Reviews

19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
IO (2019)
2/10
If you value your time then this movie is not for you
20 January 2019
You will find every low budget movie cliche in this movie. It's like the director was following some kind of a manual on how to make a lackluster movie by applying every overused one. I can't say anything bad about the acting or the cinematography but with such an atrociously boring script, all that work amounts to nothing.

I'll be honest, I couldn't watch the movie till the end. It just wasn't worth my time. I am someone who works 50-60 hours a week and my spare time is valuable to me. If you are like me and you want to watch quality cinema then this is not the movie for you.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bird Box (2018)
5/10
This movie is the definition of average. And average isn't good by any means.
30 December 2018
The movie has a promising start but it lacks many important ingredients for it to be anything else than an average cliched sci-fi horror wannabe flick. The main things which aren't there are effects, any resemblance of realism and any sort of lore.

When it comes to the effects, they are non-existent. The "entities" which are responsible for the whole mess are simply invisible. How convenient for the producers, they were able to save just enough money on effects to pay Sandra Bullock.

Suspension of disbelief is something which this movie struggles with. You want me to believe that a computer screen can turn you into a suicidal maniac? Fine. You want me to believe that it can turn your eyes from brown to blue? Fine. You want me to believe that Sandra Bullock can run through a thick, unfamiliar forest, blindfolded while carrying two 5 yearolds? Nope. You want me to believe you can drive a car without seeing anything but GPS in a debris filled city? Nope. There's a fine line between something being perceived as possible and something being perceived as total nonsense when it comes to sci-fi flicks. You'll be perceiving a lot of nonsense while watching this one.

Sci-fi movies of this type are fun because they present the viewer with a mysterious and interesting antagonist. The formula which works best is always the same - introduce the mysterious "aliens", show the effect these malevolent "aliens" have on human kind, introduce a solution based on our understanding of the "aliens" and finally - present the viewer with some sort of closure. This particular movie follows the formula but has a significant problem. There's absolutely no explanation for the occurring phenomenon. Most movies utilize some sort of mechanism through which they inform the viewer what these antagonists are. This kind of mechanism is severely lacking here.

If you are OK with average then I suggest you give this movie a try. If you are someone who values his time and wants to watch quality stuff then avoid this one.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mandy (I) (2018)
4/10
This is the most realistic rating you'll see here
3 October 2018
Yes, indeed, the movie is stylish but you know what? Style is not a substitute for substance. A movie without a decent story can never be a "great masterpiece". I get that this kind of cinema is not for everyone but lets be honest, Mandy is not a good movie. Calling it that is like taking an arts catalog and calling it a good book.

The acting is top-notch, the directing is good but there are some significant problems with the pace. There's no build-up before the fights, they just occur, very randomly at times. The problem is compounded by the fact that the fights are also very short and that prohibits the development of any tension. The usage of red palettes and dissonant sounds is annoying at times.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Red Sparrow (2018)
3/10
They tried very hard but the script was crap
28 June 2018
"Red Sparrow" should have been a good movie. The actors do a wonderful job, the director has shot wonderful scenes but what does all of that amount to with an abysmal script like that? I know that this movie is based on a book which I haven't read so I can't really comment on it but if the movie is faithful to the source material then this book is pretty bad.

Right from the get-go, the plot makes no sense. You are left wondering why would the Russian services act in this manner. As the movie progresses, it becomes quite clear that the author was not after writing an engaging spy-thriller but was rather after portraying the Russians as some sort of evil cultists stuck in the 19th century. I wouldn't have had a problem with that if the story was interesting. Unfortunately it isn't. Combine the typical Hollywood "we're the good guys and they're the bad guys" routine with an awful story filled with plot-holes and you'll get a pretty good idea what this movie is like.

It's not all bad though. The cinematography and the acting are top notch. Hollywood knows how to shoot movies and make them visually appealing. This is enough for some to praise the movie, especially if they are of the opinion, that the Russians are pure evil. I guess that the glaring plot holes are visible to them as well but they just chose to ignore them.
0 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lowlife (2017)
1/10
Utter crap
8 April 2018
This is one of those 1 star movies you'll regret giving a chance to. I got fooled by the reviews, which are obviously written by paid shills. Don't make my mistake and avoid this movie like the plague. Talking about directing and cinematography doesn't make any sense when you have a script as atrocious as this one. I'll be honest here, I normally watch movies until the end, even if they are bad but by God, this thing was so incredibly stupid that I couldn't make it until the end. Make yourself a favor and skip this one.
33 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Could have been much better
17 December 2017
I'm a fan of the first Skyline. I thought it was a well made alien movie that had some mystique to it and an unique ending. Unfortunately, Beyond Skyline takes the most interesting ideas from the first part and completely obliterates them in the most profane way possible.

The first half of Beyond Skyline is pretty good. The main characters are introduced in a very clichéd manner but I don't think that will bother the audience. Once we peek inside the alien ship things start to get really interesting. This is where the film really shines. Lots of special effects, lots of cool environments and lots of "what the *beep* are those things" moments. It really builds up a nice momentum and keeps you interested. But by the time the movie is half way through, things start to take a turn for the worse. The plot starts to get lazy, the characters start to behave oddly and the whole thing starts to fall apart. It is if the screenwriter decided "*beep* it, I'm going all in on this shit" and just destroyed the carefully crafted momentum from the first part of the movie. This is done in a gradual but heavy handed manner.

By the time the movie reaches it final stages, you're not going to care for it anymore. Why? Because the mystique is gone and because the mighty aliens are now being slaughtered in melee combat by some very vulnerable humans. But nothing can rival the final 5 minutes of the movie. You thought slaughtering aliens in heavy armor with knives was over the top? You haven't seen anything yet!

All in all, the movie is quite entertaining but it could have been much better. I feel the story could have worked if the movie had more time to develop it in a natural way. In its current form it just feels rushed and quite frankly stupid. Nevertheless, I feel Beyond Skyline deserves a watch and would recommend it to sci-fi fans.
63 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Attraction (2017)
7/10
A decent Sci-Fi that is worth your time
30 September 2017
The are two thing the Russians are not particularly good at - making luxury cars and shooting quality sci-fi. The latter is beginning to change though.

"Attraction" is an engaging sci-fi thriller that has a very familiar Hollywood taste, which isn't a good thing. The beginning of the movie is very promising with lots of great shots and cool CGI effects. Unfortunately as the movie progresses to the second act you quickly realize that this will be one of those "why the *beep* would they do that" movies. There are severe problems with character motivation and the actions of the protagonists feel very unnatural. The movie doesn't hide its intentions to try to appeal to the casual crowd rather than the sci-fi nerds. It's message is painfully clichéd and has been done over and over again with better results.

Despite all of this, "Attraction" manages to keep you interested and entertained. It certainly isn't a masterpiece but it's worth your time.
12 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Logan (2017)
5/10
The sad and unspectacular slaughtering of the cash-cow called "X-men"
18 March 2017
I think that "Alkali research" might have put a "pathogen" in the water that has prevented the birth of sane, critically thinking movie goers for the last 25 years. Or it might just be the fact that Hollywood produces turd after turd and that has lowered our expectations. Either way, the sad reality remains, a simple and unspectacular movie like Logan gets a 8.5.

The movie begins at a somewhat slow pace. The more it progresses, the more it starts to get evident that we're not going to be seeing decent special effects. This was produced on the "cheap" and has a TV series feel to it. The execution and the sheer scale are not up to par with the other X-men movies, the script is lacking too. The worse part however is that this movie is supposed to give the whole X-men series closure and it does that in a very unspectacular and boring way. They rushed it, probably seeing a good opportunity to slaughter the dying cash-cow, seeing that Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart wanted to retire from playing their iconic X-man characters.

A big disappointment and a sad ending to an otherwise decent franchise. Can't wrap my mind around the 8.5 mark, I guess a good part of the budget went for paying up the shills.
60 out of 130 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Guernica (2016)
7/10
A classic war drama
2 August 2016
Guernica could have been one of my all time favorites but unfortunately, as it happens too often these days, the culmination was badly executed. The first act is wonderful, a perfect setup for the upcoming events in the movie, with breathtaking cinematography, decent script and superb acting. The sets and the costumes were top notch, whoever could pull this off with 5 million deserves utmost respect. The first 30 minutes really feel like you're watching one of those great classics and I was pretty convinced that this movie is going to be ten star material. Unfortunately, as the movie progresses past the second act, it starts to lose its charms. The focus turns on the love story, which somehow manages to be underdeveloped, despite the huge screen time that it has. From there on, we have a cascading chain of blatant clichés which, combined with a final act that feels disjointed, really ruin the whole experience. Now if you pay attention, you'll notice that the final act is where we lose the German perspective. A scene on a bomber, a pilot reaction or even the German colonel watching the ongoing bombardment from a far would've kept this perspective alive and could've added some needed dramatic effect. Instead, the focus falls entirely on the events occurring in Guernica, which wouldn't be so bad if the whole act wasn't filled with severely overused clichés. All in all, this is a pretty decent war drama, which could've been something really special, had the writers come up with more original ideas.
36 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
You should pass this one
30 July 2016
Another low budget production with an atrocious script. The whole thing is just a collection of boring action scenes with very little in-between. Forget about a good story, forget about characters that you care about, forget about nice scenery. You'll be staring at a brick wall, a prison cell or a dirty street. That's it. The "horde" of zombies consists of 15 people. They don't even bother to change their clothes, so you'll be seeing a lot of the same people playing as various different zombies. It's not obvious at first but it becomes pretty evident by the end of the movie. This could have been much better with a good script. The first ten minutes are the best part of the whole thing but don't get fooled, the rest of the movie is complete and utter trash.
17 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Nice Guys (2016)
2/10
The Nice Guys is just not working the way they intended it to
29 July 2016
You begin watching "The Nice Guys" and even in the first few scenes, you realize that there's something very wrong with this movie. As you continue to watch, you quickly realize that the awkwardness that reeks from every scene is supposed to be humor. At some point, I was asking myself if this movie isn't some sort of social experiment. Like they purposely create a disgustingly bad comedy movie, surround it with hype through an interesting trailer and their shill army, and then carefully measure the generated income. But then I realized we are way past that point. These sort of experiments had to be proved a success long time ago because now we are getting a steady stream of low quality content that producers know is going to sell thanks to this modern way of marketing. Thus, the conclusion that must be drawn is even more disappointing. The conclusion is that the producers of this movie haven't made it as bad as it is deliberately, it's just that this is their potential. This is what they have to show with that budget and those actors.
18 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Warcraft (2016)
8/10
I'm not a critic. I'm just your average guy.
10 June 2016
The intro of W3 Reign of Chaos is a masterpiece. From today's standpoint, the animation of the battle between the foot-soldier and the orc grunt might be dated but the directing, the way this little sequence is "shot", is just incredible. You can feel the power of the blows as the orc smashes the shield away from the foot-soldier's hands, leaving him shattered but firmly holding his sword, now with both hands. The soldier dude is a friggin tank, armored to the teeth, pretty much capable of holding his own against the brutal orc attacks. We needed to have that in the movie. We needed to have a cast of huge dudes with fat, muscular necks in huge armor, wielding huge swords and huge shields, not a bunch of scrawny dudes who aren't wearing helmets and a 16yo kid killing orcs with ease. That's not how it works in Warcraft, Duncan Jones, you should've watched those W3 animations and learned from them. King Llane's biceps is frig-gin' huge, even the peon, your average villager, is super-duper buff. That's how Blizzard rolls dude, check the StarCraft stuff as well. Also, them elite foot-soldiers aren't getting one-shot-ted even by Illidan. You dun goofed. No, really, there was no epic-Ne's in none of the battles in the movie. The sole exception was the battle between Durotan and Guldan. We have the orcs one-shot-ting every foot-soldier in sight, while the human heroes were one-shot-ting orcs without ever receiving a blow. That's some lazy ass directing.

The mag-es. Why did you have to stray from the norm, Duncan Jones? They are old and have gray hair and wear funny hats. Did I mention they have long gray/white beards? Other than that, the movie is OK. It does have some pretty illogical moments and a very, very non-believable romance but I guess I can let that slide. The effects are good. The orcs are made really well. They'll motivate you to hit the gym more often. Yes, Travis Fimmel, I'm looking at you. Dem forearms must get bigger, boy. You gotta stand up to deem orcs and not deal dirty low blows, 360 MLG no-scoping style. Stop it.

8/10 just because it entertained me. I'm expecting much better from the second movie.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Kill Command (2016)
7/10
When low budget sci-fi's are done right
13 May 2016
Kill Command is a solid movie, there's no doubt about it. I'm a big sci-fi fan and I've watched many, many low budget sci-fi productions. Kill Command is by far, the best one yet. Putting aside the awful script, the movie looks very professional and the acting, although a bit stiff in places, is decent. Considering the modest budget of 1 million, the special effects are fantastic. The robot designs are nice and detailed and the battle scenes are made very well. The sound effects and the music are top notch. Unfortunately, as I've stated above, the script is bad. Although all of the scenes are shot with taste, the lines that the actors must deliver are terrible. Some of the scenes feel incredibly artificial because of the bad script. There is a constant tension throughout the movie which will keep you interested but it leads to a weak culmination. All in all, I feel there's a lot of wasted potential when it comes to the script but despite that, the movie is enjoyable - 6.5/10.
141 out of 152 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Terminus (2015)
4/10
A somewhat weak drama with sci-fi elements
22 January 2016
Terminus is not a bad movie. It just suffers from an illness that is common for many other low budget productions - it doesn't engage the viewer. The movie is more drama than a sci-fi. Unfortunately, the drama element is severely clichéd and the sci-fi element is undeveloped and feels incredibly artificial. The script is atrocious which leaves an imprint on the otherwise OK acting. Character development is non-existent and leaves you wondering what drives some of the characters to do the things they do. The effects are decent but scarce and boring. A real sci-fi flick has to have some thrilling moments but this movie has none of that. Overall, I wouldn't recommend this movie, it's a waste of time 4/10.
79 out of 139 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Mosters (2) has nothing to do with the monsters and everything to do with American exceptionalism
18 March 2015
Quite frankly, Monsters (2) is a recruitment movie. It has nothing to do with the monsters and everything to do with American exceptionalism. The first movie was good and left a good impression with many people. That's why some genius decided that the title can be used to craft another clichéd recruitment movie with the monsters used as an excuse for its existence. Why is the idea so dumb? Because people expect to see a sci-fi movie, not a war movie (and a bad one at that). And believe me, Monsters: Dark Continent is bad. So bad that you'll be tempted to turn it off or leave the theater. If you are a fan of the first movie - don't waste your time, you will be disappointed and you'll feel tricked. Tricked into watching something you didn't want to watch.
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Welcome to the age of genetic engineering
18 April 2010
An excellent documentary presenting the struggle between the farmers and the corporate giant "Monsanto". Shows the cruel reality of todays world where corporations can deprive the common man of everything he owns based on false claims. Inevitable questions are raised in the mind of the viewer - Who decides that GMOs are safe? Are we willing to sacrifice the good of our children for some profit in the short run? Where will the corporate lust for money and control lead us?

Watch this documentary, it's an important educational piece. It will open your eyes on the topic and will show you what the big fuss around GMOs is all about.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Seamstresses (2007)
8/10
Watch it, and if you are Bulgarian than don't miss it
16 August 2008
Most of the shows on American television won't be so funny if watched by non-US audience. Why? Simply because this audience doesn't have the deep knowledge of all these influential people and all these events that are present inside the American culture. Sure they will laugh but when it comes to some certain jokes they just won't get it. That's how you'll feel when you watch this movie and you're not a Bulgarian. The movie is great and its fundamentals can be understood by every human being but its real strenght lies in the cultural references. If you've lived in Sofia you will just feel how it's all there and it's all so real. The fast pace of life, the misery, the arrogance of the people towards the humble person coming to the big city. I've got to say that I liked "Mila from Mars" but "Shivachki" tells you a more realistic story, one that is very common in Bulgaria.

Thumbs up for the director and the acting. 8/10
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A great, great, great parody
24 September 2006
This movie is an excellent parody of the American horror movies from the 60s. I don't know how people who watched this movie can make a negative comment on the camera, the lightning and the play. They just didn't get it I guess. The special effects, the play and the camera were all meant to be badly done so they can resemble the 'drive in' movies from the 60s. This is one of those movies which you can't and must not take serious. The quality of such productions lays by my opinion in the way that the story is served to the viewer. A thing that Stanley Sheff and Bob Greenberg have done in a very good way. Overall a great parody - 10/10!
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
V is for profit machine
18 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
First of all I want to say that I had great expectations about that movie. Probably you would ask why.. It was not the flashy trailer. It was simply the Wachowski brothers. The directors and writers of the cult movie "The Matrix" which is by my opinion a diamond in the Hollywood industry. "V is for Vendetta" was awaited by many as the next big event in the action/comics genre. Instead we got an average action movie which could only be described as ridiculous. Okay I understand that the plot is not going to be realistic as we're talking about a comics based movie here. The fact is that "V is for Vendetta" uses a very incompetent political model which appeals to be realistic and fairly possible.

If we dig up a little bit into the story of "V is for Vendetta" and see the main reasons why the dictator, Chancellor Adam Sutler (John Hurt), came to power we could as well laugh. The reason is a vaccine.. that doesn't sound quite reasonable does it?

In "V" we have a strange mixture of dictatorship and democracy. The majority of the people were presented as suppressed but somehow obedient. Although they knew who was responsible for their misery they didn't react which is unlikely for people who have the feeling for living in a democratic society. In the end it took a hero to show them that they must act (very original indeed!). The idea of the movie was that even one man can change the way that people think and that is nothing revolutionary.

I find it funny and stupid at the same time that so many people were wearing masks at the end scence. What is "V" a mask tycoon or something?

At the end of my post I want to tell you my exact point of view about this movie. The Wachowski brothers sold their names for little profit. They shot a movie which was unambitious, boring and in the end just a sub-average action movie. They wanted to save money from FX and instead fill the time up with cheesy dialogue and a lot of drama in a pathetic attempt to throw at us a stolen idea. Stick to the action genre guys! The flashy trailer was promising ... but it was all that this movie had to show to the hungry public. Where are all those movies which really deserve the grade 8.5?
26 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed