Spider-Man: Far From Home
The Lion King
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No user info supplied.
Lacking the original's more satirical bite and having new ideas that don't go anywhere coupled with an emotionless performance from Joel Kinnaman, even before he gets roboticised, the RoboCop remake nevertheless has better performances from its supporting cast, great action sequences with the PG-13 rating actually being less restrictive than you might think and even has some concepts that could've lent themselves better to a video game rather than a blockbuster movie as pointed out by The Nostalgia Critic in his review of the movie making this cyberpunk superhero movie a lot better than it had the right to be.
An improvement over the last two Twilight movies, and by that I mean less bad. The acting is slightly better, it's actually quite fun to see Edward and Jacob trash-talking each other, Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson have better romantic chemistry and I actually did appreciate the build-up to the big action sequence which was actually quite awesome. Yet Eclipse, despite having being cinematic enough to warrant an IMAX release, still falls into the same traps as the last movie thanks to dialogue that's hard to take seriously ("Dad. I'm a virgin"), slow pacing (though admittedly not as bad as New Moon) and an uninspired script. Rather shocking considering the screenwriter would go on to be a showrunner for an admittedly good TV show. But then again, having a script faithfully following a Stephenie Meyer book was probably destined to be not good. Also, for the movie that fully focuses on that one evil vampire who's out to get revenge on Bella and Edward, she doesn't really have a lot of screen time. She's not even played by the same actress. The summarized Entertainment Weekly review of "The best 'Twilight' movie so far" is right but that's not really saying much. It's just the big climactic action sequence that helps this movie earn 2.5 stars.
Rio 2 has gorgeous animation that's a step up from the first film, great voice acting and catchy songs as well as decent comedy but that won't save it from its case of sequelitis thanks to the iffy messages that are essentailly double standards, a villain that's reduced to a joke (thankfully, he's not the main antagonist again. I don't even think the villain and heroes even meet each other face-to-face until the third act) and a more formulaic story compared to the original's charm with more heavy handed eco-friendly messages than you can shake a stick at. Rio 2 is not that bad and it does have more effort put into it than Ice Age 5 but coming off the heels of the first film, Rio 2's a bit of a disappointment. I genuinely feel sorry for Blue Sky because they're so notorious for milking out Ice Age sequels that the other movies are overlooked even though they're actually relatively decent and underrated films. Oh well, maybe one day they'll get their own personal Into the Spider-Verse.
Harriet the Spy has good life lessons and rises on the strength of the performances of the two leads. Also, I'm guessing it's faithful to the book I've never read because that's what other reviews praise this movie for. So, good job for your source material fidelity. Yet, the movie can't help but feel rather mean-spirited at times, playing out as more of a family-friendly Carrie. I just wanted to hug poor Harriet at times. It also brings nothing new to the table since it has all the family movie tropes and cliches you've come to expect from these types of films. I'm sure children will like it but the first Nickelodeon Movie just didn't do anything for me.
Gulliver's Travels has decent special effects, the charisma of Jack Black and some decent jokes every once in a while, one of which is even a reference to the original version of the book, which was an adult-oriented satire on human nature. Yet the juvenile script, rushed feel and having a decent idea that just wasn't executed very well making it easy to see why executives likely put an Ice Age short before the actual film starts so that the movie had a better chance of not bombing. And it worked. Sure, most people want to see Jack Black but I'm sure there are also those who only went to see the film just for the short film. But Gulliver's Travels is still not very good for those outside of the target demographic.
Possibly one of the worst mainstream animated films ever, Alpha And Omega wastes a talented voice cast on terrible animation and visuals, a dull plot and shamelessy ripping off from much better movies like The Lion King making this animated film not just terrible but also boring. And for an animated film for kids, that's just not acceptable.
It juggles a few too many plotlines too at once and the pacing gives off the impression that the film is mich shorter than it really is but production and costume design, the performances of the cast and Mike Newell's direction make this adaptation of the Charles Dickens tale a good one that doesn't feel unnecessary.
An obvious cash-in on the dystopian YA fiction film adaptations that were all the rage at the time, The 5th Wave feels more like a parody at times, rather than a serious adaptation due to the lack of chemistry between Chloe Grace Moretz and the love interest, bad lighting and cinematography and a twist that, when you think about it, is actually all that obvious as well as an obligatory sequel hook, The 5th Wave is definitely the worst out of all the YA sci-fi films. At least the filmmakers behind the Maze Runner and Divergent movies actually wanted to make a good movies and were just striking while the iron was hot, rather than being 100% Follow the Leader films. A shame too, because the performances are good and the movie actually seemed to be going in a more interesting direction before Pretty Boy enters the picture, turning this movie into Twilight with aliens. Though this movie didn't outright bomb, no sequels coming out of this one, don't you worry about that.
Gambit tries to be a screwball comedy with decent performances from its leads and having the Coen brothers write the screenplay but it ultimately devolves into an unorganized mess. A shame too because I know the Coens are well-liked for their witty scripts.
OK fine, Playing For Keeps has its problems, but I don't think it's as bad as the abysmal Tomatometer score makes it out to be. There is a touch of sexism in there, yes. The script could've used better writers. It doesn't always have a proper focus. But the charming cast and sweet nature result in a movie that I don't really regret seeing.
It might be predictable and unremarkable but the talents of its cast members and Dustin Hoffman's assured direction make Quartet an irresistible and sweet musician dramedy.
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is an improvement over the first film. The action sequences are better, the Ghost Rider is better utilized, if only because the shorter runtime creates the illusion that he has more screen time than he actually has and Nicolas Cage is having more fun with his performance this time around. But does that make it a good movie in its own right? The star rating has already answered that question. The CGI, while not terrible, has a more uneven look, compared to the first film. The story and script are rather generic and not wholly original. In fact, they even put in 3 animated sequences done in a comic book style to cut corners. I love those types of sequences in films but here, they feel like they're mostly there in an attempt to keep your attention. Though considering that the directors were also writers on Jonah Hex, a comic book movie on par with the first Ghost Rider film, to say the least, maybe I shouldn't have been surprised. There are some rather bizarre things in this movie that have to be seen to be believed. Ghost Rider peeing fire and 2 instances of Johnny Blaze v Ghost Rider that's edited like a '90s/ early 2000's heavy metal music video. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is so bad, it's good but I'd rather take a movie that embraces that rather than the first film's more boring, slow-paced nature.
A fun and humorous as well as endearing, if somewhat familiar and not wholly original Christmas adventure that's sure to entertain children and, if they're in a good enough mood, their parents too.
There's nothing all that remarkable about this movie, though it isn't as bad as the critics made it out to be so I'll just type in parts of the consensus instead:
"Parental Guidance is sweet but milquetoast, an inoffensive trifle that's blandly predictable." That's all there is to it.
The Lion King 2019 is mostly like a video game remaster. It's mostly the exact same things, right down to dialogue recited verbatim from the original script but with upgraded visuals to give off a more photorealistic look. I agree that it is essentially a double-edged sword. On one hand, it's very easy to forget that this is all animated conventionally, including backgrounds. On the other hand, the lack of facial expressions and preferences to stick to realism sacrifice some of the more enjoyable aspects. Though with regards to the former, it's not as bad as the trailers and TV spots made it out to be and the voice acting and body language help the animals out in this regard. The music is great, though seeing as how this was composed by Hans Zimmer, who also composed the original, should it have come off as much of a surprise? I will admit that the shot-for-shot criticism that Beauty and the Beast 2017 was attacked for was much more noticeable here for me. While BatB 2017 was a shot-for-shot remake with new stuff added in to pad the runtime, it never felt like one. Here, The Lion King feels like one though I don't really mind since I was never against the live-action remakes. The Lion King "live-action" remake probably doesn't need to exist but if you want to relive all the feels the original gave you in glorious 4K, go watch it. Sooner or later, Disney will probably going to run out of remakes...won't they?
"A whole lotta nothing in between somethings". That's the precise sentence that an article I read summed up New Moon as. Guess they were onto something. Not only is the pacing incredibly slow but all the things that the first film had bad, this movie does worse. The acting is worse, the script is worse and it's hard to take seriously. With cringy dialogue, an overlong runtime and unlikable leads. Basically the Cullens leave because Bella got a papercut on her birthday and she spends 3 months sitting on a chair sulking and apparently that's all she did in those 3 months, seeing as how she never changes clothes and nothing in the background looks any different. The few things the movie has going for it are: some decent-ish, if disappointingly brief, action scenes with some decently rendered CGI werewolves and Michael Sheen's performance. Shame he's not in a whole lot of it because God forbid we put in someone who's good at acting, regardless of film quality, and have him stay there for more than 10 minutes. We wouldn't want the other actors to be revolting now, would we? Also, why doesn't she stay with Jacob? True, I already know who she'll end up with (I haven't felt this much suspense since Katniss, Peeta and Gale) but Jacob actually does have more dimensions than sparkly Cedric Diggory ever had. And I'm not saying that because we share the same first name. If you're a Twilight fan, more power to you. But if you're not, this movie is so boring. Even if the franchise was already fairly short on action to begin with, that doesn't excuse the fact that barely anything happens of interest despite being a story about vampires and werewolves.
While it has great action sequences and the actors are trying their best with the material they're given, Pearl Harbor suffers from bad dialogue, cliched characters and being needlessly overlong. And to be fair with regards to the romance, while it is obvious that it was cashing in on the success of Titanic, it should be noted that while Michael Bay had his problems during production, the love triangle was something that was against his wishes from day one. Likewise with the large amounts of historical inaccuracy. While I think Transformers 5 was a worse Michael Bay film, I don't find it hard to see why Shrek ultimately won the box office battle.
Poignant, inspiring and bolstered by the performances of its two leads, this true story save-the-animals drama is an effective, satisfying film that the entire family can enjoy.
Possibly one of the worst films of 2010, this sequel to a film that was cute but wasn't all that spectacular wastes the talents of multiple celebrities thanks to a terrible script, unfunny humour and not treating its target audience with any respect.
While The Tuxedo is sometimes fun and Jackie Chan's charm in the lead role prevents this film from being a complete trainwreck, its bad writing and emphasis on special effects over story (as was common in the early 2000s, I'm guessing) make it too silly for anyone above the age of 12.