Reviews

Just the thought of a SyFy Saturday night movie makes my eyes roll. However, there was nothing else to do, so we watched.

Wow. I was surprised.

For starters, the acting was actually decent. Usually, the acting in these movies is painful at best, but the acting in this movie was actually good. There is a bit in the diner near the end of the movie, when the main character gives his back story, that is actually VERY good.

The effects are pretty typical for Syfy, however, this monster actually stayed the same size & proportion throughout the movie. Surprising, given the variety of long shots, close-ups, and CGI interaction w/ actors & locations. Someone thought it through, for a change.

The story actually made sense, too. The sequence of events played out logically and the character's motivations were actually rational. Sure, there was the typical (idiotic) "make yourself a target" moves when some nit runs away from the only cover, or stands stupidly in the middle of an open area, but hey, it's a MONSTER MOVIE. That comes with the turf. The only utterly, completely, irrational part was the doctor's demise.

The end was very enjoyable. Usually, w/ Syfy fair, the best aspect of the end of the movie is that it IS the end - but this actually had a decent ending, finishing up the story well, and having a logical and satisfying monster demise.

Usually, the Syfy monster movies' only value would be as MSTy3-K fodder. While Joel and the bots could only make this movie better, their absence does not take away anything from the movie.

I loved the mini-series "V" back in the wayback - though I thought the series itself fell apart by the end of the first season - so I wasn't sure how they were going to pull this one together.

so, far, the pilot shows great promise, if they stay on this path, and don't pull a "Heroes"-style implosion, it'll be worth a weekly investment.

Morena Baccarin (who I just love in general) does another notable characterization. How can someone so pretty come across as so serpent-like??? I sincerely kept expecting her to strike, like a rattler; her body language, and that smile that never touched her eyes were absolutely unnerving. The interview was especially disturbing because she was SOOOOOOOOO nice... after having shown us a different attitude only moments before.

I was especially impressed by the sub-text and the "current events" themes in the writing; equating the V's to terrorists was a brilliant touch. I did however have a problem with the idea that so many of them somehow managed to infiltrate society without much challenge:with the high level of technology that we have today, interstellar scout ships bringing a number of aliens that are completely undetected by the military seems unlikely, as does the "upkeep" for these creatures to be living on earth. For example, they didn't go into any detail regarding how they maintained their human-like appearance, and that was a gaping hole for me. Perhaps it will be addressed in future episodes.

I was greatly appreciative that the singular "religious" element (Father Jack) wasn't a blithering, bumbling idiot - thank you!!! Usually, Christians of any denomination are passed off in such environments as doofuses, so it was nice to see that one of the good guys (I assume) wasn't played as a stereotypical jerk.

I agree with the comments of others that this has a high "paranoia" factor - the idea that the V's had been infiltrating our societies for so long prior to their "arrival", and that ANY one could be one... yeah, you'd be seriously wanting special glasses to see them (anyone get that reference to another evil-alien movie?*) I thought the costuming deserved special note: the V's clothing (I thought) utilized very subtly the subconscious impressions made by clothing. Erica Evans and Dale Maddox, the FBI agents, wore shlupy,"working" clothes, whereas Anna was super-polished, as were many of the other high ranking V's. The lesser ranks had pseudo-uniforms - not militaristic enough to create concern, but they had a degree of "authority," that made them seem so much "better" than boring humans, and implied a degree of trustworthiness and orderliness that people seem to think means "good".

Overall, well done, looking forward to more, good acting, good scenery, good storytelling, and once it had created the foundation, good pacing and character development.

*movie reference, in case you're DYING to know: "They Live". IMDb it: you're already here anyway!!

*small spoilers*

I think Amanda Tapping is the best actress on TV; however, I wasn't overly-impressed by the pilot. I thought it would be casual entertainment that I would kind of half-watch. But kept with it. I'm glad I did.

The main characters have become increasingly complex. Helen Magnus is every bit the Victorian Lady who has lived through 2 world wars, the industrial revolution, and into the computer age. Tapping brings out tons of subtlety with this character - at times gentle and vulnerable, and at times tough to the point of threatening. I simply love her character.

Will's character started out a little stronger in the pilot -unfortunately, they don't effectively utilize the specific skills highlighted in the pilot, but he is still quite likable and engaging. He has a law enforcement background, and that's been getting more play than it did in the first couple of episodes, as opposed to his special observational and logic skills.

Chelsey (the gun toting, hot-headed daughter) needs work - but she's getting better. She needs to stay away from trying to being sweet, flirtatious, or any other quality beyond smart and smarmy. Go with your strengths, girlfriend.

Henry, the required tech geek, is very much like an adorable puppy dog with a healthy bite. His character is being fleshed out a little more every episode, and that is being done very effectively, imho.

The "abnormals" are secondary characters, and it would be cool to have some of them fleshed out, but the ones utilized as the primary focus of each episode are fascinating.

Helen Magnus' history has been being fleshed out a little every episode; some of it is fascinating and believable, and some of it is a bit cliché - especially that her father is somehow still alive, and that she had a relationship w/ Jack the Ripper. However, it is wildly fun to see how they incorporate historical people (Nikola Tesla and H.G. Wells, for example) into the storyline, or Helen's past.

Are there holes in some of the plots? Yes - but there were w/ Star Trek, too - and no one complained much about that!!

I'm really looking forward to seeing what they do with it. I'm willing to invest in a second season!

The only reason I didn't give this a 10 is because of the language; even though it was consistent w/ the character, it didn't have to be so vulgar.

Other than that, I adored this film.

Hancock is NOT your typical "superhero" film - that is what confuses people. Hancock is not a 'superhero' at all, in the beginning of the film. He has powers - but a hero he ain't. He is pathetic; he is disgusting. He is a shamble.

That is what makes his transformation - and the reason behind it - so very engaging.

There is no "super villain" - at least, not one externally. Hancock is his own worst enemy - he undoes his own efforts - he doesn't need a villain to play off of, cuz he's his own kryptonite.

That is the big "twist" - who and what you are inside, what drives you. Is it heroic? Is it villainous? Your past determines who you are - but what if you can't remember your past, as Hancock cannot? What about your future - Can you change it, if you don't know your past? You actually have to THINK about this film, in order to FULLY appreciate it. It's not a "sit back mindlessly and enjoy" it film - I mean, you can do that, but if you want to really enjoy this film, you need to get involved w/ the characters, invest yourself in what they think and feel.

If you fail to involve yourself in the film, you'll miss the best parts of it.

Jason Bateman is wonderful - sweet, hopeful, gentle. His comedic timing is fantastic. He plays off Wil Smith wonderfully;there is a delightful chemistry between them.

Charlize Theron - wow. Wow. She's amazing. She brings such astonishing depth to this character. Realizing the subtext in her performance, once you know the end of the film, is a treat in and of itself.

Wil Smith does some great things with this character - some subtle, some not so subtle -- but that is what makes his performance so very engaging. His character changes dramatically - he reflects the emotions of other characters, and enlarges them. But this is done subtlety, reflectively - so that, as the viewer, you have time to anticipate his changes, and take that moment of "joy" in knowing that he, finally, understands what it means to be a 'superhero'.

The special effects were, overall, excellent. Storyline - awesome. Character development - excellent. I LOVED this film.

I don't usually go to see R-rated movies; I find the abuse of language and the usually inappropriate/unnecessary sexuality used exclusively for titillation purposes an insult to my intelligence.

But I like James McAvoy, and figured I could endure the annoying bits, given that it looked like a fascinating story line.

Of course, I am occasionally wrong. Very, very wrong.

First, what worked - James McAvoy. This guy is awesome. Subtle, realistic, strong. He was stunning.

The stunts: mostly awesome - the car stunts in particular. I actually yelled "Cool!" at one point, taken by delighted surprise at some particularly visually artistic component.

The visuals - mostly good - a few that required me to close my eyes - bullets boring through the forehead, not my cup of tea.

What was wrong??? "Hi, I'm your willing suspension of disbelief, and I'm going to be sent to the outer solar system for the duration of this film".

Puh-lease. I am willing to suspend my disbelief for some things (can't watch anything w/ the Hulk, cuz it drives me nuts his pants don't rip right off of him). But this was beyond "suspension" of disbelief - this required cryogenic freezing of willing disbelief.

Story line - it was horrendous. Idiotic. There was SO MUCH that could have been done with it - but the characters operated beyond what I thought should be realistic responses. The whole thing, in that capacity, was a cheat, imho. The characters coulda/shoulda responded a certain way to certain events - and they didn't. When they find out about the 'betrayals', they do not respond - they just keep plowing forward. When all that they believe is challenged, they just kind of shrug and say "oh, well, onward and upward. Sorry - if Wesley had just found out about all this... and suddenly had his whole life history handed to him on a platter, and then finds out these people have been lying to him... and he just goes blithely on, not questioning, not wondering, not challenging what he's seeing or being told... sorry, do not, cannot believe his character would act that way.

That burned it for me; there was the straw of "disbelief" that broke this camel's back. It ruined the movie for me.

There was SO much that COULD have been done w/ the script - but instead, they went for pure action and "wow" factor, and treated the audience like they were nothing more than idiot adolescents.

But maybe that is what they were going for.

But honestly, no other word fits.

These guys are hysterical; my kids turned me on to them, and I LOVE them. They are charming, witty, outrageous. The puns are atrocious - which of course means their fantastic. They were looking for a cow bell, and couldn't find one, so the one says to the other "Looks like you get the prize." "What prize?" "The No-Bell prize." I especially love the "instant replay" voice overs, done like golf announcers.

It seems to have some similarities to shows like "The Monkeys," "Monty Python," and "Pee-Wee's Playhouse", but has developed its own style and flavor, so that it is nothing like any of those shows, but takes the best of all of them.

If you liked Pee-Wee's playhouse, you will LOVE this show. If you didn't like Pee-Wee's playhouse, you will LOVE this show - because it has everything that was fun about the show, but none of the annoying things. No screaming, no talking chairs, no ugly suits. They do different voices, incredible physical comedy, great pantomime, and they're both cute.

This show needs to last; it is truly remarkable.

I can't say I liked this, as a movie. It didn't feel like a movie, which was probably the point. I certainly didn't look like a movie, which didn't bother me. It didn't develop like a movie, or begin or end like a movie, or "work" like a movie - unless it was a movie done by 7th graders w/ mom's cheap camera... I didn't get 'attached' to the characters, and I thought their decisions were idiotic - and at the same time, perfectly rational. And that is why this "movie" worked for me.

It didn't pretend to be a "movie," - it was erratic, poorly lit, poorly shot, and - my favorite aspect - absolutely, brilliantly acted.

These people were so unbelievable real.

There were aspects which I thought were 100% realistic, like their behavior and reactions in the subway (other than the fact that they were insane to go into the subway in the first place...). I was so very, very "with them" in the subway! But that was why I didn't think of this as a movie. A movie makes you think, makes you feel, makes you connect (or hopes to). This had no such goals - and yet, I found myself responding to the events along with the characters.

I should think that generation-X which (according to marketers is all about 'experience') will ADORE this movie - nothing to think about, nothing to connect to... but lots and lots of reactive emotion.

Train wrecks are disturbing, because there is something about them that makes us want to watch. That pretty much describes this movie.

I am not a big fan or DeNiro or Scorcese - and I like Liza only a little - but I'm a huge musical fan. One of the things I like about musicals is the inevitable development between the two lead characters. That doesn't exist on any level with these two characters. The 'marriage scene' is highly disturbing. When Jimmy "proposes," it sounds like a threat. When he manipulates her into marrying him, it is controlling and abusive.

The only logical reason I can see for Liza's character even being remotely interested in this guy is that at the beginning of the film she seems to be on something of a rebound; there is a song that hints as to the psyche of her character, and why she might be attracted to this evil self centered man. (I think the song is called, 'The Man I love")other than that, there is NO logical reason for her to respond to this horrendous mockery of a man who deserves love.

He does nothing to earn her respect, to validate her response to him, or to encourage tender or compassionate love. Liza's character seems always on the verge of breaking out of the 'little woman role' that is representative of women of that period. If she had done that, this would have possibly been redeemable. But as it is, the strength of the female lead is furtive and amorphous - and ultimately,the failure of the female lead to develop is one of the harshest disappointments of this film.

*Contains spoilers* Way too many 'blue fairies' in this film.

At some point, someone says the blue fairy represents wishful thinking - and that is what this film felt like, to me. Spielberg's wishful thinking in this movie was that he was creating some great emotional masterpiece, but I honestly think he missed the whole point of the story.

I saw the movie on TNT, during one of their 'play it to death' weekends. I actually saw the end first, and thought that it looked interesting enough to watch it when it aired again.

Throughout the film, there is an undercurrent focusing on the desires of people and what they will do to get what they want - no matter the cost. The actions, prompted by the wishful thinking of what could be, motivate pretty much every human in the movie. Martin, Monica's son, is ill and in cryo, waiting for a treatment - for five years she waits, and waits, and waits, putting her life and her husband's life on 'hold.' Then she gets David - and even though she hasn't let go of her other son, she 'embraces' David - only to 'unembrace' him when he becomes inconvenient. Martin's wishful thinking is to manipulate David so his mother hates him, and Martin can get rid of the competition. The mother's wishful thinking is that it is somehow 'better' for David to be dropped off in the middle of nowhere, terrified and afraid, give him a few sentences worth of guidance - and that this is better for him than to be deprogrammed and have his memory erased.

Throughout the rest of the story, there are several incidences where people use the robots to get what they want for themselves- without taking into consideration what their complete narcissistic and selfish actions say about their own lack of humanity. Throughout the film, the desires of David the A.I. is to become human - and yet, throughout this film, the humans are shown to be either selfish, or violent, or hateful and narrow. Even his creator, Professor Hobby, only ever saw David as a tool to produce revenue - even though he suggests to his staff in the very beginning of the film that creating robots who can truly love is some kind of philanthropic gesture for people who can't have children.

Spielberg wants the story to be about an A.I. who loves, and is eventually loved in return, and this make him 'real'. But throughout the movie, David was the only person who was real - everyone else was two-dimensional and self-focused. The Great Spielberg missed the entire point of the movie he was making - love does, in fact, define the truest most noble aspects of humanity - and the humanity in the film was utterly lacking in it.

And please - hyper smart aliens who can clone a person, w/ selective memories, and they can't make their OWN robot for the kid to live with??? It would have been a better end - instead of him becoming a real boy, he gets an A.I. who becomes a real, loving mother.

Yes, I gave this a 10, which is deserves...if you can stand to sit through the first hour of it and wait for the castle storming sequence - which is so abysmally, horrendously horrible it is HYSTERICALLY FUNNY!!! At first, it was so bad I wanted to cut out my heart with a spoon, (because it would hurt more, you twit!), The harpies are about as scary as I am when I wake up in the morning (admittedly that can be pretty bad some days, but...) and the dialog is asinine. Balwin is ridiculous (big shock there), but I was eventually rewarded for my masochism about 45 minutes into the SCI-FI broadcast with the "Storming the Castle Sequence".

This sequence is so funny it had me and my husband howling with laughter. My favorite is building the trebuchet overnight - out of plywood, which they make no effort to disguise - and then watching this plywood contraption BOUNCE upon launch. The music varies during this sequence from actually being good to being a ludicrous heart beat in the background.

Then there's the bit where Baldwin's character hides the all-powerful amulet in his mouth...

Turn this torture of a movie on half an hour after it begins airing; distract yourself for a few minutes, and keep an open mind - and watch for the really, REALLY bad humor. It's not fun/funny like "Army of Darkness," but more along the lines of a "post Joel and the Bots (Mystery Science Theatre 3000) do-over - if you can subject yourself to the first hour!!

Unlike so many others, I thought the CGI was amazing 95% of the time. I thought there were times when the people looked real. Except for the Hero Girl; the dimensions on her face created some odd angles, and there were times when she looked as if someone forgot to finish the detail work on her. And the Elves. Besides the fact that several were Jewish (cuz there just aren't a lot of non- Jewish people who use the word 'meshuganna' in casual discussion), the elves were FREAKISH looking. When one of them kicks a kid down off the giant toy bag, and then turns to another and says, "Trust me"... whoa. I found it disturbing, for some reason.

Aspects which others thought boring and unnecessary - such as the ticket flying out the window - I found absolutely mesmerizing. I really admired and appreciated the craft that went into some of the more interesting visuals - like the ice breaking, and the dance sequence. But I do agree, these were utterly unnecessary for the story telling of the film.

Plot - hmmm??? Oh, plot! Um, yeah, it's here, somewhere,... sort of... maybe one of the many extemporaneous kids on the train - who all seem to believe in Santa, so what are they doing there???? - took it and hid it. Or maybe... there wasn't one!!! The plot 'didn't just work out for me."

I'd watch it again - just cuz it was so pretty. But unlike "It's A Wonderful Life" or "A Christmas Story" I don't think I could *listen* to the lame dialouge every year. That's what laptops are for!!!

Finally. FINALLY!!!! I love the Batman cartoons; Justice League, and even Batman Beyond. But I tire of cartoons, and they lack visual impact. I didn't like any of Burton's versions. I never bought Keaton as the dashing billionaire playboy smart enough to pull off a double-life. I liked Val Kilmer, but thought the vehicle itself wasn't good; too campy, too over the top. But this... it simply doesn't get better. Great storyline that defines not only the character of Batman, but also of Alfred (who supports and assists Bruce in these somewhat unusual endeavors), Gordon, Lucius Fox and even the city itself and the Batcave. The history created in this story, and the characters that populate it are 100% credible. It was so real; so believable. Christian Bales was perfect as Bruce Wayne and Batman - not necessarily the most dashing of playboys, but obviously even that played into the aspect of Bruce Wayne trying to define himself and this life. Bruce Wayne was smart -really smart - and thoughtfully developed so that the audience could understand the method behind Batman's madness. Finally, The Dark Knight wasn't just a man with a grudge - or a man on a mission. He was a man with a vision who wanted to not only wanted to avenge his parents, but wanted to make criminals afraid of being criminals. And through it all, his own code defines his actions, and determines which boundaries he will and will not cross.

The cast was brilliant. Top notch, in every way. I was even pleasantly surprised by Katie Holmes; she easily could have been totally overwhelmed by the quality and intensity of the performances of the other actors, but she held her own. It was distracting at times that she did look all of 18 - and it wouldn't have been difficult to mature her look, but her performance was quite credible. The gadgets - way, way cool. Way cool - totally explainable, totally believable. The cape was brilliantly defined and actualized. I've read complaints about the Batmobile not being cool enough - but I thought it was slick and MEAN. It inspired terror and intimidation - not envy or sexiness.

The thing that really captured me about this movie was the reality of it; the release of all of the prisoners in Arkham - some of whom have been experimented upon by the Scarecrow and have had brain damage as a result of his toxins - are released into the general population and not recovered, which explains even that aspect of the city's character -why it seemed to attract every loon for 1000 miles!!

This storyline was incredible and was very well-acted and brought to the screen with an eye for realism that places this Batman vehicle on its own well-deserved pedestal. Only one down thing: fight scenes. Too choppy, too dark. the visual of arms and legs randomly slashing across the screen was disorienting. I love a good fight scene, and this had some great -really great- moves, but it was all too fast to really appreciate. One other comment that earns an extra "++++" the visual violence where someone got hurt was not overdone or bloody; often it was off screen completely, and there were a whopping 3 swear words, and no sexual overtones. I didn't worry about my kids seeing this film, and finally there is a Batman movie we can all enjoy together! THIS Batman is THE Batman - an Everyman superhero for every generation.