Question: What about story?

If you aren't a Brenden Fraser fan, stop right here and search for another film.If you are, you'll like "Journey".This is a good family film. We were able to watch it very comfortably with our 9 year old grand-daughter.The movie, which is about three people trapped far beneath the earth with prehistoric plants and creatures, is both exciting and funny. The main characters are all likable, and Brendan Fraser is at his charming and funny best.Sadly, even if you do all the work to correctly track down the 3D dvd version of this film and the 3D glasses. it won't do you much good. The home 3D presentation doesn't exactly jump off the screen at you, so my advice would be to skip the extra trouble and expense that I went through to that end.Suspension of disbelief is no greater for this 'follow-up' film than it was for the Verne book or for the original movie with James Mason and Pat Boone. The special effects are good, and the same solid dinosaurs about to eat people type that you've come to appreciate ever since Jurassic Park. The story is NOT meant to be a cover of the Verne book, it is sort of a sequel, in a way. That element of the movie was handled in a very interesting fashion.This is not the best movie you've ever seen, but it is enjoyable, and one of few you can enjoy with the family, so it does have value.

Answer: This is a good family film

This is a good family film .

If you aren't a Brenden Fraser fan, stop right here and search for another film. If you are, you'll like "Journey". <hl> This is a good family film . <hl> We were able to watch it very comfortably with our 9 year old grand-daughter. The movie, which is about three people trapped far beneath the earth with prehistoric plants and creatures, is both exciting and funny. The main characters are all likable, and Brendan Fraser is at his charming and funny best. Sadly, even if you do all the work to correctly track down the 3D dvd version of this film and the 3D glasses. it won't do you much good. The home 3D presentation doesn't exactly jump off the screen at you, so my advice would be to skip the extra trouble and expense that I went through to that end. Suspension of disbelief is no greater for this 'follow-up' film than it was for the Verne book or for the original movie with James Mason and Pat Boone. The special effects are good, and the same solid dinosaurs about to eat people type that you've come to appreciate ever since Jurassic Park. The story is NOT meant to be a cover of the Verne book, it is sort of a sequel, in a way. That element of the movie was handled in a very interesting fashion. This is not the best movie you've ever seen, but it is enjoyable, and one of few you can enjoy with the family, so it does have value.

If you aren't a Brenden Fraser fan, stop right here and search for another film.If you are, you'll like "Journey".<hl> This is a good family film <hl>. We were able to watch it very comfortably with our 9 year old grand-daughter.The movie, which is about three people trapped far beneath the earth with prehistoric plants and creatures, is both exciting and funny. The main characters are all likable, and Brendan Fraser is at his charming and funny best.Sadly, even if you do all the work to correctly track down the 3D dvd version of this film and the 3D glasses. it won't do you much good. The home 3D presentation doesn't exactly jump off the screen at you, so my advice would be to skip the extra trouble and expense that I went through to that end.Suspension of disbelief is no greater for this 'follow-up' film than it was for the Verne book or for the original movie with James Mason and Pat Boone. The special effects are good, and the same solid dinosaurs about to eat people type that you've come to appreciate ever since Jurassic Park. The story is NOT meant to be a cover of the Verne book, it is sort of a sequel, in a way. That element of the movie was handled in a very interesting fashion.This is not the best movie you've ever seen, but it is enjoyable, and one of few you can enjoy with the family, so it does have value.


Question: How is the story line?

I was dubious about this premise and the show before I started watching.  It took only one episode for me to be totally hooked!  The character development is excellent, the plot is fun, the story arches are enjoyable and engaging.Bottom line - its well done and its a lot of fun!

Answer: The character development is excellent, the plot is fun, the story arches are enjoyable and engaging.

I was dubious about this premise and the show before I started watching. It took only one episode for me to be totally hooked! <hl> The character development is excellent, the plot is fun, the story arches are enjoyable and engaging. Bottom line - its well done and its a lot of fun! <hl>

I was dubious about this premise and the show before I started watching. It took only one episode for me to be totally hooked! <hl> The character development is excellent, the plot is fun, the story arches are enjoyable and engaging. <hl>Bottom line - its well done and its a lot of fun!

<hl> The character development is excellent, the plot is fun, the story arches are enjoyable and engaging. <hl> Bottom line - its well done and its a lot of fun!


Question: What is your opinion about the character?

Firefly is like no other television program.  Only lasting one year, with episodes randomly thrown on strange nights on FOX, this series boasted a classic combination of science fiction with a western flair.  How could it go wrong?  A humorous program that had fun, fought bad guys, and harbored extremely dark secrets.  Why did it only last one season?  Marketing.  FOX, as we all can learn from my review of Outfoxed, is not quite the "fair and balanced" type of programming that it promotes, but instead attaches itself to the hottest trend and pushes it nearly to the point of sickness.  For those that would disagree, I ask you to check out how many predictable seasons of American Idol we will have to endure until someone realizes that it lost its steam a many a moon ago.  Or how about the disaster of a series called Wife Swap?  Honestly, did FOX just ignore the idea of creativity and push directly for insulting "reality" television?  From what I see on television today, I could only assume the answer to be "yes".  Firefly was a bold, unique, and highly original series that gave us powerful characters, detailed stories, and that Lost itch in the back of your mind that keeps you asking that age old question, "why".  Yet, in all of its power, it was cancelled.Firefly is perfection on a stick.  The twang of the guitar, the stone-face stare of Mal, the goofiness of Jayne (is that a girls name?), the questionable past of Shepard Book, the humor of Wash, the power of Zoe, and the innocence of Kaylee is exactly why I fell in love with this show.  This is honestly, one of the few series that I could go back from the beginning and watch again, loving every moment of it.  Whedon created a masterpiece in my eyes, and a huge opportunity was missed by several major networks to keep this imagination alive.While some will argue that Firefly was full of nothing more than C-rated actors who were "shallow cut-outs, and whose dialogue never rises above the level of a so-so sitcom", I thought that they brought so much personality and charisma to a smorgasbord of unoriginal programming. I wanted to know the truth behind River and the darkness behind the good Shepard.  I continually waited for a snappy comeback from Mal, and was excited whenever he showed humility.  Jayne was a big favorite of mine, always questioning authority, yet as loyal as the family dog.  The love between Zoe and Wash brought a new layer of honesty to this sci-fi series.  It wasn't just about paying for the ship, flying through unmapped terrain, or stealing, it was about humanity.  That sense of humanity could be found in the opening episode for this series aptly titled "Serenity".  In it, the crew takes upon some passengers with some rather unknown cargo.  Inside one of those crates is a girl that will change their lives forever.  For this series to work successfully, as it did, we needed human characters that bled, felt compassion, and demonstrated connectiveness to each of us.  Mal's ship, Serenity, was a living example of how television could be done creatively and originally.The characters could only be as strong as the words that were handed to them.  Listening to the words that pass through Mal's mouth, the charm of Wash, or even the inconsistent ramblings of River, you could only wonder where Whedon could have gone with all of them.  In each of these characters, Whedon had written secrets.  While, sadly, we may never know what they all were, that is what made you itch for more episodes.  You not only wanted to see the creative "western" adventures that Whedon was sending his crew, but you also wanted to learn more about these band of renegades.  They were good, but possibly darkness reigned inside of them.  The character most guilty of this (outside of River) was Shepard Book.  I loved this character.  Whedon drew him with so much passion and conviction, yet with every episode you learned more about this man than imaginable.  He is an excellent example of what this series was like.  He represented the smart words of Whedon, the humanity of his character, and the secrets that each of these shared.  He was a "priest", yet he knew more about the Alliance than anyone aboard that ship.  If anyone were to ask me to describe the series in two words, I would simply say, "Shepard Book".George Lucas is credited with creating this detailed futuristic world that gives us glimpses of a possible future, or a galaxy far far away, Whedon succeeded in this series by giving us a plausible future in the not-too-distant future of 500 years.  Prostitution in legal, in fact respected in the community, the Chinese and Americans have forged one super power called the Alliance, and our hero is a war veteran, still not shaken by the loss that his side took due to the Alliance control.  While Lucas gives us far-fetched characters and situations, Whedon gives us a imaginative look at our future.  I think that is why this series worked so well for me.  I could imagine this future.  I could see it past the characters.  I wasn't bogged down by dopey looking aliens, but instead a plausible man vs. man situation.  Firefly was simple, yet so complex.I could honestly go on forever about how much I enjoyed this show.  I have never watched a series where I found myself prepared to watch over and over again. Firefly blends a power mixture of comedy, western, and action all together ... and the characters bleed.  Villains die in this series.  How often do you see that?  If you have not watched this series, or have not spent the money to support it, DO IT RIGHT NOW!Grade: (proudly) ***** out of *****

Answer: the characters bleed

Firefly is like no other television program. Only lasting one year, with episodes randomly thrown on strange nights on FOX, this series boasted a classic combination of science fiction with a western flair. How could it go wrong? A humorous program that had fun, fought bad guys, and harbored extremely dark secrets. Why did it only last one season? Marketing. FOX, as we all can learn from my review of Outfoxed, is not quite the "fair and balanced" type of programming that it promotes, but instead attaches itself to the hottest trend and pushes it nearly to the point of sickness. For those that would disagree, I ask you to check out how many predictable seasons of American Idol we will have to endure until someone realizes that it lost its steam a many a moon ago. Or how about the disaster of a series called Wife Swap? Honestly, did FOX just ignore the idea of creativity and push directly for insulting "reality" television? From what I see on television today, I could only assume the answer to be "yes". Firefly was a bold, unique, and highly original series that gave us powerful characters, detailed stories, and that Lost itch in the back of your mind that keeps you asking that age old question, "why". Yet, in all of its power, it was cancelled. Firefly is perfection on a stick. The twang of the guitar, the stone-face stare of Mal, the goofiness of Jayne (is that a girls name?), the questionable past of Shepard Book, the humor of Wash, the power of Zoe, and the innocence of Kaylee is exactly why I fell in love with this show. This is honestly, one of the few series that I could go back from the beginning and watch again, loving every moment of it. Whedon created a masterpiece in my eyes, and a huge opportunity was missed by several major networks to keep this imagination alive. While some will argue that Firefly was full of nothing more than C-rated actors who were "shallow cut-outs, and whose dialogue never rises above the level of a so-so sitcom", I thought that they brought so much personality and charisma to a smorgasbord of unoriginal programming. I wanted to know the truth behind River and the darkness behind the good Shepard. I continually waited for a snappy comeback from Mal, and was excited whenever he showed humility. Jayne was a big favorite of mine, always questioning authority, yet as loyal as the family dog. The love between Zoe and Wash brought a new layer of honesty to this sci-fi series. It wasn't just about paying for the ship, flying through unmapped terrain, or stealing, it was about humanity. That sense of humanity could be found in the opening episode for this series aptly titled "Serenity". In it, the crew takes upon some passengers with some rather unknown cargo. Inside one of those crates is a girl that will change their lives forever. For this series to work successfully, as it did, we needed human characters that bled, felt compassion, and demonstrated connectiveness to each of us. Mal's ship, Serenity, was a living example of how television could be done creatively and originally. The characters could only be as strong as the words that were handed to them. Listening to the words that pass through Mal's mouth, the charm of Wash, or even the inconsistent ramblings of River, you could only wonder where Whedon could have gone with all of them. In each of these characters, Whedon had written secrets. While, sadly, we may never know what they all were, that is what made you itch for more episodes. You not only wanted to see the creative "western" adventures that Whedon was sending his crew, but you also wanted to learn more about these band of renegades. They were good, but possibly darkness reigned inside of them. The character most guilty of this (outside of River) was Shepard Book. I loved this character. Whedon drew him with so much passion and conviction, yet with every episode you learned more about this man than imaginable. He is an excellent example of what this series was like. He represented the smart words of Whedon, the humanity of his character, and the secrets that each of these shared. He was a "priest", yet he knew more about the Alliance than anyone aboard that ship. If anyone were to ask me to describe the series in two words, I would simply say, "Shepard Book". George Lucas is credited with creating this detailed futuristic world that gives us glimpses of a possible future, or a galaxy far far away, Whedon succeeded in this series by giving us a plausible future in the not-too-distant future of 500 years. Prostitution in legal, in fact respected in the community, the Chinese and Americans have forged one super power called the Alliance, and our hero is a war veteran, still not shaken by the loss that his side took due to the Alliance control. While Lucas gives us far-fetched characters and situations, Whedon gives us a imaginative look at our future. I think that is why this series worked so well for me. I could imagine this future. I could see it past the characters. I wasn't bogged down by dopey looking aliens, but instead a plausible man vs. man situation. Firefly was simple, yet so complex. I could honestly go on forever about how much I enjoyed this show. I have never watched a series where I found myself prepared to watch over and over again. <hl> Firefly blends a power mixture of comedy, western, and action all together ... and the characters bleed . <hl> Villains die in this series. How often do you see that? If you have not watched this series, or have not spent the money to support it, DO IT RIGHT NOW!Grade: (proudly) ***** out of *****

Firefly is like no other television program. Only lasting one year, with episodes randomly thrown on strange nights on FOX, this series boasted a classic combination of science fiction with a western flair. How could it go wrong? A humorous program that had fun, fought bad guys, and harbored extremely dark secrets. Why did it only last one season? Marketing. FOX, as we all can learn from my review of Outfoxed, is not quite the "fair and balanced" type of programming that it promotes, but instead attaches itself to the hottest trend and pushes it nearly to the point of sickness. For those that would disagree, I ask you to check out how many predictable seasons of American Idol we will have to endure until someone realizes that it lost its steam a many a moon ago. Or how about the disaster of a series called Wife Swap? Honestly, did FOX just ignore the idea of creativity and push directly for insulting "reality" television? From what I see on television today, I could only assume the answer to be "yes". Firefly was a bold, unique, and highly original series that gave us powerful characters, detailed stories, and that Lost itch in the back of your mind that keeps you asking that age old question, "why". Yet, in all of its power, it was cancelled.Firefly is perfection on a stick. The twang of the guitar, the stone-face stare of Mal, the goofiness of Jayne (is that a girls name?), the questionable past of Shepard Book, the humor of Wash, the power of Zoe, and the innocence of Kaylee is exactly why I fell in love with this show. This is honestly, one of the few series that I could go back from the beginning and watch again, loving every moment of it. Whedon created a masterpiece in my eyes, and a huge opportunity was missed by several major networks to keep this imagination alive.While some will argue that Firefly was full of nothing more than C-rated actors who were "shallow cut-outs, and whose dialogue never rises above the level of a so-so sitcom", I thought that they brought so much personality and charisma to a smorgasbord of unoriginal programming. I wanted to know the truth behind River and the darkness behind the good Shepard. I continually waited for a snappy comeback from Mal, and was excited whenever he showed humility. Jayne was a big favorite of mine, always questioning authority, yet as loyal as the family dog. The love between Zoe and Wash brought a new layer of honesty to this sci-fi series. It wasn't just about paying for the ship, flying through unmapped terrain, or stealing, it was about humanity. That sense of humanity could be found in the opening episode for this series aptly titled "Serenity". In it, the crew takes upon some passengers with some rather unknown cargo. Inside one of those crates is a girl that will change their lives forever. For this series to work successfully, as it did, we needed human characters that bled, felt compassion, and demonstrated connectiveness to each of us. Mal's ship, Serenity, was a living example of how television could be done creatively and originally.The characters could only be as strong as the words that were handed to them. Listening to the words that pass through Mal's mouth, the charm of Wash, or even the inconsistent ramblings of River, you could only wonder where Whedon could have gone with all of them. In each of these characters, Whedon had written secrets. While, sadly, we may never know what they all were, that is what made you itch for more episodes. You not only wanted to see the creative "western" adventures that Whedon was sending his crew, but you also wanted to learn more about these band of renegades. They were good, but possibly darkness reigned inside of them. The character most guilty of this (outside of River) was Shepard Book. I loved this character. Whedon drew him with so much passion and conviction, yet with every episode you learned more about this man than imaginable. He is an excellent example of what this series was like. He represented the smart words of Whedon, the humanity of his character, and the secrets that each of these shared. He was a "priest", yet he knew more about the Alliance than anyone aboard that ship. If anyone were to ask me to describe the series in two words, I would simply say, "Shepard Book".George Lucas is credited with creating this detailed futuristic world that gives us glimpses of a possible future, or a galaxy far far away, Whedon succeeded in this series by giving us a plausible future in the not-too-distant future of 500 years. Prostitution in legal, in fact respected in the community, the Chinese and Americans have forged one super power called the Alliance, and our hero is a war veteran, still not shaken by the loss that his side took due to the Alliance control. While Lucas gives us far-fetched characters and situations, Whedon gives us a imaginative look at our future. I think that is why this series worked so well for me. I could imagine this future. I could see it past the characters. I wasn't bogged down by dopey looking aliens, but instead a plausible man vs. man situation. Firefly was simple, yet so complex.I could honestly go on forever about how much I enjoyed this show. I have never watched a series where I found myself prepared to watch over and over again. Firefly blends a power mixture of comedy, western, and action all together ... and <hl> the characters bleed <hl>. Villains die in this series. How often do you see that? If you have not watched this series, or have not spent the money to support it, DO IT RIGHT NOW!Grade: (proudly) ***** out of *****

Firefly blends a power mixture of comedy, western, and action all together ... and <hl> the characters bleed <hl> .


Question: What is the quality of the movie?

Unknown to the majority of the populous until late 2009/early 2010, Christopher Nolan was not attempting a directorial debut with Batman Begins, The Prestige, or The Dark Knight. No. He directed said films to gain experience for an idea which had been simmering in his mind for almost a decade:Inception, which was to be his breakthrough as a major feature film director. Though not as highly successful overall as The Dark Knight, which mainly received such favorable reviews because of Heath Ledger's posthumous Academy Award, Inception was a success in its own way: subtly brilliant, with a plot simple enough to comprehend but twisting enough to keep your attention.The score, composed by Hans Zimmer, is fantastic. Though perhaps not his best composition work, it definitely earns him a place among his greats. Leonardo DiCaprio is an amazing actor as always. Ken Watanabe fully captures the corporate businessman's enigmatic role. Marion Cotillard, Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Caine are each persuasive in their own way, making the characters believable as well as drawing the appropriate emotion out of you.The plot is an obvious Nolan brainchild. Who else would compile such a brilliant and stunning script and successfully tie it together for one brilliant finale? Not many.Watch this movie. Find the time: it will be worth your while. Christopher Nolan is one of the greatest director's of our time, and he will be until his career has come to a close.Rated PG-13For Intense Sequences of Violence and Action throughout

Answer: which was to be his breakthrough as a major feature film director

Unknown to the majority of the populous until late 2009/early 2010, Christopher Nolan was not attempting a directorial debut with Batman Begins, The Prestige, or The Dark Knight. No. <hl> He directed said films to gain experience for an idea which had been simmering in his mind for almost a decade:Inception, which was to be his breakthrough as a major feature film director . <hl> Though not as highly successful overall as The Dark Knight, which mainly received such favorable reviews because of Heath Ledger's posthumous Academy Award, Inception was a success in its own way: subtly brilliant, with a plot simple enough to comprehend but twisting enough to keep your attention. The score, composed by Hans Zimmer, is fantastic. Though perhaps not his best composition work, it definitely earns him a place among his greats. Leonardo DiCaprio is an amazing actor as always. Ken Watanabe fully captures the corporate businessman's enigmatic role. Marion Cotillard, Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Caine are each persuasive in their own way, making the characters believable as well as drawing the appropriate emotion out of you. The plot is an obvious Nolan brainchild. Who else would compile such a brilliant and stunning script and successfully tie it together for one brilliant finale? Not many. Watch this movie. Find the time: it will be worth your while. Christopher Nolan is one of the greatest director's of our time, and he will be until his career has come to a close. Rated PG-13For Intense Sequences of Violence and Action throughout

Unknown to the majority of the populous until late 2009/early 2010, Christopher Nolan was not attempting a directorial debut with Batman Begins, The Prestige, or The Dark Knight. No. He directed said films to gain experience for an idea which had been simmering in his mind for almost a decade:Inception, <hl> which was to be his breakthrough as a major feature film director <hl>. Though not as highly successful overall as The Dark Knight, which mainly received such favorable reviews because of Heath Ledger's posthumous Academy Award, Inception was a success in its own way: subtly brilliant, with a plot simple enough to comprehend but twisting enough to keep your attention.The score, composed by Hans Zimmer, is fantastic. Though perhaps not his best composition work, it definitely earns him a place among his greats. Leonardo DiCaprio is an amazing actor as always. Ken Watanabe fully captures the corporate businessman's enigmatic role. Marion Cotillard, Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Caine are each persuasive in their own way, making the characters believable as well as drawing the appropriate emotion out of you.The plot is an obvious Nolan brainchild. Who else would compile such a brilliant and stunning script and successfully tie it together for one brilliant finale? Not many.Watch this movie. Find the time: it will be worth your while. Christopher Nolan is one of the greatest director's of our time, and he will be until his career has come to a close.Rated PG-13For Intense Sequences of Violence and Action throughout

He directed said films to gain experience for an idea which had been simmering in his mind for almost a decade:Inception, <hl> which was to be his breakthrough as a major feature film director <hl> .


Question: How is the film "passion of the christ" described?

First of all, I am so relieved that I have finally seen this film after so much anticipation, and I was moved to tears as I had expected. It's been so long since I have been so taken by a romantic movie, and Brokeback Mountain is as beautiful and emotionally impacting as films like Happy Together(Tony Leung), Intimates(Carina Lau), and The English Patient(Ralph Fiennes). It's such a treat to see Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger under the meticulous direction of Ang Lee. I agree with Lee that this film is a beautiful love story and not a gay cowboy movie.Brokeback Mountain uses the beautiful mountain landscape of Alberta as a stand in for the Wyoming mountains. It's the place where Jack(Gyllenhaal) and Ennis(Ledger) spent their first year in the mid '60s working together as cowboys tending the sheeps. The two lonesome cowboys clashed at first, but eventual became friends and secret lovers. Jack is the sexy and rebellious one, and Ennis is emotionally and sexually confused. At first, they didn't want to acknowledge their feelings for each other, until they were separated for four years, and started to miss each other. During those four years, they both got married and led a "normal life", and had kids. Ennis' wife Alma(Michelle Williams) eventually found out that he's cheating on her with Jack, but never actually confronted him until years later. Jack had been relocated to Texas since marrying the beautiful and wealthy Laureen(Anne Hathway).When Jack and Ennis were reunited, it reignited their old passion and lust for each other, and occasionally went up to Brokeback Mountain to have their secret romantic getaways while pretending to be on fishing trips. Jack's feeling for Ennis grew stronger gradually, and suggested to move away and live together. But Ennis has homophobia of his own and fear any possible alienation and condemnation, and just wanted to keep it a "once in a blue moon" deal. So time passes by, and twenty years later, they are both middle aged men, still going through the same old pattern. Jack becomes resentful towards Ennis, because he had wasted half of his life loving him and not having him entirely, even when he had already been divorced from Alma for years.This film features a scene stealing Michelle Williams. The scene when Alma saw Ennis kissing and hugging Jack outside her house was so funny and shocking. She was mesmerizing when she had her heart-to-heart confrontation with Ennis. Anne Hathway has less screentime and a less challenging role to work with, and she gets to wear different kinds of wigs. Her final scene when she breaks the tragic news to Ennis was her big moment. I enjoyed watching every scene between Jake and Heath. I actually like Jake's character more, because he knew what he wanted and was not afraid to love the man of his life. I was very moved by his final scene, which was kind of long, but the most dramatic between the two leads. I wished Jake had a few more stronger scenes to work with. It's Heath who actually got the most tear-jerking moments, and yes, his performance is compelling, and heartbreaking, especially the last fifteen minutes.Ang Lee had done a great job making this film visually stunning and emotionally powerful, even though the love scenes are rather low-key. The cinematography captures the most beautiful images of the mountains, sheeps, rivers, and lakes. The original score and theme song are quite memorable. This film is going to have a huge following of gay audiences, but it's also a must-see for the mainstream crowds, because it's truly the year's most unforgetable romantic movie!

Answer: anticipation

<hl> First of all, I am so relieved that I have finally seen this film after so much anticipation , and I was moved to tears as I had expected. <hl> It's been so long since I have been so taken by a romantic movie, and Brokeback Mountain is as beautiful and emotionally impacting as films like Happy Together(Tony Leung), Intimates(Carina Lau), and The English Patient(Ralph Fiennes). It's such a treat to see Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger under the meticulous direction of Ang Lee. I agree with Lee that this film is a beautiful love story and not a gay cowboy movie. Brokeback Mountain uses the beautiful mountain landscape of Alberta as a stand in for the Wyoming mountains. It's the place where Jack(Gyllenhaal) and Ennis(Ledger) spent their first year in the mid '60s working together as cowboys tending the sheeps. The two lonesome cowboys clashed at first, but eventual became friends and secret lovers. Jack is the sexy and rebellious one, and Ennis is emotionally and sexually confused. At first, they didn't want to acknowledge their feelings for each other, until they were separated for four years, and started to miss each other. During those four years, they both got married and led a "normal life", and had kids. Ennis' wife Alma(Michelle Williams) eventually found out that he's cheating on her with Jack, but never actually confronted him until years later. Jack had been relocated to Texas since marrying the beautiful and wealthy Laureen(Anne Hathway).When Jack and Ennis were reunited, it reignited their old passion and lust for each other, and occasionally went up to Brokeback Mountain to have their secret romantic getaways while pretending to be on fishing trips. Jack's feeling for Ennis grew stronger gradually, and suggested to move away and live together. But Ennis has homophobia of his own and fear any possible alienation and condemnation, and just wanted to keep it a "once in a blue moon" deal. So time passes by, and twenty years later, they are both middle aged men, still going through the same old pattern. Jack becomes resentful towards Ennis, because he had wasted half of his life loving him and not having him entirely, even when he had already been divorced from Alma for years. This film features a scene stealing Michelle Williams. The scene when Alma saw Ennis kissing and hugging Jack outside her house was so funny and shocking. She was mesmerizing when she had her heart-to-heart confrontation with Ennis. Anne Hathway has less screentime and a less challenging role to work with, and she gets to wear different kinds of wigs. Her final scene when she breaks the tragic news to Ennis was her big moment. I enjoyed watching every scene between Jake and Heath. I actually like Jake's character more, because he knew what he wanted and was not afraid to love the man of his life. I was very moved by his final scene, which was kind of long, but the most dramatic between the two leads. I wished Jake had a few more stronger scenes to work with. It's Heath who actually got the most tear-jerking moments, and yes, his performance is compelling, and heartbreaking, especially the last fifteen minutes. Ang Lee had done a great job making this film visually stunning and emotionally powerful, even though the love scenes are rather low-key. The cinematography captures the most beautiful images of the mountains, sheeps, rivers, and lakes. The original score and theme song are quite memorable. This film is going to have a huge following of gay audiences, but it's also a must-see for the mainstream crowds, because it's truly the year's most unforgetable romantic movie!

First of all, I am so relieved that I have finally seen this film after so much <hl> anticipation <hl>, and I was moved to tears as I had expected. It's been so long since I have been so taken by a romantic movie, and Brokeback Mountain is as beautiful and emotionally impacting as films like Happy Together(Tony Leung), Intimates(Carina Lau), and The English Patient(Ralph Fiennes). It's such a treat to see Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger under the meticulous direction of Ang Lee. I agree with Lee that this film is a beautiful love story and not a gay cowboy movie.Brokeback Mountain uses the beautiful mountain landscape of Alberta as a stand in for the Wyoming mountains. It's the place where Jack(Gyllenhaal) and Ennis(Ledger) spent their first year in the mid '60s working together as cowboys tending the sheeps. The two lonesome cowboys clashed at first, but eventual became friends and secret lovers. Jack is the sexy and rebellious one, and Ennis is emotionally and sexually confused. At first, they didn't want to acknowledge their feelings for each other, until they were separated for four years, and started to miss each other. During those four years, they both got married and led a "normal life", and had kids. Ennis' wife Alma(Michelle Williams) eventually found out that he's cheating on her with Jack, but never actually confronted him until years later. Jack had been relocated to Texas since marrying the beautiful and wealthy Laureen(Anne Hathway).When Jack and Ennis were reunited, it reignited their old passion and lust for each other, and occasionally went up to Brokeback Mountain to have their secret romantic getaways while pretending to be on fishing trips. Jack's feeling for Ennis grew stronger gradually, and suggested to move away and live together. But Ennis has homophobia of his own and fear any possible alienation and condemnation, and just wanted to keep it a "once in a blue moon" deal. So time passes by, and twenty years later, they are both middle aged men, still going through the same old pattern. Jack becomes resentful towards Ennis, because he had wasted half of his life loving him and not having him entirely, even when he had already been divorced from Alma for years.This film features a scene stealing Michelle Williams. The scene when Alma saw Ennis kissing and hugging Jack outside her house was so funny and shocking. She was mesmerizing when she had her heart-to-heart confrontation with Ennis. Anne Hathway has less screentime and a less challenging role to work with, and she gets to wear different kinds of wigs. Her final scene when she breaks the tragic news to Ennis was her big moment. I enjoyed watching every scene between Jake and Heath. I actually like Jake's character more, because he knew what he wanted and was not afraid to love the man of his life. I was very moved by his final scene, which was kind of long, but the most dramatic between the two leads. I wished Jake had a few more stronger scenes to work with. It's Heath who actually got the most tear-jerking moments, and yes, his performance is compelling, and heartbreaking, especially the last fifteen minutes.Ang Lee had done a great job making this film visually stunning and emotionally powerful, even though the love scenes are rather low-key. The cinematography captures the most beautiful images of the mountains, sheeps, rivers, and lakes. The original score and theme song are quite memorable. This film is going to have a huge following of gay audiences, but it's also a must-see for the mainstream crowds, because it's truly the year's most unforgetable romantic movie!

First of all, I am so relieved that I have finally seen this film after so much <hl> anticipation <hl> , and I was moved to tears as I had expected.


Question: Is the movie thing okay?

Although I knew from the open, that this was an exercise in the absurd, Cameron Diaz gyrating down the street like a deranged valley girl juxtaposed into the hilly streets of San Francisco?  I watched "The Sweetest Thing" anyway.Diaz plays Christina, who looks up from her rollerblading and walkman long enough to trip over galpal Courtney anyway(Christina Applegate), dressed like a corporate lawyer.  I suppose we should believe it when we find out she IS one here, solely on the basis of her attire.  These two are best friends, and if that's not hard enough to swallow, add Jane, the third and most unwelcome wheel in this car-wreck trio.  It seems that Jane, played by Selma Blair in an eerily revisited naive, loose bimbo bent as in "Cruel Intentions", (see my review)is not happy unless she is being used, abused and laughed at by everyone in town, literally.  Does anyone really think this is a girl bonding film?  A girl BONDAGE film would be less humiliating to women compared to her role here.The ONLY good thing in this film, and the only character I cared about is Peter. (Thomas Jane) Peter is about to get married when he meets Christina, gyrating for a change, at a bar.  There is something electric for both, and Christina, a FEMALE commitment-phobic, feels he may be the one.  Since she can't forget him, she drags Courtney on the worlds most rediculous roadtrip to find him.  If two girls using a filthy public mens room, to wash off a container of spilled festering maggots sounds good, followed by hovering over a urinal for it's intended use...but not in any position normally used by a human, which subsequently causes a geyser to erupt from it, look no further for a quality viewing experience."The Sweetest Thing" tries so hard to be funny, it misses the mark more often than not.  As a woman, I can't see this being a female empowerment film.  Just because Christina is commitment-phobic, a classic man problem revisited in every venue, she doesn't get any upper hand here.  She is not a sympathetic character, and even when getting what she wants, she nearly blows it anyway.Speaking of blowing it, the trio's aforementioned Jane, played by Selma Blair has to be in one of the most humiliating roles a female has ever played.  Picture a life, where the removal of protein stains oddly positioned on clothing lead to embarrassment at the cleaners.  How about a large object lodged behind her tonsils with a human still attached, and needing to sing classic Aerosmith to dislodge it, along with a viewing audience in chorus.  Let's not forget, the conjugal visit to her workplace storage room, from a boyfriend in a big fluffy animal suit that bops her on the head repeatedly while physically engaged.  Is that what the real life of the strong modern woman is supposedly like?  I just want to let the guys know that are asking, the answer is NO.While "The Sweetest Thing" has a few good moments, mostly the romance between Diaz's Christina, and Jane's Peter, there are too many over the top, debasing moments to lift the film from wallowing in an abundance of trite silliness. Watch once if you are inclined, and then forget it.

Answer: the answer is NO.While

Although I knew from the open, that this was an exercise in the absurd, Cameron Diaz gyrating down the street like a deranged valley girl juxtaposed into the hilly streets of San Francisco? I watched "The Sweetest Thing" anyway. Diaz plays Christina, who looks up from her rollerblading and walkman long enough to trip over galpal Courtney anyway(Christina Applegate), dressed like a corporate lawyer. I suppose we should believe it when we find out she IS one here, solely on the basis of her attire. These two are best friends, and if that's not hard enough to swallow, add Jane, the third and most unwelcome wheel in this car-wreck trio. It seems that Jane, played by Selma Blair in an eerily revisited naive, loose bimbo bent as in "Cruel Intentions", (see my review)is not happy unless she is being used, abused and laughed at by everyone in town, literally. Does anyone really think this is a girl bonding film? A girl BONDAGE film would be less humiliating to women compared to her role here. The ONLY good thing in this film, and the only character I cared about is Peter. (Thomas Jane) Peter is about to get married when he meets Christina, gyrating for a change, at a bar. There is something electric for both, and Christina, a FEMALE commitment-phobic, feels he may be the one. Since she can't forget him, she drags Courtney on the worlds most rediculous roadtrip to find him. If two girls using a filthy public mens room, to wash off a container of spilled festering maggots sounds good, followed by hovering over a urinal for it's intended use...but not in any position normally used by a human, which subsequently causes a geyser to erupt from it, look no further for a quality viewing experience. "The Sweetest Thing" tries so hard to be funny, it misses the mark more often than not. As a woman, I can't see this being a female empowerment film. Just because Christina is commitment-phobic, a classic man problem revisited in every venue, she doesn't get any upper hand here. She is not a sympathetic character, and even when getting what she wants, she nearly blows it anyway. Speaking of blowing it, the trio's aforementioned Jane, played by Selma Blair has to be in one of the most humiliating roles a female has ever played. Picture a life, where the removal of protein stains oddly positioned on clothing lead to embarrassment at the cleaners. How about a large object lodged behind her tonsils with a human still attached, and needing to sing classic Aerosmith to dislodge it, along with a viewing audience in chorus. Let's not forget, the conjugal visit to her workplace storage room, from a boyfriend in a big fluffy animal suit that bops her on the head repeatedly while physically engaged. Is that what the real life of the strong modern woman is supposedly like? <hl> I just want to let the guys know that are asking, the answer is NO.While "The Sweetest Thing" has a few good moments, mostly the romance between Diaz's Christina, and Jane's Peter, there are too many over the top, debasing moments to lift the film from wallowing in an abundance of trite silliness. <hl> Watch once if you are inclined, and then forget it.

Although I knew from the open, that this was an exercise in the absurd, Cameron Diaz gyrating down the street like a deranged valley girl juxtaposed into the hilly streets of San Francisco? I watched "The Sweetest Thing" anyway.Diaz plays Christina, who looks up from her rollerblading and walkman long enough to trip over galpal Courtney anyway(Christina Applegate), dressed like a corporate lawyer. I suppose we should believe it when we find out she IS one here, solely on the basis of her attire. These two are best friends, and if that's not hard enough to swallow, add Jane, the third and most unwelcome wheel in this car-wreck trio. It seems that Jane, played by Selma Blair in an eerily revisited naive, loose bimbo bent as in "Cruel Intentions", (see my review)is not happy unless she is being used, abused and laughed at by everyone in town, literally. Does anyone really think this is a girl bonding film? A girl BONDAGE film would be less humiliating to women compared to her role here.The ONLY good thing in this film, and the only character I cared about is Peter. (Thomas Jane) Peter is about to get married when he meets Christina, gyrating for a change, at a bar. There is something electric for both, and Christina, a FEMALE commitment-phobic, feels he may be the one. Since she can't forget him, she drags Courtney on the worlds most rediculous roadtrip to find him. If two girls using a filthy public mens room, to wash off a container of spilled festering maggots sounds good, followed by hovering over a urinal for it's intended use...but not in any position normally used by a human, which subsequently causes a geyser to erupt from it, look no further for a quality viewing experience."The Sweetest Thing" tries so hard to be funny, it misses the mark more often than not. As a woman, I can't see this being a female empowerment film. Just because Christina is commitment-phobic, a classic man problem revisited in every venue, she doesn't get any upper hand here. She is not a sympathetic character, and even when getting what she wants, she nearly blows it anyway.Speaking of blowing it, the trio's aforementioned Jane, played by Selma Blair has to be in one of the most humiliating roles a female has ever played. Picture a life, where the removal of protein stains oddly positioned on clothing lead to embarrassment at the cleaners. How about a large object lodged behind her tonsils with a human still attached, and needing to sing classic Aerosmith to dislodge it, along with a viewing audience in chorus. Let's not forget, the conjugal visit to her workplace storage room, from a boyfriend in a big fluffy animal suit that bops her on the head repeatedly while physically engaged. Is that what the real life of the strong modern woman is supposedly like? I just want to let the guys know that are asking, <hl> the answer is NO.While <hl> "The Sweetest Thing" has a few good moments, mostly the romance between Diaz's Christina, and Jane's Peter, there are too many over the top, debasing moments to lift the film from wallowing in an abundance of trite silliness. Watch once if you are inclined, and then forget it.


Question: How is the animation?

This movie is set in the not to distant future, it is about a police officer who happens to be an android. The plot is deeply philisophical, as the android ponders her own existence. She contemplates if she is alive or in fact just a machine. This movie took the world animation festival by storm in 1996, and rightly so. Even big name directors like James Cameron (titanic) praised this film. The plot is smart and the animation is incredible. Even now seven years later the film still looks as good as anything else out there. The color is extremely vivid and the music is also done very well. For anyone out there looking to start a great anime collection, this should definitely be on your list of must haves.

Answer: the animation is incredible

This movie is set in the not to distant future, it is about a police officer who happens to be an android. The plot is deeply philisophical, as the android ponders her own existence. She contemplates if she is alive or in fact just a machine. This movie took the world animation festival by storm in 1996, and rightly so. Even big name directors like James Cameron (titanic) praised this film. <hl> The plot is smart and the animation is incredible . <hl> Even now seven years later the film still looks as good as anything else out there. The color is extremely vivid and the music is also done very well. For anyone out there looking to start a great anime collection, this should definitely be on your list of must haves.

This movie is set in the not to distant future, it is about a police officer who happens to be an android. The plot is deeply philisophical, as the android ponders her own existence. She contemplates if she is alive or in fact just a machine. This movie took the world animation festival by storm in 1996, and rightly so. Even big name directors like James Cameron (titanic) praised this film. The plot is smart and <hl> the animation is incredible <hl>. Even now seven years later the film still looks as good as anything else out there. The color is extremely vivid and the music is also done very well. For anyone out there looking to start a great anime collection, this should definitely be on your list of must haves.

The plot is smart and <hl> the animation is incredible <hl> .


Question: How could you describe the movie a special case?

I really enjoy this series. The writing and acting are exceptional. These DVDs are good quality and the special features are great.

Answer: These DVDs are good quality and the special features are great

I really enjoy this series. The writing and acting are exceptional. <hl> These DVDs are good quality and the special features are great . <hl>

I really enjoy this series. The writing and acting are exceptional. <hl> These DVDs are good quality and the special features are great <hl>.

<hl> These DVDs are good quality and the special features are great <hl> .


Question: How do you like the show?

This adult sci-if series is full of imagination, humor, and excellent acting. Tatiana Maslany is terrific at playing nine different parts and making each one believable. This series is well worth checking out

Answer: imagination, humor

<hl> This adult sci-if series is full of imagination, humor , and excellent acting. <hl> Tatiana Maslany is terrific at playing nine different parts and making each one believable. This series is well worth checking out

This adult sci-if series is full of <hl> imagination, humor <hl>, and excellent acting. Tatiana Maslany is terrific at playing nine different parts and making each one believable. This series is well worth checking out

This adult sci-if series is full of <hl> imagination, humor <hl> , and excellent acting.


Question: How was each character characterized?

Come on George Lucas, I'm sure you can do much better than feed us with this bloated, over-acted pathetic excuse of a film. I mean, anyone else helming this movie, and you might think..."hmm..good attempt" but this is Lucas we're talking about, the man who gave us such classics as Star Wars 4,5,6 and Indiana Jones movies. I am very disappointed with the outcome of this saga, honestly. What makes it more painful is the fact that I loved Star Wars 4,5 and 6. I grew up on those movies... it was the "Lord Of The Rings" of my generation.Years later, we get this...totally unnecessary prequels. The script is weak, there were many plot holes...the acting was bad, especially the romantic parts of the movie...that was laughable...me and my friends had a nice laugh at those parts, totally unrealistic and no chemistry at all. And what is up with Anakin aging like 10 years and Amidala looking like she hasn't aged a day? But that's a hiccup compared to the rest of the problems plaguing this movie. The effects were good though (hence the 2-star rating) but then again, we're in the 21st century and those effects were not groundbreaking, basically we've already seen it. George really has his work cut out for Revenge Of The Sith, I hope he doesn't blow that to dust too.Sorry if I offended anyone, it is not my intention to belittle Star Wars, and I am definitely not a Star Wars hater...I'm just giving my honest views. Anyway, Star Wars Episode III will be released soon, and I sincerely hope it is more to the standard of 4,5,6 than 1 and 2.

Answer: acted pathetic excuse

<hl> Come on George Lucas, I'm sure you can do much better than feed us with this bloated, over- acted pathetic excuse of a film. <hl> I mean, anyone else helming this movie, and you might think... "hmm..good attempt" but this is Lucas we're talking about, the man who gave us such classics as Star Wars 4,5,6 and Indiana Jones movies. I am very disappointed with the outcome of this saga, honestly. What makes it more painful is the fact that I loved Star Wars 4,5 and 6. I grew up on those movies... it was the "Lord Of The Rings" of my generation. Years later, we get this...totally unnecessary prequels. The script is weak, there were many plot holes...the acting was bad, especially the romantic parts of the movie...that was laughable... me and my friends had a nice laugh at those parts, totally unrealistic and no chemistry at all. And what is up with Anakin aging like 10 years and Amidala looking like she hasn't aged a day? But that's a hiccup compared to the rest of the problems plaguing this movie. The effects were good though (hence the 2-star rating) but then again, we're in the 21st century and those effects were not groundbreaking, basically we've already seen it. George really has his work cut out for Revenge Of The Sith, I hope he doesn't blow that to dust too. Sorry if I offended anyone, it is not my intention to belittle Star Wars, and I am definitely not a Star Wars hater...I'm just giving my honest views. Anyway, Star Wars Episode III will be released soon, and I sincerely hope it is more to the standard of 4,5,6 than 1 and 2.

Come on George Lucas, I'm sure you can do much better than feed us with this bloated, over-<hl> acted pathetic excuse <hl> of a film. I mean, anyone else helming this movie, and you might think..."hmm..good attempt" but this is Lucas we're talking about, the man who gave us such classics as Star Wars 4,5,6 and Indiana Jones movies. I am very disappointed with the outcome of this saga, honestly. What makes it more painful is the fact that I loved Star Wars 4,5 and 6. I grew up on those movies... it was the "Lord Of The Rings" of my generation.Years later, we get this...totally unnecessary prequels. The script is weak, there were many plot holes...the acting was bad, especially the romantic parts of the movie...that was laughable...me and my friends had a nice laugh at those parts, totally unrealistic and no chemistry at all. And what is up with Anakin aging like 10 years and Amidala looking like she hasn't aged a day? But that's a hiccup compared to the rest of the problems plaguing this movie. The effects were good though (hence the 2-star rating) but then again, we're in the 21st century and those effects were not groundbreaking, basically we've already seen it. George really has his work cut out for Revenge Of The Sith, I hope he doesn't blow that to dust too.Sorry if I offended anyone, it is not my intention to belittle Star Wars, and I am definitely not a Star Wars hater...I'm just giving my honest views. Anyway, Star Wars Episode III will be released soon, and I sincerely hope it is more to the standard of 4,5,6 than 1 and 2.

Come on George Lucas, I'm sure you can do much better than feed us with this bloated, over- <hl> acted pathetic excuse <hl> of a film.


Question: What about chemistry?

This adaptation of Pride and Prejudice is well-made and has an exceptional cast.  Each actor fit wonderfully with the assigned role, and even though some of the performances got a little too over the top at times (I'm referring to Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins), they still elicited a lot of chuckles.  The most inspired casting choice was Colin Firth as Darcy.  I think this is the best he's ever looked in any movie, and no one does smoldering hauteur better than he does; it gets to be that one eagerly awaits the moment when he'll next appear on the screen.There are some minor points that detracted from the movie.  The film was made to be presented on television in installments.  If one watches it all at once, rather than spaced out over time, one notices some repetitive scenes and passages of dialogue (placed in the movie not only to remain faithful to the book, but to jog the television viewer's memory over what happened in the last installment).  Also, there are some ludicrous moments where floating heads appear in mirrors or carriage windows, and again, these disembodied talking heads usually pop up to remind the viewer of something that happened earlier in the movie.  Also - and this bothered me most - I wish more of the dialogue revolved around matters that weren't strictly plot-related.  In the book there are certain comments and conversations that are omitted from the movie that I think would have fleshed out the characters more.Other than that, the BBC's Pride and Prejudice is a joy to watch.  Not only are the actors fantastic, the movie is filmed in a very picturesque way and you will love looking at the period costumes.  And Firth...  Colin Firth's presence prompts one to purchase the DVD.

Answer: Each actor fit wonderfully with the assigned role

This adaptation of Pride and Prejudice is well-made and has an exceptional cast. <hl> Each actor fit wonderfully with the assigned role , and even though some of the performances got a little too over the top at times (I'm referring to Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins), they still elicited a lot of chuckles. <hl> The most inspired casting choice was Colin Firth as Darcy. I think this is the best he's ever looked in any movie, and no one does smoldering hauteur better than he does; it gets to be that one eagerly awaits the moment when he'll next appear on the screen. There are some minor points that detracted from the movie. The film was made to be presented on television in installments. If one watches it all at once, rather than spaced out over time, one notices some repetitive scenes and passages of dialogue (placed in the movie not only to remain faithful to the book, but to jog the television viewer's memory over what happened in the last installment). Also, there are some ludicrous moments where floating heads appear in mirrors or carriage windows, and again, these disembodied talking heads usually pop up to remind the viewer of something that happened earlier in the movie. Also - and this bothered me most - I wish more of the dialogue revolved around matters that weren't strictly plot-related. In the book there are certain comments and conversations that are omitted from the movie that I think would have fleshed out the characters more. Other than that, the BBC's Pride and Prejudice is a joy to watch. Not only are the actors fantastic, the movie is filmed in a very picturesque way and you will love looking at the period costumes. And Firth... Colin Firth's presence prompts one to purchase the DVD.

This adaptation of Pride and Prejudice is well-made and has an exceptional cast. <hl> Each actor fit wonderfully with the assigned role <hl>, and even though some of the performances got a little too over the top at times (I'm referring to Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins), they still elicited a lot of chuckles. The most inspired casting choice was Colin Firth as Darcy. I think this is the best he's ever looked in any movie, and no one does smoldering hauteur better than he does; it gets to be that one eagerly awaits the moment when he'll next appear on the screen.There are some minor points that detracted from the movie. The film was made to be presented on television in installments. If one watches it all at once, rather than spaced out over time, one notices some repetitive scenes and passages of dialogue (placed in the movie not only to remain faithful to the book, but to jog the television viewer's memory over what happened in the last installment). Also, there are some ludicrous moments where floating heads appear in mirrors or carriage windows, and again, these disembodied talking heads usually pop up to remind the viewer of something that happened earlier in the movie. Also - and this bothered me most - I wish more of the dialogue revolved around matters that weren't strictly plot-related. In the book there are certain comments and conversations that are omitted from the movie that I think would have fleshed out the characters more.Other than that, the BBC's Pride and Prejudice is a joy to watch. Not only are the actors fantastic, the movie is filmed in a very picturesque way and you will love looking at the period costumes. And Firth... Colin Firth's presence prompts one to purchase the DVD.

<hl> Each actor fit wonderfully with the assigned role <hl> , and even though some of the performances got a little too over the top at times (I'm referring to Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins), they still elicited a lot of chuckles.


Question: What is the story like?

The movie 10,000 B.C is one of those movies that you should listen to the critics about. On Yahoo it has a C- rating by Top Critics. I was like who cares,the critics are always wrong, right. Well, I should have listened to them for sure. It did have action, but Roland Emmerich messed up on this one. First of all the Earth has not been around for 10,000 years. Second off, the movie was poorly made and really annoying at times. Don't see one of the worst movies that has a huge budget and has nothing good to talk about.Story:FActing:FAction:DDirection:FVisual effects:D+Rating:D

Answer: Story:FActing:FAction:DDirection:FVisual effects:D+Rating:D

The movie 10,000 B.C is one of those movies that you should listen to the critics about. On Yahoo it has a C- rating by Top Critics. I was like who cares,the critics are always wrong, right. Well, I should have listened to them for sure. It did have action, but Roland Emmerich messed up on this one. First of all the Earth has not been around for 10,000 years. Second off, the movie was poorly made and really annoying at times. Don't see one of the worst movies that has a huge budget and has nothing good to talk about. <hl> Story:FActing:FAction:DDirection:FVisual effects:D+Rating:D <hl>

The movie 10,000 B.C is one of those movies that you should listen to the critics about. On Yahoo it has a C- rating by Top Critics. I was like who cares,the critics are always wrong, right. Well, I should have listened to them for sure. It did have action, but Roland Emmerich messed up on this one. First of all the Earth has not been around for 10,000 years. Second off, the movie was poorly made and really annoying at times. Don't see one of the worst movies that has a huge budget and has nothing good to talk about.<hl> Story:FActing:FAction:DDirection:FVisual effects:D+Rating:D <hl>


Question: How is character?

I had never heard of this show until it showed up as a suggestion on Amazon Prime.  I read a few reviews and saw that it was a precursor series to the movie "Serenity."  I did see that movie and really enjoyed it.  After watching about half of the episodes I am just blown away by how wonderful this series is.  I am quite sad that there is only one season.  While a part of me cannot understand why it was cancelled, another part understands more clearly.  Mainstream television viewers are not interested in a show of this quality.  It has too many elements that poor imaginations cannot wrap around...and poor imaginations are a plenty in the living rooms of America.  People dressed like cowboys flying around in spaceships?  We all know that, in the future, we will all be wearing tight fitting uniforms issued by the interstellar government.  Everything will be clean and shiny.  There will be a problem and our heroes will solve it using nothing but intellect.  We can't possibly be so base, in the future, as to punch people out in a matter of principle.Firefly is a refreshing, imaginative look at the future.  The characters are complex and flawed.  The spaceship is dirty.  It is gritty and realistic, which makes the characters and the worlds encountered much more believable and accessible.  I would trade just about everything on television these days, especially all of the "un"reality shows for more seasons of Firefly.  It makes me sad that, just when something truly entertaining comes along, it is tossed in the garbage heap in favor of another police drama or reality show about idiots running around a swamp somewhere carrying guns.Well, at least I found this absolute gem of a show and had one fantastic season to watch.  Hopefully, someone will come along and try to bring it back to life...it's been done with much lesser shows!

Answer: The characters are complex and flawed

The characters are complex and flawed .

I had never heard of this show until it showed up as a suggestion on Amazon Prime. I read a few reviews and saw that it was a precursor series to the movie "Serenity." I did see that movie and really enjoyed it. After watching about half of the episodes I am just blown away by how wonderful this series is. I am quite sad that there is only one season. While a part of me cannot understand why it was cancelled, another part understands more clearly. Mainstream television viewers are not interested in a show of this quality. It has too many elements that poor imaginations cannot wrap around...and poor imaginations are a plenty in the living rooms of America. People dressed like cowboys flying around in spaceships? We all know that, in the future, we will all be wearing tight fitting uniforms issued by the interstellar government. Everything will be clean and shiny. There will be a problem and our heroes will solve it using nothing but intellect. We can't possibly be so base, in the future, as to punch people out in a matter of principle. Firefly is a refreshing, imaginative look at the future. <hl> The characters are complex and flawed . <hl> The spaceship is dirty. It is gritty and realistic, which makes the characters and the worlds encountered much more believable and accessible. I would trade just about everything on television these days, especially all of the "un"reality shows for more seasons of Firefly. It makes me sad that, just when something truly entertaining comes along, it is tossed in the garbage heap in favor of another police drama or reality show about idiots running around a swamp somewhere carrying guns. Well, at least I found this absolute gem of a show and had one fantastic season to watch. Hopefully, someone will come along and try to bring it back to life...it's been done with much lesser shows!

I had never heard of this show until it showed up as a suggestion on Amazon Prime. I read a few reviews and saw that it was a precursor series to the movie "Serenity." I did see that movie and really enjoyed it. After watching about half of the episodes I am just blown away by how wonderful this series is. I am quite sad that there is only one season. While a part of me cannot understand why it was cancelled, another part understands more clearly. Mainstream television viewers are not interested in a show of this quality. It has too many elements that poor imaginations cannot wrap around...and poor imaginations are a plenty in the living rooms of America. People dressed like cowboys flying around in spaceships? We all know that, in the future, we will all be wearing tight fitting uniforms issued by the interstellar government. Everything will be clean and shiny. There will be a problem and our heroes will solve it using nothing but intellect. We can't possibly be so base, in the future, as to punch people out in a matter of principle.Firefly is a refreshing, imaginative look at the future. <hl> The characters are complex and flawed <hl>. The spaceship is dirty. It is gritty and realistic, which makes the characters and the worlds encountered much more believable and accessible. I would trade just about everything on television these days, especially all of the "un"reality shows for more seasons of Firefly. It makes me sad that, just when something truly entertaining comes along, it is tossed in the garbage heap in favor of another police drama or reality show about idiots running around a swamp somewhere carrying guns.Well, at least I found this absolute gem of a show and had one fantastic season to watch. Hopefully, someone will come along and try to bring it back to life...it's been done with much lesser shows!

<hl> The characters are complex and flawed <hl> .


Question: How is film?

***Please note, review is based on the 3D version***-So I saw this movie available when I was strolling through a BestBuy Store, read the back of the cover and thought to a myself, "would this be something I like?". I decided to read some reviews on amazon. While the reviews are a mixed bag of positives and negatives. I kept reading about "Guillermo del Toro" who I believe directed the film but I couldn't match the name with a face. then I read that this movie is made by the same person who made Hellboy into a movie. Let me start off by saying, Hellboy was not something I liked at all, nor any of his other movies. For Example, the story, characters and feel of Hellboy and other movies by Del Torro are in my mind, extremely cheesy, and often annoying. This movie seemed to have a bit of a different feel, and after reading more on what the 3D version is like, I decided it would be worth buying to add to my ever expanding collection of bluray 3D movies. I watched this movie last night, without high expectations. I popped in the movie, grabbed a soda and some munchies, and watched with amazement. The 3D effects and CGI are truly top notch. There were parts when I thought to myself, "now this is what 3D movies need to look like", IMHO.  With the sound cranked up, feeding my ears with awesome sounds and my eyes gazing into the amazing CGI and incredibly dazzling 3D graphics, I was very happy and excited.When the main actor of this movie came on, I was a little put off by seeing some "overacting" that was more annoying than enticing. Throughout the movie, there are parts where I wished they would just cut out the story, and just get to the cool parts where the CGI and 3D blend to make an extraordinary visual explosion to the eyes and mind. The actor who played Hellboy is in this movie, who is another person I cannot Stand watching - Ron Perlman. There are the good guys, who have to battle these incredibly large monsters coming from another dimension. The great part about the monsters is, they don't cut anything out as far as the full presentation of the monsters body, size and overall look. It's all there which is too cool. Often in movies like Godzilla, King Kong, and even the recent Hobbit movie where there is no actual scene that shows Smaug the dragon in his entirety, this movie does not leave you wishing you could see more of what these monsters look like. They don't make you use your imagination to fill in the blanks. In 3D, these monsters are popping out at you and look nothing short of incredible. The monsters are taken on by the good guys that use somewhat matching size Mech machines as shown on the cover of this movie. The Mech Machines are also dazzling to watch, and look incredible while combating against these evil monsters.Looking at this movie from all perspectives, there were many things that make this movie worth watching again and again. This movie is so beautiful and the 3D is so good, that it's tough to rival compared to any other 3D movie I have seen at home (vs. in the theater or via IMAX). The 3D effects and stunning visuals alone makes me happy I purchased this film. The story itself, is not bad either. Is it great? Absolutely not, but trust me, it could have been a lot worse. It's got a good premises and although far fetched, it's exciting and makes you think a bit, which is what tells me a movie is good (from a story standpoint). The acting? Well, that depends on one's definition of acting. Most of it was tough to watch and you want to laugh at some scenes because the acting is way overplayed and comes off as lame for the most part. Acting aside, the actual actors in this movie are so-so. Del Torro makes his appearance, which to me was a real downer since I can't stand watching this guy. The main characters otherwise are not going to win any awards for this movie, I can asure you. This is an action movie, and there is no doubt that this is truly action packed. Some reviews state that the movie drags on, but I didn't feel that. It wasn't too short, and it is by no means a long film like any of the lord of the rings movies. There is not enough story and detail with characters and overall environment to support anymore time than the actual film dispays. There could have been some scenes that were shortened to keep the action scenes a little tighter, but overall the length of the film is appropriate in my opinion.This movie, by far, will not be for everyone. My wife didn't watch this, but I can guarantee she would have rolled her eyes at the end of this film and would say "wow, that was really lame". Other reviews on this site for this movie have pegged it down pretty well. If you like old style Japanese movies with Godzilla and King Kong where there is mass destruction with every swing the bad guys take, then this is for you. If you like action packed films with fairly poor acting (almost comparable to B films with poor acting but decent story - for example movies on the Sci-Fy channel) then you will probably enjoy this. The major different between budget films and this is solely based on the amount of work that's gone into the CGI and overall effects. They are truly, truly amazing. This film could have been so much more, but for what it's worth, its a good flick for the action junkies, the nerds, the manga and Japanese Monster lovers, and for anyone with an open mind that can tune out the negatives, and see the movie for what is really is - an action packed, visually stunning and phenomenal 3D flick that will not leave you disappointed. If I were to see this in the standard Blu-ray edition, I think I would rate this somewhere between 2 & 3 stars. But, I got the 3D version, and am very happy I did. For this version, I would rate this a high 3 or low 4. Many will like this, however, many will find it an absolute joke. The question is, where will/do you stand???? See it for yourself, going in with low expectations and you might just be surprised.

Answer: If you like old style Japanese movies with Godzilla and King Kong where there is mass destruction with every swing the bad guys take, then this is for you

***Please note, review is based on the 3D version***-So I saw this movie available when I was strolling through a BestBuy Store, read the back of the cover and thought to a myself, "would this be something I like?". I decided to read some reviews on amazon. While the reviews are a mixed bag of positives and negatives. I kept reading about "Guillermo del Toro" who I believe directed the film but I couldn't match the name with a face. then I read that this movie is made by the same person who made Hellboy into a movie. Let me start off by saying, Hellboy was not something I liked at all, nor any of his other movies. For Example, the story, characters and feel of Hellboy and other movies by Del Torro are in my mind, extremely cheesy, and often annoying. This movie seemed to have a bit of a different feel, and after reading more on what the 3D version is like, I decided it would be worth buying to add to my ever expanding collection of bluray 3D movies. I watched this movie last night, without high expectations. I popped in the movie, grabbed a soda and some munchies, and watched with amazement. The 3D effects and CGI are truly top notch. There were parts when I thought to myself, "now this is what 3D movies need to look like", IMHO. With the sound cranked up, feeding my ears with awesome sounds and my eyes gazing into the amazing CGI and incredibly dazzling 3D graphics, I was very happy and excited. When the main actor of this movie came on, I was a little put off by seeing some "overacting" that was more annoying than enticing. Throughout the movie, there are parts where I wished they would just cut out the story, and just get to the cool parts where the CGI and 3D blend to make an extraordinary visual explosion to the eyes and mind. The actor who played Hellboy is in this movie, who is another person I cannot Stand watching - Ron Perlman. There are the good guys, who have to battle these incredibly large monsters coming from another dimension. The great part about the monsters is, they don't cut anything out as far as the full presentation of the monsters body, size and overall look. It's all there which is too cool. Often in movies like Godzilla, King Kong, and even the recent Hobbit movie where there is no actual scene that shows Smaug the dragon in his entirety, this movie does not leave you wishing you could see more of what these monsters look like. They don't make you use your imagination to fill in the blanks. In 3D, these monsters are popping out at you and look nothing short of incredible. The monsters are taken on by the good guys that use somewhat matching size Mech machines as shown on the cover of this movie. The Mech Machines are also dazzling to watch, and look incredible while combating against these evil monsters. Looking at this movie from all perspectives, there were many things that make this movie worth watching again and again. This movie is so beautiful and the 3D is so good, that it's tough to rival compared to any other 3D movie I have seen at home (vs. in the theater or via IMAX). The 3D effects and stunning visuals alone makes me happy I purchased this film. The story itself, is not bad either. Is it great? Absolutely not, but trust me, it could have been a lot worse. It's got a good premises and although far fetched, it's exciting and makes you think a bit, which is what tells me a movie is good (from a story standpoint). The acting? Well, that depends on one's definition of acting. Most of it was tough to watch and you want to laugh at some scenes because the acting is way overplayed and comes off as lame for the most part. Acting aside, the actual actors in this movie are so-so. Del Torro makes his appearance, which to me was a real downer since I can't stand watching this guy. The main characters otherwise are not going to win any awards for this movie, I can asure you. This is an action movie, and there is no doubt that this is truly action packed. Some reviews state that the movie drags on, but I didn't feel that. It wasn't too short, and it is by no means a long film like any of the lord of the rings movies. There is not enough story and detail with characters and overall environment to support anymore time than the actual film dispays. There could have been some scenes that were shortened to keep the action scenes a little tighter, but overall the length of the film is appropriate in my opinion. This movie, by far, will not be for everyone. My wife didn't watch this, but I can guarantee she would have rolled her eyes at the end of this film and would say "wow, that was really lame". Other reviews on this site for this movie have pegged it down pretty well. <hl> If you like old style Japanese movies with Godzilla and King Kong where there is mass destruction with every swing the bad guys take, then this is for you . <hl> If you like action packed films with fairly poor acting (almost comparable to B films with poor acting but decent story - for example movies on the Sci-Fy channel) then you will probably enjoy this. The major different between budget films and this is solely based on the amount of work that's gone into the CGI and overall effects. They are truly, truly amazing. This film could have been so much more, but for what it's worth, its a good flick for the action junkies, the nerds, the manga and Japanese Monster lovers, and for anyone with an open mind that can tune out the negatives, and see the movie for what is really is - an action packed, visually stunning and phenomenal 3D flick that will not leave you disappointed. If I were to see this in the standard Blu-ray edition, I think I would rate this somewhere between 2 & 3 stars. But, I got the 3D version, and am very happy I did. For this version, I would rate this a high 3 or low 4. Many will like this, however, many will find it an absolute joke. The question is, where will/do you stand???? See it for yourself, going in with low expectations and you might just be surprised.

***Please note, review is based on the 3D version***-So I saw this movie available when I was strolling through a BestBuy Store, read the back of the cover and thought to a myself, "would this be something I like?". I decided to read some reviews on amazon. While the reviews are a mixed bag of positives and negatives. I kept reading about "Guillermo del Toro" who I believe directed the film but I couldn't match the name with a face. then I read that this movie is made by the same person who made Hellboy into a movie. Let me start off by saying, Hellboy was not something I liked at all, nor any of his other movies. For Example, the story, characters and feel of Hellboy and other movies by Del Torro are in my mind, extremely cheesy, and often annoying. This movie seemed to have a bit of a different feel, and after reading more on what the 3D version is like, I decided it would be worth buying to add to my ever expanding collection of bluray 3D movies. I watched this movie last night, without high expectations. I popped in the movie, grabbed a soda and some munchies, and watched with amazement. The 3D effects and CGI are truly top notch. There were parts when I thought to myself, "now this is what 3D movies need to look like", IMHO. With the sound cranked up, feeding my ears with awesome sounds and my eyes gazing into the amazing CGI and incredibly dazzling 3D graphics, I was very happy and excited.When the main actor of this movie came on, I was a little put off by seeing some "overacting" that was more annoying than enticing. Throughout the movie, there are parts where I wished they would just cut out the story, and just get to the cool parts where the CGI and 3D blend to make an extraordinary visual explosion to the eyes and mind. The actor who played Hellboy is in this movie, who is another person I cannot Stand watching - Ron Perlman. There are the good guys, who have to battle these incredibly large monsters coming from another dimension. The great part about the monsters is, they don't cut anything out as far as the full presentation of the monsters body, size and overall look. It's all there which is too cool. Often in movies like Godzilla, King Kong, and even the recent Hobbit movie where there is no actual scene that shows Smaug the dragon in his entirety, this movie does not leave you wishing you could see more of what these monsters look like. They don't make you use your imagination to fill in the blanks. In 3D, these monsters are popping out at you and look nothing short of incredible. The monsters are taken on by the good guys that use somewhat matching size Mech machines as shown on the cover of this movie. The Mech Machines are also dazzling to watch, and look incredible while combating against these evil monsters.Looking at this movie from all perspectives, there were many things that make this movie worth watching again and again. This movie is so beautiful and the 3D is so good, that it's tough to rival compared to any other 3D movie I have seen at home (vs. in the theater or via IMAX). The 3D effects and stunning visuals alone makes me happy I purchased this film. The story itself, is not bad either. Is it great? Absolutely not, but trust me, it could have been a lot worse. It's got a good premises and although far fetched, it's exciting and makes you think a bit, which is what tells me a movie is good (from a story standpoint). The acting? Well, that depends on one's definition of acting. Most of it was tough to watch and you want to laugh at some scenes because the acting is way overplayed and comes off as lame for the most part. Acting aside, the actual actors in this movie are so-so. Del Torro makes his appearance, which to me was a real downer since I can't stand watching this guy. The main characters otherwise are not going to win any awards for this movie, I can asure you. This is an action movie, and there is no doubt that this is truly action packed. Some reviews state that the movie drags on, but I didn't feel that. It wasn't too short, and it is by no means a long film like any of the lord of the rings movies. There is not enough story and detail with characters and overall environment to support anymore time than the actual film dispays. There could have been some scenes that were shortened to keep the action scenes a little tighter, but overall the length of the film is appropriate in my opinion.This movie, by far, will not be for everyone. My wife didn't watch this, but I can guarantee she would have rolled her eyes at the end of this film and would say "wow, that was really lame". Other reviews on this site for this movie have pegged it down pretty well. <hl> If you like old style Japanese movies with Godzilla and King Kong where there is mass destruction with every swing the bad guys take, then this is for you <hl>. If you like action packed films with fairly poor acting (almost comparable to B films with poor acting but decent story - for example movies on the Sci-Fy channel) then you will probably enjoy this. The major different between budget films and this is solely based on the amount of work that's gone into the CGI and overall effects. They are truly, truly amazing. This film could have been so much more, but for what it's worth, its a good flick for the action junkies, the nerds, the manga and Japanese Monster lovers, and for anyone with an open mind that can tune out the negatives, and see the movie for what is really is - an action packed, visually stunning and phenomenal 3D flick that will not leave you disappointed. If I were to see this in the standard Blu-ray edition, I think I would rate this somewhere between 2 & 3 stars. But, I got the 3D version, and am very happy I did. For this version, I would rate this a high 3 or low 4. Many will like this, however, many will find it an absolute joke. The question is, where will/do you stand???? See it for yourself, going in with low expectations and you might just be surprised.

<hl> If you like old style Japanese movies with Godzilla and King Kong where there is mass destruction with every swing the bad guys take, then this is for you <hl> .


Question: How is the movie?

In 2009, out of the scrapped Halo movie, first-time director Neill Blomkamp shocked the world with District 9, a very unique film about extraterrestrial refugees stuck in contemporary South Africa. It currently holds a 90% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, citing its unique story (a rarity in films these days), excellent acting, writing, and (despite its modest budget) special effects. Naturally, expectations were high for his follow up, Elysium. After viewing Blomkamp's second film, one wonders whether he was pressed for time, because it plays out like a first draft in need of heavy revision.In the year 2154, the ultra wealthy live on Elysium, a utopian space station where crime, sickness, and war are nonexistent. Everyone else is stuck on an overpopulated, impoverished earth. One man, however, has the means to change all of that and bring equality to the two worlds.There isn't a singular flaw that can be attributed to Elysium's catastrophic failure, but "absolutely no character development" is towards the top of the list. Our protagonist, Max (played by Matt Damon) is an ex-con who's trying to stay on the "straight and narrow". It's difficult to care about him because he is essentially a cardboard cutout, like every character in this movie. The squalor the earthlings live in is portrayed with excellent, stark imagery, but viewers need more than imagery to stay invested in the "good" characters and their plight. "Why should we root for Max? What makes him so special?" It's unfortunate that Blomkamp doesn't answer these questions.Some of the characters are an extreme hindrance to the success of the film. Jodie Foster plays Delacourt, Elysium's cruel, scheming Secretary of Defense who has a penchant for poor acting including, but not limited to, cringe-inducing lines unbecoming of a two-time academy award winning actress. Kruger (played by Sharlto Copley of District 9 fame) is meant to be a fun-to-watch villain, but Delacourt's personal mercenary has an incredibly obnoxious, pseudo-French/cockney accent that would be hilarious in a Monty Python movie, but it's distracting and less than intimidating in this one. The actors are not entirely to blame; it's difficult for a good actor/actress to perform well when given poor lines.The environments, spaceships, robots, and weapons are a visual treat, as expected. The action scenes have inventive elements, but they are too few and far between, often relying heavily on slow-motion. Ultimately, the film lacks character development and substance, both of which are essential for the kind of story Blomkamp is trying to tell.Considering how great District 9 was, and the enormous potential Elysium had, it's obvious Blomkamp has some great ideas; it's just a matter of allowing them to develop. 4/10

Answer: citing its unique story (a rarity in films these days), excellent acting

In 2009, out of the scrapped Halo movie, first-time director Neill Blomkamp shocked the world with District 9, a very unique film about extraterrestrial refugees stuck in contemporary South Africa. <hl> It currently holds a 90% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, citing its unique story (a rarity in films these days), excellent acting , writing, and (despite its modest budget) special effects. <hl> Naturally, expectations were high for his follow up, Elysium. After viewing Blomkamp's second film, one wonders whether he was pressed for time, because it plays out like a first draft in need of heavy revision. In the year 2154, the ultra wealthy live on Elysium, a utopian space station where crime, sickness, and war are nonexistent. Everyone else is stuck on an overpopulated, impoverished earth. One man, however, has the means to change all of that and bring equality to the two worlds. There isn't a singular flaw that can be attributed to Elysium's catastrophic failure, but "absolutely no character development" is towards the top of the list. Our protagonist, Max (played by Matt Damon) is an ex-con who's trying to stay on the "straight and narrow". It's difficult to care about him because he is essentially a cardboard cutout, like every character in this movie. The squalor the earthlings live in is portrayed with excellent, stark imagery, but viewers need more than imagery to stay invested in the "good" characters and their plight. "Why should we root for Max? What makes him so special?" It's unfortunate that Blomkamp doesn't answer these questions. Some of the characters are an extreme hindrance to the success of the film. Jodie Foster plays Delacourt, Elysium's cruel, scheming Secretary of Defense who has a penchant for poor acting including, but not limited to, cringe-inducing lines unbecoming of a two-time academy award winning actress. Kruger (played by Sharlto Copley of District 9 fame) is meant to be a fun-to-watch villain, but Delacourt's personal mercenary has an incredibly obnoxious, pseudo-French/cockney accent that would be hilarious in a Monty Python movie, but it's distracting and less than intimidating in this one. The actors are not entirely to blame; it's difficult for a good actor/actress to perform well when given poor lines. The environments, spaceships, robots, and weapons are a visual treat, as expected. The action scenes have inventive elements, but they are too few and far between, often relying heavily on slow-motion. Ultimately, the film lacks character development and substance, both of which are essential for the kind of story Blomkamp is trying to tell. Considering how great District 9 was, and the enormous potential Elysium had, it's obvious Blomkamp has some great ideas; it's just a matter of allowing them to develop. 4/10

In 2009, out of the scrapped Halo movie, first-time director Neill Blomkamp shocked the world with District 9, a very unique film about extraterrestrial refugees stuck in contemporary South Africa. It currently holds a 90% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, <hl> citing its unique story (a rarity in films these days), excellent acting <hl>, writing, and (despite its modest budget) special effects. Naturally, expectations were high for his follow up, Elysium. After viewing Blomkamp's second film, one wonders whether he was pressed for time, because it plays out like a first draft in need of heavy revision.In the year 2154, the ultra wealthy live on Elysium, a utopian space station where crime, sickness, and war are nonexistent. Everyone else is stuck on an overpopulated, impoverished earth. One man, however, has the means to change all of that and bring equality to the two worlds.There isn't a singular flaw that can be attributed to Elysium's catastrophic failure, but "absolutely no character development" is towards the top of the list. Our protagonist, Max (played by Matt Damon) is an ex-con who's trying to stay on the "straight and narrow". It's difficult to care about him because he is essentially a cardboard cutout, like every character in this movie. The squalor the earthlings live in is portrayed with excellent, stark imagery, but viewers need more than imagery to stay invested in the "good" characters and their plight. "Why should we root for Max? What makes him so special?" It's unfortunate that Blomkamp doesn't answer these questions.Some of the characters are an extreme hindrance to the success of the film. Jodie Foster plays Delacourt, Elysium's cruel, scheming Secretary of Defense who has a penchant for poor acting including, but not limited to, cringe-inducing lines unbecoming of a two-time academy award winning actress. Kruger (played by Sharlto Copley of District 9 fame) is meant to be a fun-to-watch villain, but Delacourt's personal mercenary has an incredibly obnoxious, pseudo-French/cockney accent that would be hilarious in a Monty Python movie, but it's distracting and less than intimidating in this one. The actors are not entirely to blame; it's difficult for a good actor/actress to perform well when given poor lines.The environments, spaceships, robots, and weapons are a visual treat, as expected. The action scenes have inventive elements, but they are too few and far between, often relying heavily on slow-motion. Ultimately, the film lacks character development and substance, both of which are essential for the kind of story Blomkamp is trying to tell.Considering how great District 9 was, and the enormous potential Elysium had, it's obvious Blomkamp has some great ideas; it's just a matter of allowing them to develop. 4/10

It currently holds a 90% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, <hl> citing its unique story (a rarity in films these days), excellent acting <hl> , writing, and (despite its modest budget) special effects.


Question: What do you prefer to broadcast?

Well I could not get enough of this movie Daniel Craig looks great, scenery was great, watching on 1080 was sharp. Keeping it short great movie, great acting, some sad good byes, M, Money Penny...but nice needed changes and inclusion of others. It was time to make some changes and keep it fresh....

Answer: movie Daniel Craig looks great

<hl> Well I could not get enough of this movie Daniel Craig looks great , scenery was great, watching on 1080 was sharp. <hl> Keeping it short great movie, great acting, some sad good byes, M, Money Penny...but nice needed changes and inclusion of others. It was time to make some changes and keep it fresh....

Well I could not get enough of this <hl> movie Daniel Craig looks great <hl>, scenery was great, watching on 1080 was sharp. Keeping it short great movie, great acting, some sad good byes, M, Money Penny...but nice needed changes and inclusion of others. It was time to make some changes and keep it fresh....

Well I could not get enough of this <hl> movie Daniel Craig looks great <hl> , scenery was great, watching on 1080 was sharp.


Question: How much action does the movie have?

This film will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end-the action is superb and gripping from moment to moment. The story is no new story but every King Kong out there has his own way of handling the beauty he is entranced by. That's what keeps us coming back for every new one that comes out. I'm waiting for this movie to come out in 3-D-imagine that!!! I love this movie.

Answer: the action is superb and gripping

<hl> This film will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end- the action is superb and gripping from moment to moment. <hl> The story is no new story but every King Kong out there has his own way of handling the beauty he is entranced by. That's what keeps us coming back for every new one that comes out. I'm waiting for this movie to come out in 3-D-imagine that!!! I love this movie.

This film will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end-<hl> the action is superb and gripping <hl> from moment to moment. The story is no new story but every King Kong out there has his own way of handling the beauty he is entranced by. That's what keeps us coming back for every new one that comes out. I'm waiting for this movie to come out in 3-D-imagine that!!! I love this movie.

This film will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end- <hl> the action is superb and gripping <hl> from moment to moment.