Wow, I really am at a loss of how anyone can like this huge waste of money and manpower. I could write a huge list of all of things I hated about this, but I really don't want to waste so much time, and after skimming some of the other negative reviews, others have covered a lot of what I hated in depth. To sum it up briefly: The way people act in this is very stilted and unnatural. There is no joy, humor, wittiness, edginess; it is all very flat and unemotional. The "movie" plods along, much longer than it needed to be. The "villain" is a ridiculous one dimensional charactiture that has no charisma, in fact you cannot even understand what he is saying most of the time. What was his motivation? Why would ANYONE follow such a freakish looking weirdo? Did they ever explain the outlandish mask he wore? People come in and out of the movie like they just walked on to a set. It is all very false and fake seeming. The dialogue was infantile and uninspired. What happened to Christian Bale? He seems to be sleepwalking through this. This is worse even than "Terminator Salvation". Again, I love all types of movies. I am not a movie snob. I just fail to understand how anyone could get ANY enjoyment out of watching this. Watching this, while it was not quite torture, it was an endurance test I would not want to repeat, even thought HBO is now showing this non-stop.
Reviews
7 Reviews
Star Trek Into Darkness
(2013)
Star Trek in name only
28 June 2013
Here is what I don't understand: If you didn't like a show, as Abrams mentioned, why "reimagine" said show? Why have the same characters? Why not have an ORIGINAL movie with a whole new set of characters and back story? Oh, I know why. Because YOU ARE A HACK WITHOUT AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT! Because you want to attach the name of something great to your unimaginative derivative crap in order to make more money, and at the same time p*ss off an entire generation, more than one generation of people who hold the original Star Trek dear to their hearts for reasons you wouldn't understand. What the original Star Trek lacked in budget, it more than made up for in great stories, original characters, and a lot of heart and imagination. It seems that a lot of these types of "movies", like "Transformers", "Man of Steel" and such, think that non-stop special effects and CGI action somehow make up for characters you actually care for. I could list all of the things I disliked about this movie, and it's predecessor, but it can be summarized in one sentence (for both "films"): Stupid villain causes a lot of destruction for some stupid reason or another, utilizing massive bloated budget and lots of CGI to the point of CGI overload, then villain is defeated in some stupid way that will be quickly forgotten. "Movies" like this will not stand the test of time, unlike truly great films, which will be remembered for generations to come.
Dream House
(2011)
Monumentally Stupid, Dumbed-Down Lame Exuse of a movie
27 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, I am so sick of these types of "thrillers" that have replaced actual horror movies, or even scary movies. It reminds me of the equally crappy "Woman in Black", with no real scares, no originality, formulaic by-the numbers plot, cliché filled, rated PG-13 bore-fest. Also, the actual plot is created by the monumental stupidity of more than one character.
Let me illustrate: EVIL money grubbing husband and father wants to kill his wife really bad, for the insurance money or whatever. Well, he is a puss so he hires a convenient bad guy gun for hire. Here is where it gets beyond stupid. The EVIL husband never bothers to show the hit-man a photo of his wife, or even describe what she looks like (blonde hair would have helped!!!). And on top of that, he doesn't even give the gunman his home address! He says something like, "oh it's the third house on the left, or maybe the fourth, I forget..." WOULDN'T THESE DETAILS BE IMPORTANT TO ANYONE WITH MORE INTELLIGENCE THAN A FLATWORM?!?
The rest of this crap is just another typical boring ghost movie, with nothing scary to be found. A good antidote would be "A Ghost Story", 1980. That at least had some adult themes and was truly intelligent and scary!
Let me illustrate: EVIL money grubbing husband and father wants to kill his wife really bad, for the insurance money or whatever. Well, he is a puss so he hires a convenient bad guy gun for hire. Here is where it gets beyond stupid. The EVIL husband never bothers to show the hit-man a photo of his wife, or even describe what she looks like (blonde hair would have helped!!!). And on top of that, he doesn't even give the gunman his home address! He says something like, "oh it's the third house on the left, or maybe the fourth, I forget..." WOULDN'T THESE DETAILS BE IMPORTANT TO ANYONE WITH MORE INTELLIGENCE THAN A FLATWORM?!?
The rest of this crap is just another typical boring ghost movie, with nothing scary to be found. A good antidote would be "A Ghost Story", 1980. That at least had some adult themes and was truly intelligent and scary!
The Tree of Life
(2011)
Lame period drama mixed with Nova "Discover The Universe"
9 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, once again the critics bamboozled me. I was watching the "best of 2011" movie reviews on channel 2, and the 3 main reviewers (including Ebert)all had this movie and none other on their respective 3 lists. They were all gushing about what a masterpiece this was. For some odd reason I believed them and rented out this "movie" at the local red box machine. They must have been paid off!
I can sum up this movie pretty simply: A family "drama" set in the 1950's that occasionally flashes to the present, and sometimes flashes to the time of the dinosaurs, and even the creation of the universe. That may sound interesting, but the execution is extremely annoying. You keep seeing little bits of Brad Pitt, his wife (all bones and red hair) and three generic sons at various stages of their life.
It is shot in a cloying, pseudo-artistic way of extreme facial close-ups, light shining through branches, and other clichés. Meanwhile there is this annoying woman whispering nonsense, and sometimes a boy whispering nonsense. I kept expecting the kid to whisper "Zoom zoom", like in those old Mazda commercials. At least that would have added and element of humor, which the "movie" totally lacks. Oh, and the computer generated dinos look totally fake (inexcusable!), Sean Penn wanders around looking constipated, and the ending (may contain a "spoiler", I don't think so, though)is everybody frolicking on some beach! Stupid!
I can sum up this movie pretty simply: A family "drama" set in the 1950's that occasionally flashes to the present, and sometimes flashes to the time of the dinosaurs, and even the creation of the universe. That may sound interesting, but the execution is extremely annoying. You keep seeing little bits of Brad Pitt, his wife (all bones and red hair) and three generic sons at various stages of their life.
It is shot in a cloying, pseudo-artistic way of extreme facial close-ups, light shining through branches, and other clichés. Meanwhile there is this annoying woman whispering nonsense, and sometimes a boy whispering nonsense. I kept expecting the kid to whisper "Zoom zoom", like in those old Mazda commercials. At least that would have added and element of humor, which the "movie" totally lacks. Oh, and the computer generated dinos look totally fake (inexcusable!), Sean Penn wanders around looking constipated, and the ending (may contain a "spoiler", I don't think so, though)is everybody frolicking on some beach! Stupid!
Plain Jane
(2010–2014)
Contrived, yet enjoyable
18 August 2010
I have seen the first two episodes of "Plain Jane", and while I realize it is a somewhat contrived, fake show, it is at least entertaining. So far, there have been two somewhat attractive "Janes" that had cute faces and nice bodies, so it is no surprise when they are "transformed". I actually thought the redhead with the glasses looked better before her "transformation"! The preview for the third episode also has an attractive dark haired woman, wearing baggy clothes to hide her thin body, for some reason. I agree with some of the other posters who thought the first guy "crush" was gay. His hair was a serious giveaway! Maybe he was just "metrosexual", but I doubt it! The show also features the girls "facing their fears" and being put into awkward and embarrassing situations. The British female host is amiable enough, though she looks awfully skinny! Typical Hollywood! The women are too skinny and the men are gay! I hope future episodes feature women with some meat on their bones! Well, while I can find plenty wrong with the show, I find it quite watchable. My wife likes it as well, so at least it is a show we can both watch and enjoy.
Motherhood
(I) (2009)
How many movies about being a parent do we need?
25 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
My wife and I rented this the other night from the movie machine at Publix. I really had no interest in seeing it, but decided to give it the benefit of the doubt. I like Uma Thurman, and always found her sexy, sagging boobs and all. She seems like a competent enough actress, but she definitely has had the lions share of bombs, going back to Even Cowgirls Get The Blues, Gattaca, etc.
In this movie, like billions before, it is set in Manhattan, which I am really quite sick of. The first few minutes of the film, in which we see Uma shambling around a shabby apartment, seemed kind of creepy, like a PSA for depression. The film is very uneven and can't be called a comedy, and really didn't seem like a drama or love story. If anything, it shows the average New Yorker as quite annoying and unlikable. Uma's character whines about not having time to do anything, even though she does not have a job and creates extra work for herself, like giving her elderly neighbor orange juice. She writes meaningless Blogs, Carrie Bradshaw- style, in the "little slices of free time" she has. She runs around like a crazy person, trying to prepare for her daughter's birthday, obsessing bizarrely over the fact that the day is the "last day my daughter will be 5". WTF was that all about? Also, why does she wait until the last minute to prepare for the party? She seems to want to be a victim, to be able to complain incessantly about the "hardships of being a mother". Like other posters said, having children is a choice (usually). Nobody forced her to have two kids, and a dog she doesn't clean up after!
I am sick of so many unoriginal movies about parenthood. Why doesn't Hollywood do something original (fat chance) and actually portray a couple that cannot have kids? The fact that this movie flopped so badly is a good indication that people are sick of this type of movie. I will give this movie a little bit of credit for having the couple not be rich and I liked the Pylon song Uma and the delivery guy danced to.
In this movie, like billions before, it is set in Manhattan, which I am really quite sick of. The first few minutes of the film, in which we see Uma shambling around a shabby apartment, seemed kind of creepy, like a PSA for depression. The film is very uneven and can't be called a comedy, and really didn't seem like a drama or love story. If anything, it shows the average New Yorker as quite annoying and unlikable. Uma's character whines about not having time to do anything, even though she does not have a job and creates extra work for herself, like giving her elderly neighbor orange juice. She writes meaningless Blogs, Carrie Bradshaw- style, in the "little slices of free time" she has. She runs around like a crazy person, trying to prepare for her daughter's birthday, obsessing bizarrely over the fact that the day is the "last day my daughter will be 5". WTF was that all about? Also, why does she wait until the last minute to prepare for the party? She seems to want to be a victim, to be able to complain incessantly about the "hardships of being a mother". Like other posters said, having children is a choice (usually). Nobody forced her to have two kids, and a dog she doesn't clean up after!
I am sick of so many unoriginal movies about parenthood. Why doesn't Hollywood do something original (fat chance) and actually portray a couple that cannot have kids? The fact that this movie flopped so badly is a good indication that people are sick of this type of movie. I will give this movie a little bit of credit for having the couple not be rich and I liked the Pylon song Uma and the delivery guy danced to.
I Love You, Man
(2009)
Typical Hollywood: full of stupidity, cliché's, annoying people, no humor
31 August 2009
I don't know why I still hold out hope that movies like this will actually make me laugh or feel good. My wife really wanted to see this, but I was having doubts, after disliking similar "comedies" like "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" and "Knocked up". It was more awkward and painfully embarrassing than funny. I don't think I laughed once. Pretty much all of the characters ranged from bland and boring (Paul Rudd, his fiancé,) to enraging jerks (Jason Segal, John Favreau, who played the most vile, despicable character, ever. The one married to the annoying stick figure Jamie Pressley. I wanted to kill him.) Also, I own two dogs. Letting one's dog crap on a busy sidewalk or beach is NOT FUNNY. It should earn you a good beating. The wedding at the end was especially horrible. People don't act like that! Also, while I have nothing against gay people, the portrayal of the gay brother who tries to have sex with straight men (and succeeds?!?) is not funny, just really skeevy. Why this got so many favorable reviews is just wrong and sad.
Tell Your Friends