Reviews

Fan made content is usually way too raw to create an enjoyable experience for me, but ST Horizon definitely sets itself apart and can stand on it's own even by regular standards. The production value is pretty good and I even liked their cinematographic choice of using blur and lens flares to hide imperfections. It may not be everyone's cup of tea and needs some time to get used to, but I think it's better this way than to have distracting green screen sets like they used on Sanctuary (TV show). The acting is also decent, Lang carries the movie quite well and Bussell, Thompson and Kaiser deliver performances around him that really feel like a genuine effort. It still is a bit flat at times and the movie had a few difficulties to evoke emotions in me, but it's absolutely no cringe-fest like lower quality fan content.

The story itself is also very good, there are a few flaws in the plot but it's still rock solid and made the movie for me. I got hooked right away and was thoroughly entertained by it. Some of the dialogues could have used some polishing, but that would be nitpicking on an otherwise great experience.

Overall, I can highly recommend the movie to fans of the franchise.

I'd like to write a spoiler free review because the episode was so bad that if would go into specifics, it would end up in a rant. However, it perfectly reflects S4, which started out not too bad, but then devolved into an ugly mess. Even I as an amateur could pin point the problems of extremely lazy writing, poor planing and execution of the season long plot and a huge drop in quality around visual effects and stunt performances. It's so blatant, that messed up shots of some extras or stunt doubles are making the cut these days and aren't ending on the floor. It's "bad wig stunt guy in an 80's TV show" bad.

The S4 finale bottles all that's bad and gives you one more dose of it. Luckily it also provides enough closure and avoids any cliffhangers, so right now I've absolutely no reason to even be curious about S5.

At its core the movie is great and as a comic fan I was really delighted to see them going all out on the material. Affleck's Batman is the kind I hoped he'd be and now I hope they go for a few stand alone movies, because it was that good and left me wanting more. Same goes for Gadot and her Wonder Woman and luckily her movie is around the corner.

Though, it wasn't all roses and rainbows. Snyder, with his pacing problems came out in full force again. And that's what I think made most critics pan it. Focus and streamlined story telling isn't his strong suit and if you have no idea about the source material, I can see how the experience might be more frustrating than enjoyable.

bottom line. if you like comics and DC animated movies then I can highly recommend this one.

The show feels a lot like Spiner's Fresh Hell or at least the basic idea does. However, the production value and the list of guest stars (which is basically the a Who's Who list of fan favorites in the sci-fi / fantasy genre) are miles ahead in Con Man and the story and characters are overall a lot funnier. The premise of the show is about a sci-fi actor who's entire career is defined by his role in a short lived TV show and how he struggles with this "creative-stigma" on a daily basis. The humor mostly comes from scenes between Tudyk and convention fans, convention volunteers, his booking agent and other actors in his circle. And the anecdotal aspect of it (since Tudyk plays a parody of himself) makes this show extremely funny and I had to pause a couple of times to recover from laughter before continuing to watch. Though, in my opinion it also has enough funny material for people who aren't familiar with Firefly and Tudyk to make it just as entertaining to watch.

The movie stays away from the damsel in distress theme and the female lead is a strong independent woman whose motives, feelings and thoughts are explored throughout the movie. It's awful that it needs to be mentioned, but that's one of the few movies where I think the female lead is portrayed as a real person. Fonseca with her stellar performance round it off and make her character very relatable. Unfortunately Doneger's character is a tad underdeveloped which makes him a lot more the typical RomCom lead, with all the tropes and predictability. And in my opinion most of it is due to the fact that they went for the typical 3 act structure, which wouldn't have been necessary, considering the chemistry the leads have. Bottom line, the movie is worth watching if you're not totally opposed to RomComs. The story has redeeming qualities, the acting is good and the ending, although predictable, has a bit of a twist. And Bruce Campbell is in it.

I like the MCU and what they have achieved on the big and small screen and the latest installment is no exception. The movie is really entertaining, the special effects are top notch, the whole cast is great and besides good dialog and a bit of character development they also find plenty of time to throw out funny one-liners and slap stick in a non-contrived way. However, I was a bit disappointed with the polishing. It's still well rounded, but I left the theater feeling that it wasn't Whedon's best work and that he either kept too many reserves or ran out of them all together. The sub-plots are usually way better embedded in the main story and even if it's an action flick his emotional scenes carry a bit of a bunch. He still tried to do it, but in this area the movie falls short and some of the scenes even feel unnecessary. The characters where still great though, Ultron and the Avengers aren't just black and white but feature a few shades of gray. Still, as I said, good entertainment and a fun movie.

If you deconstruct the movie then most of its pieces are great in their own way (visuals, music score, casting, acting, story, etc), but the problem for me is that the pieces don't fit together and even overload the whole thing in a baroque-esque way. I like it simpler, but I can enjoy more elaborate movies, though, Nolan's MO is just so recognizable that you can't help to identify the issues while you are watching. His opulent screenplays paired with stunning visuals and grandiose music scores push the inconsistent characters in the background and the plot is kept ambiguous enough to never fully commit to one story and Interstellar is no different. Still it also had a few things to it I liked, for instance, the story concept itself or omitting sound effects in space scenes (like it would be in a real vacuum) or touching on a few political topics with current relevance. So all in all, it's worth watching if you have 3 hours to spare.

In terms of acting it was top notch and Cumberbatch really delivered a masterpiece. There is also almost nothing to criticize about the execution, even though they could have done a slightly better job mixing the 3 timelines together to underline certain moments and improve the pacing. But as a whole I was rather disappointed, because it turned out to be a Hollywood-ified drama where only the message itself - that Turing was a great scientist but flawed human and that he suffered a gross injustice due to prejudice - remained in tact, but all the details that made the real story so interesting where thrown out the window and replaced by tropes. I don't mind creative license in movies, but in this case it was unnecessary and way too much.

I loved the Librarian movies because they were fun and Wyle's portrayal was spot on to make them goofy, but not to a point where it becomes obnoxious. That the concept of the library can work on the small screen was already proved by Warehouse 13. And I was looking forward to another goofy sci-fi-esque fantasy show with a mystery of the week concept that's just fun to watch. And in that regard I wasn't disappointed, the plots are fun, not too serious and the characters' chemistry is OK. It will take a while until the actors find their groove, but they seem to be on the right track. And if I would stop here I'd give it a 7/10. However what's really bad is the production itself - the sound, the lighting, the special effects, the stunts and even the music score is bottom drawer. It feels like they came up with these grandiose ideas in the script and forgot what they can execute on a budget and they just did it anyway. I can overlook bad CGI on a TV show if it doesn't happen too often and if it is crucial to the plot, but if they have to blow up a helicopter for no reason then it should at least look like they had the money to do it. Same goes for the lighting, I'm OK with using it to cover up incomplete sets, but not if it's overused. But the worst are probably the stunts, they are just awful, no proper choreography, the actors seem like they received 0 instructions and again it seemed like they were saving money by skipping on stunt coordinators and doubles all together. All this and the rather poor sound engineering paired with an uninspired music score, makes the whole thing look like a super cheap production that tries to pretend it's more than it is and unfortunately it's just too obvious to overlook.

When I saw the pilot I was actually positively surprised how well they integrated the Flash on a TV setting that can't rely on big budget effects like they have in the movies and also the story was not too bad, however it went downhill from there. It's a lot like Smallville at the beginning, with a monster of the week setup and a small overall story arc. But the dialogs are just unimaginative and really corny, in fact so corny that I find myself cringing threw them or skipping these parts of the episode all together. I don't mind that they have this teeny stuff going on, since CW has to cater a bit to it's usual audience, but they always talk about the same thing and it's a lot worse than it ever was on Smallville or Arrow. Also they opened up too many small plot holes during the first few episodes so that I'm losing interest really fast. Too bad, it could have been a nice addition to the already great comic line-up on TV, but imo it's the weakest of all.

Braff is in my opinion a great writer/director - movies often rely on twists and plot-devices to make you think about the whole thing, but he keeps it low profile. Nothing extraordinary, just a story that lets you watch a family and how it experiences and copes with a defining period in their lives. He keeps it real enough that you can identify with the characters and you start to reflect on your own life while watching. And by doing so you give yourself the answers to a few questions the movie tries to raise. And all that is embedded in a solid composition of good music scores, comedy and a cut that excels in it's simplicity. It's definitely not for everyone, because if you don't connect to the characters it can very easily become a drag due to it's rather slow pace. But if you liked Garden State then the chances are good that you might like this one too.

It doesn't use an original idea nor does it stay clear from the usual RomCom tropes and the plot is sort of predictable. But even though it has all the ingredients for a derivative flick it feels fresh and is quite entertaining. Mainly it's because of Radcliffe and Kazan, the more original dialogues and by staying clear from slapstick comedy. Also the story by itself feels convincing as a whole and the characters stay consistent and relatable for the most part. Though, by the end you also recognize that they slandered a lot of potential by going the usual RomCom route. It could have been better by doing a few things differently, which I'm not going to name here to avoid spoilers.

Bottom line, if you like RomComs then you will probably like this one. If you don't like the genre at all you may still find this one bearable enough to sit through it next to someone.

It's very hard to watch and later describe the movie without comparing it to the original Sin City and that's probably the ultimate reason why it tanked critically and commercially. Looking at it as a stand-alone project it's a great movie, visually stunning, a decent story and very much unique. But since there was already a part, it loses the freshness with it's visuals and has to compete on a whole new level and unfortunately it does a few things very wrong. The main things that come to mind are that Josh Brolin isn't as good as Dwight as Clive Owen was and the stories aren't as connected to each other as they should be. Without these stronger intersections the story had no punch and became quickly just a conclusion to the first one. There was no originality in the cut and the structure was almost too conform to a mainstream flick. However, I gave it an 8/10 because it was still entertaining and spectacular if you don't try to measure it too much against its predecessor. Also the performances of Rourke, Green and Alba were enough for me to like it.

I'm not a fan of CGI animation, because I think it's just not there yet to give a series like this the textures it requires to set the mood. And also the animation of Batman himself is not one of my favorites. Although the series could have been better with traditional animation, the CG didn't make it worse, so you get used to it quickly. What I really liked about it is that they looked a bit around and used other lesser known villains and they went more into the direction of the Outsiders and not really the Justice League route. Also Alfred gets a bit of an emphasis on his MI6 background and they chose Katara to play a bigger role as sidekick. The stories are also quite good and are held together by a season long arc.

Overall, I can understand how a fan of BTAS might not like this new depiction, because I was skeptical too but after 3 episodes I started to like it.

I'm seriously conflicted. It was a great pilot with a good pace and shifting the focus to Gordon was executed very well. The tone and the acting of the show is also very fitting and I would definitely watch it if it wouldn't be the mothership of flawed prequels. The name dropping aside the show's premise will have a hard time to convince people that there are any stakes. Because they either have to change the Batman mythos or they have no story. Gordon can't be successful in cleaning up the PD and the streets, because then there's no need for Batman to rise. Which leaves him with solving the Wayne murder as an overall series arc and some random crime investigations for episode stories. But even then there is the component of the perp being a random punk that also motivates Batman. He never got real closure and he used the randomness and unfairness of the crime that defined him as a view on crime itself. So basically you have to accept that they don't stay close to the Batman mythos or that Gordon will ultimately fail. And right now I'm lacking imagination to see an alternative, but I'll stick around for a while to see if they can surprise me.

Overall, if you aren't bothered by people tinkering with Batman's background but you still like the Gotham City angle on crime then this show is definitely worth watching.

The CGI is actually not too bad, it still doesn't come close to traditional styles in terms of texture and depth but it makes up in other areas and you're getting used to it quite quickly. The stories of single episodes and the overall story arc are also very intriguing and are paced very well to keep the show entertaining (ignoring the huge plot holes in some of the early episodes). However, the major problem this show has is Hal Jordan - there are other depictions of him in DC animated movies that work but in the series he's just too obnoxious, patronizing and unlikable, what saves it though is the team, their dynamic and humor they infuse in the dialogs.

I watch animated superhero shows on Saturday morning to satisfy the inner child in me and my favorites so far were Batman TAS and Justice League. But this show blew me away, probably because my expectations were so low about a show revolving around the sidekicks. But it quickly establishes that the stakes are high and it finds a good way to integrate the story and the characters into the DC universe. The stories are complex, the characters fleshed out and it finds an almost perfect balance between action, story and characters. It's not about wanna-be heroes but heroes in the making. Taking season 1 alone I would give it 10 out of 10 and maybe even call it the best animated show in the DC universe, but unfortunately TV business intervened. The show didn't hit the intended demographics (too many girls were watching - which just demonstrates how ridiculously archaic the TV and advertisement business really is) - anyway this led to the tinkering of the 2nd season's setting and the premature cancellation. The quality of season 2 is still high, but you can never shake the feeling that they abandoned a great show and made too many compromises to cater to a specific audience.

It's a completely different Batman when you compare it to the one from the 90s animated series and the Justice League show. This show has a different take on the character and depicts a younger Bruce Wayne / Batman that still learning and fumbles from time to time. However it's less character driven and focuses more on the action itself so the new angle gets a bit lost or isn't as integral to the show as you might think. The animation itself was also updated, Batman himself didn't change much with the exception of his jawline. The Joker however got a complete make over, while his character remains pretty much the same. All other characters are pretty close to what you would expect, Alfred is probably more of a father figure, his humor is more direct and often not as subtle. Overall, I'd say if you like the animated Batman then it's definitely worth checking out.

The premise is rather simple - Agent Coulson (a fan favorite from the Marvel movies) is resurrected and tasked with forming a team to go on missions for S.H.I.E.L.D.. At the beginning they focus on a monster of the week kind of show where small hints of an overall story arc are dropped (Coulson's resurrection and the origins of a team member). Over time the focus then shifts more on these mysteries and also has a very well executed tie-in with Marvel's Captain America the Winter Soldier. From a perspective of a Marvel movie fan this show is a very good addition of the universe to bring some parts of it to the small screen. If you're not a Marvel movie fan then it's still an interesting spy-fi show but you may find it difficult to understand all the references and name dropping the show uses to cater to its fans.

If you know MacFarlane and his style then you pretty much know what kind of comedy you can expect. It's set in the western frontier of the late 19th century and besides slapstick, jokes and some comedic-gore (see movie title) you also have subtle satire about the era back then, which, from time to time, achieves to mock the backward thinking of a few people from the present. The only thing which is slightly different is that there are fewer politically incorrect jokes. Also MacFarlane's performance is solid, he fits like a glove for the role as sheep farming nerd and coward, who doesn't belong in that place and time. His chemistry with Theron is good and I was surprised how well she would do in such a goofy production. Her more serious part acts as a nice counter balance to keep the whole thing grounded, but it never takes itself too seriously. Also Neeson's outlaw with Irish accent is a pretty cool antagonist and way better than some of the bad guys I know from other comedies. The only things I would criticize are the rather predictable plot and the pacing towards the end, which is a bit too slow. However, I think this movie is hilarious, it's definitely not meant to be liked by everybody especially if you don't like MacFarlane, but it was fun and very entertaining.

I gave it 9/10 because of the problems this movie has with being an unintended sequel otherwise it would be a 10/10. It's definitively not meant to just cash-in on it - it has a very good plot, the animation improved quite a bit and they were able to make it just as much fun as the first one. And in some areas they even surpassed it by adding more dramatic elements, moments which reminded me of the old animated movies from my childhood like Lion King or the Land before Time. So all in all it's a polished and well executed production. The only 2 things that bothered me a bit were that the plot doesn't fit as smooth as you'd like to see it in a sequel and Baruchel's voice, which was a perfect fit for the first one, is too close to the awkward teenager and doesn't really help to make the transition to the young adolescent Hiccup is supposed to be in this one.

When I heard about this project I was skeptical and worried that Hollywood is just going to cash in on it. Since it's a European comic, I expected that they are going to americanize the source material and take out the essence and taint some of my fondest childhood memories. That's why I ignored it when it was in the theater but recently I came around and bought the DVD. And now I'm a bit disappointed that I didn't go to see it in the first place. Spielberg and his writers were obviously fans of the comics and appreciated it for the same reasons I did and the result is phenomenal. Sure there are a few compromises here and there, in the story, in the characters and how it translates from comics to a 3D animated movie, but overall Tintin, Snowy, the Captain and Thompson and Thompson were just like I remembered them - only pity is that the Professor was absent, who was one of my favorites. The story itself is a blend of 3 comic albums and works great for a movie, really good pacing and a good mixture of mystery, adventure and simple fun. And even if you don't know the comics, the movie is a very good introduction to Tintin's adventures around the globe.

It's an unnecessary sequel just like Die Hard 4, but with the difference that this one doesn't work at all. Too many tropes and too many stereotypes are mixed together to make the movie more than predictable and borderline cheesy. Although the plot itself would be not too bad it suffers from an undefined /underdeveloped villain and it could never bring the point across that the stakes are just as high as in all the previous installments. Although the chemistry between Willis and Courtney (who could basically play Michael Rosenbaum's younger twin) is pretty good, the setups for their character scenes aren't. And besides the usual action it misses the typical Die Hard moments from the previous movies where McClane is Mr. Cool. The action sequences and the stunts are really good, but all together the movie is only worth watching if you have nothing better to do.

The story plays in the same universe as the recent video games and the animation leans heavily on the characters from the games so it's easy to recognize the connection. The voice acting is solid, Conroy shines as Batman and Baker's Joker is not quite the same as Hamill's but it's very close and in my opinion works very well. The story is also fun, besides Batman, the Suicide Squad gets a lot of screen time, so Batman isn't in the center of it all but is part of an ensemble where he takes the lead on the heroes side. The plot and some scenes are definitely more mature and target the gamers as audience, which sets it apart from the usual DC animated movies. You still grasp the whole thing if you don't know any of the games but some scenes might be creepy if you don't know in what kind of universe the whole thing is set. All in all it's very entertaining and definitely worth watching if you are a fan of the animated movies.

I'm a big Superman fan because he is the god among mortals who chooses to lead by example and not put himself above the law - he's a beacon of hope and uses his actions to inspire people to become better persons. So I was hoping that Snyder would grasp the concept of his character and make an interesting movie out of it - he did a good job on Watchmen to preserve the spirit of the graphic novel, so there was little reason for me to lower my expectations before seeing it. But I was rather disappointed that after a good start it turned out to be just another run of the mill origin story which became an over the top disaster flick by the end. Especially since the story was shallow and derivative. Zod as the antagonist provides with the "might makes right" philosophy the exact opposite of Superman and a good story should basically write itself, but instead it all ended in a conclusion that was in so many ways just wrong. Most of all because it only works if you're willing to swallow a big plot-hole and ignore the lazy writing to set it up. And besides all this it also tried too hard to incorporate some darker and serious tones that came across as incohesive ramblings and made the movie look like it took itself way too seriously. The only good things are that I can now lower my expectations for the sequels and that it inadvertently made Superman Returns better.