I really wish we could get rid of this Doctor. Jodi Whittaker has to be one of the worst actor there is. No imagination, no charisma, nothing to like about her. I don't know why everybody likes Bradley Walsh. Whenever I see him all I can think about is The Chase. He is a good game show host but not an actor.
What is with those boots she wears? Who goes to a fancy party dressed in a Tux and work boots?
This is a James Bond episode not Doctor Who. Why does almost every episode have to take place on 21st century earth? Why can't we get back to other places and times with Daleks and Cybermen and other creatures?
Reviews
17 Reviews
Judy
(II) (2019)
One of the worst
5 October 2019
One of the worst movies I have seen in a while. It is long, it is boring and it is depressing. Renee neither looks nor sounds like Judy. As a matter of fact nobody in this turkey looked or sounded like the person they were portraying. The younger Judy was no where close to the original. I only way you could tell the Liza character was Liza was the haircut. Renee has done some good acting in other movies but this was not one of them. She just looked like an actress trying to do a poor imitation of Judy.
The Orville
(2017–2022)
Ignore the humor
10 September 2017
I understand it is supposed to be a spoof of Star Trek. If they were to remove the spoof part and turn it into straight Sci-Fi it would be a decent show. Certainly not on the level with Star Trek TNG but decent. The science fiction parts of it were quite well done. The humor was lame and all it did was take away from the rest of the show. Put in more science fiction action and lose the attempts at humor and it could be a winner. Only gave it a 6 but I would give it higher without the "jokes".
Arrival
(II) (2016)
Good premise, poor execution
10 December 2016
Maybe mild spoilers: The idea of the movie, that is, learning the alien language is interesting but dragging it out for 2.5 hours was just too much. It could have been done in 45 minutes without losing anything. A large part of it was just walking back and forth to the ship and going up and down on the scissor lift. The scissor lift got almost as much airtime as some of the actors.
The first time they went on the ship took, probably, ten minutes of the movie and then nothing happened. Much of it is like that. Walking around. Looking at ship from outside. Walking down the tunnel from the ship entrance to the viewing area. Getting on trucks, getting off trucks. Getting on the scissor lift, getting off the scissor lift.
Spoiler: If the alien were just there to give us their language why did they not bother to try and learn ours before they arrived so their would not have been such a misunderstanding. Don't they watch sci-fi movies and realize that misunderstanding through poor communication is a recurring theme.
By the way, go to the trivia section and read why they did not land. What a load of BS that is.
Save your money and wait until it comes out on Netflix or Amazon Prime.
The first time they went on the ship took, probably, ten minutes of the movie and then nothing happened. Much of it is like that. Walking around. Looking at ship from outside. Walking down the tunnel from the ship entrance to the viewing area. Getting on trucks, getting off trucks. Getting on the scissor lift, getting off the scissor lift.
Spoiler: If the alien were just there to give us their language why did they not bother to try and learn ours before they arrived so their would not have been such a misunderstanding. Don't they watch sci-fi movies and realize that misunderstanding through poor communication is a recurring theme.
By the way, go to the trivia section and read why they did not land. What a load of BS that is.
Save your money and wait until it comes out on Netflix or Amazon Prime.
TURN: Washington's Spies
(2014–2017)
Want to like it but can't
29 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I probably don't know as much about the Revolution as I should so I am not aware of all the inaccuracies so they don't bother me that much. After all, we know it is fiction so why try to berate it for not being truthful.
Everyone says they can't understand the people talking. That is my problem also but the opposite. English, American or British, was much different than today. I would rather they spoke in thicker dialects and had subtitles. I find that I can't get in to the show because the language sounds too much like 21st century. There are just too many modern idioms which just take me out of the story.
Secondly I am not that thrilled about the acting. Much of it seems forced.
Finally, although some of the scenery is nice, much of the scenery is so obviously green screen that it is hard to watch. That part in the third episode where they were rowing across to New York was so obviously CGI that it put me off the whole thing.
Everyone says they can't understand the people talking. That is my problem also but the opposite. English, American or British, was much different than today. I would rather they spoke in thicker dialects and had subtitles. I find that I can't get in to the show because the language sounds too much like 21st century. There are just too many modern idioms which just take me out of the story.
Secondly I am not that thrilled about the acting. Much of it seems forced.
Finally, although some of the scenery is nice, much of the scenery is so obviously green screen that it is hard to watch. That part in the third episode where they were rowing across to New York was so obviously CGI that it put me off the whole thing.
Cradle Will Rock
(1999)
Shorter is sometimes better.
27 March 2015
I had heard a lot about this movie and I wanted to like it but I could not get in to it. Mostly it was because there was too much going on. He tried to do too many stories at once. There was the story of the play, and of the ventriloquist, of Rockefeller and the mural, of the down and out singer, of Hearst and his fortunes. It just went on and on. He switched back and forth so much that I could not keep the stories straight. One or two minutes on a story then quickly to another and then back to another to I got dizzy trying to keep up. If he had cut out about a third of the plot and cut down the time it would have been much better.
Interstellar
(2014)
The Grapes of Wrath meets 2001
14 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I am being generous by giving it 3 stars. First it is way, way too long. Second, I was given to understand that it was a movie about going to space to hunt for a new planet. Most of the story takes place on Earth. It is almost an hour in before they even leave the Earth. Third I am getting really tired of "the earth is dying because of what we have done to it, poor poor us". I am not a flaming non-global warming person, but I think that this environmental disaster stuff in every movie is getting a bit much. The first half was taken directly from Grapes of Wrath. The pickup trucks loaded with a families' possession heading off to a better life. If you want to see this done properly go watch the Grapes of Wrath. It is much better done. And at least it was based on a true story. The ending is ripped from 2001. Also done better than this movie. I know some people say there is not comparison but I don't buy it. I hate to say it but even the space visuals were done better in Gravity. I hated the story in Gravity but the visuals were stunning. Interstellar is just standard space disaster stuff with a bad story. I could spend hours talk about the plot holes but others have done that better. The only one thing I will mention. They need a rocket to boost their shuttle into escape velocity from the earth then when the were leaving a planet with more gravity then earth the small engines on their were just fine.
Noah
(2014)
As bad as it gets
30 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This has to one of the worst movies ever made. It has to rank right up there with Ishtar and Battlefield Earth.
Minor spoilers but nothing you won't see other places The beginning was the worst. Where did they get their food? Rock creatures? Come on, give me a break. Nothing of this is even in the slightest degree believable. People say the events in the bible are not believable but this goes well beyond that. In the beginning I was thinking that this must be a parody. To be fair it is somewhat based on the book of Enoch and some other ancient writings which were not included in the Bible because they were thought to be too fantastic. But even these books did not go this far down the rabbit hole. Even the weirdest of the ancient books don't go as far as rock creatures.
Nothing says that God did not want humanity to survive. If he has just want to animals to survive why put Noah on the ark. He could have just had Noah shove all the animals in the boat and shut the door.
I had to fast forward through much of this just to get through it. Please for your own sanity skip this thing.
Minor spoilers but nothing you won't see other places The beginning was the worst. Where did they get their food? Rock creatures? Come on, give me a break. Nothing of this is even in the slightest degree believable. People say the events in the bible are not believable but this goes well beyond that. In the beginning I was thinking that this must be a parody. To be fair it is somewhat based on the book of Enoch and some other ancient writings which were not included in the Bible because they were thought to be too fantastic. But even these books did not go this far down the rabbit hole. Even the weirdest of the ancient books don't go as far as rock creatures.
Nothing says that God did not want humanity to survive. If he has just want to animals to survive why put Noah on the ark. He could have just had Noah shove all the animals in the boat and shut the door.
I had to fast forward through much of this just to get through it. Please for your own sanity skip this thing.
Gravity
(2013)
Go but lower your expectations
5 October 2013
The more I watched the trailer the less I was sure I wanted to spend the money to see it. I am glad I went but it is not something I would see again.
The visual is very good. If you go see it you must see it in IMAX 3D or don't see it at all. It is great to see views of the earth from space and also nice to see extreme closeups of the Hubble, the shuttle and the ISS both inside and outside. The 3D was so realistic I blinked a few times as things came flying toward the screen.
As for the story, don't even both paying much attention. Just sit back and watch the visuals and ignore the story. The believability is not even in the near vicinity of this universe. There is almost nothing about this movie that is any way related to how things like this would happen in space. I would go so far as to say you could take along earplugs and not listen to the story. Just watch the visuals.
The visual is very good. If you go see it you must see it in IMAX 3D or don't see it at all. It is great to see views of the earth from space and also nice to see extreme closeups of the Hubble, the shuttle and the ISS both inside and outside. The 3D was so realistic I blinked a few times as things came flying toward the screen.
As for the story, don't even both paying much attention. Just sit back and watch the visuals and ignore the story. The believability is not even in the near vicinity of this universe. There is almost nothing about this movie that is any way related to how things like this would happen in space. I would go so far as to say you could take along earplugs and not listen to the story. Just watch the visuals.
Lincoln
(2012)
Good but not great
26 November 2012
I will start by saying this movie is good but not great. It is worth watching but it will not become a classic like many other movies of the Civil War era, such as Gettysburg. What I was expecting was more comprehensive biography of Lincoln. What I got was one little slice of his life surrounded by many other characters. As many reviewers have said, this should be called a movie about the 13th amendment not about Lincoln. Almost all of it takes place in January of 1865 and involves Lincoln's fight to get the amendment passed. The movie gets very slow and tedious in the middle with all the wrangling.
Considering the subject it could have been shorter and ending with the passing of the amendment. The assassination seem to be a add-on which could have been left out. It is a movie you go to see for the scenery and the performances not for the story.
When I saw the trailer I had my doubts about Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln, but I have to say he pulls it off. He will almost certainly get a nomination for his acting. Probably the best character is Thaddeus Stevens played by Tommy Lee Jones. He pulls it off perfectly. If you look up the picture on Wikipedia of Stevens, Jones looks just like him. For a Spielberg movie I as disappointed in the special effects. Much of it was obviously green screen. The carriage rides though the city were so obvious green screen that it was distracting. The riverboat that was obvious built on a back lot and had no water under it was a big blooper. As a huge Civil War and Lincoln fan I am glad I went to see it but I would not rush out to see it again any time soon.
Considering the subject it could have been shorter and ending with the passing of the amendment. The assassination seem to be a add-on which could have been left out. It is a movie you go to see for the scenery and the performances not for the story.
When I saw the trailer I had my doubts about Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln, but I have to say he pulls it off. He will almost certainly get a nomination for his acting. Probably the best character is Thaddeus Stevens played by Tommy Lee Jones. He pulls it off perfectly. If you look up the picture on Wikipedia of Stevens, Jones looks just like him. For a Spielberg movie I as disappointed in the special effects. Much of it was obviously green screen. The carriage rides though the city were so obvious green screen that it was distracting. The riverboat that was obvious built on a back lot and had no water under it was a big blooper. As a huge Civil War and Lincoln fan I am glad I went to see it but I would not rush out to see it again any time soon.
Lebanon, Pa.
(2010)
What not to do
24 March 2012
This is a fine example of making every bad decision you could possibly make. From abortion to an affair with a married person to teen sex to getting drunk. They do it all but somehow it all works out in the end and everyone will live happily ever after. If you watch this as a movie about what not to do then it would be OK. They could have done a move about pro-abortion and teen angst without the B story of the guy coming back to sell his father's house. The main (A) was about the girl and her problems. His story was real superfluous. I lived near Lebanon for three years. Even though it was not my favorite place to live I can tell you that not everybody is a redneck. It is also not that conservative. It is more conservative than Philly but it is not Redneck country. I could not recommend this movie to anyone.
The Music Man
(2003 TV Movie)
As good or better than the original
19 October 2011
This is one of the few movies where the remake is at least as good as, if not better than,the original. The dancing is just superb especially the library number. Matthew Broderick does a very good job as the professor. He is a very good dancer. Kristin Chenoweth has a wonderful voice. The new ending really was a delight because it tied the story together more than the original ending. If I had any complaints it is that the mayor is miscast. I see the mayor as a sort of clown. Victor Garber is not really believable as a clownish character. He is too polished to play a clown. This is a movie that I would see over and over again.
Riverworld
(2010 TV Movie)
Purist
20 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
*very mild spoilers* My son said it best about this movie. He said it depends on if you are a Riverworld purist or not. Him and I both are. If you are not a purist or have not read the books then it is an OK action movie based really loosely around Riverworld. Not great but not as bad as some I have seen. If you are it purist then it stinks. Clothes, horses, climbing mountains, etc just ruins it.
But what really ruined it for me was the concept. The books were mostly based on the mystery of Riverworld and the quest to find the answers. Here with the blue (Avatar) people and all the things that went along with that it just took all the specialness out of the story. Plus there was supposed to be 36 billion people on that planet. The idea in the books was that if you died you came back in a different place so we got to see different parts of the world and different cultures. This idea of a dozen or so people always coming back to the some little shore ruined the grandeur of the story. I realize that you can't do it all in 4 hours on a limited budget but they could have done better.
Years ago I was in a bookstore looking for a book to read and I read on the back of the first Riverworld book "you are in this book". That is why I bought it and read it and then all the rest. I did not feel I was in this movie.
By the way having the earth destroyed by the "Vogons" and having Matt transport with "Stargate" transport rings just made the story laughable.
It was left open ended to leave open the possibility of a series. Trouble is the were no really answers to any of the questions this movie left open and I would not expect to see this go any farther than this movie so I guess we will not get any answers.
But what really ruined it for me was the concept. The books were mostly based on the mystery of Riverworld and the quest to find the answers. Here with the blue (Avatar) people and all the things that went along with that it just took all the specialness out of the story. Plus there was supposed to be 36 billion people on that planet. The idea in the books was that if you died you came back in a different place so we got to see different parts of the world and different cultures. This idea of a dozen or so people always coming back to the some little shore ruined the grandeur of the story. I realize that you can't do it all in 4 hours on a limited budget but they could have done better.
Years ago I was in a bookstore looking for a book to read and I read on the back of the first Riverworld book "you are in this book". That is why I bought it and read it and then all the rest. I did not feel I was in this movie.
By the way having the earth destroyed by the "Vogons" and having Matt transport with "Stargate" transport rings just made the story laughable.
It was left open ended to leave open the possibility of a series. Trouble is the were no really answers to any of the questions this movie left open and I would not expect to see this go any farther than this movie so I guess we will not get any answers.
John Adams
(2008)
Very good but there is something about the look
10 January 2009
I find it an excellent series as far as the story goes. I enjoy the glimpses in to history that this series gives. My favorite part is watching and listening to David Morse as George Washington. I think he is incredible. I wish that they would do a series on Washington with David Morse in the lead. I cannot add much to what the other people have said about the series but I want to add two observations.
First, I think that, in many places, they give a little more credit to Adams than he deserves. I know that he is regarded as the leader in the push for independence but I think this series even exaggerates that beyond the actual fact. Also, I am concerned about his leadership when he was president. I think that they make it much more powerful and important than it really was considering how history has looked at his presidency.
My second and hardest thing to get over in this series is the 'look'. I am reading a book called Max Quick: The Two Travelers. In this a couple of boys are transported in time back to 1912. One of the boys comments that the look of people in 1912 is different. He comments that if a few people from 1912 were transported to our time and mixed in with people from our time he could tell which ones were from 1912. This is the problem I have had with the John Adams Series from the beginning. There is something about the look of the people that just does not ring true. I cannot put my finger on it. I am not sure if it is the makeup or the dress or the language or the mannerisms but something is just not right. I think Paul Giamatti is the hardest to get get used to. I am not putting down his acting or his performance, it is just that there is something about his look that just does not sit right with me. The same seems to apply to most of the characters. They just do not seem like they live in the 18th century. As I mentioned above the only one that seems to pull it off is David Morse.
This is the only reason I am giving it 7 stars instead of something much higher. Otherwise it is a very good series. I recommend it to any fan early American history.
First, I think that, in many places, they give a little more credit to Adams than he deserves. I know that he is regarded as the leader in the push for independence but I think this series even exaggerates that beyond the actual fact. Also, I am concerned about his leadership when he was president. I think that they make it much more powerful and important than it really was considering how history has looked at his presidency.
My second and hardest thing to get over in this series is the 'look'. I am reading a book called Max Quick: The Two Travelers. In this a couple of boys are transported in time back to 1912. One of the boys comments that the look of people in 1912 is different. He comments that if a few people from 1912 were transported to our time and mixed in with people from our time he could tell which ones were from 1912. This is the problem I have had with the John Adams Series from the beginning. There is something about the look of the people that just does not ring true. I cannot put my finger on it. I am not sure if it is the makeup or the dress or the language or the mannerisms but something is just not right. I think Paul Giamatti is the hardest to get get used to. I am not putting down his acting or his performance, it is just that there is something about his look that just does not sit right with me. The same seems to apply to most of the characters. They just do not seem like they live in the 18th century. As I mentioned above the only one that seems to pull it off is David Morse.
This is the only reason I am giving it 7 stars instead of something much higher. Otherwise it is a very good series. I recommend it to any fan early American history.
WALL·E
(2008)
Animated version of ' An Inconvenient Truth'
26 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Nothing like hitting you over the head with the ecology message. Nothing subtle about the message in this movie. Granted, most movies, especially kids movies, have an underlying message but this is to blatant. Without dialog it was mostly this wheeled machine whizzing around. That is cute for a few minutes and for the first few minutes the CGI holds your attention but with no plot you can only watch a cute CGI robot for so long. Young children will probably like this because of the cute robot but adults are going to get bored real soon. It would have made a nice 30 minute TV special but as a full length movie it was just too long. I especially could not get into the animated humans. They did not seem in anyway realistic. I would have preferred a mixture of live humans and CGI. The love story in the beginning was OK. The way Wall-E "stalked" EVA, but once the story left earth and got to the spaceship the plot vanished and it became dull. I did not really care that much about Wall-E. He was not cute enough to really get to like and without a voice their was no way to really get to know him. All in all, I think if they had stayed with Wall-E and EVA having a love affair on Earth and forgotten the spaceship it could have been an OK movie. But as is, like I said before, very young children will probably like it but beyond that I think it falls flat.
Sunshine
(2007)
Starts off OK but soon slips into horror/gore.
30 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This could have been a decent movie. It was a bit of a stretch to buy the premise of the sun dying but not anymore than some other movies. If they had stayed with the theme it could have been good. They could have went with the psychological theme of a crew member screwing up and feeling guilty. Or they could have worked with the theme of how hard it was to deliver the payload. But, instead, they went with the creature/gore theme and not very well. I still don't know what powers the person had that made him able to blur film. That part made no sense at all.
There was no back story on any of the characters so we did not get to know them or care about them at all. There was even less about the crewman who went mad. Why did he go mad, what was his reasoning for killing everyone, other than he had a God complex.
Tell me if I am wrong but I had a real problem with the oxygen troubles. They had a ship that huge, with a "cargo bay" bigger than a hanger and yet there was not enough oxygen for a few days or weeks for all the crew. Don't you think there could have been a way to shut off some of those sections and use confine themselves to one room and save oxygen. I know that is is the same amount whether it is free in or tanks but in areas that big there is bound to be slow leaks, chemical reactions, i.e. rust, or other consumers of oxygen, and isolating the air to a few rooms seems to me to be a wiser choice. And WHERE was the GRAVITY coming from?
Toward the end so much of the story was obstructed with overexposed sections that were to represent the brightness of the sun that it was impossible to follow what was going on.
I watched this movie because I heard that it was supposed to be great. I don't know who would think this is great. It is standard creature/horror and not well done creature/horror at that. I give it two stars because some of the visuals are good but that is about all.
There was no back story on any of the characters so we did not get to know them or care about them at all. There was even less about the crewman who went mad. Why did he go mad, what was his reasoning for killing everyone, other than he had a God complex.
Tell me if I am wrong but I had a real problem with the oxygen troubles. They had a ship that huge, with a "cargo bay" bigger than a hanger and yet there was not enough oxygen for a few days or weeks for all the crew. Don't you think there could have been a way to shut off some of those sections and use confine themselves to one room and save oxygen. I know that is is the same amount whether it is free in or tanks but in areas that big there is bound to be slow leaks, chemical reactions, i.e. rust, or other consumers of oxygen, and isolating the air to a few rooms seems to me to be a wiser choice. And WHERE was the GRAVITY coming from?
Toward the end so much of the story was obstructed with overexposed sections that were to represent the brightness of the sun that it was impossible to follow what was going on.
I watched this movie because I heard that it was supposed to be great. I don't know who would think this is great. It is standard creature/horror and not well done creature/horror at that. I give it two stars because some of the visuals are good but that is about all.
Gods and Generals
(2003)
Not really worth the time.
19 May 2003
I might consider this a decent movie, maybe a 5, if it were not for the music. Most of the movie consists of long weepy segments of people going off to war or generals pontification the horrors of war, all the while there is this slow, depressing music so loud you can hardly hear the actors. There is even one scene where a soldier gives part of a monologue from "Julius Caesar", all the while this music plays. In between these scenes are scenes of battle, most northern soldiers running across open fields while southern soldiers hid behind fences and buildings and cut them down. By the way, it is primarily down from the perspective of Virginia. All during the battle scenes of soldiers screaming and guns booming, this music plays.
This is a very SLOW, dark, depressing movie. I know that is the way the war was, dark and depressing, but I don't have to set for three hours watching it this way. Don't waste three hours of your life on this.
This is a very SLOW, dark, depressing movie. I know that is the way the war was, dark and depressing, but I don't have to set for three hours watching it this way. Don't waste three hours of your life on this.
Tell Your Friends