Reviews

Some good footage within, but had to bail on this series early because the narration is probably the worst I've ever heard. Even though it can be a harrowing watch, especially for those with relatives still in living memory who were caught up in the conflict, the narration simply takes you out of the world. Yes - although this world is a tough one, you still want to be immersed in it.

But the narraration takes you out of it, it simply doesn't fit. The material I saw was OK - more of a beginners guide, but still with some footage that surprises. And if it's a subject that fascinates you, you can put up with repitition. Hopefully someone makes a proper WW2 documentary, with a stronger script and narration that fits the images.

Typical garbage produced in America in 2022. Take episode one - rather than delving into countless deserving women, we are treated to other tangenital subjects. It's the sort of show you expect in 2022 - if you don't fit the bill, if you don't talk politics, if you don't look right, you will be omitted despite your talent and impact. The Shangri-La's, The Ronettes and The Shirelles deserve better, and that's just a small sample of those overlooked in just the first episode.

Going through the episodes and decades, we are shown some deserving women, but the problem is those who are omitted stick out. 95% of worthy women are ignored, or only briefly namechecked. The talking heads aren't up to par, either. It's all substandard - rather than being of a high standard, it's like an idiot's guide. With an emphasis on idiot.

The director has three movies (this, The Old Man & The Gun, and The Green Knight) set in interesting, mythical, cinematic worlds, but not once has managed to convince this viewer of those worlds. From the start, nothing ever rings quite true, otherwise competent actors don't seem to fit, and you're dumped in without ever being engaged. This movie floats about, echoing not Malick but films that have tried to be like Malick films. A pale imitation of pale imitations.

Perhaps A Ghost Story is OK, but I dread the thought of wathcing it. And is there any clearer a sign that a filmmaker isn't for you?

One of my most anticpated movies for many years, but fell rather flat. As another reviewer states, it captures a look but not the feel. The soul is missing. The sort of film that floats on screen before you, without reaching out and grabbing you. For what could be a classic noir, it's not enough.

I feel it's in part down to the casting. Cate Blanchett as a femme fatale? Probably the worst choice I've seen since Hollywood decided to try Hilary Swank as one. The femme fatale is one of Hollywood's classic archetypes but they no longer seem to understand why (or, more likely they do, but get it wrong regardless).

This, and its sister show Discovering Film (which concentrates on acotors), are both going downhill now the show has moved on from classic Hollywood.

A lot of the modern directors, such as Jonathan Demme, don't have much weight, or they've literally made ONE highly acclaimed film and laughably get an episode (John Singleton & Antoine Fuqua). If one masterwork is really enough, there are hundreds of directors who've been overlooked by the series. Another problem is there are too many clips and not enough context.

I'm also puzzled as to why the show has become so narrowly focused on Hollywood. They used to explore world cinema, with diverse shows on the likes of people from Sergei Eisenstein to Claudia Cardinale. Now they seem to bypass legends like Wener Herzog to focus on middle-of-the-road, at best, modern Hollywood filmmakers. They have skipped too many legends, too much of the world, and we're left with a show that recounts the last few decades of an increasingly narrow film world. There's little left to discover in these shows, but the magic is still out there if they could find it again. . .

This, and its sister show about directors are both going downhill now the show has moved on from classic Hollywood. Yet there are many legends - such as Jean Arthur and Louise Brooks, to name but two of many, who haven't been covered while mediocre actors who debuted in the 80s are covered. What is there to discover about Emma Thompson, Matthew Broderick, and Julia Roberts? These stars are all relatively fresh, especially as this show is mainly just clips without showing us more of the context like it used to.

I'm also puzzled as to why the show has become so narrowly focused on Hollywood. They used to explore world cinema, with shows on the likes Alain Delon and Claudia Cardinale. Now they seem to bypass legends of world cinema.

There's little left to discover in these shows, the magic has gone, but legends past and global icons are still out there to be rediscovered if the programme makers can find the attitude they used to have.

Utterly awful. Halfwit, humourless trash masking itself as satire. Nothing here worked for me, it's like one long meme.

Some of the acting and shots are absolutely terrible, yet they're still better than most of the writing. Hollywood at (some) of its most annoying. Expect it to be nominated for several awards come awards season.

The fact that Ennio Morricone, probably the one person in all of film history who stands above all others in their respective field, didn't have this night dedicated to him shows how far deep into the gutter the Oscars has sunk. They didn't even use his music during the montage for those we've lost, which is a quite incredible missed opportunity (as was the chance to, perhaps for the last time, harken back to golden age Hollywood due to the passing of Olivia de Havilland).

This is the same awards show that didn't give Stanley Kubrick an Oscar for direction, Barbara Stanwyck an award for acting, yet have given countless awards to some of the most mediocre artists and minds you'll ever see, so it shouldn't come as a suprise.

However, that somone like Morricone, who elevated the form beyond almost any other and whose contribution to film, art and culture will last beyond any others here; and in the future whose works will stand alongside those of whoever one cares to name - Shakespeare, da Vinci, Beethoven - took such a back seat in the eyes of the origanizers still came as a shock.

I used to watch the show, but have only skipped through the last few ceremonies. This offensively bad show has ensured I won't even bother paying it any attention again.

The Beatles deserve better. Himesh Patel, Ed Sheeran & James Corden simply aren't good enough to be associated with such material.

I think it's aimed at mainstream audiences who seek light, fluffy entertaintment. But why would any hardcore Beatles, or music, or even film, fan want to assiciate some of the greatest songs of all time with utter mediocrity such as those people mentioned above?

This film is simply an insult to four great men, and a wasted opportunity for film fans.

I just felt like this was unnecessary especially since it is far too bad to be taken seriously. I personally haven't read the original poem and just went for the film on demand to be entertained by a story. Instead Dev Patel is completely out of place. Are we still doing race washing in 2021?

Serves up a good lesson that decent budget is not always quality.

. . . they chose this one! The most unromantic football club that has ever existed, and a documentary that is as sanitized as you'd expect. Who takes any of their achievements seriously?

A documentary as empty, vapid and soulless as the club itself. And some of the most suspicious positive reviews you'll ever see.

I just wanted to disagree with the one other reviewer who states there are grammatical errors. The example provided is not an error, and is correct in English. Perhaps it's not the done thing in a regional variant, such as American English, but that doesn't matter.

And the big cats are 'cheetahs'; those cheating on their partners are an example of the 'cheaters' of this world.

The show has started well (will update my review after more episodes).

Who could have predicted a film starring James Corden, Taylor Swift and Idris Elba would be among the worst of the decade?

What's the point in a historial film which contains more inaccuracies than fact? Such liberties might be acceptable in the theatre, but cinema is a vastly superior artform and, therefore, this kind of thing doesn't cut it.

Ironically, re-writing history to fit in modern agendas will surely only date a film - in decades to come, why would anyone interested in the 1560s seek out a film soaked in the agendas of 2018?

For a few series, this is passable entertainment for those looking for an on-screen pirate fix. But by the final series, it devolves into the most pointless pontificating, and largely by non-pirates, I have ever seen on screen. It goes on and on, round in circles, over the same stuff for unengaging episode after unengaging episode.

Typical modern blockbuster, full of lame jokes, no surprises and invincible characters hurtling towards an ending that only services sequels.

The original movies are fondly remembered, but there is nothing in this that will last. Who will remember any of this stuff?