Reviews

Overall a good film but with some parts that just don't hit right, but the message Bob Marley had for the world, and that carries through to this movie, is one we desperately need in our world-love all.

The movie covers the last few years of Marley's life with plenty of flashbacks to add depth. After surviving an assassination attempt in Jamaica, Marley moves to London and records with his band one of the greatest albums ever, Exodus. He returns to Jamaica, adored by his country but dying of cancer. It's incredible to realize he passed away at just 36 years old.

I think Kingsley Ben-Adir did a good job portraying such a compelling person, and I'm happy that Rita Marley's story, or at least some of it, was told as well.

I hope people ignore the critics and see the movie. It's a poignant, powerful story with an important message.

Watching this a couple of months after the massacre in Israel was strange. Paratroopers land in a field and kill teenagers just after a teacher gives a lecture on how Genghis Kahn's military encircled their enemy, closed in and slaughtered them. Young people are then seen being attacked along the road as they try to escape. One would think Hamas stole these ideas. It certainly put a pall over the evening as I'd told my daughter this was a so-bad-it's-good movie that people poke fun at.

I can only add that for the most part the acting is terrible and the special effects are cheap. The editing is rough and often common sense is lacking in the characters. Attempts are made to make the enemy "more like us" but fail due to poor writing, and when Patrick Swayze's character wants to kill the Soviet soldier because, "We live here" or some such nonsense, I had to cringe at the stupidity of it all. I mean, it's a war and the country is being invaded, that's why you kill the enemy, not because you're having a toddler tantrum over immigration.

The thinking that went into this fluffy piece of propaganda are just icky but there was enough there to hold almost all of my attention until the end. I would advise not to take any of it seriously.

At least the cinematography is excellent. I'll give it that.

I'm watching this for the first time in many years, and I have to say it tends to be boring at times. It's faithful to the book which I appreciate as I think it's one of few of King's works where he managed to control his worst impulses. I assume the miniseries was four hours long which means a lot has been removed for the two hour movie.

For those unfamiliar, the story is about a writer named Ben Mears who returns to his hometown to write a book and also to confront a terrifying memory from his childhood that took place in the Marston House which looms over the town. At nearly the same time, a vampire moves into the Marston House and begins to take over the town.

One thing King has excelled in is creating characters that are truly decent human beings. We love them and root for them throughout the story but I'm not sure this comes across as strongly in this movie as in the book as some of the acting is subpar and the editing does not allow time for the viewer to appreciate the characters and relationships. In fact, it doesn't even fully explain Ben's childhood experience.

However, there are also some good performances that help move the film along. James Mason alone makes up for any disappointments.

There are also some good jump scares, and the head vampire still looks terrifying. I'm disappointed this wasn't filmed in Maine, where the story is set, and the story is a good one, for sure. In my opinion it's one of the best vampire tales created since the original Bram Stoker novel.

Overall I'd recommend it to anyone who hasn't seen it before. It's subtle in many ways and there's nothing wrong with that.

I couldn't finish the movie. It's boring, has poor production values and jumps from scene to scene in a strange, uneven manner.

The talented cast is completely wasted, it's like the director told them to take whatever makes them talented and shove it down, way deep down, where no one can see it.

The movie, as much as I saw of it, provides a steady display of cruelty and nastiness that is depressing and absolutely stupid. It's difficult to think of a movie with more unlikeable characters. Everything about this movie is out of touch and inferior. I'm at a loss why anyone thinks it's a good movie.

This is a well written show that has held up very well over the years. The stories, while confined to the sitcom format, have not lost relevance today. I've been watching it on FreeVee and am up to season 2 and while I'm not happy about about the loss of two of the characters, it hasn't harmed the quality of the show. I really liked Susan Sullivan's character, she did a great job, but Louise Lassiter was a good replacement. I think the only character that is stuck in the 80s is the piano player, Sonny. However, compared to other smarmy, misogynist 80s characters, Sonny is much easier to take, and the actor is funny and has some good lines. Speaking of good lines, Ann Jillian has some real zingers.

The creators of It's a Living went on to do The Golden Girls, one of the best sitcoms ever made, so there are elements of It's a Living that are familiar to GG fans, like the music, storylines, and actors.

I didn't watch this too often during its original run, but I appreciate it a lot more now, and am so glad I found it. My only complaint is the theme song, which is so grating I have to mute it every time.

Despite some flaws, and no show is perfect, Battlestar Galactica is a fantastic show. I loved it when it was a first run series, putting up with the infuriating lag times which no one would tolerate in a lesser show, and rewatching all these years later I think it holds up well.

The series encapsulates science, religion, politics, war, philosophy and the human experience, however confusing and difficult it may be.

Multilayered, well acted characters like 6 and Baltus will never be duplicated and this is a credit to the excellent writing and direction of the show.

While the initial impact of the show has faded, there will never be a time when it won't be relevant.

I think this movie is easier to understand if viewed as a film about a perennially dishonest poseur named Ezra who is trying to find meaning and authenticity in his dysfunctional world, but even at that it's problematic, not least for its offensive depictions of Jews, and certainly because no one is likable. I mean, I'm pretty sure that in the real world, most people would not devolve into horrendous stereotypes when confronted with the prospect of a mixed race marriage (but please, trot out the tired old trope about the hired help being like family, we haven't seen that nearly enough.) The film may have been rescued with some heavy editing and a much shorter run time as it has some spot-on points made early on before the movie devolves into a morass of racism and antisemitism.

It seems that the movie has upset a lot of people, but I've yet to read anything on the overarching issue which is class. Wealth and materialism ooze out of every scene. How do two millennials afford a house in LA when neither have sustainable jobs? How can people in 2023 afford a recital dinner like the one Ezra and Amira have? Or their endless supply of overpriced shoes? Give us realistic people representing our dwindling middle class dealing with the problems in this movie rather than this fantasy land.

Free to Choose is for one thing a fascinating time capsule and worth watching for that reason alone. But this was released in 1980, on the cusp of Reagan's presidency and a major turning point in America. Want to learn about Reaganomics?

Then watch this because it's Friedman's sinister ideas that fueled that mess which has affected us to this day.

No doubt Friedman was incredibly intelligent, but here you can see how he outright ignores facts in order to push his ideas about his glorious free market which he believes will solve every social I'll, despite the glaring facts to the contrary.

Each episode begins with Friedman traveling to different places around the world and touting his free market ideaology and the second half of the show is Friedman back at the University of Chicago, where so many horrible things have come out of their School of Economics, and he debates his theories with a number of people across the political spectrum. The discussions are intelligent and engrossing and at times even surreal, such as when "businessman" Don Rumsfeld insists on morals and ethics and asks where is the humanity in Friedman's ideas. You can't make this up.

An interesting exercise while watching this is comparing the situation we're in now with how Friedman and the others said it would be.

My daughter came across this and it's terrible. It's Poorly written, badly acted, cliché stereotypes, terrible accents and a sexist story. Just awful all over and needs to be avoided.

I have always hated Full House and I still think it's one of the worst shows ever. BUT Fuller House is for the most part a much better version. I watched nearly all of it with my daughter and found myself laughing out loud and even teary eyed at times. Overall it's a cozy and warm show that kids enjoy and parents won't suffer through while watching with them. Also, I was disappointed it was canceled, I think it deserved a longer run.

This movie is very well written and funny. I enjoyed just sitting and relaxing and laughing and I was touched at moments bringing me to tears. It was a heartwarming story but I thought it was a little mature for a PG rating. I also think that the subtitles were hard to read and at some moments I had to guess. That said, I still think this is a great movie and I recommend.

Jessie, age 11 Rate:10 Movie rate:pg.13 Rec:yes

Byeeeee.

The humor is excellent as is the writing, and the theme of abuse and trauma is handled honestly and well. I've already started watching it for the second time.

An improvement over the first movie. It's sweet and funny, and shows the value of friendship and self-acceptance. It's good to see such a positive movie for a change. I'm glad my 11 year old likes it.

A wonderful film that has held up well over the years. A well made story about the struggle of the artist and the non-conformist in our society and the constant fight against the cheap and ugly.

I went into the documentary thinking there would be something redeeming about it. Maybe a commentary on poverty in America or the troubled history of West Virginia, or even a troubled family that succeeds in some way despite the odds stacked against them, but that's definitely not the case. The Whites have no redeeming qualities. None. In fact, after just a short viewing I find it difficult to ascribe to them any shred of humanity, intelligence or morals. Spare yourself, it's not worth your time.

My ten year old daughter likes this show and I often watch along with her, although I wonder if this is appropriate for kids.

It has some good writing, intelligent twists, and I'm a fan of Sean Astin, who does a great job as the dad and provides the only warmth in the show, but ultimately the show is mentally exhausting to watch.

The actress who plays the character of Nick is not good, she's too earnest and just too much. I find that the constant lying and cover-ups wear me out and ultimately the criminal activity, selfishness and lying are depressing. Personally, I don't think that sociopathy is entertaining. Additionally, at some point the inability for the family to see they are being conned is frustrating.

At least flipping the narrative from one season to the next was interesting.

This is a fun, not too scary movie for kids, plus a good cast and jokes for the adults watching with them. It's definitely one to add to your Halloween movie list.

Stupid, boring and awful. Full of offensive stereotypes and bad acting.