Reviews

...when you can use a famous historical figure for publicity and just make up an alternate story that better fits your views, whims, or "vision" ?

Napoleon by Ridley Scott is a good film : good storytelling, great acting, and of course awesome production value. Might feel a bit lengthy at times, the main character is not quite rounded up and can feel confusing, but overall a nice watch.

I am just fed up with this new trend in Hollywood that uses real people as a pretext, as if the details of their lives, of their personnality, the events they created had no value at all, when it is actually all these elements that made them who they are, how they had an impact on history and why we remember their names today ?

The utter contempt that Ridley Scott displays when he says "Get a life" to people who point out inaccuracies, or "When I have issues with historians, I ask: 'Excuse me, mate, were you there? No? Well, shut the (...) up then.'" just goes to show that he doesn't care about being true to the character whose life he's supposedly narrating, he just wants to make a film about a story he's making up : THEN WHY DON'T YOU JUST CREATE A FICTIONNAL CHARACTER AND LEAVE REAL PEOPLE ALONE ???

Surfing on the popularity of historical figures is so intellectually dishonest, there should be consequences.

These directors will argue that their films are not documentaries, and therefore do not need to be historically accurate, and I agree to some extent : it doesn't really change the meaning of the plot if the costumes or the props are not exactly true to the period depicted.

However, changing main events or personnality traits are a complete different thing. You distort the story, and doing so, what is to be learnt from these hstorical events and characters, and here lies my issue.

Everyday a new biopic comes out, and instead of making people pleasantly take in the morals of these events and not remake the same mistakes over and over, they pervert history and make people believe in alternate versions that are just not true and don't have the same meaning. And that's how you grow a society full of gullible idiots.

I suffered through the whole abyss of shallowness which are the 8 episodes of this monstrosity so as to give it every chance possible. I could have stopped at the 2nd episode, which displays the exact same appaling dialogue and storyline as the rest of the series.

The 1st episode is probably the worst of them all, the constant screeching is unbearable.

Pretending this has anything to do with the brilliant work of Edith Wharton is an insult on so many levels, I don't know how the people involved can look at themselves in the mirror.

It seems to have been written by a 14 year old. The dialogue and the situations in which the characters put themselves into are so stupid and immature it made me cringe every 2 minutes on average.

I'm not even talking about the gross misrepresentation of the period's mores such as not running around half dressed all the time, young ladies just deciding everything for themselves and other absurdites which are completely contrary to the point Wharton is trying to make.

The producers just wanted a pretty love mess to seduce their audience. Well, pretty it is - eventhough most costumes are so badly cut I don't understand how they can have been approved to be filmed - but the sets are the only truly well achieved part of this show. The cast is pretty as well I suppose, I can't really judge their acting with such awful dialogue. The love stories are not engaging and are trying to look complicated when they're really just stupid.

Unless you are an uncultivated and unread 14 year old on a sugar rush, avoid at all costs.

I watched the whole 1st season, and although the acting and production were great, the writing is really bad.

Dialogues are terrible, but most of all, the whole arc of Poppy is so implausble it got me angry at times.

She's supposed to be this top-notch investigative reporter, with a thorough background investigating murders.

But her investigating is so shallow, she bounces from one suspect to another with no proof but a gut feeling that is as changing as the wind, it is ridiculous.

Her whole character rings so untrue, that even the wonderful Ocatvia Spencer can't redeem her.

Very disappointing, it left me trying to rank the level of stupid within the people involved with these series.

It's funny how this show explains how to dominate people by manipulating the truth and has no problem in doing the exact same thing.

Some of the sarcastic depictions are entertaining, but we don't learn anything, except a very biased way of portraying the facts which makes us understand how americans are blindly lead into having a certain worldview that probably influenced their willingness to participate in some of the latest conflicts they were involved in - or started.

Painting some of the characters and events mentionned here in such a black and white light is grossly misrepresenting the truth, and US citizens deserve a more nuanced and truthful education in order for them to see themselves and the rest of the world as they really are : in shades of grey.

I am appalled at the thought that some people could think that this is a truthful representation of historic events. It is entertainment only, beware !

What we get here are 6 episodes of Michael Barnett overacting all sorts of scenarii, the focus always on him instead of the main subject which is Natalia.

The filmmakers wallow in all the trashiest sensationalist aspects of the story and, especially Barnett's character, instead of giving a serious account of facts (no doctor is interviewed to give a scientific opinion on her age, no psychiatrist on her mental state). She is not even given the chance to express herself at any point.

We're only given Michael Barnett's version which is ridiculous most of the time, so fake it's cringeworthy.

This curious story deserved a serious approach, and I feel really bad for the people who were used to make this pseudo-documentary : Natalia and the hell she endured, and also the boys, Jake mostly, who is obviously traumatised by what happened in this house.

This is trash, and Michael Barnett is unsufferable.

I guess this is not for everyone, the reviews seem very polarised - even though most of the bad reviewers did'nt wath the whole season, sometimes even not the entire first episode to their own admission.

To be honest, I was not completely taken by it either around the 3rd episode with the time jump and the whole cast change either. But I stuck with it because I was intrigued by the dynamic between the main characters.

I must admit I don't know much the historic figures they are based upon nor their precise history. So I can't speak for their accuracy, and I didn't know the story beforehand. Maybe it helped making them intriguing ? I suppose.

What I do know is by the end of the first season, I was at the edge of my seat and very much looking forward to the second.

And I should add, contrarily to some, I found the acting and writing topnotch, and the production value - though the sets might be a bit lacking - very nice overall, enough to find it globally beautiful.

This is not an action series packed with fights, sex and gory murders every five minutes, that might explain the disappointment of some. It is mostly a political drama - with some occasional nudity, swearing and violence - which gets more clever as it progresses.

I was very much looking forward to this, the character and time period being quite untouched by the entertainment industry until now, it was a refreshing period drama to jump into.

I couldn't go further than mid-first episode, so I can't speak for the last 3/4 of the work, but I found the first quarter very disappointing.

Production and photography are very beautiful. Costumes, colour palette, it's all quite well done.

The flock of first rate actors also promised some good acting, however, it is unfortunately quite the opposite. Apart from Virginie Ledoyen who is believable, I found everyone else very.stiff and artificial, especially Isabelle Adjani.

First of all, in spite of the thorough plactic surgery work that was done to her face, I'm sorry but she can't pass for a 35 year old (in most of the scenes from that episode), and even less for a 17 year old !!! (at some point in the story). The famous "timeless youth" of Diane de Poitiers at 50 doesn't apply here for an actress who is almost 70 - stll beautiful for sure and looking younger than she is - but not for a very youthful looking 35 year old, this is absurd, and harmful to the story, and I admit it really bugged me.

And I suppose I wouldn't fixate on her looks so much if she could act, but she is so bland and with a permanent wide-eyed surprised facial expression that just doesn't apply to most situations.

To be honest, I felt the writng was very poor and therefore probably quite hard on any actor, which seems to be substantiated by the fact that all those otherwise very good actors came across very stiff.

That's a long review for someone who only watched 25% of the whole thing, but it's proportional to my disappontment.

Extant is very surprising in that it has some great moments, great production value, great acting, and then suddenly it's completely cheap with bad dialogue and plot holes everywhere.

You will spend part of an episode very satisfied and pretty sure of watching sufficient quality television, and part of the same episode wondering why you keep watching such crap - at least that's what happenned to me !

I must say Pierce Gagnon as Ethan the robot child is very good throughout, and I believe Grace Gummer also doesn't disappoint. But the same cannot be said unfortunately for Halle Berry. Though always very good in emotional scenes, she isn't up to the task for the action scenes. Some very bad writing and editing doesn't help.

All in all very inconsistent, it's quite unsettling.

A man-child daddy's boy gets stranded in a 5 star hotel after being cut off for doing some bad deals.

I don't know who found this watchable, I couldn't go further than the 2nd 15min episode.

10 people gave this a 10 stars rating, I'm guessing friend and family of the production, or the production itself ?

There's no comedy, the clichés, stupidity of the characters and bad acting added to the feeling of watching a bad ad for wherever it takes place - St Pete something, Florida - was way too painful.

The only believable character is the hotel manager : she seems to be the only one not falling for his - non-existing - charm.

I am not a Titanic fan and therefore didn't notice all the historical inacuracies apparently contained in these - very long - series.

However, I must say the synopsis sounded more interesting than the whole thing ended up to be.

I feel like it was very bad writing that doomed this story which could have been very interesting : construction of Titanic, in the backdrop of workers issues and the development of unions, all that in Belfast in the 1910s, with factions strengthening their political and religious stances. So much important and gripping content, so terribly delivered.

Production and photography were great, but writing and acting were awful. Not one character feels real or makes us care about their story.

This series will stay with me for a very long time. It is so powerful I don't have words to express how it reached and moved me.

Everything is superb : the story, the characters, the writing, the acting (phenomenal performances by both Margaret Qualley and Andie McDowell, and outstanding too for BJ Harrison's supporting role), photography, locations... nothing is out of place or felt untrue.

The ending is maybe the only litterary liberty taken with how realistic this whole experience is for the viewer.

I salute this wonderful character and her writer, her story has drilled into my soul.

Watch it to your emotional doom !

Season 1 started great : good characters, plot, and awesome sceneries. The personal stories and intrigue made up for the fact that the 2 leads looked more like models than detectives. And you know, hollywood and unrealistic beauty standards, we're used to it.

But somewhere in the middle, it got smaller, and less original, and just goes downhill to the end of season 2.

The quality of writing and acting fluctuates. The plot holes get bigger and less and less believable, the characters don't keep to their personnality traits... It might be a detail, but representative of the growing sloppiness : Cassie's hair in season two looks so fake and mismatched with her usual style, that I was constantly distracted by it.

It's really too bad, because it started out as a great show mixing thriller and drama with a possibility of exploring female frienship, without any romantic perspective for once. But it sacrificed too much to action and cliffhangers, and let the quality and specificity of its characters fade on the way.

By the end, it felt like watching any cop show, with stereotypical characters, and a sensationalist but unrealistic plot.

The story is great, with brilliant fun dialogue. The world is entrancing, and most characters are endearing and/or interesting. The artwork is great as well, beautiful characters, sceneries and details.

But the animation is sub-par, and that's really too bad : the way the characters walk is especially bothering and prevented me from immersing completely into this series.

I am still looking froward to a 4th season, the story is well written and kept my interest all through the first 3.

I am appalled at how many inhumane reviewers there are, at their lack of empathy for this young man who has had his life completely turned around by this tragedy. His whole family was ripped appart and he is looking for meaning where people are not in a state to give it.

Some said that it lacks truthfulness from him, but I think the most beautiful thing about this documentary is exposing how lost he is.

Of course, we would have loved a resolution, but this is not Hollywood, this is real life, and all these people will have to go on with their lifes with this heartbreaking lack of closure. I hope for their sake the final elements will give them some measure of it.

In the end, it is a very good first documentary about a very personal subject matter, and I think he gave an honest depiction of the desperate search for meaning he led.

Supposedly arty and edgy, the lack of rythm and construction just makes for a dull experience.

As for the moralistic tones, either it is a bad retelling of the tale due to bad writing, or just that it doesn't translate well to a contemporary audience, whatever the case it just falls completely flat and only manages to make us dislike the character.

It was really hard to stay awake until the end, I wouldn't advise it to people expecting an epic medieval tale. Nothing epic about it, just boring.

I wanted to like this, the premise seemed really fun. But I struggled too much with the bad dialogue, the childish reactions and the terrible acting. I guess it's bad writing and bad directing to be fair.

I do watch some good teen shows, but I couldn't finish the first episode of this one. Maybe it gets better ? Maybe for really young kids ? I don't know, but I think even teens would find this hard to watch.

It was a great remake. I still like the original better because the choice of songs are more meaningful to the character - even though I usually much prefer the music in this version than Michel Sardou !

This version has real deaf people portraying deaf people which is so much better, and the fishing activity is a good fit. But the main character, her dilemnas, her back story, her reactions are more real and heartfelt in the original in my opinion.

However, as I said, it is a nice and well done remake, well worth a watch if you're not affraid of shedding a few tears.

The sets look good from a distance, but the effects are terrible and green screen insertions are so bad, they look like they were made by a photoshop novice.

The editing is awful as well, the fighting scenes are laughably painful to watch. They mostly look like a parody.

I believe some of the directing and the dialogues are really lacking too, it takes some really good actors in all main characters to save the day.

Apart from all that, the story is great. It is a new spin on JM Barrie's books and Disney, with some inspiration from Regis Loisel's graphic novel and Dickens' books.

All in all, it was enjoyable eventhough it made my eyes and ears bleed at times.

The effects and artsy cinematography are sometimes beautiful, sometimes over the top, the plot is chaotic (voluntarily or not, that's your opinion to make), the acting is superb, the characters are interesting, and the island is a character in itself, the best of all.

Overall it is a very atmospheric show, with slow development and many unanswered questions.

It was definitely chilling. The level of violence was hard to bear for me- don't watch with kids ! -, but if you are into that kind of thing, I believe it was well done. Don't expect a fast-paced thriller, it is - sometimes painfully - contemplative and pseudo-introspective.

I found it a bit pretentious at times, wanting to be more intellectual and deep than it really is.

It's not the kind of show I would usually watch, I was really misled by the reviews. But I stuck with it because it is not bad and I wanted to watch the full thing before leaving my own review : I'm so tired of people who post a review after watching only a few episodes, sometimes even just the first one ! I understand you can make your mind about liking it or not, but that's not what a review is.

These films are really sweet, and I think a lot of teenagers and kids can relate and will enjoy them.

On a side note, I just find the fake eyelashes all the time trend really annoying and here the main character even keeps hers to sleep.

It's setting such unrealistic standards for young women, I find it disapointing for an otherwise good role model.

I'm in no way a basketball fan or even a sports fan, but these series got me entertained and engaged until the end.

It's just a shame they chose to jump back and forth in the timeline, it really wasn't necessary and made it quite confusing sometimes.

The other regrets I have is that none of the personal lives of these big stars are mentioned. I think it would have been interesting - without intruding too much - to see if such tremendous pressure took a toll or not on their relationships and loved ones. Some of these people's personnalities (MJ especially) were probably quite difficult to live with !

I grew up in the 80s, aware of the name Jordan as a teenager, but it was fun to really see with my own eyes why he became such an icon even before the instant-starmeter of nowadays social medias.

I don't usually write a review when I haven't watched the whole show, but with this one I'll make an exception : I made it until the end of ep.4 cringing the whole time.

It is just so atrociously bad I couldn't go further.

The writing, the acting, the representation of musicians and the business, ... none of it has any authenticity or quality to it. It's kind of a performance to be so out of touch with reality when there are many professionals amongst the crew. I guess it falls on the director for making very bad choices.

Sorry I really tried.

This is well structured, oriented but not too blatantly biased in my opinion, and not too stretched out either, as too many true crime series are. You could probably cut 1 hour out, but most of it isn't fillers or repeats. It's facts, interviews, court appearances and some emotional feedback from the concerned individuals, which is important to understand the story and develop an opinion on who they are.

I wish it were a bit more documented : even though we get more towards the end, the first episodes are really lacking - I suppose it goes to show the point the defense makes later on, but we are a bit lost at the beginning.

In any case, the chronology of events is well exposed and clear, of course a bit more screentime of the opposite side would have been appreciated, but as we can expect not many were interested in taking part in this telling of the story.

Now here are a couple personnal thoughts concerning the content of the story : It is truly scary to see such incompetence considering the stakes - both for the defendant and the victim(s). Neither get justice and it is heartbreaking and maddening to think that this little boy and his family will probably never get closure. And all will keep scars for the rest of their lives.

Final very trivial thought : who the hell is Jake Brydon ? He comes out of nowhere and is interviewed as an expert on the case ? It seemed to me like he was trying to get publicity or something for his involvment. Weird guy.