3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
I don't know what to say, but I'll try...
15 October 2015
Wow. If this is the level of comedy that people are watching these days, then I must really be missing something, because I can't point out a single point throughout the run-time of this show when I even cracked a smile.

Seth Meyers had a fun role on SNL. Doing the same thing over and over again there was part of the SNL culture. But a late night show requires dynamism and character, an improvisational feel, humor... This is by far the worst late night show put together. It is indeed a mystery to me how this has been airing for so long... I really wonder how much the channel pays entertainment news sources not to talk about how unfunny and uninteresting this show is.

When Seth Meyers' own brother is one of the most repeat visit guests, it tells me one thing: even the celebrities and their agents don't want them to air on this show to relieve them from the tedious and embarrassing nature of it. I mean seriously, the last episode I watched had a 5 minute discussion between him and his brother about how useless twitter is. We know twitter is useless. The people who use it know it's useless. It's a boring subject, and so is every. other. subject. on. this. show. I feel like the target audience of this show is hospital patients, as if they weren't already going through enough.

It's painful to watch this series. It makes me hurt on the inside because I feel like I'm wasting valuable minutes on completely pointless conversation. I really don't know how so many unfunny people managed to find each other to collaborate on this wasted effort. Worse yet, it's airing internationally! Everyone I talk to about this show is as upset about it as I am. Why aren't viewer ratings being considered? Please, if you value comedy, end your careers and free air-time for something that isn't thoroughly boring.
59 out of 90 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Moon (2009)
What a disappointment...
7 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I mean wow, reading all these positive reviews, one would watch this movie thinking that they're about to experience a new sci-fi concept that's astoundingly original, but this film is far from original or even in the slightest bit interesting. The lead character, and only character, develops sporadically in the eyes of the viewer. You never really get a sense of who this person is, hence you never really relate to him.

I'm going to spoil it all below because honestly I think it's better you read a 2 minute summary, rather than a bunch of reviews, which could potentially save you another 90.

The movie begins with an introduction to this Sam Bell character, along with poor CGI animation of rovers on the moon harvesting some scientifically unsound energy. He's gone nuts from 3 years of isolation, goes out in a rover to fix a problem with a machine, starts hallucinating, and ends up crashing. In the meantime, the base produces a new Sam from a chamber of clones it has in its basement. Apparently the clones only live 3 years, so by the end of them, the first Sam we met was already slowly dying and losing his mind. The new Sam finds his new surroundings suspicious upon waking and goes off to find out what happened at the crash site, only to find a clone of himself in the wreckage.

Clones. He has been being cloned for 15 years in 3 year intervals, go figure. It turns out he wasn't imagining a counterpart, which is what the director was trying to portray (so poorly it wasn't at all a surprise that he wasn't imagining him). All the while, a robot, and not just any robot, but a robot programmed to run an entire moon base, allows its human captive clone to do whatever he pleases, without at all getting in the way, and even later facilitating his cover-up and eventual escape to Earth, which would be illogical since whatever device projected out of the base would reach the company that cloned him back on Earth...

So the people who put the guy on the moon base didn't think of programming the robot to do what the company would want in all circumstances. The whole story is just absurdly constructed with several loopholes and questions left looming around. Many scenes either linger too long, or are cut short by a strange fade out. The soundtrack is just plain cheesy rubbish. It's movie ratings on IMDb that are this high for bad movies that have made me trust public opinion less and less...

In short, don't waste your time, watch Interstellar instead, at least it had CGI budget.
7 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Who Am I (2014)
Cheesy, Been Done Better Elsewhere
24 September 2015
When I put this movie on, I had high expectations, however, for me, this film was a German equivalent of a low budget Hollywood movie, where the little money available was squandered on a special effects title sequence, and little effort was placed into writing a compelling story.

If you've seen the first season of the series Mr. Robot, then you've already seen a very similar storyline, only done many times better. The difference here is that so many plot twists arise at the end that you just don't know what to do with them all.

The film constantly dips its toes into the cheesy waters of washed up humor and thriller climaxes. At some point you're just laughing at how cheesy it is.

Me being an English speaker reading the sometimes illegible English subtitles (come on guys, get someone to take another look at them!), I found it extremely difficult to follow the dialogue on the train scenes (which was the only truly creative environment made for this movie), and I think this is the fault of the sound engineer / designer. The soundtrack is also quite poor, jumping sporadically between cinematic sci-fi arpeggiators and tech / tech-house party scenes, both lacking in creativity.

I find it great that directors are looking for topics about the deep web and underground hacker scene, but I think we've seen enough psycho-thriller hacking movies to know that what we need in a hacker movie is a character who's strong with a meaningful purpose whose story is truly compelling. Enough with the personality and psychological disorders, bring a fresh character who knows saving the world isn't what he/she is really doing.

The bottom line is: I wanted to like this movie because the theme interests me greatly, but I didn't really, mostly because of déjà vu, but also because of the overall weakness of dialogue, soundtrack, and characters.

I gave the movie a 4 because it did managed to get some chuckles out of us, but it was a general consensus with friends that this was not a good movie.
20 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

Recently Viewed