Change Your Image
moafuhr
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Prometheus (2012)
Bad moments in the film
This could have been a great movie. If it had a good script it would have been the best in the series. But it is an extremely flawed film, although fun and beautiful in several moments.
Instead of doing a review, I'm simply going to mention the main problems with the film, which make it a bit stupid and unrealistic.
- What is the main couple's specialization anyway? At the beginning of the film they are shown as archaeologists, later they appear to be biologists. What are they really?? No one knows.
- "That's what I choose to believe" No, that's not an argument. Why do you really think they engineer us?? The actual evidence that exists is this: "Some kind of human-shaped creature came into contact with ancient civilizations and aimed for the stars for some reason." And that's it. That's the evidence. Any other idea is an invention without any basis.
- Why wasn't the conversation about who's in charge prior to the trip? It doesn't make any sense to take a trip this distance and after years of traveling want to define the rules of the expedition. All of this would be discussed during the travel plans.
- What was the plan? You want to say that billions of dollars were spent, years wasted, 17 people were put at risk and you want to convince me that no one made the plan for what to do. If there was a super advanced civilization on the planet? What would they do? It amazes me the idea that no one planned anything.
- Considering that they didn't have a map of what they were looking for, they just knew which planet they were going to visit, it's incredible how quickly they find what they're looking for. We are talking about an entire planet!!!! They must have spent months exploring before finding anything. Or by giving a justification such as: "We are capturing radio signals from a certain location".
- Why Elizabeth is so quick to reject any protection on the expedition. The guy says "My role here is to ensure the safety of the expedition" and then she says she doesn't need to. Why did the guy come then?? Couldn't I have stayed at home instead of traveling for years for a job that wasn't necessary??
- While on the way to the structure, Hollowey asks the geologist. "I want to know if that is natural or not." And the geologist says "I can't say that." Of course you can say that! What kind of geologist would you be if you couldn't? Plus, there's a skull carved into the top of the thing!! I think that's a good sign that it's not a natural structure, right?
- About the exploration: it would have been smarter to send the mapping robots, and then, two days later, when the map was ready and if there was a good idea of what would be found, then start exploring the place. Scientists are not quick to put themselves at risk in this way.
- Removing helmets on a strange planet without proper analysis is absurd. The air is breathable, but there can be bacteria, viruses and several other microbes in the air that can be terribly deadly and contagious on this planet. How could you put yourself at risk like that without need. In fact, this part of the script is understandable in a way. I watched the documentary about the production "Furious Gods: The Making of Prometheus" and it's clear that these helmets caused a lot of problems during production, so I think Ridley Scott soon decided to come up with a silly excuse to get rid of them whenever possible.
- And what about the geologist who has a panic attack as soon as he finds a (totally harmless) corpse that is a thousand years old. None of this made sense. It was just a script mechanism for the team to split up, so that he and the biologist could be killed later. Pathetic.
- David didn't really know what those vases were. By taking one to the ship he could have killed the entire team. What if it was a bomb or a biological weapon that spread through the air (totally possible). They don't have another ship. If this ship was destroyed, all of them would die on this planet. David should be more logical than that. He is a robot!!
- Shouldn't such a team, destined to find an alien civilization, include a historian or archaeologist? The way they deal with everything they encounter... These could very well be the last remains of a lost civilization. There is no one taking photos or worrying about analyzing the mosaics and reliefs on the walls, nor doing any type of analysis of the architecture, etc.
- Then there is a scene where Elizabeth tells Vickers "I don't know" if all the aliens are dead. So establishing that, how no one cares about the two team members who got trapped inside the alien structure. If we establish that there might be aliens alive somewhere, they could be at risk. But no one on the ship bothers to keep an eye on them. Maybe take shifts to keep an eye on the team members who got stuck by the monitor.
- The unscientific way in which Elizabeth and the other woman deal with the alien's head!! A real scientist would have thousands of things to study if he found an alien's head. They treat it with so much carelessness that they manage to make the thing explode after just a few seconds. All that's left is boogers and debris from the explosion. What kind of scientists are these?
- The Computer speaks of "DNA Match". This is impossible, as engineers are very different from humans. DNA could have similarities. In the same way that chimpanzee DNA is similar to ours.
- Wouldn't it be interesting for them to have brought an animal along on the ship, being a pseudo-scientific expedition. It would be good to do tests. David could have put the alien substance in a rabbit to see what happens. It would be more scientific than testing on one of the most important members of the expedition.
- Why people on the expedition keep saying that David has no soul and is not a real man when he clearly shows that he has feelings and even says in the film that he has things that he likes? He says "this is from a movie I like", I think this would be proof that a computer has artificial intelligence, liking something seems to be a sign of intelligence. No?
- The expedition's biologist decides to act stupidly towards a local animal that he has no information about. I believe that a real biologist would not behave so foolishly, but would be more focused on taking photos and perhaps capturing the animal for study.
- The way they behave in the face of Holloway's infection shows how there was no plan in the expedition. There should be a medical area outside the ship ready for quarantine if necessary. After all, they are going to a completely unknown planet, hoping to find life on this planet. This includes microbes, viruses, etc.
- David's attitude of wanting to take an alien to Earth that grew inside a woman in an astonishing speed is idiotic. He better than anyone would know that the risks of doing something like this could be catastrophic. He would be more interested in delivering a baby immediately so he could study the living thing. Keep in mind: This is one of the first living aliens (literally alive) they encounter on the planet. Simply the risk of putting this on board a ship during a journey that would take years is unthinkable. You just don't know how this alien life would develop and what it would become. Taking her to Earth without this knowledge is unthinkable.
- There's really no justifiable reason why Weyland would take Elizabeth along on the trip to see the alien inside the structure. She's only there because the script needed her to act like an idiot so Weyland would have security beat her so the alien could see how evil humans are.
- The pilots of Prometeus sacrifice themselves with great happiness. It didn't seem very realistic.
- Prometheus school of running. It's an intentionally hilarious passage in the film. And Elizabeth should be dead. She is saved by hiding under a rock, which is somehow capable of supporting the weight of thousands of tons falling on top of it.
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One (2023)
weakest film in the franchise
This is unfortunately the weakest film in the franchise.
The only way they can fix Part 2 is by having it revealed at the beginning of the film that artificial intelligence is not omniscient and in fact there is a man and a secret organization behind everything, and this organization is controlling a very advanced program, but the AI is far from omniscient.
If they don't do this, they risk having a gigantic failure on their hands. I myself have no interest in seeing the next film if the premise remains the same. Ethan Hunt against a computer? No thanks!
That said, the film isn't bad. Hayley Atwell was a good addition to the cast. Vanessa Kirby is amazing, as always! And the rest of the cast is ok. The villains Pom Klementieff and Esai Morales were not convincing. Better actors are needed in the central role as villains. Someone capable of stepping into the shoes of Sean Harris and Henry Cavill. Very sad how little importance Rebeca Ferguson had in the film. Such a capable actress should have had something better to work with.
I must add that the chase scenes that took place in Rome have terrible CGI. It's obvious that filming the car chase scenes in the historic city wouldn't be allowed, and the moment you start to think that it's all fake, it becomes very easy to notice the signs of bad CGI. The rest of the film is convincing.
But the film's biggest problem was the theme, which was very science fiction. Did not like. Need to move on to the next one. It would be very sad to end the franchise in a downward spiral.
There was also something else that started to make me quite uncomfortable. Why doesn't Tom Cruise kiss these women? I mean, the film suggests that he has a kind of relationship with the character Ilsa, they even say that he loves her. But he's not able to kiss her the entire movie, not even once? This just makes me think that Tom Cruise might be gay. The kind of thing you shouldn't be thinking about during the movie. Next time, Tom, take one for the team. It is not so difficult. And no, this is not objectifying women. It's life, people who are together kiss and give public displays of affection.
Oppenheimer (2023)
Good film
A cool miniseries. I watched it in three days.
I was really more interested in the bomb production part, so everything that came out about post-war political intrigue and McCarthyism didn't interest me as much. Everything about the organization of the Manhattan Project, the organization of Los Alamos, discussions about physics and bomb testing were very interesting to me, I loved those parts.
I think putting the main character in an audience where he had to explain all his actions was a cheesy and lazy script device. Just as I found Lewis Strauss' idea of explaining everything he thought and planned to his own advisors to be very absurd. Shouldn't they already know all this?
I also didn't understand why the Lewis Strauss scenes were in black and white. It didn't make much sense to me.
I think the exaggerated soundtrack contributed to making the film more interesting, otherwise the story could have been quite boring.
The performances from everyone involved were very good but especially from Cillian Murphy, Matt Damon and Robert Downey Jr., I also liked Kenneth Branagh as Niels Bohr.
I understood the idea of the film: he made the bomb but felt guilty about the deaths and spent the next few years trying to stop the hydrogen bomb from being made. Interesting, I just think it was told in a rather boring way.
In the end, a very good film. It would have been a fantastic film if it had focused less on the post-war period and more on Oppenheimer's life before the war. Although I don't know much about his life, I think it would have been more interesting to see his academic life before the bomb rather than his post-war political persecutions.
Who Killed Jill Dando? (2023)
just boring
It's official, the English police are the worst in the world.
Looking at this documentary I came to the conclusion that the United Kingdom can only be a dictatorship.
The police only acted with the press in mind.
Search warrants were authorized even when there was absolutely nothing against the individuals being investigated.
People were arrested without any evidence.
A person was arrested and considered a suspect just for having an 18mm gun, one of the most common types of weapons in the world.
My guess? She was killed by some Serbian nationalist. It is the possibility presented that makes the most sense.
The truth is that most cases are impossible to solve, especially older ones at a time when people didn't have smartphones, GPS and security cameras weren't so common.
The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (2010)
The worst of the saga!
David Slade managed to do the impossible! Turning the best book in the series into the worst movie. How did he manage to do this? Let's do it by steps:
The choice of David Slade: I don't know who was responsible for choosing this director. Perhaps it was producer Wyck Godfrey? Fact is, I can't think of a worse choice. Choosing the director of the famous 30 Days of Night; one of the bloodiest and most violent psycho vampire movies to direct a Twilight movie?!?! What were you thinking??? David Slade is the big problem in this movie. He simply has no ability to understand the series and has done the obvious for someone like him: turned Twilight into an action movie.
Action replaces romance: Let's get one thing straight, the Twilight books are romance books, they're about feelings and emotions. That's their strength. David Slade simply took away all the magical and mystical character of the series and gave a huge importance to all scenes involving action and removed all scenes that involved feelings. Anyone who has read Eclipse knows that this is a book where the characters spend 90% of the time talking about their feelings. The battle between vampires and werewolves at the end of the movie doesn't even appear in the book. Even in the final scene the focus is on the feelings of the characters. Another example is the scene where the vampires and werewolves train for the fight. David Slade converted this into an action scene, when in the film, again, the focus is on the emotions of the characters. And as if that weren't enough, new scenes that aren't in the book were created to highlight the action even more.
Cinematography: Javier Aguirresarobe who was responsible for doing the best cinematography of the series in New Moon, destroyed this film. Obviously that wasn't his fault, it's the director who makes the decisions about it and the director's orders were to create a realistic palette taking all the magic out of the environment. Why did he want this? To make battle scenes more exciting and realistic. The film simply became dry, dull. The wolves were also made as realistic as possible, which is why their depiction is the worst in the series.
Soundtrack: When the news came out that Howard Shore, the genius behind the Lord of the Rings soundtrack, was going to score Twilight, I was really excited. Unfortunately, his choice was due to the fact that Eclipse had become an action movie. Eclipse's score is the worst in the series because it also ignores the characters feelings and focuses on emotional scores that highlight the tension and final battle.
There is a scene at the end of the film that was altered by the director and which shows how completely ignorant he is of the message of the series. After the battle between the newborns and the Cullens, they allow a surrendered newborn to live. This is Bree Turner, who has immense difficulties controlling herself around Bella, due to the attraction that her blood represents. In the books, this is an introspective and important moment for Bella. She sees herself for the first time in front of a vampire with immense difficulties to control herself because of her thirst and reflects on her future. If she too, after becoming a vampire will be like this and the difficulties that this will bring in her new life. David Slade obviously had a better idea. He simply put the character completely at ease behind the Cullens, to show that the Cullens stood between her and the Volturi. That is, trying to reinforce the idea of the Cullens being the good guys. Anyone who has read Eclipse and read the work dealing with Bree Tarner knows how stupid this decision was. But, again, David Slade ignoring the character's feelings. What's new?
Directing actors: Kristen Stewart, Taylor Lautner and Robert Pattison are not great actors. But the directors of the first two films were able to get good enough performances out of them, because those directors understood the story and knew very well what they wanted from the actors. From the third film the main trio's performances get worse and worse and it all started with Slade. Robert Pattison, especially, never understood his character. The Edward of the books is a fascinating individual who has his problems but manages to hide them behind a charming facade. He is not an individual in constant depression. His sad days were behind him when he met Bella. Bella herself is a much more lively, smiling and kind character. The performances of the main trio suffer at times from the third film onwards and this is not the fault of the actors, but of the directors, David Slade and Bill Condon, who were not able to inform the actors about how they should behave in their scenes.
Throughout this review I've been blaming David Slade for everything, but a lot of people are also blaming Melissa Rosemberg, the screenwriter. I just can't do that because I don't believe she would do an exceptional job in the first two movies to just destroy the whole story in the third movie. I think her full script was more sentimental and paid more attention to feelings, but David Slade simply chose to ignore those scenes when he finished the film. At least that is my conviction.
If the movie is so bad compared to the book, why did I give it such a high rating? It is necessary to compensate for society's unjustified hatred of the Twilight series. Angry downvotes from people with psychological problems cause the series to score lower than it deserves. So, to compensate, I gave the film a higher rating than it deserved. This movie is at best a 7/10 or 6/10.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Best book, worst film
I only have one thing to say:
"Congratulations Mike Newell and Steve Kloves!"
You achieved the feat of turning the best book in the series into this deformity and worst film in the series.
As in the third film, the film by Afonso Cuaron, the look is off. I believe that the two directors opted, for some reason, for a more realistic look, leaving aside the magical atmosphere established by Chris Columbus. Who wants a magical atmosphere in a movie about magic anyway, right? That would obviously be absurd, wouldn't it?
I know this is the worst movie to adapt. The division of the book into five major events: Quidditch Final, 1st task, 2nd task, 3rd task and battle with Voldemort makes any adaptation difficult. But what irritated me the most were not the cut parts, the big problem was that the adapted parts were terrible, with constant unnecessary additions. The book was poorly adapted. And the actors were also poorly directed (Albus Dumbledore??).
It's very clear in this movie that those involved simply didn't respect the source material and the fans.
But someone explains to me: With so many directors in the world, why choose Mike Newell, a guy with no tradition with films of the genre, to direct this work? Do you know why? Because he is English. This whole series was the crap it was because it favored English actors and directors, discarding American professionals. Have you heard about the Americans? The world's leading experts in filmmaking?
The only films in this series that are decent are the first two, not by chance directed by the only American director in the series.
The Host (2013)
Wonderful
I love every second of this movie. The book is wonderful and I think Andrew Niccol did a magnificent job and produced one of the best book-to-film adaptations I have ever seen!
Saoirse Ronan is perfect in the lead role. But my favorite character is Jeb (William Hurt). Fantastic acting and extraordinary charisma.
I also really liked the futuristic look of the film. I think the choice of director for Gattaca and other futuristic films was very well thought out. The view was magnificent.
I love the book and now I love the movie too. Too bad I couldn't see this movie in the theater. At the time it was produced I didn't even know about it. I believe little investment was made in marketing, I only found out that the film existed many years later. I've watched it several times since then and it always has the same impact on me.
Max Irons (Jared), Jared Howe (Ian), Diane Kruger (Seeker) and Chandler Canterbury (Jamie) are also fantastic in their roles! Excellent casting!
Praise also goes to the smooth soundtrack by Antonio Pinto and the beautiful direction of photography by Roberto Schaefer. Wonderful job!
To everyone involved in this movie, I love you!
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 (2011)
Good, but with many problems
The first time I read Breaking Dawn I thought "This is an impossible book to adapt to a movie!". So I'm a little more sympathetic to the mistakes made by Bill Condon and Melissa Rosemberg.
Anyone who has read the work knows that the role of werewolves is much larger in the book. In the film most of the scenes with the werewolves were cut or adapted so that the werewolves did their dialogue in human form. I didn't like it very much. Especially because I thought it wasn't clear to anyone who watched the movie how werewolves communicate. They can only hear each other's thoughts when in animal form. The movie makes a lot of fuss about it.
Directing actors is a problem. Although Kristen Stewart gave a good performance, Robert Pattison and Taylor Lautner again failed. This is of course due to both the troubled script and Bill Condon's ineffective direction. Most of Jacob's scenes are terrible. The love of his life was dying and he looked like someone who had lost his wallet! There was a fault with the actors, yes, but Bill Condon is to blame for not realizing the need to include scenes that reinforced the despair of these two characters. Jacob and Edward were completely destroyed watching the love of their life self-destruct in front of them. I don't know if the two actors are capable of showing the pain these individuals were going through, but it was clear that the director didn't even think about it.
Renesmee, the baby resulting from Bella's pregnancy, only appears in one scene at the end of the movie, so I won't waste too much time criticizing her appearance. It was only a few seconds, and my major criticisms will be made in the review of the next and final film.
The setting: Most of the movie takes place in the Cullen house which is in the middle of the woods. The director decided to build a house inside a huge studio to shoot these scenes and that was very clear in the film. The sets look fake and the lighting is clearly artificial and this takes away from the impact of the scenes. For me it is a negative factor.
There were also several changes to the story due to budget issues. Not only were fewer werewolf scenes made, but other scenes were made with fewer actors and filmed more cheaply.
The film's most serious problem, however, is the issue of Imprinting. This is a central issue of the film and the series that had already been poorly worked on in the third film and was very poorly worked on in this film. So much so that it took the addition of some of the most forced lines in film history at the end of the film to justify what had just happened. That whole Edward line:
"Jacob imprinted. They can't hurt her. Whoever a wolf imprints on can't be harmed. It's their most absolute law."
That line is just plain pathetic and is the equivalent of explaining to someone the ending of the movie instead of building a real script. If the theme had already been constructed correctly (as it happens in books), when the fact happened, people would understand without the need for explanation. It's a terrible script error, which I would expect from amateurs, not a professional screenwriter.
The film's biggest problems, however, are directing, scripting, and editing problems.
But overall the film is good, the more mystical and magical mood returned to the series after the disastrous experience with David Slade. Carter Burwell who scored the first film was brought back for the last two and did a very good job. And the birthing and conversion part at the end of the movie, which I had no idea how it could be turned into a movie, was good enough, although the book version is obviously better.
It's a good movie, but for me it's way behind New Moon and Eclipse.
If the movie has so many problems why did I give it such a high rating? It is necessary to compensate for society's unjustified hatred of the Twilight series. Angry downvotes from people with psychological problems cause the series to score lower than it deserves. So, to compensate, I gave the film a higher rating than it deserved. This movie is probably a 7/10.
The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
The best of the saga!
Chris Weitz did an excellent job, it seems he was the only director on the series to fully understand the books. There's a certain magic to this film that none of the others have been able to replicate. The excellent soundtrack by Alexander Desplat (the best in the saga) and the cinematography by Javier Aguirresarobe contributed a lot to this.
What stands out most is the fact that this is by far the most difficult book to adapt. The Cullens are no longer in Forks and Bella spends most of the book alone in depression, and even with that difficulty, screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg managed to create a captivating and electrifying script. The book is excellent, don't get me wrong, but it certainly imposed many challenges for an adaptation in just 2 hours.
My favorite scene is the final part with the Volturi, I loved the fact that Chris Weitz decided to present a more renaissance version of these vampires, as opposed to the boring gothic vision that is commonly chosen to represent vampires. This, by the way, was a mistake made by Bill Condon when he directed the final two films of the saga, he returned to the gothic version of the Volturi. Which doesn't make any sense because Stephenie Meyer's vampires have no reason to hide from light in dimly lit environments. Not to mention vampires living in Renaissance palaces are way cooler!
I love Chris Weitz for what he did in this movie! This is the best movie in the saga!
Twilight (2008)
Incredible!
When I first watched the movie, I hadn't read the books. I had heard of them but decided to see the movie to decide whether to read the books or not. And the film impressed me a lot and still does today! It is a low-budget film, unlike the other films in the saga, and that makes its quality even more impressive. It's amazing what Catherine Hardwick, the director, managed to produce on such a low budget!
It is an excellent adaptation of the book, and what caught my attention the most was how well the city of Forks and the entire setting were built in an extremely realistic way. You really feel like entering this magical and mystical world. The soundtrack is beautiful, the entire cast was very well cast and well directed (the same cannot be said of the other films).
I've watched the film several times, it always gives me great pleasure to feel the energy that emanates from this work. It's one of my favorite movies and one of the best movies in the saga.
Blade (1998)
My eyes, my eyes!!!
That was one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life.
I can't believe this thing got two sequels.
Seriously, I would be sorry to put this movie in my trash, my trash deserves better.
The Underworld series is Oscar-worthy compared to this crap. If you like vampires watch that.
Friends: The Reunion (2021)
Love the show, but this is ridiculous
I didn't understand: What was the point of doing this?
When talking about a "reunion", what the fans had in mind was an episode where it would show how the story developed and how was the marriage of Ross and Rachel, Monica and Chandler, Phoebe and Mike e what as Joey doing.
Why not show some funny story about what it means to be a father, what it means to have adult children, what it means to live with 50 years of age?
Aren't they actors ??!?! Isn't that their profession?
I don't understand how people who are professional actors refuse to act and just accept to record an interview ?! What is the point of this?
If I wanted to watch an interview with the actors I would go on Youtube, there are better ones there.
Unacknowledged (2017)
Pure garbage
One thing that makes this film very confusing is the fact that they refer to alien spaceships as UFOs. UFO means unidentified flying object. UFO is not synonymous with alien spaceship, it is synonymous with "I have no idea what this flying thing is".
But this is purposeful. If they referred to UFOs as "alien spaceships" they would lose all credibility from the start, because there is absolutely no evidence that these objects are alien spaceships.
The film begins by attacking scientists who challenge this "alien theory". Saying that there is millions of evidence, evidence is not lacking according to them. Then they spend the rest of the film without presenting any evidence. The so-called "evidence" comes down to:
- phrases of important people taken out of context
- strange situations that have not been properly explained
- blurred images of flying objects
- testimony from people who worked in government agencies
- photos of government documents, most of which do nothing to defend the alien thesis
Okay, I accept: the images of flying objects are strange. But the producers of this documentary make a basic mistake made by people who don't understand what Science is:
- they start with a theory ready: Aliens exist, they have already come to earth and everything that has no explanation is done by them
- and from there they have to make all the evidence support it, and the evidence that doesn't support it's discarded.
It is very clear that this documentary is produced by people wanting to attract attention. A bunch of narcissists who were saddened by the loss of the spotlight (yes, I'm talking about you, Gordon Cooper) and other nobodys who like the attention they get when they talk nonsense.
Even if we accept the hypothesis that the flying objects are real, and strange looking bodies have actually been found inside ships, and they are being hidden by the government. Okay, let's make this an opportunity to play a mental game:
- What is the evidence that these ships are from another planet?
- Couldn't they be from human beings of the future?
- Couldn't they be from people that inhabit the core of the earth and of which we are unaware?
- Couldn't they be cloud dwellers?
- Couldn't they be from another dimension?
- Couldn't they be peoples of an invisible civilization that lives on earth and that just left their invisible dome to study the human inhabitants of the planet?
The Babysitter: Killer Queen (2020)
Unnecessary and just bad
Nobody asked for this movie. And what a mess!
It has nothing to do with the original, it looks like a mix of Quentin Tarantino and Tim Burton, and not in a good way. It is unbelievable to see that the director of the two films is the same. Because the first is a good film, well shot and fun. This film, however, is one of the worst things I've ever seen. Well, I say I saw it, but the truth is that I skipped several parts, watched halfway and then I couldn't take it: I skipped to the finale to end my torment.
I will simply pretend that this film does not exist from now on. Because the first one was really good.
A Perfect Murder (1998)
Awful
I didn't see the original, but this was awful. There is absolutety nothing "perfect" about this guy's plan. Everybody in this movie is actually quite stupidy: The husband, the lover, the wife, they all act like morons. The plan of the husband is idiotic and he end up killing the guy in a public place. Everybody end up dead in the end, except the adulteress wife. Terrible ending, by the way. I was waiting the entire film thinking: "I wanna see this perfect plan, its gonna by awesome", well, it's not. The script sucks! Don't waste your time watching this.
Les témoins (2014)
Awful
I only watch the first season, so the comment below only applies to that: The plot seems interesting at first, but the script is so bad that the series ends up falling in quality to each episode. There is no character development. Everyone is empty and boring, and it's hard to care about any of the characters. The relationship between the main characters, Sandra and Paul Maisonneuve, is simply ridiculous. The script tries to force a relationship that simply never happens. The two behave like strangers throughout the entire series and although a past story is quoted it has no ability to create a true relationship and the two characters spend the whole series being boring and distant. The script is very bad. There are no words to describe how bad it is. French police act like a bunch of retarded people in every episode and the way detectives make the discoveries is simply laughable. Most of the time they simply guess things without any evidence. The acting is very bad too. I just watch the series because I'm studying French and I wanted to have a greater contact with the language and the French culture. But I would never recommend this series to anyone. It's just bad.
Batman: The Killing Joke (2016)
Damn, that was good!!
While watching this film, the only thing i could think of was: "Damn, that is good!! How they can never make a live action film good as this!?!?" I already read the homonyms comics, but the film was really entertaining anyway. He manages to capture the spirit of the characters, develop a great story and all this in less than 2 hours.
Meanwhile, that Batman v Superman disaster has 3 hours!!! I can't understand, the thing is: I always watch this cartoon films, and they are always better than the live action films. Good job you guys!
This is one of the best movies about Batman ever. Although, The Dark Knight Returns is also very good. Can wait for the next one.
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2 (2012)
Good
I never had any major issues with Stephenie Meyer's extra vampire abilities. In the first two films characters are presented with abilities to read thoughts, manipulate emotions, see the future, make people feel pain by thinking, scent trackers, escape abilities... all are very subtle abilities and are basically extra brain functions, and this makes sense within the mythology created by Stephenie Meyer.
However, in the last book the author decided to introduce other characters with new abilities and two of them, in my opinion, are problematic as they make Twilight almost become an X-Men. Benjamin's powers (manipulating elements of nature, telekinesis) and Kate's (producing an electric current with his hands) do not fit Stephenie Meyer's logic because they are physical and not mental powers. That for me was a problem and it shook the construction of the universe a little bit. Sounds like a worldbuilding problem to me.
That said, I liked the movie. Although many problems still persist:
Direction of actors remained a problem and editing continued to be fumbled. In addition, it is inevitable to talk about Renesmee, who gave us the worst special effects in cinema in the 21st century.
The blame obviously lies with Bill Condon. The director should have done hundreds of tests before filming began to decide how he would present the character. Obviously, he made the wrong decision: he decided to choose an actress (aged 11 at the time) and use visual effects to create the character as she developed from a baby to a toddler. Every scene in which this character appears until she turns 11 is ridiculous and painful to watch. And she only happens to be interpreted by the real actress at 57 minutes of the film! And as if not enough, towards the end of the film, Alice has visions of her grown up and AGAIN the director chose to use a digital actress which was ridiculous again. It is truly an unforgivable mistake. Twilight was a joke at the time because of how terribly this effect was produced.
And it was so easy to fix it!!!! It was only necessary to find about 4 girls, ages 1, 4, 7, 18 who had some similarity to actress Mackenzie Foy and use them instead. If necessary, SMALL modifications could be made using CGI to try to show that it was the same character, but if that didn't work out, it wasn't even 100% necessary. People are used to the idea of different actors playing the same character as they age.
That was a truly unforgivable mistake by Bill Condon! And because of that mistake we will forever have a laughable Renesmee.
I'm also not sure how I feel about the battle at the end of the movie. I really liked the book because it built great tension and in the end the conflict was resolved without fighting, just talking. I even liked the battle scene in the movie, the whole sequence was very well shot in my opinion, but for me who read the book my initial reaction was "WHAT ARE YOU DOING!!!!!!!!" and when the scene turned out to be fake I was in shock. I don't know how to feel about her until now. Even though I've watched it several times, it just doesn't feel right. Twilight is not an action movie. I think it was a lazy solution, the tension could have built up in other ways.
Another thing: The way the South American Indians were represented also made me angry, because I believe it would have an interesting and not ridiculous way of representing them. Why do vampires in Brazil have to live like animals in the jungle? And why do they have to dress like barbarians and not like civilized people?
Anyway, I think it's a good movie. It's probably not a 9/10 but it is necessary to compensate for society's unjustified hatred of the Twilight series. Angry downvotes from people with psychological problems cause the series to score lower than it deserves. So, to compensate, I gave the film a higher rating than it deserved. This movie is probably a 7/10.
The fact is, we will always have the books and they are perfect today and always will be. Thanks for that, Stephenie Meyer.