Recent User Reviews
This was Dicaprio's worst effort getting an Oscar. Nothing more, but extremely focusing on disguasting and poitless
scenes with LeonardoThis was Dicaprio's worst effort getting an Oscar. Nothing more, but extremely focusing on disguasting and poitless
scenes with Leonardo having a frozen gaze during the whole movie and no sence of pain, just ¨grrrr grrrrrrrr grrrrrrr
and nothing else but grrrrrrrrrr! However the movie could attributed at less time, skipping meaningless points, because it
hasn't something very important to share, just a plain revenge...… Full Review »
Phantoms is one of my favourite horror movies. The cast give fun performances and the movie has intense,
complex special effects. The moviePhantoms is one of my favourite horror movies. The cast give fun performances and the movie has intense,
complex special effects. The movie was produced by Wes Craven's Dimension Films company. Phantoms is one of the wittiest and inventive horror movies of the 90's.… Full Review »
Inception is a well crafted movie that has a very interesting premise behind it. Not only that, but Zimmer's score really accentuates theInception is a well crafted movie that has a very interesting premise behind it. Not only that, but Zimmer's score really accentuates the grandiose nature of the subject material, and tugs the emotional strings when needed. The characters of Dom and Mal are developed well and the overall narrative comes to a satisfying conclusion, however Dom's companions are given little background and their motivations seem questionable. There are also a few glaring plot holes within the film that seem to contradict the 'rules' of the Dreamworld.… Full Review »
When one makes a fanpic.. eh documentary of two prominent scientists who are also known or perhaps even more known for other reasons - theyWhen one makes a fanpic.. eh documentary of two prominent scientists who are also known or perhaps even more known for other reasons - they are atheists - it would be of great importance that the cover of the documentary correlates with the stated content and that the actual documentary is in tune with those as well. In this the unbelievers makes a tactical error as the title points to their atheism(but not literally), states to be about two scientists talking in public(the thought alone!) about the importance of science and reason, but is in fact about two atheistic scientists, Richard Dawkings and Lawrence Krauss on a tour through two mostly christian countries(Australia and the US,) mixing the two up while talking mostly among themselves in front of an audience who are already biased to them anyway. If this isn't preaching to the choir, than what would be?
Any religious scientist might take offense at the suggestion that science and reason and unbelief are intimately connected. The one leads to the other, or perhaps vice versa. It isn't really openly admitted, but it is implied. It suggests an arrogance to claim that science and atheism go hand in glove and which is slapped in the face of any christian by showing of a christian cross on the cover thus admitting that it is the christian religion this is aimed at. The rest got of the hook, for the moment.
The problem with this documentary is that it doesn't really know what it wants to be and, to be honest, it gets boring fast. This is the kind of documentary that just barely rises above the level of a family home movie and if the participants had not been known figures nobody would watch it but the family of the two. The only other audience that now might appreciate this will be the fanboys who will nod enthusiastically and tell how truly amazing and eyeopening this documentary is. Nothing that surprises.
The subtitle 'What are you willing to believe!' makes the documentary even worse as its provocative line, ending with an exclamation mark, is so at odds with the real content that is delivered. The unbelievers, mostly two men babbling away, never stimulates, challenges or adds anything new to what we already know and have been told over and over. On youtube discussions mostly, often in a more engaging way and with people who do not fall in line with Krauss and Dawkins so easily. A summary of some of the important debates would probably have been a lot more lively and to the point.
The result is a movie that is more like a homage to two atheist scientists regurgitating stock ideas. Which is a shame really for the two involved men are better than that. More annoying is adding some other famous people to the documentary just to beef it up a bit. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Woody Allen and the like make a less than one minute appearance so they can be credited and suggest some fireworks. If that isn't a cheap shot, than I don't know what is.
I think that there is a statement that captures the weakness of this movie very well: don't tell, but show. This movie is all about telling things we already know in a boring way in front of a predisposed audience, but doesn't show a new thing.… Full Review »
It is beyond reason that anyone in their right mind with a half an ounce of intelligence...could consider this film
anything more than aIt is beyond reason that anyone in their right mind with a half an ounce of intelligence...could consider this film
anything more than a complete waste of celluloid. It was utterly painful... totally pointless. Clooney is so over-rated in general, and in this role, he's just plain idiotic. SKIP THIS… Full Review »