Reviews

For those of you who don't know, this movie is a politically correct box ticker, here's why:

1. Selina Kyle is black 2. Jim Gordan is black 3. Jack Ryder is black 4. The mayor is black 5. Catwoman steals from people, why? BECAUSE she needs to "take back from the white privileged millionaires".

Some other terrible things: 1. There is really no storyline 2. The music is as unoriginal as it gets, just Ave Maria in different styles. Nothing new.

3. Penguin is huge.

4. Riddles is 10 times more psycho than any Joker has ever been (not Edward Nigma from any universe) 5. The movie had just 3 colours, Black white and red.

"You disappoint me, especially you Wendy"

This summed up season 3 and 4(Part 1) for me perfectly. Ozark used to be about a super smart guy who got in over his head and is solving problems as they go. Marty was ozark for the first 2 seasons. Now Wendy is ozark, and quite honestly she is as passive aggressive as a school girl who has no control over her emotions. Wendy is not smart, she messes everything up, and yet the writers feel like she's a valid story center.

In the episode where negotiations took place with the Shaw CEO and Wendy couldn't pull it off so she had Marty literally say "this is what we have and we can stop talking anytime". That was the moment the show got it right for a small second. I loved that. Marty was the kingpin again.

You guys are so focussed on trying to make a Breaking Bad(esque) show that you are putting all the attention on Jesse, when all we really want to see is Walt do his thing. Let Marty do his thing. Let him be the smartest again. Let him save his family. Make Ozark about the guy it was about when the show won awards. Because even though the ratings are high for now, a show about Wendy won't go down as ons of the best shows ever. But Marty. That could be legendary.

People who drown don't do it like they did in the show and that bugs me. People don't just sink horizontally under water paddling up forcing themselves to go down. Humans float (ask any person who has ever been in a pool) when they simply hold their breath. It's the breathing out that causes you to go down bit by bit. Not paddling to the bottom with everything you have.

Still a good episode. But maybe they should've asked a lifeguard if the most emotional scene of the episode was at all realistic.

I watched this movie in 2022, and couldn't understand why we afe routing for the pedo. What did I miss?

The acting was okay, but the writing was bad, beyond clichè.

The title lists the rule. Any normal person would've switched bags immediately and have both parties take all 10 marbles from the other party. That way all 78 players could win. No one had to die. The rules were vague and not even the smartest guy in Korea could see it and had to have his Pakistani friend killed?

This episode was sloppy writing.

Aaah man this is garbage. It should actually be called "scenes from a marriage as pictured by an unmarried leftist". Because Episode 1 starts out the show with having to list pronouns, then a discussion with a biracial couple in an open marriage, followed by two women kissing, and then the main female getting an abortion.

I've watched everything Jessica Chastain has ever been in. And I've watched most of what Oscar Isaac has ever been in. And I would've never believed they would star in such utter trash if I didn't see it for myself.

This show is amazing, I truly love it. The acting, the characters, the camera work, everything is brilliant... The script however robs it of a perfect 10. Why would I say that?

Well for starters, episode 1 starts by saying it's inspired by events that took place in 33AD, and yet theres A LOT of references made to modern or even pop culture things.

E.g. The Jeff Dunham "over your head" gesture made by the Jesus character in S2E8. Or referencing to glass mirrors in the same episode.

And then there are things that are just plain unchristian, like Mary telling Jesus she is PROUD of Him? The Father used the words "well pleased" because pride is a sin, infact it was Satan's sin, so Jesus wouldn't smile at that, He would rebuke her.

What I really don't like is how the show woks with reading and writing. Back in the day towns had scribes. Poor people couldn't read or write, and for some reason the creators understand this with Ramah, but forget it for EVERYONE ELSE (see episodes S1E3 and S2E8).

Finally the liberties taken for the sake of story really has started to twist scripture by Season 2. Jesus did not practice His sermon on the mount, He didn't invite anyone, He just suddenly saw everyone there and started preaching because He knew they followed Him. There were no negotiations, Judas didn't help, and Jesus didn't stress that everything had to be perfect, it was impromptu perfect.

Finally, the fact that Jesus lies down when praying, that would never ever have happened 2000 years ago, it's as modern and American as you get. Being down on your knees is the posture Jesus taught His disciples.

While writing this review I am up to date at Season 2 episode 3. And I highly doubt my rating would fall lower and know it won't go higher. If it does I will rewrite this review after Season 7.

What I like about this show is that it presents a possible history of what time was like back when Jesus walked on the earth. It shows how humans probably were and what the Israelites went through at that time and why they needed a messiah.

But what I like even more is how it constantly reminds the viewer "this is not what happened" through simply things like speaking about time in "hours" instead of "within the milking of a cow". Time at that stage has not been defined to mean what it does to the modern viewer. Or the fact that all the fishermen could somehow read and write, this too is most likely very improbable and yet we take it for granted in modern times. Or where a notice was placed at the tax booth and no announcement was made, it is expected that everyone should read it despite them being illiterate. And THIS fact for me is the one that constantly reminds me "okay this is not biblical" and I don't confuse it with the Bible.

Some people might see it as a flaw. For me it is a tether keeping you from confusing truth and a TV show with each other.

-The only cops who ever worked -The best cop in the world -The fastest police department ever -The most uncommon car (Prius) in America -The most ungrateful wife -Luckiest Cop -The guy who could shoot without knowing where the bullets go -The airport security who wanted the coins -The police who sent the pictures a second too late.

I could go on, but you get the picture. This movie is unbelievable, and I mean that in the literal sense, I didn't believe any of it. The coincidences in this film were so beyond belief that I was more glad it was over than I was glad when the action finally started.

Access my profile and see for yourself, every other Christopher Nolan film ever made has a perfect 10/10 from me. Needless to say I probably expected too much from this one, but within the first 5 minutes I adjusted my expectations because I saw that this film is not going to be an epic like the ones we got used to.

Christopher Nolan goes back to his Memento roots by telling a story backwards, because if this film has to make sense to you, you need to know what the ending will hold. That's why people claim it's so great the second time around... The only problem is, a film that isn't great the first time you see it, usually isn't worth seeing a second time.

This film had 3 major problems. 1. The music: it was terrible, the sound balance was wrong and the music didn't tell any story related to the film. No Soundtrack CD sales will come from this, where the OST from Interstellar and Inception became legendary. 2. The framing: The shots were flimsy and seemed more like a Shane Carruth budget than a big studio backed film. It broke the story's most important part and never draws you in. 3. The bad writing: Everyone will agree that the film was not great the first time around, it doesn't make sense, not because it's complex, but because you aren't informed of whatever is going on. The leading male understands concepts that aren't simple to grasp, as if he has an IQ of 250+ but an audience member with a higher IQ than Nolan (that's rare) will not even grasp it as quickly despite knowing what the film is about.

The acting wasn't great if you take into account John David is the leading role. He was perhaps the only actor who disappointed. Pattinson and Debicki really impressed though, but they didn't get all that much screentime.

The first part of the movie is hard to follow, mainly because the music is so extremely loud and overwhelms the dialogue without telling the story together, but also because the viewer isn't given any info about what's going on, and you have to watch until half way for things to make sense. The problem then becomes that the second half is extremely predictable.

I didn't enjoy this film. The action sequences were great, but even John Wick pulled that off with minimal dialogue and no complex ideas.

P.S. I'm not dumb and it's not as if I didn't understand the film, I did... My IQ is in fact higher than Nolan's, but he could've done it so much better if he took a bit more time on it.

When the film started out with "Hawkins v McGee, what is it about? You should know this on your first day at school". I rolled my eyes exactly like the guy who heard the other one had a photographic memory.

This is simply not what Law School is like. If you are the best lawyer in the country and the most renowned in your field, you will NOT be a first year lecturer. Having spent my University years as an unprepared law student for the majority of the time, I can confirm that reading case law in advance has never been important for the class ahead. Sure lecturers prescribe it, but they never assume anyone read it, because they know no one will. So this film wasn't off to a good start. And as far as the classes are concerned, it never got better.

The next matter is the fact that a first year class will NEVER be as important as it is made out. The class in this film is treated like the hardest class in final year of your degree. No lecturer is so feared or respected, in fact, lecturers like the one in the film get mocked and ridiculed and students go out of their way to irritate such lecturers. Honestly no one would show up for the second class in real life. Then again everyone would apparently have to show up, because this professor is apparently the only lecturer at the entire harvard university.

With my review concerning the law aspect of the film out of the way, I can turn to what the film is really about... Romance.

The relationship between the student and the daughter is complicated and strange, but it never, not once seems to convince the viewer that any emotion is involved.

Strangely I enjoyed it a bit, but it was really not a good insight into law school. It was clearly written by someone who has no idea of what Harvard is really like.

I was looking forward to watching these 2 episodes since the moment I saw the cast. To make it better it's a court drama.

The acting was good given it was back in the early years of TV. The writing on the other hand went from okay to bad in an instant. No re-examination after the doctor tried to explain the headaches, no objection to the badgering, and then the oldest trick in the book written a hundred and 2 years before this episode by Charles Dickens himself, the switch to give a mistrial. The only problem is that this trick is not allowed in a court of law. It is also unoriginal by now.

The first episode was good and well thought through, and in the second one everything fell flat when the writers couldn't find a way for Steve McQueen to be free. I'm mad at this episode right now. So apologies if it seemed like ranting and you had to read it.

If you ever don't want to have an Ante Nuptial Contract or as the Americans call it a Prenup. Then make sure to sign it and just tear it up afterwards, it will make the whole thing null and void. Who knew it's that easy

I usually don't care if writers get details wrong about stuff they don't know too much about. But when you write an opening scene about religion, at least try to get some of it right.

Firstly taking a progressive Jewish temple for an old man's funeral and using a female rabbi is very unlikely. In fact the elderly more often than not openly don't visit temple where a woman is the rabbi, because it is unorthodox. As for the "rabbi" stating there is no heaven nor hell, she obviously doesn't know about Sheol or Paradise that the entire old testament talks about.

Next up there was Christianity. The idea of original sin is Calvinistic in nature and almost no churches with "pastors" (like in this show, also considering a homosexual runs the childrens choir, the church is definitely charismatic) preach this, apart from that, the reason for baptism is also not at all connected with the "original sin" theory.

I think if everyone in the world just took some effort to understand other's beliefs we wouldn't think less of anyone we don't understand.

The Teen Titans Go crossover was so unexpected, but so good. Very glad that they finally brought beast boy into the show as a main character, after just hanging around since Season 1.

I have to say I feel the season is just getting better with every episode