Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews6
johnsilverlargo's rating
Amazon Prime recommended this "documentary" to me. And it does not talk about science. Not even about philosophy or antropology... It seems that somebody that hated Science when he/she was in the highschool , now realized that all he/she really wanted to do was to write documentaries. But he never have read anything about science ever... So he/she writes just common places and dumb things... Yeah, never mind if The Origin of Species is a very large book, and it takes many weeks to read it, the best thing you can do to write a documentary is not having read some books and knowing what you are talking about... You just have to smoke some weed and write the first thing that pass through your mind... Yes, this is the best way, and how this "documentary" and the rest of New Atlantis ones was made.
well, this is the last time i believe the IMDb rating before go to the theater. if i do not know the director or have other sources that tell me the movie is good, i cannot trust in IMDb. for i cannot understand this overrating (more than Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds or joe johnston's The Rocketeer, for say just two examples of films MUCH BETTER than this).
in HTTM they wanted to to a hooligan comedy twisting with the masterpiece BACK TO THE FUTURE, but with no humor at all, just having bad taste in all they do. there are not plot. no sense in what the characters do. and they not follow any rule of a sci-fi movie.
sorry , if you watch the IMDb rate , you may think: "eh, it must be a GROUNDHOG DAY-alike" movie, an excellent sci-fi comedy, and role in it Crispin Glover, its a warranty and a winkle to the old classic", but you find more a stupid teen comedy much worst than UP THE CREEK.
would be great an IMDb rates made for people who really really love the movies (i don't counting in them), a kind of critics/film-journalists/script-writers/directors rating, perhaps this way it wouldn't happen that a garbage-film has a 7.2, much more rating than other movies that are completely CLASSICS.
in HTTM they wanted to to a hooligan comedy twisting with the masterpiece BACK TO THE FUTURE, but with no humor at all, just having bad taste in all they do. there are not plot. no sense in what the characters do. and they not follow any rule of a sci-fi movie.
sorry , if you watch the IMDb rate , you may think: "eh, it must be a GROUNDHOG DAY-alike" movie, an excellent sci-fi comedy, and role in it Crispin Glover, its a warranty and a winkle to the old classic", but you find more a stupid teen comedy much worst than UP THE CREEK.
would be great an IMDb rates made for people who really really love the movies (i don't counting in them), a kind of critics/film-journalists/script-writers/directors rating, perhaps this way it wouldn't happen that a garbage-film has a 7.2, much more rating than other movies that are completely CLASSICS.
I rented the movie in DVD cause i watched the very high IMDb rating (7,5 when im writing this), but i had a great disillusion watching it.
First, I do not like the religious-mystic way of the approach to death that movie shows, it is vain and futile. perhaps its cause i am not religious at all, i prefer other movies that talk about death taking other philosophic ways, not with mysticism or idea of eternity (Blade Runner, The Sea Inside, Beguin the Beguine, Hannah and her Sisters...).
And i see that people tend to talk this film as "sci-fi"... well i think its more a fantasy movie. (if you accept this is part of sci-fi genre, then you would have to call sci-fi Harry Potter films too...) But the film has good things too: for example, acting of Huhg Jackman and Rachel Weisz (i can say she is the Queen Isabel more beautiful that the movies showed us ever).
And there is a very irritating thing that some films as this one tend to do nowdays: the fact of show you, many times during the movie, little "flashbacks" of things that have happened or still not happen in the plot... but Don't MEAN ANYTHING AT ALL... i am talking about the fact of repeat the phrase "finish it" and mix images of the "past"(you know, the novel she wrote) and the present. well, it can be a good exercise of screenplay in a videoclip-way, but it don't contribute to the movie plot and say not anything to the audience at all... just shows to you , when you finish the watching, that those pieces didn't mean anything at all... the director was fooling you, and were, as the 80% of the film, completely vain and futile.
P.S.- a film that do not deserves to be watched several times, do not deserves to be watched any time.
First, I do not like the religious-mystic way of the approach to death that movie shows, it is vain and futile. perhaps its cause i am not religious at all, i prefer other movies that talk about death taking other philosophic ways, not with mysticism or idea of eternity (Blade Runner, The Sea Inside, Beguin the Beguine, Hannah and her Sisters...).
And i see that people tend to talk this film as "sci-fi"... well i think its more a fantasy movie. (if you accept this is part of sci-fi genre, then you would have to call sci-fi Harry Potter films too...) But the film has good things too: for example, acting of Huhg Jackman and Rachel Weisz (i can say she is the Queen Isabel more beautiful that the movies showed us ever).
And there is a very irritating thing that some films as this one tend to do nowdays: the fact of show you, many times during the movie, little "flashbacks" of things that have happened or still not happen in the plot... but Don't MEAN ANYTHING AT ALL... i am talking about the fact of repeat the phrase "finish it" and mix images of the "past"(you know, the novel she wrote) and the present. well, it can be a good exercise of screenplay in a videoclip-way, but it don't contribute to the movie plot and say not anything to the audience at all... just shows to you , when you finish the watching, that those pieces didn't mean anything at all... the director was fooling you, and were, as the 80% of the film, completely vain and futile.
P.S.- a film that do not deserves to be watched several times, do not deserves to be watched any time.