a backward go at psychiatry (Scientology link from the author and source material) and promotes learning and training as the road to a equality along with trust and comradeship and a sexy woman.
About the characters and general criticism. The Psychlos are an abstract factor which we could refer to in our society as the infamous Big Brother or International Corporations running wild. The human characters have to appear as they do so we can relate to them (no point in seeing futuristic cavemen). The Psychlos are ultimately back stabbing and self indulgent with little interest in human ideals such as common goals and even trust. An underlying philosophy is that of control (leverage), one element of the writings that this is derived from.
What happens is the humans eventually bond together and compete (fight back against the bad guys) to achieve a common future with benefit for all mankind (or what's left of it).
But they also use nuclear weapons (an apparent evil) and are ultimately protected by radioactivity and then gold (the basis of our monetarist ways) is the key to their rise. Elements of our current society that are so often criticised by those on the outside.
After seeing this for the second time all (most) the way through I am beginning to warm to it. Yes it's poor but it also has some symbolism and is not that much worse than many other films I have seen.
Outcasts: Episode #1.2 (2011)
Typical BBC - rant
Poor. No other statement required.
This one idea and three episodes dragged out in too more than I can remember.
It is cheap to make. Three sets for the majority of it. No Character development and a weak plot that should have stayed in the pitching room. Poor acting, editing, scripting and even camera work - which is difficult.
Please just jump to the chase. All those up and coming actors who's career's are now denigrated to the latest Dr Who. Stood around in the same conversations. On a planet full of sand with clean uniforms. And the classic B-Movie cost saver, facsimiles.
Look if you're here you saw it. The BBC will class this as original programming. It is time for this donkey of a company to close. This is the worst kind of TV, deliberate and designed to save money against a criticism of a lack of new programming. Desperately trying to justify its enormous expense.
The BBC is by far the most expensive channel I rent. We need to get this conversation going more. And figure how to bypass that committee that safe guards us and get the politicians off the fence and chop this crap up.
It's passable for easy light headed sci-fi. Just enjoy. Pretty much on par with Avatar. If you've seen the first then that's it again if not then don't bother, perhaps with either, though you probably will so wait for video.
It would be improved with a better script and the introduction of a plot rather than a series of events. And the modern public's knowledge of computing makes it look dated already.
I expected some action back in to the real world. But instead we have a simple get out here type displacement storyline. The journey is just copied and then jazzed up from the original (same world I suppose and they have been locked away).
C-. Please try harder next time. Thank god we had Inception this year
People not effects, interesting plots and ideas not story arcs, characterisation not 3D etc...
MysteryQuest: Devil's Triangle (2009)
New Low for the History Channel
Yet another 'investigation' in to the Bermuda triangle. Officially (I.e. go and look up the real figures at the maritime institutions and see for yourself) there is no statistical aberration with regards to vessels disappearing here. So to propose a theory as to how this happens seems a little odd.
Most of this program is focused on a theory of electronic fog. The idea of electronic fog is introduced to us by David Pares, and he is in fact the inventor (not discoverer) of this phenomenon. After a brief introduction in to what it could be and how it might be created we are told this could be an explanation as to why so many aircraft have disappeared here.
The basic idea is solar wind interacting with local thunderstorms creating localised phenomena. All the science and naval and investigative authorities in the world have apparently, so far, missed it.
The program quickly falls in to 'triangle fever' and runs through the usual clichéd footage. We are shown a plane flying through clouds. The nature of the clouds is switched between real (light and wispy) and artists impressions of what a Bermudan cloud tunnel might look like. We see the compass spinning and a plane possibly in trouble (or at least a dramatic camera shot).
Pares is filmed in the aeroplane with what appears to be a radio frequency/power meter which is 'flying of the scale'; that's real data - show it somebody. I was more interested in the camera actions. Whenever the meter is jumping then the camera and/or plane are shaking (otherwise its stable). This is incredible, just repeat it and half the worlds real scientists will be up there investigating and a billion people will tune in and the missing people will be returned and .....
Pares suggest this is a new theory and one he is actively investigating (check his web site - google "David Pares"). Well all solar activity IS monitored and we could easily know if any activity hit this far south on a particular day, in fact it is so unusual it would have been on the news and the power grid would have felt it. Well theories need questions. Why was this not crossed referenced? Why don't we go up there when we know solar storms are coming? Why didn't the program focus exclusively on the aeroplane wobbling; an original scientific observation?. I could suggest, because they have made the whole thing up.
Some attempt at counter arguments are shown. But countering what. This is mostly a man flying through a cloud showing that no clocks have unexpectedly jumped forward. Hope that didn't cost. Also there was some conversation with a triangle sceptic whom on further investigation is another member of the triangle/ufologist family.
I just cannot understand why this program was made or why it is presented as anything like real science. David Pares is the single source for this theory yet no alternative (in this sense real) opinion was given; I propose the following hypothesis "It is not happening which is why you cannot find it".
These type of shows are becoming more prevalent on The History Channel, they are clearly cheap to make, generally cobbled around 20 minutes of footage repeated with varying commentary. There appears to be no background research or attempt to verify radical claims by dubious experts and pseudo-scientists. Standards seem to have dropped a long way from the award wins of several years ago.
So this is new low. Recently I saw John Hutchison (the high prince of pseudo-science) on a show introduced as a futurologist (once he hung a toy plane of a piece of wire and claimed it was floating - he forgot to hide the wire and attempted to publish the findings).
Is David Pares a real scientist. He has a website. He claims to have researched several different areas, including weather, and taught at several real institutions, respected ones. Well he is not listed at any I checked (I am not ringing from the UK). The levels of research he claims look like a life's work, so where were they done? where are the papers? This kind of stuff requires resources, where did they come from? And quick Google shows David Pares' other interests to be UFOs. Do schools and colleges in the US employ ufologists as science teachers?
Anyhow, facts. Those bombers in World War II just got lost (the captains says, and was recorded saying, "I am lost"). Ships that totally disappear inevitably leave flotsam and jetsam that does and will turn up on beaches (just like everywhere else in the world). Magical weather systems don't happen, if they did scientists would investigate them. A Compass spins when you spin it with a magnet. Cameras that shake at key moments is 'fakery'.
Laborious Plot Hole
When Nathan sacrifices himself saving brother Peter Petrelli and flying of to explode in the sky. They could have simply stuck a knife / or shard of glass in the back of his head. As per earlier episodes with Peter and Clare Bear. And 'froze/killed' him. Actually why couldn't Peter fly? Just no need for Nathan to die, unless there is moral statement regarding salvation or redemption and it just ain't that deep. There seems to be a new breed of serialised drama which follows a basic pattern of lots of characters and little air time per person as in soaps. Little character depth or plot development. As entertaining as the series was there could never be a real ending, and ultimately this just falls flat.
Superb TV series - on par with edge of darkness
If you've not seen this then look out for it. It is available on DVD. It is a channel 4 (uk) production, possibly, in conjunction with German and danish TV. If you've seen the film it is basically the same plot. Several interleaved stories are connected through the drugs trade. The story jumps between the housewife (played by the excellent Lyndsay Duncan) trying to complete a deal on behalf of her husband, who to her surprise is an international drugs dealer (and generally dangerous man).
A minister, who is embedded in his job to the detriment of his family, is investigating the whole state of affairs with international drugs trafficking. He gets a few eye openers to the reality of heroin when his daughter turns out to have a 'problem'. He then visit Pakistan, officially, where he seems to be taught that the abuse (not simply the drug or its casual use) is the problem and also gets to sample some produce (an excellent scene where he simultaneously realises what the attraction is and why it is and why it is such a problem). In Pakistan we get to see the other side. The desperation of farmers who can barely survive turning to opium production and crime lords. The pointless attempts at subsidy resulting in the system getting rich. And a country so drenched in drugs yet only a relative fraction of the abuse we have in the west. Around all this a customs official/interpol agent tries to catch the 'dutch' connection in heroin smuggling. Seeking justice for his murdered partner. This really is a masterpiece. Super, understated performances from all the main actors in a way only European cinema can really do.
A must see. Especially if you have seen the film, they compliment each other abd present some subtly different opinions/attitudes from both sides of the pond.
Rant at the poorest film in decades
Utter rubbish - this is just a rant as there is little worth mentioning. Poor acting, directing, editing, no plot worth thinking about and the lowest production values of any film made in the last 50 years. This is especially noticeable in the timing between the actors - surely its a case of snipping a few frames. Is Johnny Depp impersonationg David Bowie? This really is a stinker as many TV & Radio critics have bent over backwards to emphasise. There are other bad films which are almost necessarily bad due to financial limitations and the lack of the modern technical advances (that guy in a bear suit with a fish bowl as a helmet and flying saucers on strings). They however have acheived a cult staus, this is just drivel, this is not bad it is awful, actually bad at being bad, which I guess is mediocre or something. Don't watch it. Don't even watch it to see how bad it is.
On reading other opinions here I can only assume (as I have for a while) that many people here are hyping the films, probably on request from secondrate US producers.
That guy out of the office is in it and looks promising.