brsger

This movie gets carried all the way through by it's most excellent cast. Law is brilliant. Paltrow is even better. Damon is unrecognisable. A brilliant performance. But the hidden stars for me are Davenport, Blanchett and Hoffman.

The vulnerability, the earnestness. The guilt.

It's simply captivating.

Beautiful set design, costumes, hair/make-up, impeccable dialogue.

The camera work is experimental at times, but fitting.

For some, this might drag on a tad too long.

But I've never seen anybody NOT moved by Damon's Ripley. What a sad, sad man.

Probably his best to date.

I don't even like Italy and thought this was a banger.

My 3rd watch.

9/10.

Isaac is entertaining, Vikander is too monotonous, Gleeson is plain boring.

Sets are fun, sound design is on par, length does the movie good, plot is meh.

I really wanted to like this movie.

An intriguing question played out in a test lab.

But while this movie does a lot of thing well, especially on a technical level, it fails at the most essential task towards the viewer. To captivate. I don't feel for Gleeson's character. And I don't even believe it to be his fault. He's just given so little to work with. Apart from the obvious plot holes and the more than lackluster ending (you have to stick the landing, mate.), this was "ok" for a rewatch after 5 years. Probably won't watch it again tho.

Cue the references tho. Very subtle, I like it.

Pacing, plot, lack of suspense and lack of chemistry are the downsides of this movie.

With the little content it offers, it could've been 30 minutes shorter and nothing'd be lost.

What makes up for it and gives this movie more good than bad to offer is the setting, costumes, lightning, colour grading and first and foremost: acting.

Redmayne is great. But Chastain's natural performance overshines him just be a nodge in my opinion. The officer's are solid. But the director struggles to find a main protagonist and deviates too much in perspectives. The ending lacks a little.

This could have been more but it's been "netflixed".

This film is not only extremely American, but also very Brad Pitt.

Unfortunately, it didn't really play to his strengths as an actor.

Many interesting characters appear only to be tossed out after a single scene.

It's engaging and thrilling right from the start, the atmosphere is tense and the editing is too class.

But what keeps this movie from being great (at its genre) is the third act.

Very out of character, very forced and just overall way less enjoyable.

The most costly set, Jerusalem, was also the most interesting. Which they could have kept up the intensity afterwards.

Enos is great but isn't used cleverly.

6.8.

I, personally, loved this movie.

I didn't watch any trailer. I just enjoy Sci-Fi (emphasis on 'Fi') and I quite like Ferguson's and Gyllenhaal's work.

I usually don't get scared or anxious by horror flicks, so I didn't expect a lot of "horror".

But this movie had me on the edge of my seat.

Of course, the characters act stupid, it's blatantly obvious. Of course, nobody follows protocol and the movie is riddled with inconsistencies and technical flaws. But IF you can look past that (or just tend to not focus and these things anyway) and choose to enjoy the thrill and atmosphere, this is a blast. A few moments really make this movie worth it's watchtime. And the end of the day, the single question remains?

Do you want to be entertained? If yes, give it a try. I liked it :)

Let's make this quick.

Cruise is great, Riseborough is even better (wished for her to have a little more screen time tho). Freeman and Kulyenko are replaceable. Coster-Waldau is, unfortunately, just a pretty face and a little miscast. Leo is haunting.

The effects and CGI look quite good. Too much action for me personally (thinking about that drawn out drone fight). Music is ok. Sound design and editing is well done. Set design shines. Atmosphere is great.

What's actually important: The story (and the implications).

While necessarily relying on some non-subtle exposition by the start, the world building is just incredible. The 3rd act just blew me away with it's depth.

The final 3 minutes are a little bit too generic Hollywood - esque, but well.

8.5/10.

Post-apocalyptic scenario?

A talented actress as the lead?

Sci-Fi, non-bloated run time and some military action?

Sign me up!

And then it all falls apart.

Some mid 2010's teenage romance, done so badly.

Atrocious effects (where did the budget go??).

90% of actors involved, even the supposedly "big" stars, give it no effort whatsoever.

Worst of all though: Story and dialogue.

So plain, so unoriginal, so uninspired.

The most "tell, don't show" exposition, lame sound and music design, so so many plot holes and inconsistencies. It truly feels like this mess was written by a 12 year old.

CGM is alright, Schreiber is a failure (is he even awake?) and the pacing is all over the place. The very few redeeming qualities barely make this a 3/10.

The 'Evan' "actor" is absolutely lifeless and the YA demographic feels just so very forced.

Don't recommend.

You'd forget about the plot immediately since it's just a copy of other movies from its very distinctive time of release.

Also: BORING!

Quite good in the beginning, so very silly in the end.

McAdams is good all around. But her role doesn't give her much to do.

Nice to see Murphy as rather unusual character. Doesn't work all the way through the movie.

What's also good is that the stakes don't get crazier and crazier with every ten minutes, as in other movies.

But the effects aren't made that well.

The tension building up in first 40 minutes was simple but well executed.

The movie falls apart at the latest when the plane finally lands. Everything afterwards is just over the top - looks and feels cheesy and cheap.

A 5 out of 10.

Moura: bad, Dunst: pretty good, Späny: great.

Plemons and Offermann are trailor bait (wow, who would have guessed), as are some set and certain scenes. You'd think they'd be much more drawn out in the movie - they aren't, unfortunately.

Dialogue: sometimes weird and clunky. Surprisingly hollow (while many similar movies tend to be !too! Pseudo-profound), doesn't serve Moura's acting.

Too little development for Dunst, sadly.

Späny's character has LOTS of (subtle) development - great! Loved it in retrospect.

Garland finds, also quite unsurprisingly, beautiful pictures, but sometimes the frames are too forced. Very solid camera work. As expected from a renowned science-fiction director.

The message is parts cool, parts too on the nose. Music design: sometimes good, usually too big on the forced contrast.

Best thing: Sound design. Some solid 5-10 minutes within which made my "system" engage in the cinema. Sweating, strong focus. My buddy next to me started panting a little bit lol. Really immersive. Great job.

Worst thing: Story structure. Not his strong suit. Never was. Too short, surprisingly. At least for my taste. Feels like some parts were cut, but at the wrong place.

For a high-concept Action roadtrip war drama, all told within 109 minutes. It's rather nice.

7/10 Would recommend to genre fans.

Quaid is nice, Madison is great. Most characters are dumb, boring, cringe and forgettable.

The over-the-top characters, that are clear clichés and don't take themselves too seriously are the most fun (but die) while the "main" ones are sooo flat, especially Barrera. Also, not scary. Not even 12 year olds would get scared by this. Unfortunately, this movie is obsessed with its franchise. Get ready for EXTREME amounts of meta. Honestly, way too much.

While still somewhat enjoyable, it's too long for its content. No idea how this got (YET ANOTHER) sequel. Oh, no. I know.

Also, the cringiest dialogues and dozens of forced one-liners. Who tf wrote this????

On a technical level, very solid. Nice gore. But should probably be watched while muted.

Heartwarming, wholesome and a joy to watch.

Well, of course, this movie is at its core very basic in its premise. Two outcasts bond together, an emerging threat, a third act climax. We've seen it all before, it doesn't break any ground really.

But in the way it IS done, it's wonderful.

Gottsagen is phenomenal, Johnson is an absolute joy (wish we could have seen more of her character) and LaBeouf does what he does best.

The acting fits the story to a t.

A basic plot structure, but it works.

Sometimes a little overboard on the music, sometimes a little underboard on the set pieces, but it's alright. Personally, would have wished for a bit more drama towards the end and the very final scene. A liiiittle underwhelming.

Hollywood tries to manipulate us all the time with an emotional "underdog becomes a hero fighting against all adversities and overcomes the odds" but I'll gladly let it fly this time. Should have gotten an Oscar Nom for LaBeouf. I'll stand on business.

8/10.

Well, of course.

It's got everything an audience wants to see. A road trip, a friendship, a period piece, politics, social issues, a happy ending, a biography.

This is the least risk taking "big" movie of recent years.

Ali and Mortensen do a solid job, sure. The costumes are great. The set design is fitting. Choreography lacks (a lot), especially in the first few scenes. With such a budget, quite the embarrassment.

But the entire story, the dialogue and the "message" is just so uninspired, so boring, so lackluster and devoid of anything outstanding at all. Maybe that's just the book? Maybe it's a real story and one shouldn't tamper with it too much? Valid. But then it's most likely just not interesting enough to be made into a film.

The biggest irony is the Oscar for "Best Screenplay". For what?? Any 12 year old could have written that.

And "Best Picture"? Must have been a terrible year for movies then.

Mediocre movie, very very overhyped. Certainly one of the worst "Best picture" winners in this century.

Turn off your Spidey Sense and enjoy a colourful, thrilling, witty Action flick (which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but well).

First of all, what's not so great: The last act is a drag. The film (and some characters) overstay their welcome, too many plot elements and too much happening outside the train, which gives insight to the obvious studio set.

Also Joey King is 100% forgettable. I instantly forgot about her character after the credits rolled.

Now, too the good stuff: Cinematography. Nothing to add. Wonderful.

Brad Pitt is SO much fun. Always a joy to see on screen. This dude just has fun doing these movies and you can feel it through the screen.

The side characters are fun as well.

Lighting, Colour grading and the dialogue are a big plus, too.

Just a joy to experience if you want a fun time.

Cut some at the very start and throughout the last 40 minutes and this would be the perfect comedic Action flick. More Pitt in the future!

7/10.

Yeah nah, this is awesome.

Not everyone's cup of tea, I totally understand.

Maybe too much symbolism, maybe an ending too vague or unsatisfying, maybe not the most compelling protagonist.

But what this film does well, it does spectacularly well.

The atmosphere, sound design, gore, lighting and especially the script is a piece of art (obvio).

But the best part of the entire movie was (for me, personally) how it makes you think. Not about this niche and very specific situation itself, but the implications. Only being able to be in direct contact with the few levels above and below, the importance of gravity, power over others, selfishness and utilitarianism. I loved it.

8.6/10 Watch it subbed, not dubbed.

Why is this movie so we'll reviewed??

I don't get it.

It's a generic action thriller which has 2009 written all over it, and not in a particularly good way.

The action is fine, the set pieces are rather good, the look is gritty, at times "SAW-esque", probably stemming from the Philly setting and intense use of colour grading and artificial lighting.

Foxx is lots of fun (at the beginning at least), but becomes repetitive and a tad boring with time. Butler is just over the top. The early sequences are his best.

The plot is, to be frank, full-on bonkers ridiculous. You don't need a degree in law or have any expertise in military tactics to know how bs everything is.

Tried to switch my brain off to just enjoy some stupid fun, but it insults the viewer's intelligence again and again with every 5 minutes passing.

Structurally, not great either. No real story climax the audience would be on the edge of their seat for, a rushed ending (editing interference by the studio maybe?) and clunky sectioning.

Probs to the production value and technical aspects. But the dialogue and story is to be forgotten.

4.5/10.

Of course, this isn't perfect. That entire Jotunheim sequence goes on a bit too long. Some gags are overused (Milton conversation), at times too extensive use of copyrighted/non-original music and Idris Elba's character is rather dull.

But apart from this, this was an absolute experience in theatres and years later on Streaming once again. Iconic opening sequence, Quinn at what she does best, the brilliant Peacemaker and Ratcatcher 2, some unexpected twists/curveballs and one particular scene that gives so much emotional death ("I was happy floating and gazing at the stars").

Wonderful.

Just what we needed.

Unfortunately, superhero movies are finished nowadays. But this was one of the best.

8/10.

Honestly, this is horror done right.

Coming from two decades of generic slashers and wannabe tension driven psychological dramas (which didn't work out), The VVitch is a huge step in the right direction and gave start to the last 9 years of a genre's revival.

Eggers cast perfectly, the location and setting are astonishingly eerie and the isolation felt is so real.

The twins make me want to reconsider my stance on not hitting children, Taylor-Joy's performance is subtle but great, Dickie is very similar to her character in Game of Thrones, but it works. The boy is second best imo but the absolute show stealer for me is Ralph Ineson. 10/10 Haunting sound design, specific colour grading and authentic dialogue give this movie a unique style which is hard to find in this genre.

Some clunky editing in the middle and tad bit over the top -ness reduce it to an 8 out of 10 for me.

But it's still great!

The last 25 minutes are certainly a highlight and make me recommend it to all horror fans.

Rewatching this in 2024 after many years is an odd experience.

Super fast editing, unusual for Nolan. Sometimes mediocre casting (Holmes, Neeson), ridiculous costumes and hard to listen to dialogue is not something we're used to with this director. But at the end of the day, this movie is still a triumph.

So entertaining, so fun. Impeccable set designs and world building, great action, a gritty look that would be replicated for decades and Bale at the top of his game (was he ever not?). Freeman, Oldman and Caine are great, too.

Wilkinson isn't my favourite. Murphy is good. Some miscasting with the extras here and there. Lots of clichés. But what do we expect, it's still a superhero movie at the end of the day. Tying this huge narrative, the start of the character's path and a whole lot of action and plot with two different villains and all that within two and a half hours is Nolan's achievement. Who would have guessed since his previous projects were so different.

A great foundation for the Dark Knight, although sometimes rushed, clichéd or over the top. A 10/10 for the right audience, an 8/10 for me.

One of the most experimental movies I've seen in recent years.

Beginning at the English production, working with mostly Poles, to create a movie about a German family, with German actors, in German.

So unusual, but such a good choice.

Friedel is solid. Although too androgynous for his character. It's a very nice touch, although historically inaccurate. Hüller is impeccable. 100% believable performance from the very first to her last second on screen. A pitch perfect performance.

Set design is wonderful. Some CGI in the background visible for the trained eye, but the main sets are great. Costumes and Hair: Perfect. So so realistic.

But probably the movie's biggest triumph is the dialogue. The very definition of subtlety. Finally a movie about this topic that isn't "in-your-face" about every little aspect. What a wonderful choice of storytelling.

So why is it just a 7/10 in my opinion?

The editing. Although one scene (or rather the intercutting of two scenes) at the very end is one of the best choices of narrative I have ever seen, the rest is hard to watch. It's got 'A24' written all over it. Too much. Sequences which are hard to grasp. Too much to puzzle together. I personally like to ask myself after the cinematic experience: "What might that have meant?" But not at 20 different instances. Especially for a somebody who is quite educated about the topic. Too artsy.

Also, a bore at points. Making 105 mins feel like 240 is not an achievement. Well maybe, but not in the good way. Don't get me started on attention span or whatever. I gladly watch 3 hour movies. If they're entertaining or actually filled with content.

But the editing is all over the place for a good chunk of the movie.

Finally gets better towards the end.

Fire your editor, Glazer. And you might make a 9/10 movie soon.

I don't understand the hate this movie got AT ALL.

Yes, the ending is clichéed and rushed.

Yes, even for somebody that isn't interested in space at all, the technical errors are very obvious and the conveniences are too convenient.

And Ruth Negga is miscast.

But the effects are great, the cinematography is beautiful, Lee Jones and Tyler do a solid job and Pitt is absolutely phenomenal. The very small moments (logs, mornings, routines, etc.) are the best part of the movie. The constant judgement by superiors and technical protocols is so real. Anyone who worked in the military, police force or something similar can relate.

Would have loved to give a 9/10 if the third act was better made. 7.5/10.

+:

• Zac Efron is great. Maybe not his best acting so far. But very much a joy to watch.

• Kaya Scodelario. Always a solid job. No surprises here.

• Overall, a very enjoyable movie. Short-lived, well edited and easily digestible.

-:

• Lily Collins and Joel Osment. Not their best. Collins is borderline annoying.

• How the production of this movie makes the same exact mistakes the media did in the late 70s.

Maybe not glorifying but definitely excusing some actions. Deliberately casting Efron, not showing the degree of any of his crimes (just mentioning), the insane "artistic liberties" this movie takes and the story's focus around Bundy himself. If I was a victim's family member, I'd say: "Not cool."

• Lack of subtlety. Not really a candidate for best screenplay.

• On the topic of screenplay, clunky dialogue.

Overall: Reviewing the scenes individually, this movie is kind of boring. But put together (again, credits to editing), it's quite entertaining.

Forgettable, though. But does it's job.

But please, maybe less serial killer flicks in the future (looking at you, Netflix) and shine some light on the victims instead.

6/10.

It's bad.

I'm sorry, but it just is.

Hard to listen to dialogue all the way through. The "gang" from the first movie is a shadow of itself.

The movie doesn't take itself serious at all. Which would be fine but ultimately fails to make anyone care about any character.

Jenna Ortega's character is very superficial.

The typical "absolutely EVERYTHING has to be tied into the story at some point" which we know from the first movie is just as forced as last time.

Boring set pieces, extremely artificial lighting (99% looks like a studio), unnecessary sexualisation, VERY bad effects (the budget probably all went into actor payments and music licensing). The middle part puts one to sleep.

So why 4 and not 1 out of 10?

Cole is better this time. Less annoying. Samara Weaving (even though it's hard to believe it's actually her? And what is that atrocious wig???) is great. And the last act is an improvement.

Not another sequel please.

Pros: The run-time, the commitment to classic horror, not taking itself too seriously, Samara Weaving, dialogue (first half) Cons: Cole, setpieces, plot inconsistencies, second half, lackluster depth and world building.

Gotta appreciate the effort to tie in pretty much everything that was established in the first half hour.

At the end of the day, the movie serves its purpose. For its intended purpose, that is.

But it just feels a little empty overall.

The gore is there. But the horror definitely could have been dialed up a few notches.

Some scenes are very repetitive. The last act lacks effort.

It serves its genre.

6/10.

Insane indeed. But in the best kind of way. 26 years after it's release, I finally got to watch this classic that has been jailed a must-see in German film history for decades. My expectations were high.

And boy, were they met.

Bleibtreu is more than solid. Knaup is great. But Potente (unsurprisingly) steals the show. Especially the voice-overs are the best of the craft of voice-acting.

Apart from acting, everything else is non-traditional.

Experimental, fully original and most importantly, fun!

These were the times when German movies just did what they wanted to. And this approach is what made them so successful, and rightfully so.

This truly is a flack back to a brighter past.

Today's cinema could learn a lot.

Batshit crazy cinematography, tonal shifts which fit so effortlessly neat and and adrenaline packed soundtrack.

This is late 90's movie making at its best.

It's hard for me to find something to complain about.

But for now, I stay with a 9/10. Tendency going up, no question about that.

No wonder this is so iconic. I love it.

AND LOOK AT THE RUN-TIME!

How much emotion and rush can one pack in such a limited run-time?

Incredible.

9.5/10.

Renner might not have been the best fit for this character.

Olsen is underused.

The third act unravels a bit to fast for my liking. The limited runtime tries to keep it compact but if you know everything that's going to happen with still 25 minutes to go, it's not ideal.

I was very surprised by Jon Bernthal. Had no billing and did his usual act. Solid tho. As always.

But THAT scene is what elevates this movie above average.

Sure, it's clichéed. Sure, it doesn't brake any new ground. But it's well choreographed, well lit, well acted and adds immense emotional depth. The plotholes on the other hand diminish the viewing experience a bit.

You don't have to live in super rural, mountainous terrain to know some things don't add up.

If we had a better Renner, a more intricate plot with some more content/context and a less stereotypical ending/message, this could have been great.

Without that, still a good watch.

7/10.