Reviews

I had no idea of the premise, and went in completely blind. A genuine surprise, it went places I never expected and was packed with satisfying twists.

The acting was of a really high caliber, scenes between leads Riley and Erin flawed me at times. The actor thelat played Riley was actually fantastic in every scene. Also loved the setting, in some ways it felt rather British.

Yeah I absolutely recommend to anyone that enjoys thrillers. Way above what I expected. Bravo.

A film I never thought I'd ever see happen, the Eternals! And what a fantastically refreshing Marvel film at that. It's nice to explore some of the more interesting and varied characters from the comics for once. I enjoyed that we explored so much history, viewing Earth from a very different perspective than other MCU films, refreshing for sure . In many ways this feels like essential viewing for the hardcore marvel fans.

I can't really understand the bad reviews either, Jolie puts in one of the performances of her career. Her screen presence has never been better. Chan is fantastic, so is Madden. The sets are beautiful, the CGI is as good as it gets on screen. My one criticism would be that I figured out a major twist very early on, without even trying I should add. It was a little obvious because of some of the dialogue, at least to me personally.

I enjoyed some of the subtle history nods. Some are quite obvious and I would hope everyone more or less knows what is what. Others a re a little smarter and I imagine most viewers won't catch it. It'd perhaps not best aimed at children this time, personally I think it's refreshing. There is still humour but it doesn't gift you all the information. Sometimes that makes for a better film and it does here.

I definitely wouldn't listen to the negative reviews. If you love sci-fi you'll love this. If you love history, this is your film. Lastly, even if you just love cinema, you'll enjoy this. It's epic and grand and I can't wait to see more of this story.

Age of empires 4 is a game out of time. In reality it's a reimagining of the second game on the core series, AOE2. It's not a true sequel and lacks much of what I'd expect from a modern sequel.

The graphics are okay, the presentation is okay, definitely reminds me of the history based games we saw 20 years ago. But if I wanted a 20 year old strategy game then I'd play one.

I can't help but feel disappointed. Age of Empires 2 felt like a game trying to reach for its grand title. Age of Empires 3 felt like it was trying to justify the Empire tag, with all its dark colonial exploitation. Age of empires 4 feels like a village builder. You're not powerful, or an empire. You don't feel the ages as strongly either. It's quite frankly a bit of a disappointing mess.

It strikes me that either the Devs forgot this was a sequel, or perhaps hoped to cash in on nostalgia before it's players discovered in the second hour of gameplay that this is just AOE2, with a little more shine, and hills. I just don't care enough about the changes. They're tiny and you'll look over them immediately, because there is no impact.

It's not a bad game, because age of empires 2 isn't a bad game. But it's nothing more. A tiny fraction of what 3 innovated on, 4 has kept. We're talking tiny slithers, trade routes. It's not enough, unjustifiably so. I'd recommend you try if you have game pass on PC. But it's not worth even half its price tag, I'd maybe pay £10?

I was at secondary school when AOE2 was released. I was at college for AOE3. Decades later I'm a grown man that's experienced a whole world of exploration and excitement. AOE4 just cannot keep up with that. The world has changed a great deal, so has technology. AOE4 may as well be Monopoly. We've all played a better alternative priced at half the price.

If Dune (80s) is a Bob Ross, this is the roof of St Peter's Basillica.

Sometimes the way a film is presented makes an impact so powerful you question how others got it so wrong. Dune does that. Every scene is scattered with frames you could print and hang on your wall. I think this will be the film that we look back on in decades to come and say "That was Villeneuve's masterpiece".

I'm not book obsessed. I also can't delude myself that the original Dune film can stand up under the microscope. Unfortunately like much of what we love, time tricks us in to remembering events as better than they were. This Dune is better in every single way.

The cast is good, but their performances are fantastic. I've often thought of Momoa as somewhat overrated. Now I see the talent and intensity that he brings in a unique way. Timothee Chalamet is magnificent, something I almost expect at this point. Ferguson was fantastic too, as was everyone. Even small parts were acted wonderfully. But this goes back to the way the film was directed and produced. Angles and introductions are often made in dramatic but thematic ways. I can't speak to specifics without spoiling things. I won't. But let's just say that many times, characters we've heard of but haven't met are introduced in equally fitting ways. It's smart filmmaking and creates a feeling of everything being in it's correct place.

The digital effects were right on point too. Nothing looks unbelievable, which is impressive in a world set 8000 years in the future. Everything seems plausible, every impossibly large vehicle believable. This is hard sci-fi at it's absolute best and I can't think to another film that did it better. Some maybe reached it equally, but not better. It's special, truly.

It was refreshing to not know where the film was going, too. I've started reading the first book, Dune. But I haven't yet finished it and I'm glad I didn't. I had no idea what was going to happen and my expectations were exceeded.

Perhaps somethings are different to the books, I can't tell you if they were. But if it has, I'm not so sure it really matters. Some will tell you the original is better, it's not. Those people with all due respect are insane. The cast, audio, digital effects, cinematography, acting, script are all superior in almost incomparable ways. It's like comparing a Bob Ross to the roof of St Peters Basilica.

I can't wait for general release so I can watch it again.

No Time to Die is a very good film. Objectively speaking it probably has the best fights of the entire franchise, some of the best action scenes and I'd argue the best cinematographically tracked scene ever in a Bond. It also features one of the most refreshing and empowering takes on a bond girl we've seen on film.

So why do some hate it? Probably because the stakes are high. Growing up with the Brosnan films, I too miss the light hearted 'heto' of Britain. But I accept this is the final film in a series focussed on a more realistic view of Bond. Because I'm an adult I can accept that this isn't my perfect bond, but probably the perfect bond film about this bond. If you enjoyed Skyfall, you'll adore this film.

Personally I think the direction this film takes is brave and refreshing in some sense.

I think it would be fair to call NTTD a loveletter to bond fans. The cars, the soundtrack, even the stunts callback to other films in the series.

I suspect that some of the negative reviews are coming from a certain kind of person, the kind we've seen blast the Last of Us for having women with muscles. In an age where anyone can post their opinions, we're bound to see more and more reviews based purely on self preference rather than objectively based. It's quite sad, so be careful, read through the bad scores and see what they're mad about? It's usually a rant exposing their scores.

Firstly the sound was abysmally poor and I really expect better. The treble on sound effects was extremely high, whilst the rest of the sound was quite low. It wasn't the cinema, it was the film. The beginning is almost unwatchable for this reason.

The editing is atrocious too. Good stuntwork is wasted with 2 seconds of stunt footage displayed. Talking of cutting, the entire film is basically 1-³ second shots stitched together. It's awful to follow.

The script was piss poor. I don't expect mega scripts for my Ryan Reynolds films, but I do expect to not be bored all the way through by them. This one was a bad one for sure. There's nothing surprising and it's edited in a way that reveals all its secrets before they even play out.

Lastly, the film's understanding of Europe and infrastructure is so bad it's almost amusing. I'm not sure they even looked at a map of Europe before basing their film here. It would have helped.

Final criticism Samuel L Jackson/ Morgan Freeman attheir absolute worst. Wasted actors.

A pleasant surprise, I expected to be bored stiff, fall asleep or yawn excessively. I didn't, instead I actually quite enjoyed it. Cruella is surprisingly likable. But that's not hard when you have megastar Emma stone, who basically always gives Oscar level performances. Stone is incredible once again. The writing doesn't always shine brightly, but Emma did a superb job. The supporting cast is quite strong too and I enjoyed the comedic timing from the two sidekicks, paticularly the gentleman from tv show: Plebs.

The fashion is outrageously good too. I didn't even know I cared for it, but by the end I was begging for one more Banksy style Cruella show. Shame the main plot and it's twists are rather lame. It felt like they didn't bother to give enough time over to reviewing the he script and it's a real shame because at it's core Cruella has a wonderful scaffold of themes and ideas.

Also worth noting that the memes doing the rounds clearly come from people that never saw the film, because they're way off from the themes.

There was a lot I enjoyed, but unfortunately the film is let down by a few tropes. If I'm pulled out of the film by a character making decisions they'd never, ever make....then it's a problem. There are too many of those moments. Too many times mistakes are made because apparently everybody has forgotten what survival instinct is. It's unreasonably unrealistic in that sense and it damages the experience in a world we're supposed to believe is gritty and paralleled with our own.

I enjoyed Emily Blunt, even if she is heavily sidelined...infact you could argue it's all really about the kids and I'm not sure it always works.

Cillian Murphy was also excellent, even if he isn't really given the most creative plot.

Overall I enjoyed it. But it never gave me anything new, I never sat back in awe, felt any real sense of fear or deep sympathy for anyone.

Nomadland

There's no question to whether Nomadland is a good film. The real question is would you enjoy it? It's definitely not for everyone and older viewers and those who have experienced enough life to feel genuine pain will relate most.

Filled with an overarching edge of Melancholy, Nomadland isn't an easy film to watch. It constantly asks it's viewer, did you do everything you wanted to? If the answer is no, the film asks us, what are you waiting for?

These are hard questions for viewers to face. It's definitely easier to sweep those questions aside and I can imagine there are many viewers who aren't ready to face their own mortality yet. But it's in these hard realities we find the true beauty of Nomadland. The stunning reality of our own obscurity as humans is never as present as when the film presents us with long shots of incredible natural vistas. The film whilst entirely based in the USA doesn't show us the America we usually see. Instead we're confronted with the endless deserts and dramatic skies of Nevada, it's barren and we barely ever see shots of towns. The film asks us another question, are you lonely?

Another main theme is consumerism and corporate America. It isn't shoved in your face, but instead presents itself as an opportunity to ask yourself key questions. I'll not mention more for fear of spoiling key moments.

Nomadland is a worthy Oscar winner. It's arty farty, sure! If it was a painting it would be a picasso with its unorthodox approach. In fact the film often lets you answer and draw your own conclusions and there's a lot left unsaid. That's a traditional approach of modernist art, and without trying to lose you, but when you view a Picasso nobody says, 'wow that's beautiful'. Instead we try to figure out what on earth he was thinking when he made the art. That's Nomadland! How do you feel? How many films even ask you that question? It's a rare gem, it's unique and offers a perspective you won't often experience.

Creating a film is a complex procedure and can be split in to many different parts. Unfortunately, Mile22 is a great example of what happens when almost every department of production falls short.

The premise should be simple. So why the film jumps around randomly, with no indication of time passed or location is beyond reason. The film essentially presents is with a series of random segments, that never pay off with a reward.

It's actually quite remarkable that they took one of the best modern martial artists and failed to give us any memorable action sequences. Part of that is down to one of the worst camera directions I've seen in years. Characters appear on the left in one frame, before a camera angle change. Suddenly they're in the bottom right. Another change, now it's another angle of a different room. Suddenly we're back with the first actor, but now they're top left, we see them for half a second and we're cutting again. It's just poor, lazy filmmaking. There are rules for camera work, change of angle? Then your character is at least in the same place in the new frame. It's really amateur errors that make this so bad.

Plot is basic, dialog is appalling, camera work unprofessional and the script....who the hell wrote that script? Imagine watching an hour and a half of Mark Whalburg and not being entertained. That's the film's greatest achievement. They took a reliable action man and made him boring and stale. Well done. That's never been done before with Mark.

It should be considered shameful to build such beautiful sets and waste them in this way.

Any well framed shot is ruined by a slow zoom, a fast cut away, bad dialogue. That directly impacts the story telling. The director has no idea on how to build tension. Any threat faced is instantly acted upon, there's no time to consider danger and so the film feels as though there is no threat.

Constantly questionable decisions: I have no idea why anyone does anything in this film. You have characters entering lakes, getting completely soaked to say 10 words, then leave the lake. Why? Why would anyone do that? And it goes on like this. Great action scenes are spoiled by choppy cuts, to add speed to moves that are already very fast.

There's just no way to enjoy anything. It feels cheap and emotionaless. Very odd film making.

It's a true shame a film like this has a massive budget whilst many other great films struggle for a budget and suffer from wonky cgi.

Within the first 4 minutes we had a smoking will kill you joke, 'you only lasted 2 minutes' sex joke and an angry second officer that only gives short angry answers. We also had one of those scenes where the commanding officer explains everything by asking the protagonist obvious questions.

Oh and just before I switched off, somebody said "You've never lead one of those expeditions in the field before".

Just keep it. Whoever wrote this should be industry blacklisted.

I have to ask myself why a production company would greenlight a product based on unbelievably popular and famous characters, with a wealth of source material, and end up with this.

It would be a lie to pretend nothing in this show is good. Star girls casting is good. The music is often a good choice too. But the writing is pretty terrible. The CGI looks like it was done on a £400 computer by a college student.

It's tragically familiar. All the lazy elements from all the other DC shows are back. Cheap looking props with a tiny budget, jokes that you'd never make for fear of being socially shunned, pacing created by someone that's never looked at a storyboard. The poor CGI is a big issue in a show like this, one that's filled with magic and superpowers. Bare in mind this is a show being created by one of the largest and most historic storytellers of the last century, then ask yourself, is this good enough?

It makes me feel quite sad, because I was looking forward to it.

Seriously? I probably laughed those words out loud a dozen times.

Every cliché, from every 'gritty drama' series you've ever seen is plastered lazily across the series.

The dialogue is easily the poorest I have ever encountered on a TV series, worse than soaps:

"I have already dispatched the assets to the target".

"We look after our own".

"I don't know if spying on U.S citizens is morally right".

You'll see villains picking up their kids from their wives, "It's my night". If you're really lucky you might even see someone punch a mirror in anger.

The relationships the main character develops (develops is a gross exaggeration) is purely a plot ploy. That the people around him even talk to him is laughable.

As for the apparent twists, you see them a mile off. The shock betrayals are obvious from 5 minutes in, when your realise certain characters are being introduced to be disposed of. It's awful.

I just thought this was going to be another food show. Wrong!

There is so much life and passion in this show! The storytelling is absolutely peak film making. The show repeatedly demonstrates it's directors ability to not only make your mouth water, but your heart beat faster at the amazing stories of the people behind the food.

I loved every second.

The last of Us 2 is one of the best games in history.

You can't ignore, the best motion capture in gaming, a powerful soundtrack, characters that feel real, and a well written story. The lighting is once again moody and frightening. It's also worth noting the game expands on the original in many ways. One significant way is the size of certain playable areas. You're given enough room to approach things in you're own way. You can fight, run, sneak by. It's up to you at times. And even when it isn't, you always feel like you're doing what you should be.

Of course many will disagree. But then again, giving 1-5/10 for a game with genuinely jaw dropping animation, great lighting and incredible voice acting isn't exactly a trust worthy review, is it?

Be careful of the fake reviews. The game has twice as many reviews as the original right now, and very few of us have actually even finished it. If anything, it has become pretty normal for the psychos to review bomb great games with fake reviews. If anything, they help reflect just how much of a collosal success TLOU2 is. Because even moths are drawn to flames, even if they are stupid. And I think I'll leave it at that....with my Last of Us themed pun.

Hope you have fun!

There's something truly magic about Phil. But it's hard to frame with one word, because Phil is a bit of many things. Passionate, warm, inviting, kind and with a wonderful sense of adventure. You've seen 100 shows with the same premise, but they were all lacking Phil. But it's not just the host. Phil's brother is the cameraman and occasional star. Phil also brings his parents along for the ride, via a video call each episode. They're always one of the funniest parts of the show.

One unique thing about this show, is in how Phil relates to people. Phil is genuinely interested in getting to know people and makes friends so fast, that often the hotel concierge or the local shop assistant pops up later on, fast friends. It's remarkable, and because of his keen interest, the most remarkable unplanned events occur. Marakesh is a perfect example of this.

It's genuinely the warmest, feel good show. I'd love to share a meal with Phil and I think you will too.

I'm not really in to this sort of thing. At least, I wasn't. I didn't expect to see so many different activities and was pleasantly surprised. I also learned a great deal. Who knew the largest waves on Earth are in Portugal?

The film is also absolutely stunning. In 4K it had me locked on to the screen throughout. Camera angles, B roll footage, and technology is excellent. Drone shots really help capture the awe of each location too.

It does a great job representing people from many different backgrounds. So I find it a shame so many reviews are mentioning a lack of female representation. These were very personal stories, many of them relied upon those exact people being included. It's also hard to portray the absolute limit of human achievement, if you consider the largest wave ever surfed by a woman is nearly 20% less than those by the highest surfing male. It's an unfortunate reality. There's also the possibility less women chose or applied to participate. Studies do show women put themselves forwards significantly less than men. Of course women's achievements are breathtaking too. But let's not jump to conclusions.

An ambitious and short sighted decision to abandon real sets for pure CGI in most scenes really damaged this one. Some of the dialog is jarringly childish, and that also really dages this one. Worst of all, pacing is all over the place. A boring chase scene (think 5th element taxi, with no style or class) takes 15 minutes bit feels like 30. But the relationship between Anakin and Padme was written by someone that's clearly lacking in human connection.

But for a few big names doing what they can with a terrible dialog and a bunch of well established franchise characters, this film would be unwatchable.

If you're not watching it just to fill a knowledge gap, don't bother, the other film you're considering is probably better.

There are four fantastic acting performances in this film, Theron, Robbie, Kidman and Lithgow. Lithgow is so good, that only at the end of the film did I remember, that it was an actor at all. It reminded me of Christian Bale in Vice, so good, so convincing, you forget there is another person under the make up. Meanwhile, Robbie is such an incredibly versatile actress, her body acting is outstanding. Kidman was strong, and Theron is Megyn Kelly. She's so similar I actually forgot what Kelly looked like in real life for the duration of the film.

The plot is strong, well formulated and fairly easy to follow. There is a fair bit of law lingo, but it should be reasonably easy to follow. I've seen some reviewers complain they struggled to follow the plot, which in all honesty, is bizarre. Watching this film and not knowing names like Bill O'Reilly and Rupert Murdoch is like going to watch Jurassic Park and complaining you don't recognise the dinosaurs, it's up to you to understand the basics. You can't expect a mature film with a complex story to spoon feed you everything.

I don't remember a soundtrack, so I assume it fitted well and was used in all the right places.

The CGI editing was really strong. A bunch of times you find the actors pasted in to existing Fox footage and it's very impressive.

I really enjoyed the film. It was objectively good, with very strong acting and a shocking story. There is nothing major for anyone that isn't an angry or sad to complain about. It's just a solid film.

So try to ignore the silly scores of 1-4, this isn't one of the worst films ever made, by any stretch of the imagination.

I knew reasonably little of the "Fox News Scandal" before my viewing of Bombshell. So I was really surprised to find such a moving and compelling story focussing on house hold names from the states.

Some of the reviews are a little extreme. It's not a great film, but it's not bad. It's probably not a good film. It's certainly at least okay.

It's definitely indulgent and certain scenes don't at all feel earned. I'm generally quite emotionally involved with films, so it's telling I didn't really feel emotionally impacted even in massive moments of the film.

The action scenes weren't up to much unfortunately, with nothing new and creative. At times so much happened that I didn't real feel anything had much impact.

There was very little development through the film and somehow, despite massive opportunities, it wasn't at all particularly creative.

It was still fun though, it still had some likable characters, lots of references and nods. It at least ends a story we've been following for decades. It was never going to live up to the journey. After all, it's never really about the end, it's about the journey.

Underdogs tells an unashamedly honest and surprisingly touching story of a group of talented, underground Hip-Hop artists from the USA.

It's very rare in 2019 that we get a chance to share the very real and personal stories of anyone talented without having our image absolutely skewed. Underdogs is a rare and precious insight.

It's refreshingly honest to see artists so vulnerable.

If you guys ever read this, know that I'm forever a fan! Don't sleep.

There's a lot to Parasite. A very complex story, only a few sets, but dozens of strands.

In some ways, it's a very good film. For example, the imagery is outstanding. Also, it's one of the most original films I have ever seen. I never guessed what was going to happen next. I was completely surprised remarkably often. Bit this also brings with it a negative. So much happens that the film started to drag for me. I noticed I was getting restless and was genuinely grateful when the film ended.

The acting is good for the most part, but occasionally reaches theatrical heights, which felt tonaly wrong.

Overall, I'm glad I watched it.