Good Movie/Bad Review

Monsters, Inc. (2001): Gratifying movie. by chinilla1010, November 9, 2010

I usually watch movies if I like the actor.I didn’t like Billy Crystal’s appearance,I know this is very superficial.I think it’s his hairstyle.Although he did look good in the first few scenes.John Goodman is so adorable and she looked much better in the first few scenes.I decided to watch this movie after I saw Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen’s ‘The Challenge’ where she says that this film is one of her favorite romantic comedies and comes in her top five favorites and also I saw ‘Hollywood’s ten best’ on Zee studio and I think this movie was the number one comedy.

As far as I observed,two Bollywood movies have been inspired by this movie-‘Dil To Pagal Hai’(the scenes where they show the old couple’s in the title song)and ‘Hum Tum’(in Hindi movies usually they make it the opposite for the boy and girl-as opposed to Billy Crystal getting married,in ‘Hum Tum’ Rani Mukherji gets married.) This film is recommended to those few people who have absolutely no clue to relationships.I have to read the transcript of this movie if available to be more sure of the dialogues as I don’t think I caught all the dialogues.

1/10 stars.

Amadeus (1984): Why is this movie so great? by maxair732865, April 7, 2010

To be honest, I hated this movie. Maybe it was the fact that our band director forced us to watch it in band. Anyway, the acting, in my opinion, was nothing more than bad. Pacing was terrible. I just could not keep focused, it was so boring. It’s like one of those movies you had to watch in music class in elementary school multiple times. Just a bitter story about someone most people don’t care about. Only difference is I only had to sit through it once.

Terminator came out in the same year. Terminator. And yet this won the Oscar for best picture. I sill fail to understand why. Someone please explain.

In short; Never watch it. The only memorable part is the creepy, gay laugh.

2/10 stars.

Amélie (2001): only movie that made me feel sick by vincent_vandevelde, September 2, 2008

I watched this movie because it was a rainy day and i had nothing else to do, but God this is an awful movie. there was nothing funny, exciting,romantic or moving about it. the only reason why people think this is because of the music(which really worked on my nerves). I had to think some time about why I hate this movie so hard before it became clear to me, but this is my conclusion: The character of Amelie is so freaky,(she’s a total freak)that if she would have existed nobody would want to be associated with her. Probably she would have been bullied so much in her youth that she would have psychic problems and probably be in some kind of setting for mental people(sorry if my English isn’t correct). And there is no normal person who would fall in love with her,like happens in the movie. if it was a spastic thin ugly guy who never washes himself it should have been a little bit credible, but otherwise this is completely wrong. Happy feeling? I felt miserable, and angry because I had lost so many time on this movie. everything Amelie did ennoyed me, and the reactions of the people ennoyed me even more, they should have reacted like: WTF go away are you sick in the head or what? Conclusion: if she would have died a terrible death with nobody who cared about her at the and of the movie, it would have cheered me up. the only positive thing about this film is that it is spoken in french, nothing more ennoying than French people talking English in Paris. Another thing: why does she look Chineze? the family Poulin is just a bunch of marginal people who have no friends. and the way they react they are just little children who will never be able to get a good job and earn money. and if Amelie wanted to try to step out of this marginality, and start acting normal, then it would be a good movie, now it sucked, because it is much to unrealistic. I can continue this for hours but I don’t want to loose more time on this “thing”(dont want to use the word movie)but I Will stop here.

1/10 stars.

Jurassic Park (1993): A masterpiece by Riki_D-Fens_Oh, June 27, 2011

of boredom. This movie is as boring as watching grass grow for ten years. If you forced me to watch this movie twice in a row I would start throwing a tantrum like a baby not long after the first viewing. Three times? I’d probably headbutt the wall until I could sleep through it. Okay but seriously, this Spielberg is supposed to be a filmmaking genius but he can’t make a popcorn movie that offers me preferable viewing to my living room wall. I just saw this for the first time since I was five. It bored me even more at that age. I don’t know why this film is so boring. I’d have to think about that but fück it why bother. I just want to say that this film is boring.

And that’s the main point of this review. All I have left now is nitpicking. The CGI looked as fake in 93 as it does now. The film’s attempts at connecting to the audience emotionally are wasted on me. Ooh this guy doesn’t like kids, I wonder what the fück that could mean.

Seeing the dinosaurs kill people properly would have been nice. Instead we just get a series of PG-13 anti-climaxes.

I liked Jeff Goldblum and Richard Attenborough but they don’t save the film from being crap. So er, thats it. Sorry I didn’t analyze the film so I could explain why it’s so boring. That would be unnecessary.

3/10 stars.

Blade Runner (1982): BAD RUNNER! by mcrabtre2001, February 9, 2002

This movie was so beyond dull and bad. This movie was concentrated too much on effects(eye candy, graphics, design) rather than the quality. There was no plot in this movie. I just found the storyline to be dull, some say it was too VAGUE, some say it didn’t make any sense at all since most of the good stuff was on effects. I was just very disapointed by that movie. Come on where are explosions, killing, ground zero, buildings falling down, car chase scenes, heads getting cut off, anything.Total Recall is alot better than that dull film. I can’t believe that this has been considered the best sci-fi ever just for a dull film. I don’t like dramas, but there were some dramas that didn’t make me hate but this one definetly did. I too much make up Darryl Hannah who does the summersault scene. The first time that was used in a movie. Come on, what was so special about it, even a 5 year old kid can do that. It is just like a dog catching a ball making people think

that it was never scene in this world. If you wan’t to see a summersault then go see Angelina Jolie in her short shorts in TOMB RAIDER, THAT IS ALOT BETTER. I don’t blame Harrison Ford it wasn’t your fault it was the movie’s fault. Even the Retro styled 80’s background music is definetly not going to get this movie out of the abyss. Take RUNNER and you have Blade with Wesley Snipes. This movie deserves to get a bad review and avoid this movie as much as you can this is beyond garbage.

1/10 stars.

Chinatown (1974): Slightly better than watching paint dry by Gdogg69, April 30, 1999

People say this is a great movie. I say this is an over-glorified piece of garbage. The movie with the exception of Jack, makes me want to ralph all over myself. The movie is a decent movie but not great. The story is decent, the acting is above average. But overall the movie suffers. I wouldnt pay to see this movie or rent it. It would take someone paying me to make me watch this movie again. I just don’t like it. Out of 10 I’d say this movie is a 5, 6.5 tops.

1/10 stars.

Jaws (1975): I HATED THIS MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! by Crouchingdestiny, August 8, 2001

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Everybody I know likes this movie, and they all say that it is a classic. Please, this movie is so boring. The movie is supposed to be about the shark, right, and we hardly see any of it, and my brother told me that the reason for that is, that it is supposed to add to the suspense. What suspense? Before Alex gets killed, we see a bunch of kids playing with a fake fin, and there is no music. Then we hear John Williams music, and we see some of the actual shark, and then we see the Alex’s leg, and you know the shark is going to kill him, so where is the suspense. There is no suspense at all, you know the shark is going in for the kill, so it’s just a matter of seeing him die. The movie is very boring, and the 3 main characters give nothing to liven up the very dull, and simple plot for a ” classic.” I know that in movies your suposed to have character devolpment, but in this movie there is too much of it. Instead of showing the shark, they show them dirnking wine, and eating dinner, and there is no point to it. They could be showing something more important to the already THIN plot, but no, instead they show people eating, and drinking.Through out the whole movie Speilberg hides the shark, and in the end, you see it’s face. It’s more like an unveiling, and of course we a regular shark, nothing to go WOW over, just a regular shark. Come on, people no what sharks look like, so why hid it the whole movie. The last 50 minutes of the film is nothing fancy, it’s not even entertaning, it’s just a matter of finding the shark, and killing it. Then we find out that they didn’t know how big the shark was, and how stupid is that, and they didn’t even pick a big enough boat, are they really that stupid. I also did not like the ending, I thought they could have though of something more complicated. Brody throws the air tank at the ahrk, and it happens to land in the perfect place for him to shoot. Well I just plain hated this movie, it far, far, far from a classic and even further from being a godd movie. It’s nor scary, or entertaining, and Robert Shaw thinks that he knows everything about sharks, and that’s the arrognace that kills him. 0/0, 1/10, thumbs way way way down, well you get the picture.

1/10 stars.

WALL-E (2008): I fell asleep on this rubbish by dawid-1243, April 28, 2010

i watched the first 30 minutes of this stupid film and i fell asleep i don’t know what happened after and I don’t want to know.

I don’t know how people rate this 10/10

I might be over exaggerating but this movie is the worst. It was even worser than the social network which i also find dreadful

people might say that this film is for kids but even children would fall asleep on this crap

I don’t understand how this film got a good result from the critics, the only reason it could is if they got paid or tortured to critic this film in a good way.

This was a waste of 30 minutes of my life and if you would want to watch a piece of crap this is the film for you.

THANKS

1/10 stars.

Die Hard (1988): useless dumb action by shutterbug_iconium, August 15, 2005

This movie was produced in a period when we did not have such concepts like 9/11. The only thing I liked in the movie is that the terrorist group is multinational by which no nationality or ethnic background is aimed at directly. But you know other than that.. what could I see in the movie? Action action stupid unrealistic action.Hollywood action roles where the hero’s shirt is ripped off in the first reel so you can see how much time he has been spending at the gym to impress our rusty eyes!! A NWPD cop who finishes off 7-8 terrorists in a single-minded way? And he has no support from LYPD police department and dumb FBI officials? This is a usual,preposterous Rambo action.Hollywood has always done this. It’s been about twenty years since the movie was made and I wonder whether America has ever seen such fictional heroes, for example why such a hero did not save the Twin Towers by himself? I can only laugh. Finishing off the terrorists who are intellectually developed,who work with clockwork precision by the efforts of one simple cop? You think the rest!!!

1/10 stars.

12 Angry Men (1957): I didn’t like the choices that the directer in this movie. by babynana, October 21, 2010

In the movie The 12 Angry Man, I didn’t like the choices that the director made in the movie. First of all, the actors were overacting and they don’t sound and their emotion doesn’t look believable. For example, when the juror number 3 was having his moment talking about his kid who he “made the man out of him” by abusing him and later his kid punched him and ran away. His emotions and the way his voice sounded doesn’t seem convincing to me. It seems to me like they are just reading their script out loud. Secondly, the camera angle wasn’t good. The camera was mostly close up and it was quite boring. You want the audience to look excited or interesting so they will pay more attention to the main points but this movie didn’t do that much of a good job. For example, in the jury room, when they were voting one by one, the camera was close up to them that I didn’t get to see the reaction on other juror faces when they were voting one by one. I think it will be good to see other juror face and trying to make eye contact with juror to change their vote. Finally, the actor that they chose to play the role of the boy who was abused all his life and is a trouble maker, the actor looks nothing like his character in the play. So there fore I think the choices that the director made in this movie weren’t that bright and it could have been better and more interesting.

1/10 stars.