Some movie reviews
May 26th, 2018
These are cut-and-pasted from Netflix. With very rare exceptions, I only write reviews for movies I disliked – it’s my way of getting revenge.
There are no spoilers here. All ratings are in the range 1 to 5 stars.
[Edit: I see that 12/14 of the reviews below use the word “stupid”. I suppose that says something not terribly flattering about myself. So be it. It’s still how I feel about these films.]
Things to Come
The Gestapo will save us from war, hatred, and irrationality and create a paradise of identically black-suited heroes who rule and identically white-gowned citizens who obey, all living in a futuristic world with lots of pneumatic tubes. Underground. And they will have television. But, of course the Gestapo (or is it Stasi? Or Checka? hard to tell) rule in the name of Humanity, so it’s all good. But they don’t approve of private airplanes. H.G. Wells personally oversaw every detail of this film. It supposedly represents his vision of an ideal (!) future world. (He supported something he called “liberal fascism”, and it shows.) Acting is high school play quality. (On the low end of that.) Special effects were good for 1938. I give it 2 stars, both for historical interest. The film isn’t worth watching aside from that.
Sunshine
I used to think Gravity was the worst recent science-fiction film. No longer. Gravity was stupid, terrible, and stupid (with great special effects and pretty good acting). But Sunshine is bad on a whole different level. It has *layers* of stupid, each dumber than the next. Layers upon layers of stupid. It’s really an amazing achivement. But not amazing enough to make it worth watching. It’s not “fun stupid” like Plan 9 From Outer Space. It’s just…. well, don’t watch it.
Interstellar
The stupid – it hurts. Physicist Kip Thorne was involved with the scriptwriting. Thanks to him the part about wormholes isn’t stupid. Just the other 99% of the movie is stupid. If you know anything at all about engineering or physics, that is. I won’t give spoilers, but please note it’s difficult to hide the launch of a Saturn V-sized rocket. And the vicinity of black holes tend to have LOTS of x-rays. Not a place you’d want to (or be able to) live. Plus, a little 1930s-style dust bowl is no reason to abandon an entire populated planet. See astronomer Phil Plait’s comments at Slate.
The Man from Earth
Some interest. Others have done it better in written science-fiction. The Mel Brooks/Carl Reiner version (2000 Year Old Man) is much funnier. This movie is all talking-heads (it cost $200,000 to make). And the characters are cardboard cut-outs, very poorly written. But some interesting ideas.
You wrote this on Sat Jan 06 15:36:05 GMT 2018
Mr. Nobody
There’s a solid 25 or 30 minutes of entertainment lurking in this 2 1/2 hour movie. It’s slow. Really slow. The filmmakers even showed they know it – there’s a line in the film “it’s like a French movie – nothing happens”. Synopsis (no spoilers): Choices have consequences. I think most people already knew that, but the film assumes that it’s a mind-blowing concept.
You wrote this on Sun Jul 02 22:27:40 GMT 2017
Argo
Intrinsically an interesting true story, but way too Hollywood for my taste. As others have mentioned, the film inaccurately minimized the Canadian role, and positively insults the heroism of the British and New Zealand embassy staff (for no conceivable reason). Worse for my enjoyment of the film was the obviously made up last-second hitches inserted by the filmmakers. Without spoiling, there are two huge omg-we’re-almost-there-BUT moments, inserted by the filmmakers for suspense. Plus a lot of smaller ones. But this is a true story. These have no basis in history, and are such obvious Hollywood tropes as to break my belief that I was watching something real. It’s like when James Bond defuses the bomb with 1 second left on the clock. You know you’re watching a scriptwriter’s cheap trick, not something that happens in real life.
Gravity
I just watched it. I’m still stunned. Stunned by the utter stupidity of this movie. From the very first minute this movie is idiocy after idiocy. Read the other reviews for some of them, but I could write a book about everything wrong – with physics, with technology, with psychology, with common sense – in this movie. Just in the first 5 minutes (no spoilers): 1) She’s a MEDICAL doctor, yet she’s there to work on an upgrade of the Hubble telescope. Huh? 2) She says she’s nauseous – while in a spacesuit. Does she immediately go inside and take off the suit? Does she have ANY IDEA what will happen if her stomach goes while wearing a space helmet? (Answer: She will choke to death on her own upchuck, while totally blinded as it coats the inside of her helmet.) 3) The stars are visible IN THE DAYTIME. Clooney is DOING CIRCLES (==burning fuel like crazy – he should be out in 90 seconds at that rate) around the shuttle in a jetpack at a speed that would kill him instantly if he hit anything. 4) People describe things being at “7 o’clock” while floating IN OUTER SPACE (so the clock doesn’t even have an up and down, let alone facing in any particular direction) 5) People are asked to “describe their position” while floating in F***ING ORBIT! (What the heck are they supposed to say… “I’m 100 feet south of the tree?!?!?”) 6) She’s a NASA astronaut, but she “crashed” Soyuz in the simulator EVERY TIME. But they still let her fly. And that’s just in the first 5 minutes. It goes on just like that for an hour and a half. My head is still spinning. WHY does Hollywood do this? This movie had a huge budget and A-list stars. How much extra could it POSSIBLY cost to hire a scriptwriter smarter than Bozo the Clown?
You wrote this on Sun Jun 08 03:57:50 GMT 2014
The Hunger Games
Too much killing of innocents. Not enough revolution. “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Thomas Jefferson
You wrote this on Sun Nov 25 04:00:40 GMT 2012
Babel
A rather long slow movie about people doing amazingly stupid things and suffering for it. Visually interesting, the characters are hard to sympathize with because they act so stupidly. I found myself feeling they deserved worse than they got.
You wrote this on Wed Feb 15 14:50:33 GMT 2012
3:10 to Yuma
It’s hard to measure these things accurately, but this may be the stupidest movie I’ve ever seen in my life.
You wrote this on Sat Nov 05 10:05:12 GMT 2011
Passenger 57
Too stupid for words. A good choice for MST 3K movie night. Watch for the big fight scene where everyone on the plane needs oxygen masks to stay conscious except, of course, for the guys fighting.
Moon
Stupid movie. First – the premise. An astronaut takes a 3-year stint, all alone, on the far side of the moon mining He-3. 3 years? All alone? Only a crazy person would do that – and it’s hardly a job for crazies. So the premise is unreasonable to start with. Next, part of the plot turns on having no direct communications with Earth, except via relay thru Jupiter (so no real-time comms). Supposedly the comsat is broken. Yet the base is just a short drive from nearside, where the astronaut can easily make phone calls to Earth. Come on – so close to nearside yet there’s no wire to an antenna there? Second, the science/special effects. When he does talk to Earth, there’s no delay. There is low-gravity outside the base, but inside the base it’s just normal Earth 1-G. And bright lights outside give visible beams in the “hazy air”. On the moon? In a vacuum? It was so un-moonlike that, at one point in the movie, the main character is exploring outside the base, and makes a “discovery”. I thought the “discovery” was going to be that HE’S NOT ON THE MOON AT ALL. (But he is; I haven’t spoiled it.) I love good hard SF, and while this film borrows heavily from 2001 and other classics, it is not in that league.
You wrote this on Sun Jun 13 03:01:41 GMT 2010
Iron Man
Stooopid. Plot is weak and very, very predictable. But the “technology” just violates way too many physical laws in far too obvious ways for me to suspend disbelief. And I’m a SF fan! If you liked the comic book, maybe you’ll like this. As an engineer, the whole idea of a “super-suit” just strikes me as ridiculous. Are tanks built in the shape of giant armed men? Hardly. Then there’s the rockets with no need for reaction mass, and people getting smashed into things at hundreds of miles per hour with no injury (suit or not, the human body is only so strong). The special effects were good. And the focus was sharp.
[Added 2018: I liked some of the later ones better.]
You wrote this on Sun May 02 03:00:39 GMT 2010
Spider-Man 3
I liked the first two Spiderman movies. This one was just too stupid to bear, from beginning to end. By halfway into the movie, it had become a MST 3000 session with everyone in my family making jokes about how idiotic this movie was. Even my 6 year old thought it was full of cliches. (He did like it, tho.)
May 26th, 2018 at 7:43 pm
WARNING: SPOILERS
Re: Man From Earth. It’s based on a story by Jerome Bixby, who wrote the Star Trek episode “Requiem for Methuselah” (about an immortal who has been many famous people). Clearly, it’s a concept he liked.
Hunger Games: The revolution happens in the sequels. The first movie is just establishing the universe.
Moon: The weird things about the guy’s situation (being alone, not being able to communicate, etc.) make sense because he’s not a volunteer or employee; he’s a slave. As for the hazy air, could dust particles be suspended by electrostatic forces? See https://www.space.com/35240-moon-dust-levitates-nasa-study.html
Iron Man: We’ve discussed how Tony Stark survives impacts within the suit (repulsor beams applying force equally to all the molecules of his body). The idea of a super suit is not that weird: people are developing exoskeletons for people today. As for the rockets without reaction mass, hey it’s still better than Superman. I really loved Iron Man 1 and 3 because of Robert Downey Jr.’s banter and the engineering geekiness throughout the films.
Argo: I’m surprised you haven’t trashed The Imitation Game for many of the same flaws.
Spider-Man 3: Watch the Andrew Garfield Spider-Mans and you’ll appreciate SM3 a lot more. 🙂
May 27th, 2018 at 12:37 am
Re Moon, no. The base is surrounded by powerful spotlights on giant towers, shining down on the base (I don’t know why). The spotlight beams are clearly visible in the “haze”. Plus the stars are visible in the daylight, but that I assumed was normal Hollywood ignorance. But the “haze” (also visible in other scenes around all illuminated objects, including the Earth) seemed so blatant as to be an intentional clue. But, no.
I haven’t seen The Imitation Game.