Question: What is the rating of the movie?

Note: May contain spoilers. Proceed with caution.Whenever I watch a film like Captain Phillips, my immediate reaction is always, “That actually happened?!?” When dealing with the world of fiction, the audience can easily accept any scenario without question because, in the back of their mind, everyone knows the events are not real. When dealing with non-fiction, however, this mindset changes drastically. Now we are watching a story based on a living, breathing human being and, depending on the narrative, this realization could be unsettling, which is the perfect word to describe Captain Phillips: unsettling. The film is raw and unforgiving in its execution, and the ending is as beautiful as it is emotional.Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) is a ship captain who is in charge of the MV Maersk Alabama, a cargo ship loaded with food and supplies. His destination is the poverty-stricken city of Mombasa, which he and his crew will reach by traveling through the Horn of Africa. Unfortunately, this part of the sea is littered with pirates, mainly from Somalia, so the risk is high for everyone on board. The fear of being taken over by pirates soon becomes a reality as Phillips and crew fight off approaching pirate boats. However, because the ship is unarmed, one of the boats manages to commandeer the ship, and Phillips must fight for his life and the safety of his crew.Surprisingly, the narrative in Captain Phillips is extremely dense, which is why the film wastes no time throwing the viewer into the action. Within moments of meeting Phillips, the captain finds himself on the ship, meeting the crew, and setting sail. I wasn’t expecting things to move at such a rapid pace, but the further I got into the movie, the more it became apparent as to why the film starts the way it does. Although it may not have been advertised as such, this is a complex story that relies on heavy emotion almost as much as it does on high intensity, so in order to receive the appropriate reaction, they needed as much detail as possible in all the right places.For the most part, the film succeeds in accomplishing this task, which is shocking given the fact the story follows Phillips, his crew, and the Somalians. With the exception of the crew, the audience builds up a certain emotional connection with Phillips through the events that transpire, and the same can be said about the Somalians, to a certain extent. These pirates aren’t acting out for personal gain per se; they are acting out because their country is struggling. As the film progresses, Phillips begins to truly understand this, and he tries to use this to his advantage through persuasion. Although I personally would have liked to see more from the crew, I understand why they were excluded due to the film’s current running time.Another minor complaint of mine comes through the use, or lack thereof, of forced subtitles. After doing some light research, I’m under the impression that the forced subtitles were present in the theatrical release, but this is never made clear to those who watch the film on DVD/Blu-Ray. Apparently there are subtitles for the Somali language, but they have to be activated in the “Settings” menu. As a result, my family went through the entire movie ignorant as to what the Somalian pirates were saying, and it became a bit taxing because they make up a good 50% of the dialogue. I will say, though, that it allowed me to better sympathize with Phillips because he too had no idea what was going on. Their language is foreign and incomprehensible, and this only makes the situation all the more frightening. So it was kind of a win/lose situation, but it is something everyone should be made aware of.My biggest complaint, however, is in regards to the obnoxious shaky cam that is arguably Captain Phillips' biggest downfall. Paul Greengrass' work on the Bourne films suffered from the same issue, but those were at least a little understandable due to the constant action. The shaky cam in Captain Phillips, on the other hand, is just the result of bad camera work. There are never any demanding fight sequences, there aren’t any crazy firefights, and there is no real reason why this should even be a problem. Majority of the film consists of Phillips and company having conversations, walking across the ship, or sitting down. That’s it. I just about lost it when the shot switched to a silent, still Abduwali Muse (Barkhad Abdi), and the camera was swaying all over the place.Although the shaky cam did manage to take me out of the experience on occasion, the performances always managed to pull me right back in. Considering this was his first film, Barkhad Abdi was a blast to watch on screen. His heavy accent made Abduwali all the more menacing, and his facial expressions displayed someone who was truly conflicted with the severity of the situation. Another surprise standout was Michael Chernus, who plays first officer Shane Murphy. He was always an attention grabber in the scenes he was in, and I would have liked to see more of him. The real accomplishment, though, came from Tom Hanks, who seems to outdo himself time and time again. His performance left me speechless as I fought back tears during the film’s final moments, and this will probably go down as one of his best performances.Overall Score: 8.8/10 - Is Captain Phillips perfect? No, but there is no denying the film’s excellence. The film manages to immerse its audience with ease, and the performances across the board were fantastic. Unfortunately, the story’s density made it impossible for the writers to include all the details that would have truly left me satisfied, like the impact these events had on the crew, and the film’s shaky cam never ceased to be a huge annoyance. Taking that into consideration, Captain Phillips succeeds more than it fails, and that’s all that matters. Those looking for a balls-to-the-wall action flick should look elsewhere, but if you want something that will truly stick with you, look no further.

Answer: actually

Note: May contain spoilers. Proceed with caution. <hl> Whenever I watch a film like Captain Phillips, my immediate reaction is always, “That actually happened?!?” When dealing with the world of fiction, the audience can easily accept any scenario without question because, in the back of their mind, everyone knows the events are not real. <hl> When dealing with non-fiction, however, this mindset changes drastically. Now we are watching a story based on a living, breathing human being and, depending on the narrative, this realization could be unsettling, which is the perfect word to describe Captain Phillips: unsettling. The film is raw and unforgiving in its execution, and the ending is as beautiful as it is emotional. Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) is a ship captain who is in charge of the MV Maersk Alabama, a cargo ship loaded with food and supplies. His destination is the poverty-stricken city of Mombasa, which he and his crew will reach by traveling through the Horn of Africa. Unfortunately, this part of the sea is littered with pirates, mainly from Somalia, so the risk is high for everyone on board. The fear of being taken over by pirates soon becomes a reality as Phillips and crew fight off approaching pirate boats. However, because the ship is unarmed, one of the boats manages to commandeer the ship, and Phillips must fight for his life and the safety of his crew. Surprisingly, the narrative in Captain Phillips is extremely dense, which is why the film wastes no time throwing the viewer into the action. Within moments of meeting Phillips, the captain finds himself on the ship, meeting the crew, and setting sail. I wasn’t expecting things to move at such a rapid pace, but the further I got into the movie, the more it became apparent as to why the film starts the way it does. Although it may not have been advertised as such, this is a complex story that relies on heavy emotion almost as much as it does on high intensity, so in order to receive the appropriate reaction, they needed as much detail as possible in all the right places. For the most part, the film succeeds in accomplishing this task, which is shocking given the fact the story follows Phillips, his crew, and the Somalians. With the exception of the crew, the audience builds up a certain emotional connection with Phillips through the events that transpire, and the same can be said about the Somalians, to a certain extent. These pirates aren’t acting out for personal gain per se; they are acting out because their country is struggling. As the film progresses, Phillips begins to truly understand this, and he tries to use this to his advantage through persuasion. Although I personally would have liked to see more from the crew, I understand why they were excluded due to the film’s current running time. Another minor complaint of mine comes through the use, or lack thereof, of forced subtitles. After doing some light research, I’m under the impression that the forced subtitles were present in the theatrical release, but this is never made clear to those who watch the film on DVD/Blu-Ray. Apparently there are subtitles for the Somali language, but they have to be activated in the “Settings” menu. As a result, my family went through the entire movie ignorant as to what the Somalian pirates were saying, and it became a bit taxing because they make up a good 50% of the dialogue. I will say, though, that it allowed me to better sympathize with Phillips because he too had no idea what was going on. Their language is foreign and incomprehensible, and this only makes the situation all the more frightening. So it was kind of a win/lose situation, but it is something everyone should be made aware of. My biggest complaint, however, is in regards to the obnoxious shaky cam that is arguably Captain Phillips' biggest downfall. Paul Greengrass' work on the Bourne films suffered from the same issue, but those were at least a little understandable due to the constant action. The shaky cam in Captain Phillips, on the other hand, is just the result of bad camera work. There are never any demanding fight sequences, there aren’t any crazy firefights, and there is no real reason why this should even be a problem. Majority of the film consists of Phillips and company having conversations, walking across the ship, or sitting down. That’s it. I just about lost it when the shot switched to a silent, still Abduwali Muse (Barkhad Abdi), and the camera was swaying all over the place. Although the shaky cam did manage to take me out of the experience on occasion, the performances always managed to pull me right back in. Considering this was his first film, Barkhad Abdi was a blast to watch on screen. His heavy accent made Abduwali all the more menacing, and his facial expressions displayed someone who was truly conflicted with the severity of the situation. Another surprise standout was Michael Chernus, who plays first officer Shane Murphy. He was always an attention grabber in the scenes he was in, and I would have liked to see more of him. The real accomplishment, though, came from Tom Hanks, who seems to outdo himself time and time again. His performance left me speechless as I fought back tears during the film’s final moments, and this will probably go down as one of his best performances. Overall Score: 8.8/10 - Is Captain Phillips perfect? No, but there is no denying the film’s excellence. The film manages to immerse its audience with ease, and the performances across the board were fantastic. Unfortunately, the story’s density made it impossible for the writers to include all the details that would have truly left me satisfied, like the impact these events had on the crew, and the film’s shaky cam never ceased to be a huge annoyance. Taking that into consideration, Captain Phillips succeeds more than it fails, and that’s all that matters. Those looking for a balls-to-the-wall action flick should look elsewhere, but if you want something that will truly stick with you, look no further.

Note: May contain spoilers. Proceed with caution.Whenever I watch a film like Captain Phillips, my immediate reaction is always, “That <hl> actually <hl> happened?!?” When dealing with the world of fiction, the audience can easily accept any scenario without question because, in the back of their mind, everyone knows the events are not real. When dealing with non-fiction, however, this mindset changes drastically. Now we are watching a story based on a living, breathing human being and, depending on the narrative, this realization could be unsettling, which is the perfect word to describe Captain Phillips: unsettling. The film is raw and unforgiving in its execution, and the ending is as beautiful as it is emotional.Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) is a ship captain who is in charge of the MV Maersk Alabama, a cargo ship loaded with food and supplies. His destination is the poverty-stricken city of Mombasa, which he and his crew will reach by traveling through the Horn of Africa. Unfortunately, this part of the sea is littered with pirates, mainly from Somalia, so the risk is high for everyone on board. The fear of being taken over by pirates soon becomes a reality as Phillips and crew fight off approaching pirate boats. However, because the ship is unarmed, one of the boats manages to commandeer the ship, and Phillips must fight for his life and the safety of his crew.Surprisingly, the narrative in Captain Phillips is extremely dense, which is why the film wastes no time throwing the viewer into the action. Within moments of meeting Phillips, the captain finds himself on the ship, meeting the crew, and setting sail. I wasn’t expecting things to move at such a rapid pace, but the further I got into the movie, the more it became apparent as to why the film starts the way it does. Although it may not have been advertised as such, this is a complex story that relies on heavy emotion almost as much as it does on high intensity, so in order to receive the appropriate reaction, they needed as much detail as possible in all the right places.For the most part, the film succeeds in accomplishing this task, which is shocking given the fact the story follows Phillips, his crew, and the Somalians. With the exception of the crew, the audience builds up a certain emotional connection with Phillips through the events that transpire, and the same can be said about the Somalians, to a certain extent. These pirates aren’t acting out for personal gain per se; they are acting out because their country is struggling. As the film progresses, Phillips begins to truly understand this, and he tries to use this to his advantage through persuasion. Although I personally would have liked to see more from the crew, I understand why they were excluded due to the film’s current running time.Another minor complaint of mine comes through the use, or lack thereof, of forced subtitles. After doing some light research, I’m under the impression that the forced subtitles were present in the theatrical release, but this is never made clear to those who watch the film on DVD/Blu-Ray. Apparently there are subtitles for the Somali language, but they have to be activated in the “Settings” menu. As a result, my family went through the entire movie ignorant as to what the Somalian pirates were saying, and it became a bit taxing because they make up a good 50% of the dialogue. I will say, though, that it allowed me to better sympathize with Phillips because he too had no idea what was going on. Their language is foreign and incomprehensible, and this only makes the situation all the more frightening. So it was kind of a win/lose situation, but it is something everyone should be made aware of.My biggest complaint, however, is in regards to the obnoxious shaky cam that is arguably Captain Phillips' biggest downfall. Paul Greengrass' work on the Bourne films suffered from the same issue, but those were at least a little understandable due to the constant action. The shaky cam in Captain Phillips, on the other hand, is just the result of bad camera work. There are never any demanding fight sequences, there aren’t any crazy firefights, and there is no real reason why this should even be a problem. Majority of the film consists of Phillips and company having conversations, walking across the ship, or sitting down. That’s it. I just about lost it when the shot switched to a silent, still Abduwali Muse (Barkhad Abdi), and the camera was swaying all over the place.Although the shaky cam did manage to take me out of the experience on occasion, the performances always managed to pull me right back in. Considering this was his first film, Barkhad Abdi was a blast to watch on screen. His heavy accent made Abduwali all the more menacing, and his facial expressions displayed someone who was truly conflicted with the severity of the situation. Another surprise standout was Michael Chernus, who plays first officer Shane Murphy. He was always an attention grabber in the scenes he was in, and I would have liked to see more of him. The real accomplishment, though, came from Tom Hanks, who seems to outdo himself time and time again. His performance left me speechless as I fought back tears during the film’s final moments, and this will probably go down as one of his best performances.Overall Score: 8.8/10 - Is Captain Phillips perfect? No, but there is no denying the film’s excellence. The film manages to immerse its audience with ease, and the performances across the board were fantastic. Unfortunately, the story’s density made it impossible for the writers to include all the details that would have truly left me satisfied, like the impact these events had on the crew, and the film’s shaky cam never ceased to be a huge annoyance. Taking that into consideration, Captain Phillips succeeds more than it fails, and that’s all that matters. Those looking for a balls-to-the-wall action flick should look elsewhere, but if you want something that will truly stick with you, look no further.


Question: Is this story scary?

This movie had it all and you really need to watch it in a theater or at least in a dark room with volume turned up to get full effect.  I cannot believe some people being so negative about it and saying Paranormal Activity was better.  INSIDIOUS is at least 1,000 times scarier that both of those horrible Paranormal Activity movies.  If someone does not think this movie is scary then they must love violence and blood.  There is a difference in being scary/creative/creepy opposed to just being bloody and stupid.  If you like movies like The Ring and The Others you will LOVE this movie.  If Saw and other bloody films are your interest, then don't even bother watching this creative ghost/horror movie!!!

Answer: this movie is scary

This movie had it all and you really need to watch it in a theater or at least in a dark room with volume turned up to get full effect. I cannot believe some people being so negative about it and saying Paranormal Activity was better. INSIDIOUS is at least 1,000 times scarier that both of those horrible Paranormal Activity movies. <hl> If someone does not think this movie is scary then they must love violence and blood. <hl> There is a difference in being scary/creative/creepy opposed to just being bloody and stupid. If you like movies like The Ring and The Others you will LOVE this movie. If Saw and other bloody films are your interest, then don't even bother watching this creative ghost/horror movie!!!

This movie had it all and you really need to watch it in a theater or at least in a dark room with volume turned up to get full effect. I cannot believe some people being so negative about it and saying Paranormal Activity was better. INSIDIOUS is at least 1,000 times scarier that both of those horrible Paranormal Activity movies. If someone does not think <hl> this movie is scary <hl> then they must love violence and blood. There is a difference in being scary/creative/creepy opposed to just being bloody and stupid. If you like movies like The Ring and The Others you will LOVE this movie. If Saw and other bloody films are your interest, then don't even bother watching this creative ghost/horror movie!!!


Question: How about audio?

I purchased the Star Wars Trilogy (Widescreen Theatrical Edition) two years ago when the price was reasonable. At first when I watched the movies they didn't seem to be in the correct aspect ratio. I realized I had to change the settings on my Blu-Ray player to send the correct 480p signal to my monitor. Upscaled with the BR player, the images are amazingly sharp and best of all its the original presentations. I am more than pleased with these copies. Just my two cents.

Answer: I realized I had to change the settings on my Blu-Ray player to send the correct 480p signal to my monitor

I purchased the Star Wars Trilogy (Widescreen Theatrical Edition) two years ago when the price was reasonable. At first when I watched the movies they didn't seem to be in the correct aspect ratio. <hl> I realized I had to change the settings on my Blu-Ray player to send the correct 480p signal to my monitor . <hl> Upscaled with the BR player, the images are amazingly sharp and best of all its the original presentations. I am more than pleased with these copies. Just my two cents.

I purchased the Star Wars Trilogy (Widescreen Theatrical Edition) two years ago when the price was reasonable. At first when I watched the movies they didn't seem to be in the correct aspect ratio. <hl> I realized I had to change the settings on my Blu-Ray player to send the correct 480p signal to my monitor <hl>. Upscaled with the BR player, the images are amazingly sharp and best of all its the original presentations. I am more than pleased with these copies. Just my two cents.

<hl> I realized I had to change the settings on my Blu-Ray player to send the correct 480p signal to my monitor <hl> .


Question: How was the actor?

I am a Sherlock Holmes fan starting with Basil Rathbone! So to see the updated version was exciting for me. Benedict is a great Sherlock. The acting was outstanding as far as I am concerned. I hope they decide to do more.

Answer: The acting was outstanding as far as I am concerned

I am a Sherlock Holmes fan starting with Basil Rathbone! So to see the updated version was exciting for me. Benedict is a great Sherlock. <hl> The acting was outstanding as far as I am concerned . <hl> I hope they decide to do more.

I am a Sherlock Holmes fan starting with Basil Rathbone! So to see the updated version was exciting for me. Benedict is a great Sherlock. <hl> The acting was outstanding as far as I am concerned <hl>. I hope they decide to do more.

<hl> The acting was outstanding as far as I am concerned <hl> .


Question: Does this film its good for the time expend?

Not having been a fan of Johnny Cash my entire life, I didn't have any of his life details to compare while watching the movie.  I had no idea about his relationship with June Carter, or really any of his hit songs.  That being said, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit.  The portrait that Joaquin Phoenix paints of the classic singer is a troubled man who battled some of the usual demons that people in the spotlight often fight.  Booze, drugs, cheating on the spouse, and losing touch with the loved ones in the family, all of these plague Cash in the film.  Most of these things, like always are self imposed, and should be avoided.  It's interesting how much these things affect the famous in the world.Anyway, the performances are solid, especially Reese Witherspoon, who shines in her role as June Carter.  She spends most of her life in the limelight, working with Cash for lots of her adult life and eventually marrying him.  The film provides us information about their life together once it ends with her agreeing to marry him.  Witherspoon won the best actress Oscar for the role, well deserved.  She is always watchable in her movies and this was no exception.In short, I liked the film.  Not a movie I plan on watching repeatedly, but it was worth the time to see.  I recommend it highly, even if like me, you know little or nothing about the singer.  This film is worth the time invested.

Answer: I liked the film.  Not a movie I plan on watching repeatedly, but it was worth the time to see

Not having been a fan of Johnny Cash my entire life, I didn't have any of his life details to compare while watching the movie. I had no idea about his relationship with June Carter, or really any of his hit songs. That being said, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. The portrait that Joaquin Phoenix paints of the classic singer is a troubled man who battled some of the usual demons that people in the spotlight often fight. Booze, drugs, cheating on the spouse, and losing touch with the loved ones in the family, all of these plague Cash in the film. Most of these things, like always are self imposed, and should be avoided. It's interesting how much these things affect the famous in the world. Anyway, the performances are solid, especially Reese Witherspoon, who shines in her role as June Carter. She spends most of her life in the limelight, working with Cash for lots of her adult life and eventually marrying him. The film provides us information about their life together once it ends with her agreeing to marry him. Witherspoon won the best actress Oscar for the role, well deserved. She is always watchable in her movies and this was no exception. <hl> In short, I liked the film. Not a movie I plan on watching repeatedly, but it was worth the time to see . <hl> I recommend it highly, even if like me, you know little or nothing about the singer. This film is worth the time invested.

Not having been a fan of Johnny Cash my entire life, I didn't have any of his life details to compare while watching the movie. I had no idea about his relationship with June Carter, or really any of his hit songs. That being said, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. The portrait that Joaquin Phoenix paints of the classic singer is a troubled man who battled some of the usual demons that people in the spotlight often fight. Booze, drugs, cheating on the spouse, and losing touch with the loved ones in the family, all of these plague Cash in the film. Most of these things, like always are self imposed, and should be avoided. It's interesting how much these things affect the famous in the world.Anyway, the performances are solid, especially Reese Witherspoon, who shines in her role as June Carter. She spends most of her life in the limelight, working with Cash for lots of her adult life and eventually marrying him. The film provides us information about their life together once it ends with her agreeing to marry him. Witherspoon won the best actress Oscar for the role, well deserved. She is always watchable in her movies and this was no exception.In short, <hl> I liked the film. Not a movie I plan on watching repeatedly, but it was worth the time to see <hl>. I recommend it highly, even if like me, you know little or nothing about the singer. This film is worth the time invested.

In short, <hl> I liked the film. Not a movie I plan on watching repeatedly, but it was worth the time to see <hl> .


Question: Is it plenty of flaws?

A fast moving action film that works surprisingly well - the action certainly conveys the sense of a remorseless and overwhelming enemy. The reaction of both civil and armed forces seems unusually rationale for a Hollywood film. The film does feel rushed towards the end and leaves quite a few loose ends unresolved. Was this supposed to be a longer film? Or the first of a two part series? Either way, aside from the scrappy and rather abrupt ending, the film is very watchable. This isn't a blockbuster but it is a very decent zombie flick.

Answer: ending, the film is very watchable

A fast moving action film that works surprisingly well - the action certainly conveys the sense of a remorseless and overwhelming enemy. The reaction of both civil and armed forces seems unusually rationale for a Hollywood film. The film does feel rushed towards the end and leaves quite a few loose ends unresolved. Was this supposed to be a longer film? Or the first of a two part series? <hl> Either way, aside from the scrappy and rather abrupt ending, the film is very watchable . <hl> This isn't a blockbuster but it is a very decent zombie flick.

A fast moving action film that works surprisingly well - the action certainly conveys the sense of a remorseless and overwhelming enemy. The reaction of both civil and armed forces seems unusually rationale for a Hollywood film. The film does feel rushed towards the end and leaves quite a few loose ends unresolved. Was this supposed to be a longer film? Or the first of a two part series? Either way, aside from the scrappy and rather abrupt <hl> ending, the film is very watchable <hl>. This isn't a blockbuster but it is a very decent zombie flick.

Either way, aside from the scrappy and rather abrupt <hl> ending, the film is very watchable <hl> .


Question: What characterizes a different film?

Eyes Wide Shut is a very frustrating film.  As Stanely Kubrick's last movie it shows what the director was capable of but is rather lacking at  the same time.Despite what many have said about the film, it isn't a  porno movie. Sorry.  It is a series of adventures into a intresting dream  world.  Every scene is very well shot and unique.  In fact it's fair to say  that the whole isn't the sum of it's parts.  While all the different  encounters Tom Cruis's character has are well-done and intresting, they  don't fell connected and the story falls apart quickly.  Also, the audience  never really gets a sense of Cruis's or Kidman's character.The film  also feels rather incomplete.  Many times it apears the story is heading  toward an interesting confrontation only to have the plot abandon the  situation and head in a completely different direction.  I still recommend  seeing Eyes Wide Shut but the film could have been so much more.

Answer: While all the different  encounters Tom Cruis's character has are well-done and intresting

Eyes Wide Shut is a very frustrating film. As Stanely Kubrick's last movie it shows what the director was capable of but is rather lacking at the same time. Despite what many have said about the film, it isn't a porno movie. Sorry. It is a series of adventures into a intresting dream world. Every scene is very well shot and unique. In fact it's fair to say that the whole isn't the sum of it's parts. <hl> While all the different encounters Tom Cruis's character has are well-done and intresting , they don't fell connected and the story falls apart quickly. <hl> Also, the audience never really gets a sense of Cruis's or Kidman's character. The film also feels rather incomplete. Many times it apears the story is heading toward an interesting confrontation only to have the plot abandon the situation and head in a completely different direction. I still recommend seeing Eyes Wide Shut but the film could have been so much more.

Eyes Wide Shut is a very frustrating film. As Stanely Kubrick's last movie it shows what the director was capable of but is rather lacking at the same time.Despite what many have said about the film, it isn't a porno movie. Sorry. It is a series of adventures into a intresting dream world. Every scene is very well shot and unique. In fact it's fair to say that the whole isn't the sum of it's parts. <hl> While all the different encounters Tom Cruis's character has are well-done and intresting <hl>, they don't fell connected and the story falls apart quickly. Also, the audience never really gets a sense of Cruis's or Kidman's character.The film also feels rather incomplete. Many times it apears the story is heading toward an interesting confrontation only to have the plot abandon the situation and head in a completely different direction. I still recommend seeing Eyes Wide Shut but the film could have been so much more.

<hl> While all the different encounters Tom Cruis's character has are well-done and intresting <hl> , they don't fell connected and the story falls apart quickly.


Question: How many episodes are there?

I didn't really love season 4 like I loved 2 and 3. It had some new ideas and concepts and some of them didn't really work in the right ways for me. But it did have some brilliant episodes, and got us more interested about the military involvement in vampire slaying.WARNING: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS!Here's my episode-by-episode guide to Season 4#1 THE FRESHMAN - 4/5. A very good opener. Lots of comedic scenes and also shows the estrangement of your first few days of college nicely.#2 LIVING CONDITIONS - 3.5/5. Funny funny episode! I wasn't really all that happy with how it turned out, but it keeps the laughs coming on in, and the editing techniques were great.#3 THE HARSH LIGHT OF DAY - 4/5. This episode gets better with repeated viewings. Lots of good insights on relationships and such. Good music too, and seeing Spike in the sunlight was a treat.#4 FEAR, ITSELF - 4/5. Genuinely creepy episode with great production design. Also some good foreshadowing for the rest of the show.#5 BEER BAD - 2/5. Stupid, pointless episode. But I did kind of enjoy it's silly qualities. Quite funny in parts but overall - just lame and unneeded.#6 WILD AT HEART - 4.5/5. The girl who plays Veruca was atrocious and brought this episode down from a 5. Everything else was excellent!#7 THE INITIATIVE- 4/5. We finally learn about those damn commando guys! A good episode with many funny scenes that got the story-arc going.#8 PANGS - 2.5/5. Gets worse everytime I watch it. The story isn't really needed to the arc of the season, and seems just pointless...#9 SOMETHING BLUE - 4/5. Awesome comedic episode, with great performances by Sarah Michelle Gellar and James Marsters.#10 HUSH - 5/5. Brilliant episode of BTVS - one of the best ever if you ask me! Joss did a brilliant directing and writing job. A unique, very frigtening, funny and just excellent and enjoyable hour of TV!#11 DOOMED - 4/5. Keeps getting better with every viewing. Written by Marti Noxon, Jane Espenson and David Fury - this mixes all of their talents together - drama, comedy and action. Good episode, if not perfect.#12 A NEW MAN - 4/5. Very almost a 4.5, maybe after more viewings. This episode was hilarious and finally Giles got his own little story arc. It didn't really move the story-arc along or anything, but fun all the same.#13 THE I IN TEAM - 4/5. In which we are introduced to the big bad for season 4, and a questionable big bad he is...but the rest of this episode was 4.5 material!#14 GOODBYE IOWA - 3.5/5. Didn't hold my interest as much as the previous episode, but this one definitely gets the big bad's story-arc on the road as we learn more about him. Marc Blucas' acting is also brilliant here.#15 THIS YEAR'S GIRL - 4.5/5. Praise FAITH! She is just an amazing character and I can't explain how great it was to have her back. Everything about this episode was enjoyable - one of the best of the season!#16 WHO ARE YOU - 5/5. Just when I thought it couldn't get better than This Year's Girl, they give us a true Jossian episode with Who Are You. It's a weird idea that could've gone awry, but instead it turns out to be a brilliant one that furthers our knowledge of the characteristics of both Faith and Buffy. Funny, dramatic - brilliant!#17 SUPERSTAR - 4/5. Groovy little episode that gets better every time I watch it. Danny Strong did a great job and the alteration to the credits is just classic in the best sense of the word. Great job!#18 WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE - 0.5/5. Even worse than Superstar. This episode gives a good reason for people to say why they don't like BTVS. This is probably the worst episode of the show ever.#19 NEW MOON RISING - 4.5/5. Thank God for Oz! After those two HORRIBLE episodes beforehand, on comes Oz for his final episode of BTVS (I think, you never know with Joss). The acting here is great, and there is a lot of brilliantly written drama by Marti Noxon.#20 THE YOKO FACTOR - 4.5/5. Good good good! A funny episode that prepares us for the showdown with Adam and the Initiative. Very well done and with great acting by Marc Blucas and David Boreanaz.#21 PRIMEVAL - 4/5. Lots and lots of great action sequences here, and it was awesome to see the gang working as a team once more. The fight with Adam is just classic!#22 RESTLESS - 5/5. One of the most amazing episodes of the show. Though it doesn't quite beat out Hush for best episode of the season. It is very close though. There is a lot of character development here, and the directing job is probably the best the show will ever have. A great way to finish S4!--- DVD REVIEW ---This DVD is great and gives you deeper insight into the ideas for the season. The writers and directors give you a lot of good insights into the episodes they wrote. I love this DVD package. You can buy it in NZ on Region 4 and it is excellent, so when it comes out in the USA, all you American BTVS fans better order a copy from Amazon!

Answer: season 4

<hl> I didn't really love season 4 like I loved 2 and 3. <hl> It had some new ideas and concepts and some of them didn't really work in the right ways for me. But it did have some brilliant episodes, and got us more interested about the military involvement in vampire slaying. WARNING: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS!Here's my episode-by-episode guide to Season 4#1 THE FRESHMAN - 4/5. A very good opener. Lots of comedic scenes and also shows the estrangement of your first few days of college nicely.#2 LIVING CONDITIONS - 3.5/5. Funny funny episode! I wasn't really all that happy with how it turned out, but it keeps the laughs coming on in, and the editing techniques were great.#3 THE HARSH LIGHT OF DAY - 4/5. This episode gets better with repeated viewings. Lots of good insights on relationships and such. Good music too, and seeing Spike in the sunlight was a treat.#4 FEAR, ITSELF - 4/5. Genuinely creepy episode with great production design. Also some good foreshadowing for the rest of the show.#5 BEER BAD - 2/5. Stupid, pointless episode. But I did kind of enjoy it's silly qualities. Quite funny in parts but overall - just lame and unneeded.#6 WILD AT HEART - 4.5/5. The girl who plays Veruca was atrocious and brought this episode down from a 5. Everything else was excellent!#7 THE INITIATIVE- 4/5. We finally learn about those damn commando guys! A good episode with many funny scenes that got the story-arc going.#8 PANGS - 2.5/5. Gets worse everytime I watch it. The story isn't really needed to the arc of the season, and seems just pointless...#9 SOMETHING BLUE - 4/5. Awesome comedic episode, with great performances by Sarah Michelle Gellar and James Marsters.#10 HUSH - 5/5. Brilliant episode of BTVS - one of the best ever if you ask me! Joss did a brilliant directing and writing job. A unique, very frigtening, funny and just excellent and enjoyable hour of TV!#11 DOOMED - 4/5. Keeps getting better with every viewing. Written by Marti Noxon, Jane Espenson and David Fury - this mixes all of their talents together - drama, comedy and action. Good episode, if not perfect.#12 A NEW MAN - 4/5. Very almost a 4.5, maybe after more viewings. This episode was hilarious and finally Giles got his own little story arc. It didn't really move the story-arc along or anything, but fun all the same.#13 THE I IN TEAM - 4/5. In which we are introduced to the big bad for season 4, and a questionable big bad he is...but the rest of this episode was 4.5 material!#14 GOODBYE IOWA - 3.5/5. Didn't hold my interest as much as the previous episode, but this one definitely gets the big bad's story-arc on the road as we learn more about him. Marc Blucas' acting is also brilliant here.#15 THIS YEAR'S GIRL - 4.5/5. Praise FAITH! She is just an amazing character and I can't explain how great it was to have her back. Everything about this episode was enjoyable - one of the best of the season!#16 WHO ARE YOU - 5/5. Just when I thought it couldn't get better than This Year's Girl, they give us a true Jossian episode with Who Are You. It's a weird idea that could've gone awry, but instead it turns out to be a brilliant one that furthers our knowledge of the characteristics of both Faith and Buffy. Funny, dramatic - brilliant!#17 SUPERSTAR - 4/5. Groovy little episode that gets better every time I watch it. Danny Strong did a great job and the alteration to the credits is just classic in the best sense of the word. Great job!#18 WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE - 0.5/5. Even worse than Superstar. This episode gives a good reason for people to say why they don't like BTVS. This is probably the worst episode of the show ever.#19 NEW MOON RISING - 4.5/5. Thank God for Oz! After those two HORRIBLE episodes beforehand, on comes Oz for his final episode of BTVS (I think, you never know with Joss). The acting here is great, and there is a lot of brilliantly written drama by Marti Noxon.#20 THE YOKO FACTOR - 4.5/5. Good good good! A funny episode that prepares us for the showdown with Adam and the Initiative. Very well done and with great acting by Marc Blucas and David Boreanaz.#21 PRIMEVAL - 4/5. Lots and lots of great action sequences here, and it was awesome to see the gang working as a team once more. The fight with Adam is just classic!#22 RESTLESS - 5/5. One of the most amazing episodes of the show. Though it doesn't quite beat out Hush for best episode of the season. It is very close though. There is a lot of character development here, and the directing job is probably the best the show will ever have. A great way to finish S4!--- DVD REVIEW ---This DVD is great and gives you deeper insight into the ideas for the season. The writers and directors give you a lot of good insights into the episodes they wrote. I love this DVD package. You can buy it in NZ on Region 4 and it is excellent, so when it comes out in the USA, all you American BTVS fans better order a copy from Amazon!

I didn't really love <hl> season 4 <hl> like I loved 2 and 3. It had some new ideas and concepts and some of them didn't really work in the right ways for me. But it did have some brilliant episodes, and got us more interested about the military involvement in vampire slaying.WARNING: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS!Here's my episode-by-episode guide to Season 4#1 THE FRESHMAN - 4/5. A very good opener. Lots of comedic scenes and also shows the estrangement of your first few days of college nicely.#2 LIVING CONDITIONS - 3.5/5. Funny funny episode! I wasn't really all that happy with how it turned out, but it keeps the laughs coming on in, and the editing techniques were great.#3 THE HARSH LIGHT OF DAY - 4/5. This episode gets better with repeated viewings. Lots of good insights on relationships and such. Good music too, and seeing Spike in the sunlight was a treat.#4 FEAR, ITSELF - 4/5. Genuinely creepy episode with great production design. Also some good foreshadowing for the rest of the show.#5 BEER BAD - 2/5. Stupid, pointless episode. But I did kind of enjoy it's silly qualities. Quite funny in parts but overall - just lame and unneeded.#6 WILD AT HEART - 4.5/5. The girl who plays Veruca was atrocious and brought this episode down from a 5. Everything else was excellent!#7 THE INITIATIVE- 4/5. We finally learn about those damn commando guys! A good episode with many funny scenes that got the story-arc going.#8 PANGS - 2.5/5. Gets worse everytime I watch it. The story isn't really needed to the arc of the season, and seems just pointless...#9 SOMETHING BLUE - 4/5. Awesome comedic episode, with great performances by Sarah Michelle Gellar and James Marsters.#10 HUSH - 5/5. Brilliant episode of BTVS - one of the best ever if you ask me! Joss did a brilliant directing and writing job. A unique, very frigtening, funny and just excellent and enjoyable hour of TV!#11 DOOMED - 4/5. Keeps getting better with every viewing. Written by Marti Noxon, Jane Espenson and David Fury - this mixes all of their talents together - drama, comedy and action. Good episode, if not perfect.#12 A NEW MAN - 4/5. Very almost a 4.5, maybe after more viewings. This episode was hilarious and finally Giles got his own little story arc. It didn't really move the story-arc along or anything, but fun all the same.#13 THE I IN TEAM - 4/5. In which we are introduced to the big bad for season 4, and a questionable big bad he is...but the rest of this episode was 4.5 material!#14 GOODBYE IOWA - 3.5/5. Didn't hold my interest as much as the previous episode, but this one definitely gets the big bad's story-arc on the road as we learn more about him. Marc Blucas' acting is also brilliant here.#15 THIS YEAR'S GIRL - 4.5/5. Praise FAITH! She is just an amazing character and I can't explain how great it was to have her back. Everything about this episode was enjoyable - one of the best of the season!#16 WHO ARE YOU - 5/5. Just when I thought it couldn't get better than This Year's Girl, they give us a true Jossian episode with Who Are You. It's a weird idea that could've gone awry, but instead it turns out to be a brilliant one that furthers our knowledge of the characteristics of both Faith and Buffy. Funny, dramatic - brilliant!#17 SUPERSTAR - 4/5. Groovy little episode that gets better every time I watch it. Danny Strong did a great job and the alteration to the credits is just classic in the best sense of the word. Great job!#18 WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE - 0.5/5. Even worse than Superstar. This episode gives a good reason for people to say why they don't like BTVS. This is probably the worst episode of the show ever.#19 NEW MOON RISING - 4.5/5. Thank God for Oz! After those two HORRIBLE episodes beforehand, on comes Oz for his final episode of BTVS (I think, you never know with Joss). The acting here is great, and there is a lot of brilliantly written drama by Marti Noxon.#20 THE YOKO FACTOR - 4.5/5. Good good good! A funny episode that prepares us for the showdown with Adam and the Initiative. Very well done and with great acting by Marc Blucas and David Boreanaz.#21 PRIMEVAL - 4/5. Lots and lots of great action sequences here, and it was awesome to see the gang working as a team once more. The fight with Adam is just classic!#22 RESTLESS - 5/5. One of the most amazing episodes of the show. Though it doesn't quite beat out Hush for best episode of the season. It is very close though. There is a lot of character development here, and the directing job is probably the best the show will ever have. A great way to finish S4!--- DVD REVIEW ---This DVD is great and gives you deeper insight into the ideas for the season. The writers and directors give you a lot of good insights into the episodes they wrote. I love this DVD package. You can buy it in NZ on Region 4 and it is excellent, so when it comes out in the USA, all you American BTVS fans better order a copy from Amazon!


Question: How is film?

"The Passion Of The Christ" is brilliant and one of the best pictures of the year, so far! The movie focuses on the last 12 hours of Jesus' (Jim Caviezel) life leading up to his death and resurrection. This movie has some very graphic scenes, but don't let the violence concern you. It is a powerful depiction of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, thanks in part to its director, the brilliant Mel Gibson, who directed and starred as Justin Mcleod in "The Man Without A Face" and William Wallace in "Braveheart", the latter, which won him the Best Director Oscar. He also well known as Dr. Gibbon in "The Singing Detective" (2003), Graham Hess in "Signs" (2002), Lt. Col. Hal Moore in "We Were Soldiers" (2002), Nick Marshall in "What Women Want" (2000), Benjamin Martin in "The Patriot" (2000), Porter in "Payback" (1999), Martin Riggs in the Lethal Weapon movies (1987, 1989, 1992, 1998), Jerry Fletcher in "Conspiracy Theory" (1997), Tom Mullen in "Ransom" (1996), the voices of Rocky and John Smith in "Chicken Run" (2000) and "Pocahontas" (1995), Bret Maverick in "Maverick" (1994), Capt. Daniel McCormick in "Forever Young" (1992), Hamlet in "Hamlet" (1990), Mad Max Rockatansky in the Mad Max movies (1979, 1981, 1985, 2005 or 2006), and Fletcher Christian in "The Bounty" (1984). His directing in this movie is brilliant without compromise. Everything he did to make this movie has paid off brilliantly. The cast including Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene, Maia Morgenstern as Mary, Jesus' mother, are brilliant as well. Caviezel's performance as Jesus, is emotionally powerful and brilliant and as the co-anchor of the movie, besides, Gibson, does a brilliant job as much as Gibson did. Gibson's production company, Icon Productions, has produced movies of his such as, "The Singing Detective" (2003), "Payback" (1999), "What Women Want" (2000), "Braveheart" (1995), "We Were Soldiers" (2002), "Fairy Tale: A True Story" (1997), "Forever Young" (1992), "Hamlet" (1990), "The Man Without A Face" (1993), and "Maverick" (1994). The screenplay by Benedict Fitzgerald and Gibson is brilliant. The music by John Debney is brilliant. The cinematography by Caleb Deschanel is brilliant. The film editing by John Wright is brilliant. The production design by Francesco Frigeri and the costume design by Maurizio Millenotti is brilliant. The casting by Shaila Rubin is brilliant. The set direction by Carlo Gervasi is brilliant. The visual and make-up effects by Greg Cannom and Keith Vanderlaan is brilliant. This movie make a powerful point about how Jesus died and the point is brilliant and succeeds on every level. The language, which is in Aramaic, Latin, and Hebrew, which is shown in English subtitles, proves that you don't need to speak English to have a brilliant film with heart and soul. Go see this movie now or if you can see it. This is an achievement on every level. It is a movie to remember forever.

Answer: The film editing by John Wright is brilliant

"The Passion Of The Christ" is brilliant and one of the best pictures of the year, so far! The movie focuses on the last 12 hours of Jesus' (Jim Caviezel) life leading up to his death and resurrection. This movie has some very graphic scenes, but don't let the violence concern you. It is a powerful depiction of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, thanks in part to its director, the brilliant Mel Gibson, who directed and starred as Justin Mcleod in "The Man Without A Face" and William Wallace in "Braveheart", the latter, which won him the Best Director Oscar. He also well known as Dr. Gibbon in "The Singing Detective" (2003), Graham Hess in "Signs" (2002), Lt. Col. Hal Moore in "We Were Soldiers" (2002), Nick Marshall in "What Women Want" (2000), Benjamin Martin in "The Patriot" (2000), Porter in "Payback" (1999), Martin Riggs in the Lethal Weapon movies (1987, 1989, 1992, 1998), Jerry Fletcher in "Conspiracy Theory" (1997), Tom Mullen in "Ransom" (1996), the voices of Rocky and John Smith in "Chicken Run" (2000) and "Pocahontas" (1995), Bret Maverick in "Maverick" (1994), Capt. Daniel McCormick in "Forever Young" (1992), Hamlet in "Hamlet" (1990), Mad Max Rockatansky in the Mad Max movies (1979, 1981, 1985, 2005 or 2006), and Fletcher Christian in "The Bounty" (1984). His directing in this movie is brilliant without compromise. Everything he did to make this movie has paid off brilliantly. The cast including Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene, Maia Morgenstern as Mary, Jesus' mother, are brilliant as well. Caviezel's performance as Jesus, is emotionally powerful and brilliant and as the co-anchor of the movie, besides, Gibson, does a brilliant job as much as Gibson did. Gibson's production company, Icon Productions, has produced movies of his such as, "The Singing Detective" (2003), "Payback" (1999), "What Women Want" (2000), "Braveheart" (1995), "We Were Soldiers" (2002), "Fairy Tale: A True Story" (1997), "Forever Young" (1992), "Hamlet" (1990), "The Man Without A Face" (1993), and "Maverick" (1994). The screenplay by Benedict Fitzgerald and Gibson is brilliant. The music by John Debney is brilliant. The cinematography by Caleb Deschanel is brilliant. <hl> The film editing by John Wright is brilliant . <hl> The production design by Francesco Frigeri and the costume design by Maurizio Millenotti is brilliant. The casting by Shaila Rubin is brilliant. The set direction by Carlo Gervasi is brilliant. The visual and make-up effects by Greg Cannom and Keith Vanderlaan is brilliant. This movie make a powerful point about how Jesus died and the point is brilliant and succeeds on every level. The language, which is in Aramaic, Latin, and Hebrew, which is shown in English subtitles, proves that you don't need to speak English to have a brilliant film with heart and soul. Go see this movie now or if you can see it. This is an achievement on every level. It is a movie to remember forever.

"The Passion Of The Christ" is brilliant and one of the best pictures of the year, so far! The movie focuses on the last 12 hours of Jesus' (Jim Caviezel) life leading up to his death and resurrection. This movie has some very graphic scenes, but don't let the violence concern you. It is a powerful depiction of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, thanks in part to its director, the brilliant Mel Gibson, who directed and starred as Justin Mcleod in "The Man Without A Face" and William Wallace in "Braveheart", the latter, which won him the Best Director Oscar. He also well known as Dr. Gibbon in "The Singing Detective" (2003), Graham Hess in "Signs" (2002), Lt. Col. Hal Moore in "We Were Soldiers" (2002), Nick Marshall in "What Women Want" (2000), Benjamin Martin in "The Patriot" (2000), Porter in "Payback" (1999), Martin Riggs in the Lethal Weapon movies (1987, 1989, 1992, 1998), Jerry Fletcher in "Conspiracy Theory" (1997), Tom Mullen in "Ransom" (1996), the voices of Rocky and John Smith in "Chicken Run" (2000) and "Pocahontas" (1995), Bret Maverick in "Maverick" (1994), Capt. Daniel McCormick in "Forever Young" (1992), Hamlet in "Hamlet" (1990), Mad Max Rockatansky in the Mad Max movies (1979, 1981, 1985, 2005 or 2006), and Fletcher Christian in "The Bounty" (1984). His directing in this movie is brilliant without compromise. Everything he did to make this movie has paid off brilliantly. The cast including Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene, Maia Morgenstern as Mary, Jesus' mother, are brilliant as well. Caviezel's performance as Jesus, is emotionally powerful and brilliant and as the co-anchor of the movie, besides, Gibson, does a brilliant job as much as Gibson did. Gibson's production company, Icon Productions, has produced movies of his such as, "The Singing Detective" (2003), "Payback" (1999), "What Women Want" (2000), "Braveheart" (1995), "We Were Soldiers" (2002), "Fairy Tale: A True Story" (1997), "Forever Young" (1992), "Hamlet" (1990), "The Man Without A Face" (1993), and "Maverick" (1994). The screenplay by Benedict Fitzgerald and Gibson is brilliant. The music by John Debney is brilliant. The cinematography by Caleb Deschanel is brilliant. <hl> The film editing by John Wright is brilliant <hl>. The production design by Francesco Frigeri and the costume design by Maurizio Millenotti is brilliant. The casting by Shaila Rubin is brilliant. The set direction by Carlo Gervasi is brilliant. The visual and make-up effects by Greg Cannom and Keith Vanderlaan is brilliant. This movie make a powerful point about how Jesus died and the point is brilliant and succeeds on every level. The language, which is in Aramaic, Latin, and Hebrew, which is shown in English subtitles, proves that you don't need to speak English to have a brilliant film with heart and soul. Go see this movie now or if you can see it. This is an achievement on every level. It is a movie to remember forever.

<hl> The film editing by John Wright is brilliant <hl> .


Question: How is the story?

Well, now we`re in the fifth (or should I say "second") chapter in the Star Wars saga. Yet again, we`re in the middle of a trilogy.Ten years has passed since the events of "Star Wars Episode I - The Phantom Menace". Anakin is now a 19 year old Jedi padawan, and Amidala has left her position as the queen of Naboo to serve the senate. We`re also facing a cooler, less annoying Jar-Jar Binks (but don`t worry. He`s just on screen for 5-10 minutes!). Obi-Wan Kenobi is the same person as always, a worried man with a tough sense of humour. The Republic is still in crisis. Many solar systems is trying to separate from the republic. Under the lead of the mysterious count Dooku (yeah, right , COUNT Dooku, played by legendary horror veteran Christopher Lee), the separatists plan to kill senator Amidala. Anakin and Obi Wan are now sent out by the Jedi council to protect her, and this leads into many fearsome events, especially as Anakin is more and more on his way to the Dark Side.I think that "Attack of The Clones" is a lot better than "The Phantom Menace". After having seen the first film I was worried. I was thinking "Well, it`s Ok to have one bad Star Wars film. But if the second appears to be [bad], I don`t think the prequel trilogy will ever reach up to the standards of the old one"Fortunatley, Lucas hasn`t written the script himself this time. He`s co-written it with Jonathan Hales (who also wrote the action flick "The Scorpion King"). This film is more in the spirit of the original trilogy than "The Phantom Menace", and it`s full of memorable action sequences and has lots of fun lines, which comes close to "The Empire Strikes Back" which is may be the best Star Wars film in my opinion.This movie is much more matured and serious than "The Phantom Menace" - for example, there is much more love and serious drama this time.This could very well be the darkest and most serious Star Wars movie so far.Finally, we are also given the answers of questions that has previously been hidden. For example - why don`t the jedi discover the dark lord of the sith is controlling the republic, what did the Storm Troopers came from and how did Anakin`s enormous hate really began?While the last movie felt more like an adventure film, this one feels more like a typical Star Wars movie.I also think that the actors are well chosen - the newcomer Hayden Christensen is excellent as the grown-up Anakin Skywalker (while Jake Lloyd [was not]!)In fact, he`s one of the best actors since Harrison Ford to appear in a Star Wars film!Ewan McGregor is great as the always skeptical and carefull Obi-Wan Kenobi and Christopher Lee is a fun surprise as the new villain ( I think this is funny : he`s playing a real bad guy in both Star Wars II and Lord of the Rings II this year!) and Samuel L. Jackson swings his lightsaber with the same coolness as when he played "Shaft".Something which I have noticed recently is that the Star Wars characters never changes. They always have the same personality. This is making a typical film analysis  of Star Wars impossible!Anyhow, this isn`t the best Star Wars movie out there. I think that there is simply TOO MUCH action to make it as memorable as the original trilogy.The 30-minute final battle sequence sometimes seems more like  marketing for action figures than a real movie!And the sequence where Yoda swings his lightsaber for the first time is fun, but it`s sometimes feels made just for the fans to have someone laughing at. To sum it up : the action sequences are too many and too long!They should have taken even more feelsome and serious moments and cut away may be 15 minutes or so of the action sequences.But except for that, I`m actually quite happy with this movie. This movie simply brings us a new hope for the Star Wars saga - Lucas is definitly on the right way, but he`s not really there yet. It feels like a pity you have to wait for another three years to see what the final chapter of the saga is like. I hope Lucas is taking all of his best ideas and use them to give us the greatest film ever made with Episode III!!

Answer: the

<hl> Well, now we`re in the fifth (or should I say "second") chapter in the Star Wars saga. <hl> Yet again, we`re in the middle of a trilogy. Ten years has passed since the events of "Star Wars Episode I - The Phantom Menace". Anakin is now a 19 year old Jedi padawan, and Amidala has left her position as the queen of Naboo to serve the senate. We`re also facing a cooler, less annoying Jar-Jar Binks (but don`t worry. He`s just on screen for 5-10 minutes!). Obi-Wan Kenobi is the same person as always, a worried man with a tough sense of humour. The Republic is still in crisis. Many solar systems is trying to separate from the republic. Under the lead of the mysterious count Dooku (yeah, right , COUNT Dooku, played by legendary horror veteran Christopher Lee), the separatists plan to kill senator Amidala. Anakin and Obi Wan are now sent out by the Jedi council to protect her, and this leads into many fearsome events, especially as Anakin is more and more on his way to the Dark Side. I think that "Attack of The Clones" is a lot better than "The Phantom Menace". After having seen the first film I was worried. I was thinking "Well, it`s Ok to have one bad Star Wars film. But if the second appears to be [bad], I don`t think the prequel trilogy will ever reach up to the standards of the old one"Fortunatley, Lucas hasn`t written the script himself this time. He`s co-written it with Jonathan Hales (who also wrote the action flick "The Scorpion King"). This film is more in the spirit of the original trilogy than "The Phantom Menace", and it`s full of memorable action sequences and has lots of fun lines, which comes close to "The Empire Strikes Back" which is may be the best Star Wars film in my opinion. This movie is much more matured and serious than "The Phantom Menace" - for example, there is much more love and serious drama this time. This could very well be the darkest and most serious Star Wars movie so far. Finally, we are also given the answers of questions that has previously been hidden. For example - why don`t the jedi discover the dark lord of the sith is controlling the republic, what did the Storm Troopers came from and how did Anakin`s enormous hate really began?While the last movie felt more like an adventure film, this one feels more like a typical Star Wars movie. I also think that the actors are well chosen - the newcomer Hayden Christensen is excellent as the grown-up Anakin Skywalker (while Jake Lloyd [was not]!)In fact, he`s one of the best actors since Harrison Ford to appear in a Star Wars film!Ewan McGregor is great as the always skeptical and carefull Obi-Wan Kenobi and Christopher Lee is a fun surprise as the new villain ( I think this is funny : he`s playing a real bad guy in both Star Wars II and Lord of the Rings II this year!) and Samuel L. Jackson swings his lightsaber with the same coolness as when he played "Shaft". Something which I have noticed recently is that the Star Wars characters never changes. They always have the same personality. This is making a typical film analysis of Star Wars impossible!Anyhow, this isn`t the best Star Wars movie out there. I think that there is simply TOO MUCH action to make it as memorable as the original trilogy. The 30-minute final battle sequence sometimes seems more like marketing for action figures than a real movie!And the sequence where Yoda swings his lightsaber for the first time is fun, but it`s sometimes feels made just for the fans to have someone laughing at. To sum it up : the action sequences are too many and too long!They should have taken even more feelsome and serious moments and cut away may be 15 minutes or so of the action sequences. But except for that, I`m actually quite happy with this movie. This movie simply brings us a new hope for the Star Wars saga - Lucas is definitly on the right way, but he`s not really there yet. It feels like a pity you have to wait for another three years to see what the final chapter of the saga is like. I hope Lucas is taking all of his best ideas and use them to give us the greatest film ever made with Episode III!!

Well, now we`re in <hl> the <hl> fifth (or should I say "second") chapter in the Star Wars saga. Yet again, we`re in the middle of a trilogy.Ten years has passed since the events of "Star Wars Episode I - The Phantom Menace". Anakin is now a 19 year old Jedi padawan, and Amidala has left her position as the queen of Naboo to serve the senate. We`re also facing a cooler, less annoying Jar-Jar Binks (but don`t worry. He`s just on screen for 5-10 minutes!). Obi-Wan Kenobi is the same person as always, a worried man with a tough sense of humour. The Republic is still in crisis. Many solar systems is trying to separate from the republic. Under the lead of the mysterious count Dooku (yeah, right , COUNT Dooku, played by legendary horror veteran Christopher Lee), the separatists plan to kill senator Amidala. Anakin and Obi Wan are now sent out by the Jedi council to protect her, and this leads into many fearsome events, especially as Anakin is more and more on his way to the Dark Side.I think that "Attack of The Clones" is a lot better than "The Phantom Menace". After having seen the first film I was worried. I was thinking "Well, it`s Ok to have one bad Star Wars film. But if the second appears to be [bad], I don`t think the prequel trilogy will ever reach up to the standards of the old one"Fortunatley, Lucas hasn`t written the script himself this time. He`s co-written it with Jonathan Hales (who also wrote the action flick "The Scorpion King"). This film is more in the spirit of the original trilogy than "The Phantom Menace", and it`s full of memorable action sequences and has lots of fun lines, which comes close to "The Empire Strikes Back" which is may be the best Star Wars film in my opinion.This movie is much more matured and serious than "The Phantom Menace" - for example, there is much more love and serious drama this time.This could very well be the darkest and most serious Star Wars movie so far.Finally, we are also given the answers of questions that has previously been hidden. For example - why don`t the jedi discover the dark lord of the sith is controlling the republic, what did the Storm Troopers came from and how did Anakin`s enormous hate really began?While the last movie felt more like an adventure film, this one feels more like a typical Star Wars movie.I also think that the actors are well chosen - the newcomer Hayden Christensen is excellent as the grown-up Anakin Skywalker (while Jake Lloyd [was not]!)In fact, he`s one of the best actors since Harrison Ford to appear in a Star Wars film!Ewan McGregor is great as the always skeptical and carefull Obi-Wan Kenobi and Christopher Lee is a fun surprise as the new villain ( I think this is funny : he`s playing a real bad guy in both Star Wars II and Lord of the Rings II this year!) and Samuel L. Jackson swings his lightsaber with the same coolness as when he played "Shaft".Something which I have noticed recently is that the Star Wars characters never changes. They always have the same personality. This is making a typical film analysis of Star Wars impossible!Anyhow, this isn`t the best Star Wars movie out there. I think that there is simply TOO MUCH action to make it as memorable as the original trilogy.The 30-minute final battle sequence sometimes seems more like marketing for action figures than a real movie!And the sequence where Yoda swings his lightsaber for the first time is fun, but it`s sometimes feels made just for the fans to have someone laughing at. To sum it up : the action sequences are too many and too long!They should have taken even more feelsome and serious moments and cut away may be 15 minutes or so of the action sequences.But except for that, I`m actually quite happy with this movie. This movie simply brings us a new hope for the Star Wars saga - Lucas is definitly on the right way, but he`s not really there yet. It feels like a pity you have to wait for another three years to see what the final chapter of the saga is like. I hope Lucas is taking all of his best ideas and use them to give us the greatest film ever made with Episode III!!


Question: How is the story is so familiar . the brutality is unrelenting?

My husband and I spent a cozy evening at home last night, enjoying OCTOBER SKY.  Based on the book Rocket Boys (BTW look at the two titles...OCTOBER SKY is an anagram of Rocket Boys), OCTOBER SKY is the story of a group of kids, growing up in a dying coal-mining town.  The launch of Sputnik captures their imagination, and gives them all impetus to learn about rockets and make something more of their lives.  With the help of a beloved teacher, the boys achieve their dreams and accomplish things never thought possible.While this story is old and familiar, OCTOBER SKY is sweet, comfortable, and very well done, keeping us interested in these characters and their lives throughout the film.  You cheer for these kids, hope for their success, and are proud of their achievements.  Sentimental and inspiring, OCTOBER SKY is perfect family fare.  The acting is well done, the photography is lovely and wonderfully atmospheric, and the story right on target.  If I have any criticism at all, it is that this film drags a bit in a few places.  But, overall, OCTOBER SKY is a wonderful feel good movie.OCTOBER SKY reminds us all to go for our dreams, because you might just achieve them.  HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

Answer: While this story is old and familiar

My husband and I spent a cozy evening at home last night, enjoying OCTOBER SKY. Based on the book Rocket Boys (BTW look at the two titles...OCTOBER SKY is an anagram of Rocket Boys), OCTOBER SKY is the story of a group of kids, growing up in a dying coal-mining town. The launch of Sputnik captures their imagination, and gives them all impetus to learn about rockets and make something more of their lives. With the help of a beloved teacher, the boys achieve their dreams and accomplish things never thought possible. <hl> While this story is old and familiar , OCTOBER SKY is sweet, comfortable, and very well done, keeping us interested in these characters and their lives throughout the film. <hl> You cheer for these kids, hope for their success, and are proud of their achievements. Sentimental and inspiring, OCTOBER SKY is perfect family fare. The acting is well done, the photography is lovely and wonderfully atmospheric, and the story right on target. If I have any criticism at all, it is that this film drags a bit in a few places. But, overall, OCTOBER SKY is a wonderful feel good movie. OCTOBER SKY reminds us all to go for our dreams, because you might just achieve them. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

My husband and I spent a cozy evening at home last night, enjoying OCTOBER SKY. Based on the book Rocket Boys (BTW look at the two titles...OCTOBER SKY is an anagram of Rocket Boys), OCTOBER SKY is the story of a group of kids, growing up in a dying coal-mining town. The launch of Sputnik captures their imagination, and gives them all impetus to learn about rockets and make something more of their lives. With the help of a beloved teacher, the boys achieve their dreams and accomplish things never thought possible.<hl> While this story is old and familiar <hl>, OCTOBER SKY is sweet, comfortable, and very well done, keeping us interested in these characters and their lives throughout the film. You cheer for these kids, hope for their success, and are proud of their achievements. Sentimental and inspiring, OCTOBER SKY is perfect family fare. The acting is well done, the photography is lovely and wonderfully atmospheric, and the story right on target. If I have any criticism at all, it is that this film drags a bit in a few places. But, overall, OCTOBER SKY is a wonderful feel good movie.OCTOBER SKY reminds us all to go for our dreams, because you might just achieve them. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

<hl> While this story is old and familiar <hl> , OCTOBER SKY is sweet, comfortable, and very well done, keeping us interested in these characters and their lives throughout the film.


Question: Do you like humor plays?

I cried laughing so hard! I couldn't believe how funny this movie was. I was wonderfully surprise. The movie began hilarious and didn't stop until the very end. Yes there was some shocking moments, but I think that was the idea. Will be buying this movie and recommending it to everyone.

Answer: I cried laughing so hard

I cried laughing so hard !

<hl> I cried laughing so hard ! <hl> I couldn't believe how funny this movie was. I was wonderfully surprise. The movie began hilarious and didn't stop until the very end. Yes there was some shocking moments, but I think that was the idea. Will be buying this movie and recommending it to everyone.

<hl> I cried laughing so hard <hl>! I couldn't believe how funny this movie was. I was wonderfully surprise. The movie began hilarious and didn't stop until the very end. Yes there was some shocking moments, but I think that was the idea. Will be buying this movie and recommending it to everyone.


Question: How is the  focus?

Thor is my favorite of all of the marvel hero movies out there.  This movie is entertaining right from the start, has an excellent plot, and does not disappoint.  It perfectly combines Thor's heroic duties with a little romance thrown in.  The actors who play the villan characters do an excellent performance.

Answer: This movie is entertaining right from the start, has an excellent plot, and does not disappoint

Thor is my favorite of all of the marvel hero movies out there. <hl> This movie is entertaining right from the start, has an excellent plot, and does not disappoint . <hl> It perfectly combines Thor's heroic duties with a little romance thrown in. The actors who play the villan characters do an excellent performance.

Thor is my favorite of all of the marvel hero movies out there. <hl> This movie is entertaining right from the start, has an excellent plot, and does not disappoint <hl>. It perfectly combines Thor's heroic duties with a little romance thrown in. The actors who play the villan characters do an excellent performance.

<hl> This movie is entertaining right from the start, has an excellent plot, and does not disappoint <hl> .


Question: How is the show?

Really enjoying/enjoyed Downton Abbey.  The show is excellent.  It is rather British in what they decide to make a big deal of and what they don't, but it is absolutely excellent programming.

Answer: The show is excellent

The show is excellent .

Really enjoying/enjoyed Downton Abbey. <hl> The show is excellent . <hl> It is rather British in what they decide to make a big deal of and what they don't, but it is absolutely excellent programming.

Really enjoying/enjoyed Downton Abbey. <hl> The show is excellent <hl>. It is rather British in what they decide to make a big deal of and what they don't, but it is absolutely excellent programming.


Question: What is the effect of double quipo?

I love the 1976 version which really had incredible effects especially in Kong's facial emotions and perfected the relationship between Kong and the woman.I was not expecting to love this but I was expecting it to be alright and maybe even pretty good.  But this movie was absolutely torture to sit through.First off, it's a CGI fest. Of course I knew that going in but I had a false hope that perhaps they would show restraint and use CGI skillfully.  I haven't paid attention but I hope this did not win any special effects awards.  The effects of this movie and those of its type are not artistry or cinematic skill, it's all a matter of computer technology being powerful enough to process and render it all.This has all the undesirable aspects associated with CGI.  It has the overly elaborate absurd action sequences.  People run under a stampede of dinosaurs always finding the right spot to avoid being trampled and a guy karate kicks a dinosaur as he jumps from the foot of a larger dinosaur.  We have outrageous falls and always something available and utilized to break the action and he used as a swing to further combative action.  Ordinary people are utilizing everything in the environment to do amazing feats.We also have the ridiculous shifting camera angles that seem so unnatural because they can not represent anyone's point of view.This movie is backed by a bland musical score.  The acting is equally bland and doesn't cause any identification to the characters.  To me this movie hinges on the identification of the relationship between Kong and the woman which was created so beautifully in the 1976 version.In this one, Kong is whipping the woman around violently.  So much so that her neck would have to be broken.  Kong also starts out displaying threatening intimidation and intimidating bullying of the woman.  The mood becomes like a kid's movie as the woman wins Kong over by juggling and dancing for his entertainment.I was also annoyed by the movie switching to horror mode with the natives being presented as witch type characters.The bulk of the movie is spent in CGI Jurassic Park mode with constant CGI dinosaur attacks and Kong/Dinosaur battles.  We also have multitudes of large CGI creatures attacking the other group of adventurers.As I should have expected but had hoped against, the CGI goes beyond over the top when giant insects are swarming on a guys head and body as he jumps around erratically.  His buddy then gets a machine gun and blasts off the insect attackers that are grasping him.This really had nothing at common with the groundbreaking film from 1932 besides ending as expected.  Despite recreating nothing worthwhile from the 1932 classic, it did decide to bring back the worst aspect which was the corny ending remark.  "It was beauty that killed the beast".It is so frustrating to constantly see such uninspired garbage being rated 4 out of 5 stars here on Amazon and making so much money.  It is quite scary to realize that the average mentality  of society is so low.

Answer: the characters

I love the 1976 version which really had incredible effects especially in Kong's facial emotions and perfected the relationship between Kong and the woman. I was not expecting to love this but I was expecting it to be alright and maybe even pretty good. But this movie was absolutely torture to sit through. First off, it's a CGI fest. Of course I knew that going in but I had a false hope that perhaps they would show restraint and use CGI skillfully. I haven't paid attention but I hope this did not win any special effects awards. The effects of this movie and those of its type are not artistry or cinematic skill, it's all a matter of computer technology being powerful enough to process and render it all. This has all the undesirable aspects associated with CGI. It has the overly elaborate absurd action sequences. People run under a stampede of dinosaurs always finding the right spot to avoid being trampled and a guy karate kicks a dinosaur as he jumps from the foot of a larger dinosaur. We have outrageous falls and always something available and utilized to break the action and he used as a swing to further combative action. Ordinary people are utilizing everything in the environment to do amazing feats. We also have the ridiculous shifting camera angles that seem so unnatural because they can not represent anyone's point of view. This movie is backed by a bland musical score. <hl> The acting is equally bland and doesn't cause any identification to the characters . <hl> To me this movie hinges on the identification of the relationship between Kong and the woman which was created so beautifully in the 1976 version. In this one, Kong is whipping the woman around violently. So much so that her neck would have to be broken. Kong also starts out displaying threatening intimidation and intimidating bullying of the woman. The mood becomes like a kid's movie as the woman wins Kong over by juggling and dancing for his entertainment. I was also annoyed by the movie switching to horror mode with the natives being presented as witch type characters. The bulk of the movie is spent in CGI Jurassic Park mode with constant CGI dinosaur attacks and Kong/Dinosaur battles. We also have multitudes of large CGI creatures attacking the other group of adventurers. As I should have expected but had hoped against, the CGI goes beyond over the top when giant insects are swarming on a guys head and body as he jumps around erratically. His buddy then gets a machine gun and blasts off the insect attackers that are grasping him. This really had nothing at common with the groundbreaking film from 1932 besides ending as expected. Despite recreating nothing worthwhile from the 1932 classic, it did decide to bring back the worst aspect which was the corny ending remark. "It was beauty that killed the beast". It is so frustrating to constantly see such uninspired garbage being rated 4 out of 5 stars here on Amazon and making so much money. It is quite scary to realize that the average mentality of society is so low.

I love the 1976 version which really had incredible effects especially in Kong's facial emotions and perfected the relationship between Kong and the woman.I was not expecting to love this but I was expecting it to be alright and maybe even pretty good. But this movie was absolutely torture to sit through.First off, it's a CGI fest. Of course I knew that going in but I had a false hope that perhaps they would show restraint and use CGI skillfully. I haven't paid attention but I hope this did not win any special effects awards. The effects of this movie and those of its type are not artistry or cinematic skill, it's all a matter of computer technology being powerful enough to process and render it all.This has all the undesirable aspects associated with CGI. It has the overly elaborate absurd action sequences. People run under a stampede of dinosaurs always finding the right spot to avoid being trampled and a guy karate kicks a dinosaur as he jumps from the foot of a larger dinosaur. We have outrageous falls and always something available and utilized to break the action and he used as a swing to further combative action. Ordinary people are utilizing everything in the environment to do amazing feats.We also have the ridiculous shifting camera angles that seem so unnatural because they can not represent anyone's point of view.This movie is backed by a bland musical score. The acting is equally bland and doesn't cause any identification to <hl> the characters <hl>. To me this movie hinges on the identification of the relationship between Kong and the woman which was created so beautifully in the 1976 version.In this one, Kong is whipping the woman around violently. So much so that her neck would have to be broken. Kong also starts out displaying threatening intimidation and intimidating bullying of the woman. The mood becomes like a kid's movie as the woman wins Kong over by juggling and dancing for his entertainment.I was also annoyed by the movie switching to horror mode with the natives being presented as witch type characters.The bulk of the movie is spent in CGI Jurassic Park mode with constant CGI dinosaur attacks and Kong/Dinosaur battles. We also have multitudes of large CGI creatures attacking the other group of adventurers.As I should have expected but had hoped against, the CGI goes beyond over the top when giant insects are swarming on a guys head and body as he jumps around erratically. His buddy then gets a machine gun and blasts off the insect attackers that are grasping him.This really had nothing at common with the groundbreaking film from 1932 besides ending as expected. Despite recreating nothing worthwhile from the 1932 classic, it did decide to bring back the worst aspect which was the corny ending remark. "It was beauty that killed the beast".It is so frustrating to constantly see such uninspired garbage being rated 4 out of 5 stars here on Amazon and making so much money. It is quite scary to realize that the average mentality of society is so low.

The acting is equally bland and doesn't cause any identification to <hl> the characters <hl> .


Question: How are the episodes?

After the first two seasons I was really looking forward to season 3. But while watching it I found myself fast-forwarding some of the episodes, which I never did in seasons 1&2. some of the episodes seemed like they were 'jumping the shark'. Especially in disc #3. I understand Lucas caught alot of flack about Darth Maul dying but trying to make up for it by bringing in his brother, please cut it out. I know many mistakes were made in the prequels but Clone Wars has made up for it. Season three tries to make up for the prequels too much, but who cares about those movies anymore. Just keep making great stories like the last two in season 3, hands-down the best of the season. If you're a fan that wants to have the complete season for continuity's sake, go for it. If not, don't bother you're not missing anything. On a good note season 4 looks like the series is back on track.

Answer: Season three tries to make up for the prequels too much

After the first two seasons I was really looking forward to season 3. But while watching it I found myself fast-forwarding some of the episodes, which I never did in seasons 1&2. some of the episodes seemed like they were 'jumping the shark'. Especially in disc #3. I understand Lucas caught alot of flack about Darth Maul dying but trying to make up for it by bringing in his brother, please cut it out. I know many mistakes were made in the prequels but Clone Wars has made up for it. <hl> Season three tries to make up for the prequels too much , but who cares about those movies anymore. <hl> Just keep making great stories like the last two in season 3, hands-down the best of the season. If you're a fan that wants to have the complete season for continuity's sake, go for it. If not, don't bother you're not missing anything. On a good note season 4 looks like the series is back on track.

After the first two seasons I was really looking forward to season 3. But while watching it I found myself fast-forwarding some of the episodes, which I never did in seasons 1&2. some of the episodes seemed like they were 'jumping the shark'. Especially in disc #3. I understand Lucas caught alot of flack about Darth Maul dying but trying to make up for it by bringing in his brother, please cut it out. I know many mistakes were made in the prequels but Clone Wars has made up for it. <hl> Season three tries to make up for the prequels too much <hl>, but who cares about those movies anymore. Just keep making great stories like the last two in season 3, hands-down the best of the season. If you're a fan that wants to have the complete season for continuity's sake, go for it. If not, don't bother you're not missing anything. On a good note season 4 looks like the series is back on track.

<hl> Season three tries to make up for the prequels too much <hl> , but who cares about those movies anymore.


Question: How is the scene?

If foley artistry intrigues you like it does me, this film is definitly full of interesting techniques, and has it's share of "artifacts."Aside from the fact that it's an old "Spaghetti Western" which was a joint venture between Italy and US actors, there is the issue of the dubbing, which in the remastered version has been cleaned up tremendously. The remastering artists did a wonderful job correcting many problems with the previous dubs, including insert pink noise, voices and other effects to help mask some of the original artifacts.All in all, with the original Mono track in italian laying side by side with the English (A rarity with R1 discs), this is definitly a treat!

Answer: The remastering artists did a wonderful job correcting many problems with the previous dubs

If foley artistry intrigues you like it does me, this film is definitly full of interesting techniques, and has it's share of "artifacts. "Aside from the fact that it's an old "Spaghetti Western" which was a joint venture between Italy and US actors, there is the issue of the dubbing, which in the remastered version has been cleaned up tremendously. <hl> The remastering artists did a wonderful job correcting many problems with the previous dubs , including insert pink noise, voices and other effects to help mask some of the original artifacts. <hl> All in all, with the original Mono track in italian laying side by side with the English (A rarity with R1 discs), this is definitly a treat!

If foley artistry intrigues you like it does me, this film is definitly full of interesting techniques, and has it's share of "artifacts."Aside from the fact that it's an old "Spaghetti Western" which was a joint venture between Italy and US actors, there is the issue of the dubbing, which in the remastered version has been cleaned up tremendously. <hl> The remastering artists did a wonderful job correcting many problems with the previous dubs <hl>, including insert pink noise, voices and other effects to help mask some of the original artifacts.All in all, with the original Mono track in italian laying side by side with the English (A rarity with R1 discs), this is definitly a treat!

<hl> The remastering artists did a wonderful job correcting many problems with the previous dubs <hl> , including insert pink noise, voices and other effects to help mask some of the original artifacts.