Reviews

I can without doubt call Das Boot the best war movie I have seen. The thing that makes it so good is that it doesn't only focus on the war but also on the lives of the people who are obliged to take part in this war. The other thing that makes Das Boot superior to other war movies is that it doesn't serve as some sort of propaganda which is something I have never seen in another WW2 movie.

The acting and the cinematography are great. The movie really makes you experience the misery of every single character. The setting is also unique and makes you feel some sort of claustrophobia which contributes to the overall experience.

The plot is simple but intriguing and really keeps the audience entertained till the very end even though the movie is extremely long.

Das Boot is truly an awesome and unique movie that despite its long duration manages to keep the audience on the edge of their seats during the whole time.

I'm not a fan of Hitchcock's works but I have to admit that I really enjoyed this one. The plot is intriguing and makes you watch the movie with interest till the very end.

The cinematography isn't perfect but I'll omit this fact because after all Psycho is from 1960 and no one expects its cinematography to be as good as the one in the movie from the next decades.

The acting was good. Of course there are a few scenes with overacting such as the one where Marion gets murdered but that's not of vital importance for the overall acting in the movie.

The plot is as I already said intriguing and well thought. It is the greatest thing in this movie and is there probably the only reason why Psycho is considered an all time horror classic.

There are many mafia movies out there but The Godfather truly stands out among them. And it is not great just because it is one of the first movies in the crime genre but also because of it's great cinematography and outstanding storytelling .

If you retell the plot to someone it will sound like it is extremely dull. It's just the story of how a son takes over his father's business. But the way the movie presents this plot (with many betrayals and deaths) makes it great and memorable.

The acting is not always good. In some scenes it is extremely bad. Take the scene where Connie starts breaking utensils. The acting in this scene is so bad that when it comes up while I'm watching the movie, I just turn my head away. Of course I should metion that Marlon Brando and Al Pacino do a great job. Their acting is outstanding and deserves the pride it gets.

The Godfather is truly a classic in the crime genre that must be on everyone's top movies list.

Pulp Fiction is one of those movies that not everyone can enjoy. Many people say that it's boring and senseless. It is true that the plot isn't something special but it isn't the plot that makes this movie so unique but the awesome script and great cinematography.

Probably one of the greatest things in this movie are the dialogues. The dialogues just like in all other Tarantino movies aren't directly connected with the plot. Take the first dialogue between Samuel Jackson and John Travolta. They are talking about how a certain burger is called in France. This and many others dialogues don't have a direct relation with the plot line but their function is to somehow build the characters' personalities.

The other thing that makes this movie so unique is the unexpected turn of events. Like in all other Tarantino movies you don't know who they are going to kill next or what is going to happen. The scene where Vincent shoots Marvin in the face is a great example for such unexpected turn of events. This makes the viewer more intrigued and thus makes the whole experience form the movie way better.

There isn't much more that can be said about Pulp Fiction. It's not a movie that everyone will enjoy but still deserves to be seen.

Batman and Robin is often regarded as the worst movie ever or the superhero alternative of The Room. I don't find this movie good, it is actually pretty awful but it still doesn't deserve to be called the worst.

The scrip is probably one of the worst things in this movie. Filled with puns and senseless dialogues, the script makes this movie look more like a parody rather than a serious Batman movie. But to be honest I don't think that the the crew were trying to create a serious movie. All the imbecile scenes such as the one with the bat credit card just make this movie kid-friendly and more like the old Batman series with Adam West. And that makes me think that the target group for this movie aren't the Batman fans but younger kids.

George Clooney was not a good Batman. He somehow managed to make the character look silly and comical. Uma Thurman's Poison Ivy also seemed like a burlesque. I'm not even going to talk about Bane as this was the worst character in the whole movie. And these roles were ruined bot because the actors are bad, George Clooney and Uma Thurman are actually good actors, but because of Joel Schumacher's poor directing.

Probably the only thing that I liked in this movie is Arnold Schwarzenegger. His performance was as always unique and gave me a good laugh. He is the only reason why I give this movie a rating higher than 1.

I tried really hard to like this movie but I was unable to and that's not because of bad cinematography, acting or plot. The idea behind A Quiet Place is unique and original and everything else is well made but there is one thing that ruined the movie for me and that's all the plot holes.

First of all, it is made clear that even the smallest sound can trigger these monsters. But if that's true how did these people survive. There are numerous sounds that the human organs make uncontrollably. So everyone would be dead as soon as someone farts or if their stomach makes some noise.

Another thing that really bothered me is that these monsters' hearing barrier changes throughout the movie. So they are unable to hear people walking but near the end one of the monsters manages to hear how the boy falls inside the barn that is kilometers away from the house.

As for the ending, it was really disappointing. They probably thought it would be cool if the characters find a way to kill the monsters but to be honest an open ending that leaves them in the situation they were before would've been better.

There are many plot holes but if you ignore them this movie has a good cinematography and acting. And most importantly an original plot.

It is true that The Skin I Live In is an odd movie but that doesn't mean it is a bad one. It's not only the twist that makes it good but also the great cinematography, acting and the whole atmosphere of this movie.

There are many people complaining that this movie is disgusting because of the main idea of the plot (a male being turned into a female) and that's the main reason why it gets so much hate. But it is this weird and disturbing plot that makes this movie unique. It's not only the unexpected twist that makes it unusual but also its dark atmosphere and great storytelling.

I don't think that there is any need to discuss the acting as it was on a very high level. The cinematography was also very well done. It's more than evident that the director worked hard for this movie and thus did a great job.

The Skin I Live In is indeed an odd movie that might disturb certain people but it still is a good film that deserves to be seen.

It has been argued for years whether this movie deserves its fame or not. Some say that it is overrated and others say that it is the best movie ever made. What I can say is that it is true that this movie is a bit overrated but it still deserves to be called a masterpiece.

There is something about The Shawshank Redemption that creates a specific atmosphere and makes you not only watch but experience it. I have read the book and I have to admit that I enjoyed the movie more. The combination of outstanding acting, great directing and well written script makes this movie the masterpiece it is.

I really don't have anything bad to say about this movie except for its high place in the IMDB top 250's list. It is an amazing movie but it still doesn't deserve to be called the best as there are many others that are equally good or even better. But still, this movie should be on everyone's list of must watch movies.

First of all I want to state that I don't think that this movie is as bad as everyone is saying. It is a decent 90's sci-fi action movie. Of course, if you compare it to the previous Alien movies it really seems like a bad movie. Alien was a masterpiece that defined a whole genre, Aliens was a great action, Alien 3 was also a quite good horror (not a popular opinion) and then there's Alien: Resurrection. It is neither a horror, nor an action movie, it's some sort of a mix between this two genres and that just doesn't seem to work right for an Alien movie.

Even though Alien: Resurrection is a bad Alien movie it is, as I already stated, a decent action movie. A simple plot and script, filled with puns and medicore jokes, which is typical for most action flicks from the 90's. So, if you ignore the previous movies and watch it as an independent film it won't seem that bad. But there are still a few things that completely destroyed the Alien franchise and made me not enjoy this movie.

First, the Alien-human hybrid. I don't know who came up with this idea but it was awful. They tried to make something original and they failed miserably.

The second thing that destroyed this movie for me is the whole idea for Ripley being cloned. It just shows that the only purpose of Alien:Resurrection is to continue milking the franchise, even though it died with Alien 3.

I can go on and point more reasons why this movie ruined the Alien anthology. But I'll stop here and just say that Alien: Resurrection is another example of how too much sequels can destroy even the best franchise.

I'm quite amazed by the fact that so many people enjoy this movie and that there're even people out there who call it a masterpiece. It's nothing more than an average or even below average movie.

Probably the only thing that this movie did good is the portrayal of the Penguin. Danny Devito is a great actor and surely did an excellent job. His make up is also on point and very well made. But everything else is just awful.

I'm going to skip the criticism of Michael Keaton's Batman because it is without doubt the worst portrayal of the Batman so far. It's not only the witless facial expressions that he makes, but also the robotic like movements that make the Batman seem more like a tree rather than a fighter.

The script is a bit better than the one in Batman(1989) but still requires lots of improvement. As for the plot, all I can say is that it is nothing special and unoriginal.

To be honest I'm not a big fan of Kubric as I find some of his movies overrated. But I have to admit that this movie is truly a masterpiece and a classic in both crime and anti utopian geners.

There are many things that make this movie so great. The acting is on a very high level and Malcolm Mcdowell gives an outstanding performance. The scrip is well written and the plot is intriguing. I can go on and list many other things that make this movie a masterpiece but probably the most important one is the storytelling. Kubric has shown that he is a good storyteller and this movie proves it undoubtedly.

Let's not forget how controversial "A Clockwork Orange" is. There are many scenes that might seem disturbing to some viewers. But these scenes are of great importance for this movie as they make it more intense and intriguing.

It is a controversial movie, indeed. But even though filled with violence and sex, "A Clockwork Orange" manages to talk about important themes that concern the human society.

I'm not very familiar with the comics but I still spotted some major differences, one of them being that Batman doesn't kill while I'm quite sure that he killed at least 10 people in this movie. But let's ignore all the inaccuracies and review this movie as if it isn't based on comic books.

First of all, everything linked with the Batman character is poorly made. The bat suit looks extremely "immobile". Most of the scenes prove how hard it is to fight in that suit and completely ruin Batman as he is supposed to be flexible and an unique fighter. I'm not saying that Michael Keaton is a bad actor but his portrayal of the Batman is just awful. He's one of the worst Batmans, if not the worst. All the facial expressions he makes while wearing the mask make this movie look more like a parody.

The plot is nothing special and definitely not intriguing. The script is medicor and even starts to sound imbecile at some point.

Probably the only thing that I liked in this movie is Jack Nicholson's portrayal of the Joker. I have to admit that he did a great job. And I'm sure that if he had acted in a movie with better script and plot and most importantly better Batman, his Joker would've been even greater.

It is true that this movie is a bit of a mess but there's one thing that saves it from being classified as a bad movie and that thing is Jack Nicholson's great performance.

Before seeing the movie I read all the negative reviews and I have to say that I expected something terrible. But I was pleasantly surprised when I saw the movie because it wasn't as bad as everyone was saying. I mean it had everything a predator movie needs - action and lame jokes.

The plot was a bit "flat". The kid being able to understand the alien technology and the predator, who wants to save the human race were the things that ruined this movie for me. But as I already said the action was on point, which is probably the only reason for someone to see a predator film. I mean what do you expect to see? Some philosophical movie or what? The main idea of this movie is to watch people fight against an alien. And if someone expects something else then he'll be truly disappointed.

Of course there are things in The Predator that stop it from becoming a good movie and these things I already mentioned. It could have been so much better if the director cut all the "human-friendly" predator nonsense and stuck to the main predator movie formula, where the alien just fights against a group of people.

In my opinion this movie had a great potential but wasted it while trying to become something more than just an old school action movie.

The idea behind this movie is good, but the realization is awful.

The movie failed because of the director, who appears to be pretty bad at being a director. He tried to create a good science fiction but ended up creating something that reminded me of the second part of Independence Day (which was an awful science fiction). Another thing that ruined this movie was the poorly written script, which was also written by this incompetent director.

However there are a few things that make this movie not that bad. They tried to get rid of the "The USA saves the world" cliché (they failed, but hey - at least they tried). The idea behind the movie was good and original. But as I already said the director and the bad acting of the actors (which is also the director's fault) ruined it.

This movie had the potential of becoming a great science fiction, such as Interstellar and The Martian but only if it was directed by a more talented person. Still I give this movie 6 out of 10, simply because the idea was original and managed to unite fiction and catastrophe into one. Too bad they failed to find a decent director, who will be able to make this idea into a masterpiece.

Life(2017) doesn't show anything new and lacks originality. Watching this movie felt like I was watching an Alien reboot.

They bring the alien organism to the station, where it grows and kills everyone - I've already seen that in Alien. They try to kill the alien with a flamethrower - I remember that part from Alien too. So you'll ask is there anything different from the Alien movie and my answer is no. Even the alien looks like a xenomorph, I was very surprised that it didn't have acid instead of blood. The unusual ending is probably the only part, which is not copied from another movie but everything else is (as I already said) copied from Alien.

Another problem are the "tense" parts, where everyone just stay silent and look at each other, like in a movie made by Tarkovsky. There are like 2 or 3 "tense" parts in the movie but somehow these parts make the audience feel annoyed rather than tense.

Of course there are some good things in the movie but they're mostly CGI. The ending was one of the good things too, it was different and unusual and surprisingly not copied from Alien.

Today we see many movies which are defined as science fiction. But what does science fiction actually mean? Does adding space ships and special effects to a regular action movie make this movie science fiction? My answer is no. The real science fiction isn't just a story that takes place in the future, it's something more. The real science fiction has a dramatic character and almost no action in it.

Solaris is one of the movies we can define as science fiction. The movie's special effects are bad because of the time the movie was made. But even though the bad effects, Tarkovsky managed to make this movie awesome. Some people say that the movie is boring because it's slow. But it's slow because you need time to feel the atmosphere of the movie. And this atmosphere is the most important part because if you can't feel the movie's atmosphere then you can't see the pain shown in this movie. The pain of a man who receives the chance to see his wife again after her death but is forced to lose her once more.

Solaris is a sad movie and its dramatic character is the thing that makes it so awesome and unique.

Alien 3 is bad compared to the previous movies(Alien and Aliens) but still it's an OK movie.

The worst part of the movie is probably the beginning. They show us some random frames of a xenomorph "walking" round the spaceship. And then suddenly we see a planet and understand that the ship has crashed on this planet. Now the question is - What happened? What was the xenomorph doing on the ship? Why did the ship crash? And of course the answer isn't revealed.

Another thing worth mentioning is the part when Ripley learns that Newt had died. In Aliens we saw how strong is the relationship between Newt and Ripley and now when Newt is dead, Ripley just accepts it and goes on. All the parent-child relationship we saw in Aliens is gone.

Everything else is alright. The movie has some action. There are some interesting events, like the part when Ripley learns that she's carrying an alien in her womb. But still the strange beginning and the way Ripley accepts Newt's death show that the writer and the director decided to skip the "important" parts and leave the movie with some holes in it just so they can put more action in the movie.

A great science fiction movie, with an amazing plot and of course a very talented director. No one can deny Nolan's talent, all his movies are well made and Interstellar is one of his best works. Some people say that the plot of Interstellar is confusing but I don't think so (maybe because I've watched this movie more than 20 times). Still we can say that it's a bit confusing if you're watching it for the first time but don't worry it won't be confusing after the second or the third watch.

Something that really impressed me in the movie is that when something explodes in space, there is no sound, simply because of the vacuum. In many science fiction movies the audience can hear the sound of explosion, gun fire,etc in space, which makes it look less realistic. But in Interstellar every single thing is physically correct, because Nolan had many consultations with physicists to make the movie realistic.

Interstellar has many emotional and dramatic scenes too which makes it different from the other science fiction movies. It shows us the pain of a father who left his kids and went to space to search for a new home for the mankind.

Interstellar is an amazing movie and it's definitely worth watching.

Aliens is a bit different than the first Alien movie, it has more action and it has lost its mysterious, horror character. The movie provides us with great action scenes, we see hundreds of xenomorphs and even their queen in the end of the movie. If we compare it to the other movies from the Alien anthology we'll see that this one has the most action.

The movie also shows us a relationship between two of the characters - Ripley and Newt. Ripley has recently found out that her daughter has died while she was in hyper sleep. This loss is very painful for her and when she meets the little girl Newt she manages to establish a parent - child relationship with her. Ripely protects the girl, even though she's not her biological daughter. And in the end when she goes back to save Newt we can see how powerful a mother can be when she has to protect her child.

The movie provides us many action and emotional scenes. And I can say that it's as good as the first one.

Alien has a slow and mysterious beginning. It starts like nothing special - some people eating and talking on a space ship. But it gets more intense when they detect an unknown planet and land on it so they can explore it. The audience has to wait more than 1 hour to see the thing they paid for - the xenomorph. And this waiting makes its emergence one of the greatest moments in the cinematic history. Still we see the xenomorph only 3 or 4 times which is quite disappointing but this makes the alien more mysterious and gives the movie a horror character. And of course another reason we see the xenomorph so rarely is because the CGI wasn't very well developed at that time and it was pretty hard to make the alien's appearance. Alien(1979) is a great start for the Alien anthology and even though the bad CGI it's the best movie in the whole anthology. The movie is worth watching.