I have always heard plenty of good things about Emilia Clarke from big fans of her show Game Of Thrones, but I prefer movies to TV and though I have seen her in a movie, the difference in mediums is apparent and I have not been impressed by her work in movies. But I still hope so I checked this out and I have to admit I can see why she is so popular.
I love a movie that is based on a true story, and nothing is truer than crime. The core of this movie is based on a book on the case of the first murder committed by an FBI Agent. With Emilia Clarke playing the role of the FBI informant Susan Smith. It is the late 1980s in the Kentucky town of Pikeville, a small and impoverished mining community where people live off unemployment checks, modest services, and of course crime. Susan is a drug addict who spends her days getting high while providing for her children and her drug dealer ex-husband. This coincides with a new arrival, FBI Agent Mark Putnam, his wife, and child attempt to make their lives. Putnam is young, smart, and handsome, willing to do anything to advance himself as he finds Susan as they agree to help each other. But it is not just helping each other stop crime but enjoying each other sexually. Susan is worn and weak, but she is attractive and feisty, clearly, Mark wants her even as it is a violation of his duty as an agent as well as morally wrong cheating on his wife. Over time Mark's career is all that matters to him as whatever help he gains from Susan runs out as she attempts to sabotage his career while attempting to regain his attention and, in the end, leading to a tragic conclusion.
I admit I was impressed by what I saw. Emilia Clarke is a great actress. Being English but succeeding in speaking with an impressive Southern accent and being this intoxicatingly attractive and spirited woman. You feel for her character even as she does bad things because she was taken advantage of by a selfish man. Jack Huston was good in his role himself as the selfish and immoral man who betrayed a woman who did so much for him. It surprises me that this was based on something real, it is that good of a story.
My father caught this, and he always encouraged me to watch it. The fact that includes one of my favorite actors in Jim Caviezel was always something that spurred enthusiasm. But it was also the fact that it was remade into a CW TV series that prevented me from watching it. Time travel stories can be great, but they can also be terrible, and given how modestly successful this story was I was not sure if I were ever ready to see it. Thankfully, boredom wins out in the end and I took the time to watch it. Long overdue, and well worth watching.
An aurora borealis is incurring a strange phenomenon that connects a radio transmission in a New York suburb home in 1969 and 1999. Frank Sullivan is a New York firefighter who is brave and courageous but also loving to his beautiful wife Julia and his son John. While admiring the beauty of the aurora in 1969, the aurora shines in 1999 for John Sullivan as a grown man having endured a life having lost his father in a fire in 1969. Concurrently these two men in different times work a ham radio. For Frank, it works perfectly as John gets the old machine working as well as it was. The past and present connect via this old radio as John and Frank realize who they are and both men communicate over how this is possible and what they can do with this. At first, John encourages his father to save himself, and lo and behold it works and John lives life differently with new memories of a father who lived longer but still living with the old.
Things get dark when it is realized that a serial killer ended up wreaking more havoc than he did if Frank had died in the fire. Whatever that reason is driving both John and Frank to fix this mistake, saving other people as well as their own. With an amazing conclusion born out of love and courage.
I am a big fan of Jim Caviezel and I do enjoy plenty of Dennis Quaid's movies too. But this was truly something remarkable, a tale of love across time and space with men at their absolute best as heroes with great acting and a superb story. This is definitely a movie sons should watch alongside their fathers. An emotional story but teaches men that masculinity can be found with courage in the face of danger and love for their family. I am truly glad to have finally caught this.
I watch a Lifetime movie here and there mostly to check out the gorgeous women and the occasional good performance. In this case, I saw this to check out Jeri Ryan, older but still as great as she was when she played the Sci-Fi maven from Star Trek Voyager. In this case, she plays Sophie Fyne, an intelligent fashion designer with a handsome husband and a beautiful daughter. The Fynes live a privileged life and thanks to Sophie a principled one, making their mark on the fashion industry with the utmost integrity.
However, something is going on as certain people are ending up on the bad end of events from harassment, theft, and even murder. Sophie does what she can with her husband and daughter to keep them safe wondering who would want to harm her family and her business.
This was a pretty decent story, full of surprises as well as some good acting. Jeri's beauty is only matched by her talent as an actress. It was neat seeing Tiera Skovbye in this as well, clearly a young woman on her way to stardom. It was an interesting surprise seeing Anthony Lemke's performance. All in all, a good time spent.
I saw the previous films and despite the differences, I love them all. The first was a classic, worthy of praise and imitation in other works. The second was fine and could have been better. The third was wonderful in its own right. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for this sequel, at present, the final film of the franchise and it is an abomination.
The previous Crow movie was unfairly given a straight-to-home video release. This one does deserve to be denied a theatrical run, heck, it is so bad that it did not deserve to be made at all.
Jimmy Cuervo is a man having been released from prison serving time for manslaughter. Years of life living on a Mexican-Native American reservation have given him a lot of pent-up rages. But those rages are sated because of his love for Lilly, the beautiful mystic daughter of the tribal chief. Despite their differences, the two love each other and decide to get married. Only around the same time, Luc Crash, a convict acquaintance of Jimmy's escapes from a work detail with help from a host of his friends and girlfriend Lola Byrne. Luc is a Satanist with ambitions of bringing the apocalypse with his friends taking on the names of the four horsemen and granting mystical powers to his girlfriend by killing Jimmy and Lilly just as they are about to be married.
The murders call upon the divine spirit of revenge from the previous Crow stories and resurrect Jimmy as he seeks his revenge all the while saving the world from a monstrosity that Luc intends to become.
This movie, unlike the others, is a complete and utter joke. Gone is the seriousness and omnipotence that defined the previous films. Instead, there is more of a sarcastic horror pastiche resembling films From Dusk ‘Til Dawn or Machete. This was insulting to the notion of love being stronger than the death that was prevalent in the previous movies. The actors and actresses are attractive, but their performances are terrible. Eddie Furlong has the look of the Crow, but he is not a great actor. David Boreanaz plays the psychotic Satanist well but with hammy as heck. The apocalyptic posse is ridiculous, but nowhere near as bad as Dennis Hopper's special appearance. I think the only character I really liked was Tara Reid as the naughty witch girlfriend. Other characters such as Jimmy's potential in-laws including a nice appearance from Danny Trejo were nice additions but sadly wasted.
I cannot believe something so good ended so bad. As far as I am concerned Crow ended at a trilogy, not a tetralogy. Avoid at all costs.
After the legendary success of the first Crow film and the modest sequel, the powers that be made another sequel, only they decided to forgo a decent theatrical run and decided to release this straight-to-home video. Fans of the previous film felt shafted and believed that this film was sabotaged. I got to say that I agree because even though there are no characters from the previous films and the style of the movie feels different, it is still a decent movie loyal to the franchise.
Alex Corvis is a death row inmate approaching his eighteenth birthday, his date of execution, for the murder of his girlfriend. But to his last breath, he declares his innocence, that he loved his girlfriend and that some man had attacked him and planted the murder weapon in his car, the man with a distinctive scarred arm. He is executed but by the same miracle of the previous movies, a crow imbued with divine power resurrects Alex and sets him on a path of revenge against the men who murdered his girlfriend and had him executed.
I have to say that the style of the film is different, I do believe it is deserving of its place in the Crow film series. Eric Mabius does a superb job in the role of the Crow. He does not have the look of the previous Crow actors, but he makes his own version of the Crow work. Scarring from the mask at his electrocution giving he the trademark black lips and eyes. Instead of the rock star or mechanic look he wears a gray prison jumpsuit and instead of a leather jacket he dons a black fur coat. Jodi Lynn O'Keefe is marvelous as the beautiful Lauren Randall. Kirsten Dunst is amazing in an era she was at her peak as Erin Randall, the sister of the slain Lauren, who initially believed that Alex killed her sister but believes otherwise as he returns from the dead. As well as an amazing assortment of actors playing the villains of the story from Vincent Erlich, Bill Mondy, Tim DeKay, William Atherton, and Fred Ward.
Truly this deserved a full-blown theatrical release, and it is a shame that the studio had such a narrow vision.
I am a big fan of Gina Carano, coming to enjoy her in almost every movie I can with her. But I do not discount others in this movie, especially Bruce Willis who is a favorite of mine as well. He as well as Kellan Lutz who I have seen in a couple of great movies too.
Bruce Willis and Kellan Lutz play Leonard and Harry Turner, the elder being a veteran CIA field operative on the verge of retirement as his son hoping to follow in his footsteps is an analyst wanting badly to become like his father. Years of anguish have come down on the father and son when a terrorist had obtained information that led to Leonard's wife being murdered with Harry barely surviving. But as time goes by, some things have mellowed as Leonard himself is kidnapped and a powerful technological weapon is threatening to be sold to the highest bidder, the agency and Harry do what he can to save his father. Assisting the agency is Victoria, an old girlfriend of Harry's and a capable field agent in her own right. With time counting down, old truths are revealed as well as various lies exposed that threaten lives as well as each other in this splendid action thriller.
I have always been a big fan of Bruce Willis but this had him involved in a limited capacity, but he is still a great presence. Kellan Lutz proves that he can pull a solid role as he adds more experience to his resume. Gina Carano is still strong and solid as she herself adds plenty of humanity to her powerful skills. This was a basic thriller, not the best these three leads have pulled in their careers but pretty decent.
After having seen the glorious classic that was the first Crow movie, I wondered why anyone would want to make a sequel without the legend who died making the first film? Money. Always money and the way they were going to do that was by making another character become the Crow and repeat the same tale of revenge in the name of love. All things considered, it was not half bad but it could have been done better.
Years after the events of the first movie, Ashe Corven and his son Danny are murdered by a gang after having witnessed them committing a murder. The same divine power that resurrected Eric Draven to revenge upon his murder and that of his fiancé resurrects Ashe to avenge his son and his own murders. Helping him is Sarah Mohr, the friend of Eric Draven and Shelly, who witnessed her friend's resurrection and his revenge mission assists Ashe to obtain his revenge all the while growing close to him as his enemies pursue not just him but her as well.
I got to say it was going to take a lot to top the previous movie and I must say that it does not succeed but it does a fair attempt at doing so. Clearly, the filmmakers were motivated by fans to respect the previous movie, doing all that they could not exploit Brandon Lee or the previous storyteller. The film has a similar feel but at the same time giving it a different look. The acting is also plenty good. Vincent Perez does a splendid job as the Ashe Corven, the new Crow, making it clear that he is not a copy of Brandon Lee's Eric Draven by keeping the traits of the original comic book as well as the same quirks of insanity and power of his predecessor. But it is Mia Kirshner who delivers as the grown-up version of Sarah Mohr originally played by Rochelle Davis in the previous movie. Kirshner does a splendid job in creating a hauntingly lovely depiction of a young woman having endured a supernatural event motivated by love and loss and then grown up to experience it again.
While I do believe the movie does stand well on its own, I have heard rumors that the writer and director planned something entirely different, a different style, and a hope to tell a grander epic than what was shown in theaters. A Pay-Per-View Director's Cut that is no longer available proves that as well as various clips and features that criticize the producers. If true then it makes me feel sad that something great was utterly lost. Life imitating art, I guess. I do not enjoy this movie as much as the previous film, but it is not without its beautiful and worthy moments.
Lately, I have been watching remakes of various horror movies, but I have jumped in without knowing the story. All I know is from what I see, and I see an attractive cast, special effects, and because this is a zombie movie – gore, guts, and guns. And that is all that really matters.
The people of a small mountain town receive a rude awakening when the military arrives and gets them quarantined as an outbreak threatens the many thousands in the town. Mena Suvari plays Corporal Sarah Bowman, an Army enlistee who just happens to be assigned to her hometown doing all she can to protect her family, one of them being her brother Trevor and his attractive girlfriend Nina. Assisted by several others in her own unit, a PFC named Salazar and a recruit named Bud realize something is far worse than they could have imagined as the sick end up becoming monsters that end up terrorizing the town with Sarah doing all she can to save her family and her friends.
I am not one of those zombie movies fans, at least not a hardcore fan but I am getting there. Though from what I have heard from others, they say I should not have watched this, I like it. I was taken by the attractive cast and by that, I mean gorgeous ladies, Mena Suvari, Annalynne McCord, and Christa Campbell. Mena Suvari just proves that she can act, and it is disappointing that she does not have a better career as she delivers as a strong female lead. Annalynne McCord can do better than the pretty girlfriend as she is capable of defending herself. The fellas are also impressive with Nick Cannon as a grade-A zombie killer. But not everyone in the film is utilized to their best with plenty of forgettable characters. The gore is a little cheesy, CGI takes away the enjoyment in modern horror movies, and this was no exception. But I will happily watch this again for the action and the stellar leads.
I am a fan of Gina Carano, a woman who is becoming quickly known as a strong-willed and capable action starlet. So I looked anywhere I can to see if she has done a movie recently. It would appear it is not just her but a great cinema veteran in Richard Dreyfus.
Gina plays Clair McKenna, a US Army specialist who returned home after the death of her father. How that homecoming fared is irrelevant at first when it is clear Clair is paying a ransom for her teenaged son Charlie that immediately goes south when one of the kidnappers attempts to kill her after receiving the money. She manages to kill another kidnapper and spares the other in a quest to get her son back. Cut between Clair using a henchman is the kidnapper in charge, a man simply known as Father. A formerly upstanding member of the community until Clair's father had shut down his place of work. Father is a vicious leader of a gang that he has recruited for years settling scores with the community. Charlie is on the verge of becoming one of these gang members, but he is a young man who wants nothing more than to go home even after all the bad blood that had existed between him and his mother.
Not a bad film. Gina Carano develops a character that expands upon her skills as a mixed martial artist while at the same time developing her acting skills. Richard Dreyfus is no longer the marquee draw that he once was, but he has a wonderful range and intensity as the sinister Father. I also like how there is a man against nature as well as nature respecting man that comes to play brilliantly in this movie but in a subtle and sometimes not so subtle manner.
I was young when this movie came out, so I was not able to see it. But from the movie trailers and the controversial headlines that covered Brandon Lee's death on tabloids and TV, it was tough not to know about it. As a kid I wondered how the guy could be dead, the movie has been filmed, of course, it did not dawn on me at the time that it took months to make a movie, not the days and weeks that it took on TV shows. But over time when I was finally old enough, I still took my time in watching this movie, mostly because I was not a fan of the comic book as well as the dark gothic tone and the grunge rock soundtrack. But I love a good movie and as I saw bits and pieces of this on TV and watching a documentary on the death of Brandon Lee, I knew it was time to watch this movie and in the best quality that I could find.
Lee plays Eric Draven, a rock star set to get married to his beautiful fiancé Shelly on Devil's Night – the night before Halloween. But a gang of men break into his apartment, rape and murder his fiancé. He returns home, crossing the threshold, and is then shot, stabbed, and thrown out the window of his apartment, killing him too. But one year later, a miracle occurs as the great love he had for his fiancé resurrects Eric as he feels a great power via a crow. This crow, a powerful familiar that seems to be the hand of God that grants him phenomenal power, agility, strength, and healing as he seeks out and punishes the men who murdered him and his fiancé. All this as he understands his powers, caring for an old friend of his fiancé, as well as the cop who was assigned to uncovering a truth beyond the actual murders.
All this via, a spectacular 90s rock soundtrack, amazing imagery, and phenomenal acting from several great performers. Sofia Shinas as the lovely Shelly, Rochelle Davis as the sweet street-smart friend of Shelly and Eric, Ernie Hudson as the competent and honest cop. As well as Michael Massee, David Patrick Kelly, Angel David, Laurence Mason, Tony Todd, Jon Polito, Bai Ling and Michael Wincott as the villains of the story. But none more spectacular than the late Brandon Lee as Eric Draven - The Crow.
Watching this movie or any movie in which an actor died before his success was achieved feels hauntingly strange. Especially since it is because the actor died while making this movie. I felt goosebumps seeing the actor every time he was on screen as you could feel such raw emotion and the strength of Brandon's performance is something that I cannot compare. There have been pretenders or homages in movies like The Matrix movies or the Dark Knight Trilogy, but it has never been matched.
A true classic. Rest in Peace Brandon Lee.
I saw this to check out two great performers, Barry Pepper, and Kaya Scodelario. I had no idea what this was about other than its leads, but I was happy because it turned out to be a good story.
Kaya Scodelario plays Haley, a girl who is one of the best in her college swim team and has been this way since before college with the help of her father Dave, played by Barry Pepper. But despite all their happy times, things have not been the best for the whole family. Haley's parents are divorced, her sister lives a long way from home and her father is desperate to keep the house he raised his daughter. All this while a hurricane threatens the house as Haley checks in on her father. As it turns out he has been attacked by a violent pack of alligators that are claiming the basement as the hurricane eventually strikes and the levies prepare to burst.
Basically, it is an awesome survival movie with man against nature, with plenty of decent shocks and awes to make anyone jump. A nice movie to watch and I am happy that its two leads deliver great performances.
I enjoy a good Samuel L. Jackson movie, and this was plenty satisfactory seeing him and several other great cast members. I got to say Eva Mendes is beyond gorgeous but also proves to be a talented actress. This was one of the very few movies I have seen where she does a great job.
Samuel L. Jackson plays Tom Cutler, a retired cop who has a new job as a crime scene cleaner. Once the police use their procedures to solve a crime at the scene, it is not their job to clean it up, but it is good as there are people that are trained and paid to clean up crime scenes. However, one day, Tom is tasked to clean up a crime scene only to find out the place the crime has occurred never reported a crime and Tom has to wonder that the occupant, a high-ranking member of the city's justice system who has been reported missing and probably been killed with Tom being used to covering it up. But the only way that could have happened was that the killer was in law enforcement and had known him personally. He must find out who set him up before he could end up in jail or worse, pay the ultimate price.
This was not a bad story but there were a few loose ends to the film's ending and as far as police thrillers go this was not nearly as good as some of the rest. Renny Harlin is a fine director but he has lost some of his strides in making a good story. The acting is great from Jackson, Mendes as well as others like Ed Harris, Luis Guzman, Keke Palmer, and many others.
Nevertheless, this was a great ninety minutes spent.
I only saw the first movie of the Monsterverse series, the first Godzilla movie and I liked it, but it did not make me a fan. 2020 was a punch in the gut and I needed to get out of the house on my birthday no less. So, I saw this, and I was pretty happy.
After the events of the previous Monsterverse movies, it would appear that Godzilla and King Kong are leaving mankind as it is only for the peace to be broken as Godzilla attacks the site of a corporation known as Apex. With this type of unwarranted attack, Apex asks for help from the two scientist experts, one a character from the previous King Kong movies to a man out to prove himself in the academic community. With the best technology at their disposal, these experts go on a journey to King Kong's true home. But while this is going on a survivor from the previous Godzilla movie enlists her friends and a mysterious whistleblower from Apex out to prove that Godzilla was provoked and must do all they can to save humanity.
I have only seen the first movie, but after watching this movie I am definitely eager to see the rest. I got to say I did not see as many familiar faces from the first movie except for Godzilla, but that was enough. Some of the actors are good, I liked Millie Bobbie Brown as well as Bernie Hayes. Though brief I enjoyed checking out the gorgeous Eiza Gonzalez. And of course, I welcomed King Kong, but I wish there were some references to the original 1933 movie.
A decent movie.
I think it is more than obvious, but it must be said, 2020 is a horrible year, with movie theaters closed, no studio is going to throw a movie into a streaming service when they would wait instead when everybody can return to the movies. However, it would appear that there is a special gem to be found in movies that do premiere on streaming. This movie just happens to be one of them.
I do enjoy an occasional disaster movie, but this one has been tried over again with bigger budgets and of course theater space. A family member encouraged me to watch this, and I felt obligated to watch it. But as it turns out, this was well worth my time.
Set in the present-day Gerard Butler plays John Garrity, a construction engineer who returns to his family after having been separated as the big talk around the world is that a comet that is about to assail the earth. It appears relatively harmless until John gets strange information on his phone that a relocation order has been given as the comet turns out to be more massive than originally thought and a select few have been chosen for a relocation to a shelter.
This film becomes a race against time for the human race to survive. Some maintain their humanity, but others overcome by fear and resentment lose it in their desire to survive. But as the Garrity family do all they can, some live and some die in this cataclysmic epic.
I enjoy Gerard Butler and I can see how he can play an ordinary man with the courage to save his family. Morena Baccarin is phenomenal as the loyal wife out to do her part in protecting her family including the son played by Roger Dale Floyd.
Truly a great film, a gem that I am happy not to have overlooked.
After the modest success of the movie Justice League, rumors began to fly that the movie released in theaters was not what was intended to be shown. This was due to its original director Zack Snyder stepping down from his duties and making the movie handed down to Joss Whedon. Whedon, a talented director in his own right, but ended up having to finish a movie that he had to pass off as his own.
Snyder had completed eighty percent of the movie with the rest needing to be completed in post-production. But for Whedon to claim any credit at all, he needed to rewrite the script and direct new scenes, leading to a seventy percent movie. As mentioned before, the movie was a modest success but the controversy behind Snyder's removal led to numerous performers and DC's own universe of fans clamoring for a new cut of the movie.
WB initially resisted these requests but in the three years of behind-the-scenes wrangling and the outbreak of COVID-19 stopping all film production led to WB relenting to pressure from fans for Snyder to create his own version of the Justice League as he envisioned it.
While numerous fans have encouraged the making of this movie, I was against it. I have not liked Zack Snyder's work on the DCEU, believing he was the wrong director to be placed in charge of directing/producing an epic series of films. I love Man of Steel, but I hated Batman vs Superman. But I was willing to give this a shot, nevertheless.
Set at the same time around the events of Batman vs Superman, in particular, the climactic end in which Superman was killed by the monstrous creature of Lex Luthor known as Doomsday, the literal and figurative reverberations of his death have awoken a great danger from the far reaches of space. Batman, realizing he had been played for a fool by Luthor and culpable in the death of Superman, as well as being haunted by strange dreams of an apocalyptic nightmare does what he can to seek out extraordinary people to save the world. Together with Wonder Woman, they find three men they hope will be the team they need. Arthur Curry/Aquaman, a thrill-seeking adventurer who protects oceanside villages and stops seafaring criminals like smugglers, pirates, and poachers. Barry Allen/Flash, a man with the ability to run at incredible speed and uses it to stop criminals in his home of Central City. Victor Stone/Cyborg, a young man who suffered an accident that transformed him into a half-man/half-machine.
Some say yes and others say no to Batman and Wonder Woman's offer to join the team but in the end, it all comes together as a powerful alien entity called Steppenwolf comes looking for three powerful devices that will destroy the world and grant it its master the ultimate power in the universe. With an army of beastly creatures at his call, Steppenwolf hunts down the armies of the Amazons, Atlantis, and Humanity as its champions unite to stop him.
Basically, this is the same story as the theatrical version, bringing in as much as it can and not just from the previous theatrical films but also the director's cut of Batman vs Superman. But make no mistake, I can understand why this movie was not shown in theaters. Zack Snyder imagined an epic that he hoped he could get done by being provided with absolute freedom. But the studio was not willing to grant him this freedom, believing there was still so much more to be told as well as the money that could be made by making this last as long as possible. But even more, it was the fact that its leading competitor, Marvel, was doing better and they felt they need to match that success. This along with tragic circumstances in Snyder's personal life forced him to leave the project.
Zack Snyder worked a dark and complicated story in both Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman. He does so again in his version of the Justice League. Make no mistake he does do a good job in many respects, just not a great one. The movie is too long. Four hours does not make for a great movie as the film's pacing varies from fast as a rabbit to a slow as a snail's crawl. Some of the actors who did a fair performance were allowed to shine better, like Ben Affleck, Ray Fisher, and Ezra Miller. Some actors who did not appear in the theatrical cut but this movie were amazing such as Harry Lennix who is revealed to be a major character from the comic, a classic car driving beauty, Cyborg's mother, a wisecracking scientist from Star Labs, and a special surprise at the end of the movie.
But with all due respect, some new scenes were terrible or unnecessary, turning the movie from the fun action-adventure theatrical cut into the dull drama shown here. As well as a series of scenes that conflict with the canon of films. Why does Martha Kent suddenly speak in a southern accent? Why does Mera speak in a regal-sounding accent? Mera's father is dead in this movie but in the Aquaman movie, he is alive and played by Dolph Lundgren. Lois Lane just happens to be at Superman's resurrection but in the theatrical cut, but Batman actually brought her as an insurance policy. Why do Atlanteans make trilling sounds instead of speaking? In the Aquaman movie, they speak normally. Did a particular character need to die?
Even more importantly I despise how Snyder makes this movie depressing. Whereas Whedon added some much-needed levity by adding humorous moments. Snyder also wanted to add as many scenes as possible to characters who did not have their own movies yet, but it feels awkward. I find it better watching Aquaman's movie after Justice League and being introduced to his allies in that movie instead of this one. I am sure I will enjoy a stand-alone Cyborg movie if it is ever made.
I also did not like certain designs, like Superman wearing his black costume. I prefer Whedon's use of the classic costume. Whedon's Steppenwolf looked fine, and I enjoyed hearing Ciaran Hinds voice, Snyder's Steppenwolf looks too monstrous and sounds weird. One of the many things I disliked from Batman vs Superman was the strange nightmare or as fans call them Knightmare scenes are shown, visions of the future that Batman uses as warnings. But they are just left there without a thorough explanation as to how and why they are happening. It happens in this movie just like in the previous movie and I dislike them.
As well as the other technical issues. The soundtrack is by Tom Holkenberg who did the soundtrack for Batman vs Superman and used themes from Hans Zimmer's Man of Steel. But I prefer the more traditional soundtrack by Danny Elfman who used the classic themes of John Williams Superman and his own version of the Batman theme. This movie is shown in a 1.33.1 ratio, whereas the theatrical cut was presented in IMAX 1.37.1 ratio. This movie is shot in dark and depressing cinematography whereas the theatrical cut was presented in bright, clean, and colorful cinematography.
I was never on the Snyder Cut bandwagon and deep down I knew I was not going to enjoy it as much as I did the Theatrical Cut, and I was right. It also disgusted me how ‘loyal' Snyder fans were. Some fans took their Blu-ray/DVD theatrical cuts that they bought and burned them in the same way adherents to the Nazi regime burned books. I feel all this is distasteful and insulting to a great storyteller in Joss Whedon and I feel WB is only doing this to placate Snyder's fans but hopefully, this will be forgotten soon. Hopefully with a real sequel to the Justice League movie.
Ever since I was in high school, I had a great love for studying history. In my history classes, we were encouraged to read the newspaper and see the events in the world. This event caught my interest because I was a big Cold War buff, and I was completely supportive of General Augusto Pinochet. I followed this event in history as often as I could and when it ended as it did, I was overjoyed. Others did not hold my opinion and clearly, the makers of this movie do not. But in fairness, they do a good job in depicting the facts that led to the year-long situation with Augusto Pinochet and his detainment in England.
In 1998, General Augusto Pinochet was visiting England to seek treatment for an illness. But with its Labour Party government with the support of various liberal and radical Chilean movements and human rights groups took advantage of a treaty to punish Pinochet for his eighteen years of rule with his alleged crimes against humanity.
Pinochet in his plight takes advantage of the circumstances, working with the best lawyers at his disposal and his acquaintances with his foreign allies as he does all he can while the Labour government and the various anti-Pinochet groups do all they can to use the human rights charter to extradite him to Spain to await trial for abuses committed to Spanish citizens living in Chile during his rule.
This event is history, and it is committed remarkably well but also with some level of prejudice. But I enjoyed it as the actors do their job depicting the participants of history. I enjoyed Derek Jacobi as General Pinochet as he brings forward a gruff, stern strongman out to defend himself to the fullest as well as finding it nice that Peter Capaldi as one of the people out to persecute Pinochet. I really hated the character played by Yolanda Vazquez as an anti-Pinochet Chilean activist, but I presume I was supposed to.
The movie was short but it had me at my seat recalling the investment I had in the story when I was a teenager. As mentioned, I was a Cold War buff who enjoyed the forces that took on international communism and I was in awe of Pinochet. People view Pinochet as a criminal, but I viewed him as a hero who saved his country from the irresponsible, savage, idiotic communists that were threatening to destroy Chile, just as they had done in Russia, China, Cuba, and many other countries.
I am well aware that there are many horrible atrocities committed by Pinochet, the fact that his military overthrew a democratically elected leftist government is not for dispute but both sides were culpable of many crimes and deep down I question the legality of pursuing crimes against humanity as true justice or victor's justice aka revenge. In World War II, America sent the Japanese military officials to hang for crimes against humanity, but America nuked their cities. Should the pilots of Enola Gay and Bocks Car have gone to prison? Of course not. I think Nazi leader Herman Goering on trial at Nuremberg made it clear that his inditement was not justice and there are plenty of historians who agree with that. In this case, plebiscite alone should have been justice, but Pinochet's enemies in wanting him to stand trial were wanting revenge, a way of saying their way of life was right and that Pinochet was wrong. Revenge is an act of savages and I supported Pinochet for that fact alone.
This docudrama did its best to get viewers to support Pinochet's incarceration but not me. I watch the end of the movie with satisfaction. Splendid movie.
DC's Extended Film Universe continues, and it does so with one of its best in Wonder Woman. After the success of the first Wonder Woman, a sequel was most certainly assured.
The movie is set as independently from the rest of the DCEU movies as its story, much like the previous Wonder Woman movie, is set in the past. Whereas the previous movie was set in 1918 during World War I, this movie is set in 1984. With the backdrop basically being Diana of Themiscyra having lived her life under the proverbial radar as Diana Prince. She still fends for humanity as its champion, but she does not appear in the limelight like the heroes she will meet decades later. As the daughter of the Greek god Zeus, she is ageless while her old friends die, and new friends must be chosen carefully. She cannot return to her family on Themiscyra, so she is basically alone.
But things are shaken up when an ancient, cursed object is sought out by Maxwell Lord, a greedy businessman who covets wealth and power. He as well as Barbara Minerva, a colleague that Diana meets under the cover of an antiquities expert. This cursed object grants wishes to Diana, Minerva, and Lord as they obtain their hearts' desire but with great consequences.
With Diana it is her great love Steve Trevor, having heroically died in the previous film is returned to her. With Minerva, it is to be as lovely, strong, and assertive as her new friend Diana. And Lord who gets his wealth and power while unleashing hell upon the world as this cursed object is on track to destroy all civilization on Earth as it had before with other great civilizations from the past. Diana must do all she can to save the world from this cursed power, even if that means giving up what she wants most.
I was plenty happy and surprised with the first Wonder Woman movie being a success. Surprised that someone so strong and brave can be depicted as loving and kind. Respect the wonder but remember that the hero is a woman. This movie continues to respect that and I definitely enjoy how much that actress, Gal Gadot, continues to embody those fine characteristics. Especially having grown from the previous movie in that her character is no longer naïve and is more knowledgeable about the rest of the world. Yet she still has much to learn, especially as shown in the movie's prologue from the past in that virtue that comes from respecting the value of truth and integrity. The villains in this movie are also impressive as Maxwell Lord truly is the embodiment of what was wrong in the face of what was right in the 1980s, ambition can drive someone to be their absolute best but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing as well as the concept of being careful of what you wish for. Barbara Minerva is an example of someone who seeks to better themselves but at the cost of sacrificing their own good nature.
A fine morality tale all amidst the backdrop of a grand action-adventure film. However, the story is a bit flawed. The movie's start is exciting and wondrous to behold but its middle becomes muddled as its pacing drags like a snail's pace while trying to develop the plot like a good drama, but this is a comic book movie, not a drama. It is only when the film's climax hits does it return to an action film and does so splendidly.
As mentioned before, Gal Gadot is as great as she was in the previous movies. She does exhibit a few flaws, but she still proves to be the best Wonder Woman since Lynda Carter. It was nice to see the return of Chris Pine as Steve Trevor, it goes to show that even as the love interest of a female superhero, he is no weakling and proves to be as valuable to Diana as her love and an ally. Pedro Pascal as Maxwell Lord was amazing as he shows that he can play a complex villain driven to the drunken madness of wealth and power. Though the comic book character is far more ruthless than in the movie, I still think it was a splendid depiction. But it is Kristen Wiig who utterly amazed me in the movie as Barbara Minerva. Considered to be in the same league as Superman and Lex Luthor or Batman and Joker, Wonder Woman and Cheetah's rivalry is up there as one of the most iconic in DC Comics. A feud born out of violent jealousy and desire for power amidst the nobility and integrity of another. It is no surprise that Patty Jenkins would bring her in the next movie. But what is surprising is that she chose an actress more adapted for comedies instead of action, but Kristen delivered whether as the weak-willed woman in the beginning to the violent power-hungry woman in the climax. I only wish there were more emphasis on Cheetah than on Maxwell Lord. It would be like the equivalent of The Dark Knight paying less attention to the Joker and more on Two-Face.
A splendid movie.
I saw this on Netflix and with a title like the Social Dilemma, the message of this documentary is an attack on how social networks from Facebook, Twitter, etc, dominate culture in America as well effecting the world negatively.
Despite the numerous people on board attacking social networking, there were no defenders of the medium, so this was clearly a biased documentary. This was presented in an interview format but also with a dramatization worthy of a drama or comedy in the sci-fi vein of The Matrix or Inside Out. With a computer simulation deciding what a user should read, buy, and think. Making it appear as something sinister.
In every age that welcomes new technology, society attacks it with truly pathetic intolerance. Like the printing press or television, social networking becomes criticized for enabling a generation of people as being manipulated, called out as zombies because the intolerant group views the medium as something that works against the status quo.
In this case, the intolerant group is against capitalism, conservatism, as well as varying cultural norms. Citing riots, racism, and even suicide. I like the information presented but it is all one-sided. This was better suited as a sociology lecture assisted by a college drama class. A real waste of time.
I am a big-time Civil War buff, so when the opportunity to watch an epic retelling of it in a miniseries comes along, I want to watch it in the best way possible. This DVD collection just happened to be something I came across in my library and I just had to have it.
The 80s did a good share of miniseries set around the Civil War so I had no idea which set this was going to be about. It is based on a novel like most Civil War stories are about, the history is a backdrop to the drama the writer wants to convey, but they work hard at getting the history right. Most of it anyway.
Set in the months before the war begins as two families are taken for a ride on the coattails of history as the issue of slavery erupts into war. The Geysers from the South and the Hales from the North. The Geysers are supportive of their cause in defending their lands from Northern aggression, but their youngest son defends the plight of enslaved blacks. The Hales take in the youngest Geyer as he covers the war as a reporter and not a soldier but is brought under the watchful eyes of a Pinkerton detective with ties to the new US President.
Several fictional characters interact and fall in love, some are killed in the madness of war. One such incident tells of a serial killer that the former Pinkerton detective is bound to stop. Also, several interactions between Union soldiers and Confederates as well as other various moments make for good fiction amidst the historical backdrop.
From the First Bull Run, the Peninsula Campaign, Vicksburg, Wilderness, Appomattox battles are covered in this movie. Some seem out of order or are inaccurate like Southerners wearing gray uniforms in the beginning when many still wore Union blue militia uniforms. But some things are accurate like Confederates wearing US belt buckles upside down so it would spell out SN for Southern Nation. And the actor, Gregory Peck was made to portray Abraham Lincoln, I am surprised he never got a whole movie to do it.
The rest of the cast is wonderful from Rip Torn as Ulysses S. Grant, Stacy Keach, Lloyd Bridges and so much more. I love a good Civil War movie, and this was good. I still would have liked more but this was time well spent.
Having already seen a documentary on Roy Cohn I decided to check this one out to see whether or not it was better. Unfortunately, it's not. This HBO Films documentary is incredibly biased with other films being fairer. Why? This movie is directed by Ivy Meeropol, the granddaughter of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. The very people Roy Cohn had prosecuted as spies. Even my high school history teacher could tell you that is a clear-cut sign of bias.
I have read up on Roy Cohn here and there whenever I looked up McCarthyism in my history classes, he always seemed to be a very minor figure. It has been only in documentaries – this one as well as others, and in dramatizations of his life is his importance truly stated. Roy Marcus Cohn was a lawyer who grew to prominence in the 1940s and 1950s during the Cold War hysteria of the time. From working as a prosecutor assisting Irving Saypol's case against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg to Joseph McCarthy's numerous federal investigations against Communists in the US State Department to the US Army. On the surface, this truly is someone who deserves respect and acclaim, but as this documentary shows, rife with scandal. However, there is not one moment of honest respect, it is merely a one-sided assault on a dead man's character.
Ivy Meeropol presents this documentary through various interviews and archival footage. Most prominent is those involving her father Michael, particularly in his struggle to challenge the government's case against his parents. Believing it to be a travesty of justice and the years it took to obtain the information the government used against his father. It shows that the long-sought information did prove that Julius Rosenberg was a spy. But make no mistake, this documentary is not about proving the innocence of the Rosenbergs. It is a declaration of hatred for Roy Marcus Cohn and in no way a vindication of the family. Citing everything from Rosenberg's trial to Cohn's downfall at the US Army hearings with Joseph McCarthy. Piling on this are interviews from Cohn's family members, reporters, politicians, friends, neighbors even entertainers all who vehemently criticize Cohn.
The main message is that Roy Cohn was a bad man, nothing more. I believe that this is wrong, this is not a film that should have been made and that to call this a documentary is insulting to those who wish to educate themselves. This is outright propaganda from persons whose hatred is blinding to what Roy Cohn did in the service to his country. He is called evil, sociopathic, an ogre, and so many other insults.
This is a man who used his profession to serve his country against a form of government that brought about pain, death, and destruction upon the world and he stood up to face this dangerous threat to his country. Yes, he profited and benefited himself and others on attacking the character of loyal citizens. But the director of this documentary shows none of this man's virtue, only the biases that have shaped her family's point of view. A point of view that many belief is misguided. All that is done here is criticize a man, from his memorial in which this documentary takes its title from enjoying his harassment by a twisted businessman and mocking the final years of his life.
Make no mistake, Roy Cohn was no saint, but there is nothing to gain in making a film like this. It would have been better if it had testimonials of people that knew and supported Cohn or if they compare Cohn's antics with what communism had done in other countries and how it continues to do worse than anything Cohn has done. Find something better than this propaganda.