I had only one true issue with Jon Favreau's _Jungle Book_, and while it does seem like sort of an unfair one, it's also a pretty huge one.
For months before I got the chance to see this remake, I heard non-stop about what a great actor the kid playing Mowgli was, how photorealistic all the animals were, and how you would never be able to guess that the backgrounds were all actually sound stages that had been animated over. Well I just watched _The Jungle Book_, and I found all three of those compliments to be patently untrue. That might sound like three issues, but in reality they all boil down to the same one thing, suspension of disbelief. Or more accurately, the lack of it. From the word go, there wasn't s moment that I found myself being continuously drawn out of the story because of one of those reasons (usually the look of the creatures). I was not once able to fully engage, and though I recognise that from a plot point of view, this version was even better than the 1967 one, I still found myself constantly aggravated by the harsh meshing of Mowgli against the world around him.
_Final rating:★★½ - Not quite for me, but I definitely get the appeal._

> The red flower adventure!
The Rudyard Kipling's famous children's book was adapted numerous times for stage shows, television series, live-shot and animation films, and now here's the modern version and also the first digital 3D version. The Disney done it again bring all the classics to a new life, but it is a great team work, especially the post-production was terrific.
It is one of those stories never gets boring for repeat reading/listening/viewing. Of course, there were plenty of changes to the original source, but I would say it was upgraded so well. Jon Favreau did an awesome job as the director, definitely it is his one of the best films and will be remembered for very long. All the above he got the best screenplay with supportive production and crew.
Neel Sethi was obviously a perfect choice for the man-cub, he had given his best and no one could doubt it was his first film. The entire film was shot in the studio settings and the whole time he had to act alone, because the remaining characters in the film are CGI. So in that viewpoint he actually did a breathtaking job being a very young.
The CGI characters were really excellent, but the non-fur animals like elephant looked a bit fake. I mean anatomically and character performances were perfect, only visually the 3D models were out of the blend in the screen with others. These are very small things to notice, but for the todays technology, it was not bad, especially thinking the film is primarily targeted children.
The story was simple, like half of the film was an introduction and almost all the important characters from the book were launched at a high profile. It was actually the story with a backdrop of red flower. So the narration moves different part of the jungle, lot like the levels in a game. Various adventures take place and well composed stunt sequences.
I mentioned stunts right, but there were no violences, I mean nothing seriously to concern about as expected for a Disney film. Yet because of those actions, the film is very much suitable for adult viewing. So apart from the children and families, it can be watched by anyone. One of the top Disney films to do best at the box office worldwide by grabbing almost $1b.
So aggressive, furious Shere Khan ever to portray. I think the little children may get scared for his unpleasant face look and the strong roar. By the way all the songs were amazing and the end credit was very interesting. Finally, I saw it after a long wait and anticipation, most importantly, I'm very happy how beautifully it was made.
The film was not shot in India, but the locations were so resembling and gives the perfect Indian feel. Climbing a cliff by Baloo and fighting the monkeys, like that there were numerous jokes. Surely one of the grandly made children's film at the recent time. I've heard the sequel is already on the progress, so bring it on, at least a trilogy before Neel turn to a big boy.
8/10

A great movie for the whole family. Watch my full review here.
http://www.hweird1reviews.com/allreviews//the-jungle-book

"Jack Hall" (Dennis Quaid) is the somewhat discredited scientist who warns of impending disaster when the mother of all ice storms gathers - reducing temperatures to well below freezing and causing huge tsunami waves and heavy snows to devastate civilisation. Adding to the poor man's woes is his son "Sam" (Jake Gyllenhaal) stranded in New York. It's a bit heavy on the CGI and, certainly, the plot is pretty well worn and far-fetched but it's a disaster movie so I wasn't really expecting Pulitzer prize winning stuff. The young Gyllenhaal is easy enough on the eye and his adventures are marginally more interesting than his father's perilous trek from Washington. The storyline has a certain earnestness about it that is a bit preposterous, and the concluding spiel from the US President "Becker" (Kenneth Welsh) is a bit naff. Luckily, it isn't in the least romantic - it's a straightforward and entertaining disaster movie that though far, far too long, is just about worth a watch...

**The Day After Tomorrow ends the world better than most natural disaster films, with an experienced disaster director and a grounded premise.**
Roland Emmerich, the master of disaster, created one of the quintessential apocalyptic natural disaster films with The Day After Tomorrow. Floods, tsunamis, hail, suddenly dropping temperatures, and more all make their way into the perils of this film. The movie follows Dennis Quaid's climatologist as he warns the world of a quickly returning ice age. Once the global freeze catches humanity unprepared, survivors struggle against the impossible temperatures to find shelter and hope. The film sets itself apart with its cinematography featuring the expansive frozen wastelands and iconic monuments captured in ice. Performances are solid with a cast like Quaid, Gyllenhaal, and Rossum. The story is simple, which works for a disaster survival flick. The Day After Tomorrow is special compared to other big-budget catastrophe events because it is a little more grounded compared to some of the more outrageous films of Emmerich's more recent filmography, like Moonfall or 2012 but still benefits from a director that excels at destroying historic landmarks on the big screen.

I gather that climate deniers hate films like this. I would be sad if my political or social stances Completely prevented me from being able to appreciate films that stretch credulity the opposite way from my own views. I mean, I am an ardent atheist and have enjoyed religious films. I am all for science, but science fiction can take a few liberties and shortcuts and if I like it, I will suspend my disbelief. But many people automatically hate what they disagree with.
Anyway, I really enjoyed this movie, as I like extreme weather and other disaster special effects in films. I didn't feel insulted by the perceived intelligence of the plot and dialogue as others seemed to be. I don't watch feature films for the latest information on climate change: the news and documentaries are around for that. The special effects were good enough and - okay — scenes like the quick freezing dropping from the atmosphere is probably total hokey, but it serves the rapid pace of the plot. The idea of what happens with Mexico at the end seems a little heavy handed politically, but I don’t have delicate sensibilities in the political arena, so fine. Yada yada yada: Just entertain me. This one does.

It threatened and promised to be a politically (wooly) mammoth disaster picture.
Jack Hall is certain that another ice age is imminent due to the effects of global warming, but the government just will not listen to him. Sure enough the climate changes and the world is at threat from perilous frozen weather, worse still for Jack is that his son is trapped in New York City!
Roland Emmerich was the perfect choice to direct this particular piece. There is no denying that he has no little panache when it comes to destroying and blowing things up, think Independence Day, Stargate, Universal Soldier and Godzilla. What runs true through an Emmerich picture is that he is great on the CGI money shots and knows how to whet an appetite for destruction. Sadly, what is also true is that his second halves rarely deliver on their promise, so shall it be with The Day After Tomorrow. Even allowing for the expected mawkishness that comes with disaster/survival pictures, this picture relies too much on its contrivances, thus completely losing sight of its eco-conscious heart, something that I'm sure the politically aware Emmerich set out to deliver at the start.
Packing his picture with solid and professional performers (led by the always watchable Dennis Quaid as Jack Hall), Emmerich is all too aware that his money shots are what the popcorn masses have chiefly paid to see. Tornados, floods and the subsequent freeze are all excellent moments in the piece, but now, some years later the film has to be called out for being the shallow showcase that it is, in fact the CGI looks unintentionally artificial. It's a missed opportunity to make a blockbuster with an intelligent heart, and sadly Emmerich, either through boredom or ignorance? failed to seal the deal and craft one of the better genre entries.
Just about average for the destruction sequences, but very little else to recommend here I'm afraid. 5/10

Meh. Funny. Acting was alright. I liked Kevin Hart as the rabbit. But it is definitely just for kids and the ending was very sudden.
★★★

Very cute intro and some adorable animals, but the leads (voiced by Louis C.K. and Eric Stonestreet) were the worst part of the film... even if they did have a couple funny moments. What makes this worth viewing, however, are Gidget (Jenny Slate), Snowball (Kevin Hart), and Tiberius (Albert Brooks). In fact, I'd even consider watching a spin-off it it focused on them and left Max and Duke out.
BTW, the funny and adorable intro is pretty much all shown in the trailer and didn't give much of an indication into exactly what the film would be.

**Street pets versus the house pets! A day adventure in a big city!**
Animation films always fascinate me, because of its varieties. Even animals can be the heroes and villains. So this kind of new story perspective, including technology, what makes adults too can enjoy them like the kids does. This is now in the list of top 50 highest grossing films of all time and top 10 of the year 2016. Moreover, it is the highest grossing non Disney and non Pixar animation film. This is a very enjoyable family flick that directed by the 'Despicable Me' famed filmmaker.
Kind of similar to 'Bolt', but totally a different experience. This story happens in just one day. It follows a young dog named Max, one day when his owner brings another pet dog, he thinks she does not love him anymore. So to keep his position safe in the house, he strikes a deal by blackmailing his new housemate, Duke. As a revenge act, when Duke tries to get him back, something goes wrong and they get stranded on the street. So getting back to home is their biggest challenge and it should be done before the sun sets. The rest is the Max and Duke's a day adventure in the New York City.
I was not expecting a masterpiece, just the last week I saw one, 'Finding Dory'. This is a good entertainer, that has some great names in the voice-over cast. Particularly you will love Kevin Hart like I did. But watch out for his impolite dialogues, if you are watching with your kids. Though there's nothing seriously affecting, just a typical Kevin Hart, but awesome. A simple story, a simple adventure, but very likable characters and screen presentation.
From the pets' perspective about during the daytime when their owners and the kids left for the work and school, respectively, how they make their day is what's revealed in this. So the 'Secret Life' means, theirs secret get together and do whatever they want to. But an unexpected clash takes place between the two gangs, the house pets and the street pets. In so many ways, it was better than I anticipated. There are lots of untold stuffs, especially the Duke's past which might be covered in the sequel which is officially announced now. So I'm waiting for the 2018 summer. Meanwhile, watch it if you haven't yet, particularly if you like animation.
_7/10_

A SCREEN ZEALOTS REVIEW www.screenzealots.com
Anyone who is fortunate enough to share their life with a companion animal will undoubtedly get a kick out of the latest Illumination animated effort, “The Secret Life of Pets.” The film soars when it focuses on animals interacting with their human guardians, with the canine and feline characters acting like real pets do (if my cats could talk, I’m sure they’d converse in similar dialogue as portrayed onscreen). The first part of the movie is incredibly perceptive and clever, as is the last 10 minutes because it zeroes in on these very relationships (the opening and closing scenes of the movie are touching and have lots of heart). The problem comes in the middle when the story stops being about ‘pets being pets.’ Sadly, the majority of the film lags when it ventures into the dreaded animated movie territory of sheer stupidity.
Loveable human Katie (Ellie Kemper) and her pup Max (Louis C.K.) are the best of friends. Max has several animal buddies that live in the same New York City high rise, including dogs, cats, birds and guinea pigs that stop by for daily visits. When Katie brings home Duke (Eric Stonestreet) from the animal shelter, Max devises a plan to get rid of him. Problem is, the two dogs find themselves lost in the big city and Max’s would-be girlfriend Gidget (Jenny Slate) takes it upon herself to recruit other pets — including the elderly paralyzed basset hound Pops (Dana Carvey) and lonely falcon Tiberius (Albert Brooks) — to bring Max home. Along the way they find themselves at odds with the anarchist gang of “flushed pets,” a group of outspoken, anti-human animals led by former magician’s bunny Snowball (Kevin Hart).
The voice acting runs the gamut from phenomenally good (Slate) to wince inducing (Hart). Slate is perfectly cast as Gidget, a poufy white spoiled little dog who eventually saves the day. She proves herself tenfold as a legitimate voiceover actor, and I hope to see her get more work in animation in the future. There’s no denying that Hart is a super likeable actor, but his portrayal of Snowball the bunny is nothing more than repeated, strained yelling. His overall performance felt so labored and unnatural that listening to him onscreen actually made me uncomfortable. I will not hesitate to nominate Hart for a Razzie award for worst actor of the year because his voice work is that bad.
In the ‘oh no, not again’ category, there’s plenty of dopey, brainless scenarios crammed in with a feeling that their sole existence is to appease young kids. We get yet another ridiculous animal driving a car stunt that we had to endure in this summer’s nearly insufferable “Finding Dory.” In fact, in “The Secret Life of Pets” we get not only a rabbit driving a van but also a lizard driving a bus and a pig driving a taxi.
The absurdity isn’t the only problem: it’s the repetition. The filmmakers must’ve run out of good ideas and instead of moving the story forward, the audience gets the same monotony over and over and over again. I don’t require my animated films to be completely based in reality (there’s a particularly amusing Busby Berkeley inspired musical sequence in a sausage factory), but I do expect more originality than is delivered in this movie. The story at times takes a cynical approach in several places and some of the themes may be too much for sensitive kids (but the film provides a great starting point for a learning opportunity about pets and how animals shouldn’t be viewed as disposable).
At least the animation is commendable, nice and colorful with lively, fully realized backgrounds. It’s visually interesting enough for adults and fans of the genre but it’s also vibrant and bustling enough to keep the kids interested. There’s a lovely original score with a lighthearted, almost vintage sound. For me, the original music in this film is one of the standout elements.
Overall I feel like this film takes a great idea and almost completely wastes the opportunity. This dull, unremarkable action caper is mostly moronic, but the imaginative peek behind the door at an animal’s life when the humans are away is what’s pure gold. I really wish the film had focused on that component. “The Secret Life of Pets” is fine, but isn’t destined for greatness.
**A SCREEN ZEALOTS REVIEW www.screenzealots.com**

Visceral, Visionary, Visual, Sin City kicks the big un!
Three grizzled stories from Basin City comprise the basis for Robert Rodriguez's adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novels (Miller along for co-directing duties as well). Man mountain Marv is out to avenge a murdered hooker, Dwight attempts to help the red light girls stay independent from the mob, and aging cop Hartigan is trying to protect a beautiful dancer from a sadistic pervert.
I think the first thing I should say is that I have no frame of reference as regards the adaptation here, I have never read (or seen) a Frank Miller story, but from what I can gather from the IMDb site is that fans of Miller's graphic stories were well pleased with the final result. I'm pleased to see that, because too many times comic book adaptations are roundly panned by the hard core fan base of each respective franchise for not being close to the spirit of the source, so here I'm doubly relieved mainly because I find Sin City to be a majestic assault on the senses.
Sin City is a stark place, full of seedy residents thriving on misery and mistrust, and here we are privy to three stories that only serve to remind us that we don't want to be anywhere near the place. Playing out as some sort of horror comic noir, Sin City is for sure a very violent picture, yet the violence is formed so perfectly in its style, it cloaks the film in artistic class. Once viewed, Sin City is never forgotten, and I for one literally do tip my hat towards Frank Miller & Robert Rodriguez for bringing such a great and interesting movie to the masses. All of the cast do great work, so I'll not single anyone out for praise, the techniques and the whole structure of the piece is quite simply marvellous, and as for the writing? Well get a load of it!
Sin City, a dark horrible place, Sin City, a wonderful wonderful movie. 9/10

'Transformers: Age of Extinction'... what the hell happened here?! I actually seriously enjoyed a movie from this franchise, I'm honestly flabbergasted. It's written, directed and produced by the same people, though I wouldn't have predicted that whilst watching.
This, to me, felt almost entirely different to the preceding films in the series, despite the aforementioned. The opening 45-60 minutes are especially entertaining, it does wobble in that regard once or twice but when all is said and done I actually had a lot of fun with this!
I was, for the first time, actually invested into not just the robots but also the human characters too. It's a new bunch on the latter side and, despite minimally liking Shia LaBeouf & friends, I found this lot to be a big upgrade - the change also made it feel fresh. Mark Wahlberg is great as lead, Stanley Tucci and T.J. Miller (for once) are pluses as well.
Nicola Peltz and Jack Reynor are the weakest members of those onscreen, though even then I was still marginally interested in them. Kelsey Grammer, despite playing a fairly standard antagonist, is good, as is Li Bingbing in a relatively smaller role. Peter Cullen, John Goodman and Ken Watanabe, meanwhile, impress with their voices.
Upon starting this review, and still now, I was struggling to come up with negatives. I guess the near three-hour run time truly ought to be one, yet somehow it really... isn't, rather unexplainably. As for a criticism, the excessive product placement is all I've got, I'm afraid.
I'm yet to see the reception that this got, as usual I'm hoping my thoughts are not an outlier in a sea of dissatisfaction. I'd guess it's rated as mid-ly as the prior installments, at worst. Not that any of this is all that important of course, because I enjoyed it and that's all that matters. I did not expect to be saying that, at all!
*checks reception*: Welp. An outlier I seemingly am. Then again, 12k (on Letterboxd) others agree with my rating (and it incredibly again made a billion on the big screen, I see) so I guess it isn't as bad as it looks. Some uncertainty has crept into my mind, I'm thinking it over and comparing it with other films I've rated similarly and... it's not even in doubt. Wild.

I guess even Michael Bay must have realised that by the fourth outing, this franchise needed refreshing. To that end, the previously long-suffering cast have been allowed to hang up their screwdrivers and a new set of characters have been drafted in. They are led by "Cade" (an enthusiastic Mark Wahlberg). Now he just happens to buy an old truck and it just happens to turn out to be the long lost "Optimus Prime". Of course, there are still agencies hunting for the robots and soon he and daughter "Tessa" (Nicola Peltz Beckham) are on the run from a militia controlled by the manipulative industrialist "Joyce" (Stanley Tucci). Quite why it needs to take 2¾ hours to get to the standard denouement is anyone's guess. Despite the inclusion of some Tyrannosaur-bots, the film has the same relentless predictability as the "Autobots" and "Decepticons" (if you can spot the difference) go through the same repetitively staged combat scenes before an ending that relies unduly on human intervention (oh yes, and lots of sentimentality too) before we essentially start back at square one with the usual "Optimus" monologue concluding the proceedings. This has the added benefit of a truly terrible performance from the always over-rated Kelsey Grammer who had a few, entirely futile, goes at being a cinema baddie and unlike the other films which had a semblance of internationalism to them, this is now an entirely American affair that just bored me. Surely no more...?

Is there any excuse available that will justify spending 2 hours, 45 minutes to watch this film? Or why I am gifting it three stars?
It was a free rental at Redox.
I normally enjoy Mark Wahlberg movies.
I love Bumblebee.
Do any of these hold water?
I know one thing that doesn’t hold a lot of water – the story. Does it really matter at this point in the franchise? There are good guy Transformers called Autobots and bad guy Transformers called Decepticons and standing between them are stupid humans that betray their species for profit – normally it’s the U.S. Government. BUT wait – there is one hero that will change all of this and talk Optimus Prime (Autobot Boss Daddy) into fighting one last battle (for the fourth or fifth time – I’ve lost count at this point) while some hot-looking woman runs around explosions in short-shorts.
You now know all you need to know about the entire _Transformer_ franchise.
For this incarnation we trade out Shia LeBeouf for Mark Wahlberg and Courtney Fox for Nicola Pelz. And now for the twist…wait for it… Mark Wahlberg plays Nicola Pelz’s FATHER. That’s right – the FATHER. Yeah, it totally doesn’t work. At all.
There’s a point in the movie about 90 minutes in where it looks like all the loose ends are going to get tied up and I thought: You know, that wasn’t so bad. Good action flick, a bit hoaky at points but watchable.
And then the movie keeps going. And going. For another 90 minutes. And you basically watch the movie again except instead of it being in Texas and Chicago, it’s in China and Hong Kong.
It’s too long, too many explosions, too many American flags and Texas flags in the background. This movie desperately needs an editor or it needs to be euthanized. Probably the latter.
John Goodman and Ken Watanabe lend their voices serve as decent comic relief but there’s not a lot that can save this film. Bumblebee deserved better.

Poor old "Kate Dibiansky" (Jennifer Lawrence) and her professor "Mindy" (Leonardo DiCaprio) have the misfortune to discover an huge comet heading on a collision course with Earth. When they report this to "Oglethorpe" (Rob Morgan) - the man at NASA charged with coping with such existential threats, the three are now exposed to the upper echelons of the US administration that frequently elicits a smile and a grimace from the audience. The real star of the movie, Meryl Streep, is "President Orlean" (Yes, guess what her Christian name is?) who presides over her government with the aid of her hapless chief of staff son "Jason" (Jonah Hill) in what is a very thinly veiled swipe at all things Trumpian. The story pretty much follows the thread of "Meteor" (1979) only with better special effects, and the corporate machinations of the "Blofeld"-esque "Isherwell" (Sir Mark Rylance) add quite a bit of faux-menace to this rather entertaining parody of disaster movie meets political drama by way of some manipulative and fickle television journalism (epitomised by a fun contribution from Cate Blanchett). The pace of the film is a bit hit-and-miss, but keep an eye out for a nice couple of scenes from Ron Perlman as the archetypally gung-ho, militaristic, "Drask" and from Timothée Chalamet (where does he find the time?) as the hippy love interest "Yule" that both add some bulk and humour to the otherwise quite flimsy plot that enjoys quite a really fitting end. At the top end of Netflix' productions this - for a change some decent writing accompanies an on-form cast and i enjoyed it.

Full Analysis at **Spotamovie.com** **_Intro _**The movie offers several denounces about our society, politicians, and media. We will tell you more in the analysis section of this post. But, on the other hand, the film is sharp, enlightening and it tries to wake up our minds because we lost our ability to think with our brain and see the reality of what is happening around us. **The Story** Two astronomers discover a comet orbiting within the solar system. Although the scientific community may be excited, the reality is that the comet will crash on earth precisely in 6 months and 14 days. Kate Dibiasky (Jennifer Lawrence) and her professor Dr Randall Mindy (Leonardo Di Caprio), immediately understand the apocalyptical consequences because the impact will wipe out any form of life from our beloved planet.Their mission is to inform the president of the United States of America and find a way to change the comet’s trajectory. The world must unite its strengths and save the life from a tragic end.How is the world going to react? After the comet, what else are our astronomers going to find out? And what the movie wants to teach us? **Discover more at https://www.spotamovie.com/dont-look-up-movie-review-and-analysis-2021-movie/**

This is of course social and political satire, and it is sad how much of it rings true. It can be difficult to satirize the excesses of the rich and famous — or even the redneck poor — and the social media juggernaut.
But the script clicks on all cylinders a lot of the time and entertains as it eviscerates. I have always liked Mark Ryland’s roles, and this is a real departure for him as the media giant and third richest human ever. But I mostly found it difficult to like Dr. Mindy as he gradually adjusts his beliefs and personality to suit his new fame. My sympathy was with his wife and family, afterthoughts for 95% of the movie.
But it was an entertaining movie and I would be willing to watch it again someday, not because of the serious issues it raised (slightly) but just to catch more of the social media and television images that flash across the screen too quickly to take them all in. The social media satire works better, I think, than the political side, which seemed sometimes to just choose an actual person and thrust a version of them into the scene.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/dont-look-up-spoiler-free-review
"Don't Look Up hilariously approaches almost every theme worthy of discussion through Adam McKay's satirical screenplay that will undoubtedly leave viewers either incredibly satisfied or extremely triggered, depending on their opinion about certain subject matters.
Boasting an absolutely stellar cast, Netflix grabs a bold, divisive awards contender. Packed with allegories, references, and direct jokes surrounding all kinds of media, governments, socio-political topics, and environmental issues, McKay doesn't hold back, which might be a decisive factor in the audience's response.
The cast offers unbelievably great performances, but without the protagonists Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence, viewers would definitely look down to their phones instead of paying attention to the film.
A fun flick to watch during the Christmas season."
Rating: B+

Picking up hot on the heels of the last film, the newly escaped "Dom" (Vin Diesel), his ex-FBI pal "O'Conner" (Paul Walker) and "Mia" (Jordan Brewster) have to keep skipping one step ahead of the pursuing law led by "Hobbs" (Dwayne Johnson) and, whilst cornered in Rio, they must assemble everyone with driving skills so as to thwart the ambitions of drug lord "Reyes" (Joaquim de Almeida) whom they have seriously hacked off. This effort sacrifices a little of the pace and speed of the other films and tries to focus on a slightly stronger story with some better characterisations - that does mean that it can be a bit on the slow side at times and maybe we get just one thoughtful pose from Diesel too many, but as we head towards a fairly predictable denouement this easily (for my money, anyway) tops the list of F&F films before clearly teeing us up for number 6. I think it's closer in quality and standard to the first film - and still has plenty of burnt rubber and lively stunts to keep it watchable.

**Fast Five brings the action, beloved old characters, exciting new ones, and a whole lot of fun to the Fast franchise and the heist genre.**
Fast 4 and Fast 5 are the best of the Fast & Furious franchise. Fast 4 redeemed the series after the failure of Tokyo Drift by bringing back Vin Diesel and the cast and family of the first film. Then Fast 5 expands and adds to the crew with fan-favorite characters from across the series, including Han (Kang), Roman (Gibson), Tej (Ludacris), Gisele (Gadot), and more. The Toretto family plans a massive heist to buy their freedom but hot on their tale is Dwayne Johnson’s Hobbs, a perfect foil to Diesel’s Toretto. The face-off between these characters is epic! Fast Five’s bonkers action is a little more grounded than later entries, but it’s still outrageous fun. It feels kind of like The Italian Job, directed by Michael Bay. Fast Five launched the Fast Franchise into another decade of insane stunts and stories with great characters and commitment to embracing its cheesy awesomeness.

I'm not really a fan of these kinds of movies. I haven't even seen parts 1 and 2. I've seen part 3 (Tokyo Drift) which I think was a waste of time. I've seen part 4 just because everyone's watching it and surprisingly I liked it. I was even surprised to find out that Bryan O'Conner (Paul Walker) was a policeman. Haha!
So here I am, watching the fifth installment. Justine wanted to watch it badly and since I have nothing to do, I decided to accompany her. She was on leave the whole week and she just got back from Palawan. So before watching the movie, the 2 of us had dinner at Jack's Loft. I told her that we should buy tickets first but because we were lazy we forgot about it. When it was an hour before the movie, we were surprised. Sold out. Well, nearly sold out. There were like less than 10 seats. So we still went in line and luckily got seats even if the seats were bad and we were seated separately from each other.
I liked this movie. Although it was very unrealistic. (Hello? Where's the government of Rio?) I like how The Rock was there. I like him. I don't like Vin Diesl. I don't understand a word coming out of his mouth. Jordana was still pretty but she's not as pretty in this film. She's too thin. But all in all I liked it.

Pretty average movie. The dialog is maybe a bit ahead of its' time, in terms of toxicity and progressivism, but that's a few lines.
Feels really sappy and cardboard. The cast has great charisma, but they can't help playing cardboard in such a simple play. I'm not sure how exactly modern fairytales are made good, but most I've seen are better than this.
6/10

"Lewis" (Richard Gere) is a ruthless merger merchant who loves nothing better than a lucrative deal that will line his pockets regardless of the impact on anyone else. He arrives in town and has a one-night stand with call girl "Vivian" (Julia Roberts). He likes her, she likes him - so he decides that she can stay on. Maybe help him out with a few formally social occasions where she can smile and stay schtum? To that end, he gives her a credit card so she can go shop to look the part, and that's when we discover that this girl is no pushover. Despite his rigidity, "Lewis" starts to realise that he's beginning to fall for her, despite her unsavoury provenance but what happens next? The story is simply constructed and fairly predictable, but there is loads of chemistry on display between a more relaxed and natural looking Gere and an on-form Roberts. Hector Elizondo also chips in well as the hotel manager who also begins to fall for her charms and who can ever forget the saleswoman (Dey Young) who judges a book by it's cover and loses out on some mega-commission. The writing is sparing, but funny and observational of a society that judges relentlessly without ever really taking any time to get to know the people it is harshest to. Roberts offers us a cheekily endearing and spirited character that just belongs in that stretched limousine. Good fun.

There is a LOT of hate here because it doesn't portray prostitution realistically. And there is a LOT of hate here because it is demeaning to women and politics and politics and politics and...snore.
It's a movie!!!!! It's job is NOT to depict reality, it's job is to entertain!!! In many cases movies are supposed to depict the opposite of reality so you can escape it!!!!
Hate it if you want, the fact is, the film is fun and entertaining.
If you want a gritty drama about prostitution, there are movies out there about that too. Watch Taxi Driver.
I didn't want to see a gritty drama about prostitution when I sat down to watch Pretty Woman...I wanted to see a fun movie that would entertain me. Nor did I expect to see a gritty drama when I sat down to watch this.
In fact, I kind of feel the people that are complaining about the unrealistic depiction of prostitution had an insanely unrealistic expectation of the movie. You can't really make a gritty drama that accurate depicts prostitution...and still have a romantic comedy can you? They aren't compatible are they? Why are people complaining about that? It's like they wanted a completely different movie.
it advertises itself as a romantic comedy, it delivers as a romantic comedy...why did people want it to be something it never even tried to pretend it was?
I don't get it, the film was entertaining, watch it for what it advertises itself to be.

**Excellent performance and an experienced director create a romantic comedy classic full of charm and authenticity.**
No wonder it’s a classic! Julia Roberts and Richard Gere masterfully portray their characters full of nuance, sincerity, and emotional pain. Pretty Woman has a plot told many times over. Yet, with the experience of director Garry Marshall and these performances, the story feels genuine and endearing in ways unmatched by many other interpretations. I don’t consider myself a huge fan of rom-coms, but this movie was just lovely. The supporting cast of the hotel staff provides another level of charm and compassion that elevate the film further. Pretty Woman sweeps the audience up as they invest in the characters and their growth and challenges. It set the bar for rom-com very high.

"You and I are such similar creatures, Vivian. We both screw people for money."
Richard Gere has always played a rich snob really well but I can't help shake the feeling that Julia Roberts was shockingly miscast in this role. She does well but the role just doesn't fit. Oh well, can't win them all.

A street credibility Pygmallion!
Edward Lewis is a very rich man, but money, as everyone knows, does not buy everything, and as yet another failed relationship falls by the wayside, Edward faces up to the prospect of a hectic social week on his own. Enter a meeting with ebullient hooker Vivian Ward, who upon impressing Edward with her happy go lucky values, gets herself hired to be his escort for the week ahead, it's a week that both of them are unlikely to ever forget.
It almost became the in thing to stomp all over the respective work of both Richard Gere (Edward) and Julia Roberts (Vivian), adding fuel to the fire of those with an aversion to both actors is that the crowd pleasing Pretty Woman hails from that dreaded genre known as 1980s Rom-Com. Seemingly many can now not see just what made Pretty Woman so popular back in 1990. Gary Marshall's film was the fourth highest box office taker in 1990, grossing a domestic $178,406,268, and at the same time made the date movie hip again, so basically all you Pretty Woman haters can take both those facts to the bank!
As the opening credits emerge, Peter Cox (lead singer of pop band Go West) starts warbling about "The King Of Wishful Thinking", and never was a more appropriate song used to open such a genre piece before or since, and this is the key issue with Pretty Woman. Yes, the whole structure and plot devices are all fanciful splendour, I mean does anyone seriously think that hookers look and act like Julia Roberts? But really if you are entering this picture expecting anything other than a modern "My Fair Lady" like fairytale then the blinkers need to be well and truly taken off. It's also a point of worth to say that Pretty Woman has something to say outside of the main intention to lift hearts and make one smile, Marshall, aided by his screenwriter J.F. Lawton, tie in smartly the fact that Edward is as much a hustler as Vivian is, only difference being that Edward is incredibly wealthy and has therefore grown in public stature.
Both Roberts and Gere have brilliant chemistry, so it was no surprise to see they would work together again in 1999 on "Runaway Bride", and both actors are helped immeasurably by splendid support from Hector Elizondo as the hotel manager, Barney Thompson. The picture is laced with joyous moments that hark back to the golden days of screwy comedies laced with unlikely romances, and this was something that clearly struck a chord with cinema goers back on the film's original release. Yes it's a touch over sweet at times, and yes the ending is never really in doubt, but if you are prepared to invest some fluffy chilled out time with Pretty Woman then you can see and feel just why it was the big hit it was back at the start of the 90s. 8/10

This is, I think, the definitive Vietnam war movie. Martin Sheen is "Capt. Willard", a war weary veteran who is sent on a top secret mission to track down and stop the rogue Colonel 'Kurtz" (Marlon Brando) who is operating independently from Cambodia. With only a small crew of rookie squaddies, he sets off along the treacherous Nung River where, along the way, they alight on "Kilgore" (Robert Duvall) and face all sorts of dangers against both man and nature as they seek their quarry. The sheer intensity of the journey, and of the challenges it throws up cause "Willard" to re-evaluate his whole perspective, and not just on the war, as the horrors of this conflict manifest before him. It's a stunningly strong depiction of war; the humanity and vulnerability of the characters - even those who are outwardly strong - and the casting is inspired. It's bloody and gory at times, but never gratuitously and the closely shorn Brando is in a class of his own as the megalomaniac "Kurtz". Though fictional in fact, it doesn't pull it's punches and leaves us all with a bitter taste in our mouth and some seriously thought-provoking questions.

It wasn't just insanity and murder, there was enough of that to go around for everyone.
Apocalypse Now is directed by Francis Ford Coppola who also co-adapts the screenplay with John Milius from Heart of Darkness written by Joseph Conrad. It stars Martin Sheen, Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Laurence Fishburne, Dennis Hopper, Harrison Ford, Frederic Forrest, Sam Bottoms and Albert Hall. Cinematography is by Vittorio Storaro and the music is primarily arranged by Carmine Coppola.
The Vietnam War and Captain Benjamin L. Willard (Sheen) is approached by American intelligence to go on a secret assignment: he's to follow the Nung River into the remote Cambodian jungle to find and assassinate Colonel Walter E. Kurtz (Marlon Brando), a member of the US Army Special Forces who has gone insane.
One of the most talked and written about films of all time, Apocalypse Now remains to this day a harrowing and haunting experience to first time viewers. With a production shoot that has in itself become legendary, Coppola's flawed masterpiece has been dissected and argued over to within an inch of its magnificent life. People will continue to write about it for ever more it seems, perhaps there might even be the odd new confrontational spin on what resides within? But ultimately it's what the individual takes away from the film that matters, our own interpretations key to the enjoyment of such a disturbing vision of war and violence.
Many of the set-pieces, dialogue and characters have long since passed into folklore, and rightly so. The Ride of the Valkyries helicopter assault, Kurtz's surreal death camp, the boat people massacre, purple haze, the playmates, Kilgore, and of course the horror, the horror..indeed. The performances match the quality of Storaro's sumptuous Philippines photography, Sheen is fiercely committed and Duvall and Hopper in turn are powerhouse and edgy. While Brando, doing his own bizzaro thing in the last third, brings a little chaos unintentionally in keeping with the madness at the heart of this particular darkness.
Personally that last draggy third does stop it from being a complete genius type whole, but everything up to it is so damn good it's arguably churlish to expect perfection? But as near perfection movies go, Apocalypse Now proudly sits with the best of them, sitting there with a harrowed look upon its face. 9/10