Christopher Nolan's "Interstellar" (2014) isn't just a science fiction film; it's a cinematic experience that transcends genre boundaries. It's a breathtaking exploration of humanity's yearning for survival, the profound power of love, and the awe-inspiring mysteries of the universe.
The film's greatest strength lies in its seamless blend of a deeply personal story with cutting-edge scientific concepts. We follow Joseph Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), a former pilot turned farmer, who is chosen to lead a mission to find a new home for humanity. The film doesn't shy away from complex scientific ideas like wormholes, black holes, and the theory of relativity, but it presents them in a way that is both accessible and captivating. The scene where Cooper encounters his aged daughter while he himself remains relatively young is a poignant example of how the film masterfully intertwines science and emotion, leaving viewers pondering the nature of time and the enduring power of familial bonds.
"Interstellar" is not for the casual viewer. It demands attention, patience, and a willingness to engage with complex ideas. The film's pacing is deliberate, its visuals are stunningly immersive, and its themes are profound. It's a film that rewards repeated viewings, as each watch unveils new layers of meaning and scientific detail. The film's impact is further amplified by Hans Zimmer's haunting score, which perfectly captures the vastness of space and the weight of humanity's fate.
Nolan's direction is masterful, creating a sense of awe and wonder that is both captivating and emotionally resonant. McConaughey delivers a nuanced performance as Cooper, a man grappling with the weight of his mission and the sacrifices he must make. The supporting cast, including Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, and Michael Caine, also deliver compelling performances that further elevate the film's emotional impact.
"Interstellar" is a film that stays with you long after the credits roll. It's a testament to the power of human ingenuity, the enduring nature of love, and the endless possibilities that lie beyond our planet. It's a film that reminds us of our place in the universe, and the profound interconnectedness of all things. For those who appreciate thought-provoking science fiction with a strong emotional core, "Interstellar" is an absolute must-see.

What a cracker!
So glad to finally tick 'Interstellar' off my theoretical list, took me far too long to get around to it but boy am I glad I finally have done - sensational film! The most obvious sign of that being the case is how the ~2hr30min run time goes by in an absolute flash... *insert joke about it like being aboard Endurance here*
I'm obviously not able to add anything new to what many, many others have already said gushingly about this 2014 flick, so I can only say I'm sure I agree with the vast majority of whatever praise this has received. As one would expect from Christopher Nolan & Co., it's incredibly well made, sounds amazing and looks out-of-this-world (ha!) stunning.
Matthew McConaughey puts in an incredible performance as lead, most notably nailing all of the emotion-filled scenes - not that I care about these things personally, but I'm shocked to see the lack of high accolades that came his way from this... he merited more! Aside from him, there are very good showings from the likes of Jessica Chastain, Mackenzie Foy and Anne Hathaway.
I will note one 'but', mind. I didn't love the bits at the end involving the dimensional tesseract, don't get me wrong at all it's still superb viewing... just a noticeable drop from all that preceeds it, which honestly simply says more about how outstanding everything else prior is really. I thought similarly about (the equally magnificent) 'Everything Everywhere All at Once', for example. In short: just a nit-pick, tbh.
All in all, phenomenal!

This mind-bending sci-fi masterpiece took me on an unforgettable journey through space and time. From its breathtaking visuals to the captivating performances, the film had me hooked from start to finish. I couldn't help but be inspired by its thought-provoking themes about love, sacrifice, and the boundless nature of human exploration. "Interstellar" truly left me in awe and is an absolute must-watch for any movie enthusiast.

As humanity faces an existential crisis, farmer "Cooper" (Matthew McConaughey) and his family are fighting a losing battle against an environment determined to destroy what is left of their corn crop. Mystery arrives after a sand storm leaves some magnetic clues to a secret location inhabited by NASA scientists led by "Brand" (Sir Michael Caine) who manage to convince former pilot "Coop" to join a mission to go into space and, using a recently detected wormhole that he believes may have been deliberately sent to help mankind rescue itself, set off to find another home for us all. Leaving a seriously narked daughter behind, he accepts the mission and together with the daughter of "Brand" (Anne Hathaway) their perilous trek begins. This is a more solid sci-fi adventure from Christopher Nolan. Though it features doses of his usual time bending scenarios, for the most part it is an exciting action film with mishaps a-plenty as their mission sees danger at just about every junction. There is a decent chemistry between Hathaway and McConaughey allowing the characters to develop with some depth that helps to draw us into to their efforts. The visual effects are superb, it has TARS - a rather clunkily designed robot that proves a whizz when running and rescuing, and the ending has something of the Escher drawing to it. The narrative can be thought provoking offering quite an interesting series of choices, especially when Matt Damon ("Mann") joins the story and begins to challenge their approach to just what "humanity" might actually be! A host of celebrated co-stars prop it up well. John Lithgow is effective as the patriarch of the family and Casey Affleck and Wes Bentley help diffuse the intensity of the principal relationship as the space-bound menace gradually accumulates. It's all but three hours long, and there is no denying that it hits a barren spell at times during the middle hour, but for my money this is a Nolan film that does not over-complicate itself and is as good a science fiction thriller as I've seen in many a year.

It opens my mind after I watched this movie. I have watched it twice to figure out everything on the movie. Basically, this is the movie talking about earth is not a good place to stay anymore. People have to go to space to find another homeland. It reminds me that we will be like them if we didn't care much on environment

I've got to say I have been wanting to watch this film for a while now and well it's 2021 and it's a Saturday morning and damn, safe to say this is one of the best films I have ever watched in my life. loved everything about It. The creativity and intelligence put into this film is just mind-blowing considering the fact it is a 2014 film. This clearly shows that mankind will one day achieve the most unexpected and unthought discoveries.
Love and respect to the director Christopher Nolan you are a legend.

I will not add another in depth review to the several I see here on this movie. Nor will I try to evaluate the accuracy of the science behind the plot. Apparently a physicist was involved who had veto power if the script wandered out of the realm of what is at least theoretically true or possible.
But I have never let inaccuracies get in the way of enjoying science fiction movies anyway, as long as the movie is entertaining and otherwise doesn’t insult my intelligence. In the movie Monsters, for example, I read that giant the aliens looking like octopuses could not have walked upright. Fair enough, but it is entertainment, not a documentary.
So the human story of Interstellar held my attention in spite of the length of the film, and despite the elaborate special effects, that story drove the movie and my appreciation of it. I have always liked good time travel movies as well, and theories of space and time come into play in Interstellar as well.
Oh, and I say it is entertainment rather than a documentary, but it is not light entertainment. If you want to give this movie a fair chance, give it your full attention. It is not Mars Attacks, where you can watch it while distracted by life and still pick up on plot details.

"Do not go gentle into that good night; Old age should burn and rave at close of day. Rage, rage against the dying of the light".
The story is about a team of explorers undertakes the most important mission in human history; traveling beyond this galaxy to discover whether mankind has a future among the stars.
Christopher Nolan once said that 2001: A Space Odyssey was his all time favorite film and how he wanted to do a small tribute to he's next film. And then comes a movie called "Interstellar" that will put a smile on Kubrick face if he was alive today, because Interstellar is one of the best movie of 2014 and the best movie experience I've had at the cinema.
I saw this movie in IMAX and all through out this film I felt like I was in space floating around with Mconaughey and Anne Hathaway. I had that feeling that I was going deep into space just like are main character's, going deep into space just like the viewing auditions and me.
The visual effect's in this movie are some of the most stunning, beautiful and Jaw dropping effect's I've seen since 2001: A Space Odyssey. The performances were brilliant, The cinematography was breathtaking and hard to look away. The directing by Christopher Nolan and let me get this out there, this man is a true director; he knows cinema and knows how to interested people into seeing he's films and I'm still shocked that he hasn't won an Oscar yet.
Now most people or critics have said that last third of this movie ruined the movie for them, but I actually like the ending to the movie. It's new for Nolan because he always ends on a deep and cold note, but this movie didn't and I didn't mind it.
My only nick pick with the movie is some of the character's in this movie wasn't all that interesting. Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway and Jessica Chastain are the only character's that to me were interesting and I cared for them, but the rest of the character's I didn't really care for.
Overall Interstellar is a mind-blowing movie with fantastic visual's, interesting story line and the movie will keep you interested till the end.

This might contain spoilers!
---
Interstellar is my favorite movie. I'm really into space and everything about it, so this movie was my cup of tea.
The soundtrack is the best of the movie. It points out flow of time, which is the most discussed issue in the movie. Special effects are breathtaking. Even with some small mistakes, it is pretty accurate and expectable. There is some visually pleasing cinematography too, including Saturn, the curvature of spacetime or majestic black hole, which is really satisfying. Some scenes are loud and thrilling, but some moments are so quiet, that you actually think, you are in space!
The movie is long but gripping. The plot, although it's complicated, is told easily and understandably. But the end of the movie is difficult to understand, since it contains time loop and time travel at the same time, but if you listen carefully, you will get it. I watched the movie 7 times and I still enjoy it!

Again hit produced by christopher nolan after batman.
Storyline is great and also the science theory is perfectly showcased.

That this movie, at the time of writing this, holds an 8.8 rating at IMDb is simply beyond my understanding. Needless to say I did not really like this movie. The story is not very good, the science is ludicrous and the visuals not all that impressive. Maybe the latter would be better in a big theater (I watched this on my home cinema system which has a relatively large screen by European standards) but I am not really sure about that either.
Be warned that the rest of this review might contain a spoiler or two.
The movie starts of with the usual “I told you so” wet dream of the green fanatics on a dying Earth so it is off to a depressing start right away. That is an overused concept today as far as I am concerned. Then they pour it on with a school official claiming that he Apollo missions and moon landings never happened. What the f…? If they wanted to depress the audience right from the start they succeeded, at least with this audience.
The story proceeds with our heroes finding these gravity waves in the sand and by a huge stretch of imagination decrypts them to mean coordinates which leads them to the secret NASA base. Once there Cooper is told that he is their best choice of pilot for a “save the human race” mission through a wormhole. Yeah, right! This guy was former NASA. His whereabouts could hardly been unknown to them. If he was their best choice why would they entrust a mission to save the human race to someone else until he stumbled onto their door? Typical Hollywood nonsense!
The movie is full of this kind of rubbish. Romilly wastes 23 years of his life doing pretty much nothing except deciding not to go into the sleep capsule. The supposedly highly trained and vetted professor that they do find turns out to be a psychopath as well as and idiot almost blowing up the ship when trying to proceed with a docking that all the systems tells him have not succeeded. Then they proceed to dock with the main ship and stop its spin as well as bring it out of orbit around a planet with the shuttles engines. That is one hell of a powerful shuttle not to mention the strength of the docking mechanism! This just goes on. When someone is not doing something illogical or stupid (or both) they sit around talking, philosophizing and dragging the movie forward at snails pace. 169 minutes is way too much for this movie.
The movie ends up in one big time travel mess (okay they do not travel in time, just sends messages through time but still…) during a bunch of psychedelic scenes while traveling through the back hole. Science? Not so much. And what about this totally ludicrous massively illogical and inefficient robot design?
The one good thing I can say about this movie is that the performance of most of the actors, especially Matthew McConaughey, are quite good. For the rest, not my cup of tea.

This was my most anticipated film of 2014, and I was not disappointed.
The story was slightly difficult to follow on the first watch, but that was to be expected in a film dealing with complicated fields such as astrophysics and time dilation. Many didn't find its overall message - that love is the most powerful force in the universe which transcends space and time - to be very appealing, but I thought it was an interesting take on special relativity and how two people can be bound by a common feeling, even when they're in different parts of the universe at different times. I also thought the acting was believable, for the most part, and I didn't think anyone was miscast. I enjoyed the surprise appearance from a certain famous actor about halfway through.
But what really blew me away were the visuals and the soundtrack. I believe it was Quentin Tarantino who once said movies and music go hand in hand; that a moving image complimented by the right piece of music can create art. Well, the visuals in this film, which took my breath away, and the score, which perfectly captured the 'feel' of the cosmos and all its wonder, proved him right. I think this was Hans Zimmer's best work yet, and although I'm not Christopher Nolan's biggest fan, I will continue to follow his work if he can pull off more movies like this.
My only regret was not seeing this film in IMAX.
10/10

"Man kind was born on earth, it was never meant to die here."
IT has been two days since I watched it and I still can't get it out of my head. I can safely say that it has been a long LONG time since a movie had this much effect on me after watching it. And the only thing I can think of now is to somehow Re-Watch it again.
This movie was surprisingly different from Christopher Nolan's recent works because they had been great cinematic entertainment pieces catered to a wider audience with a blockbuster approach, this certainly didn't felt like that and hence the polarizing response it got. It is an ambitious project that is not meant to merely entertain, walk into it knowing that. I'll say this though, If it works for you, you'll be in heaven.
The premise of the movie is that Earth is no longer capable of supporting humans on it, we must find a new home to avoid extinction. This scenario is told from a very personal perspective and not from a Global scale like some sort of apocalyptic catastrophe disaster film. At the core of the movie is the Father-Daughter relationship. The movie takes its sweet time to develop it too.
Mathew McConaughey, not surprisingly, gives an amazing performance as the main lead. He really carries the film, some scenes were very emotional due to his great performance. The rest of the cast does a great job as well, especially the Daughter played by Meckenzie Foy. The One character that I never expected to be great was the robot TARS. He also acted as the source of the humor in the movie, well executed, timely and grounded.
Interstellar tackles a lot of themes, Survival, Humankind, Love, Time etc, out of which 'Time' had the biggest impact on me. With relativity being a big part in the film, the whole sequence about it just struck me very deeply and I found new respect for Time. I'm actually at a loss of words to describe it. Also, there is a lot science in it so it can be confusing for many and in Nolan's tradition, it also has twists and mind numbing ending, where the more you think about it, the more numbing it gets.
The visuals of this movie are breathtaking. Great cinematography and CGI. The depiction of wormholes and blackholes and other space entities were the best I have ever seen. They just suck you into the movie. Along with that, you get to listen to one of Hans Zimmer's best scores. The score not only felt personal, going perfectly with the movie, but also different from his recent works. There were times where combination of epic photography and soundtrack made the scenes timeless, like I was completely sucked into it and didn't had a clue about my surroundings. I didn't want those scenes to end.
Alas, the movie was not perfect. My biggest gripe with it is that the pacing and editing was off at times. Some scenes dragged on while others were cut far shorter. The beautiful views of space could have definitely benefited from a few seconds longer onscreen time. Also, I wished there was more space exploration in it.
With all the remakes, rehashes, reboots and sequels we are getting in these times, it is great to see original gems like these. This movie is definitely one of this year's best, one of Nolan's best work and one of the best movie I have seen in recent years.
9.5/10

Another grandiloquent movie from Christoper Nolan.
The cast is good, and McConaughey performs a role made for himself. The photography is very nice but the movie commits all the same mistakes than previous Nolan's movies. I think mistakes but it may be that they are the points Nolan fans enjoy the most ...
* The story makes you believe it is a realy deeply thought plot but, in the end, it has so basic mistakes and stupidities that make it nonsensical.
* There is a general ambience of every moment being epic; deep, solemn and smart dialogues but, at some point our highly trained engineer and pilot behaves really stupidly.
* To keep the mentioned constant feeling of being in an epic moment, Nolan uses a thumping and insistent soundtrack. As it is not a moment, but a 3h movie, it is really tiresome.
All in all, the movie is OK but you can only think this is a great movie if you are a real Nolan fan.

People seem to think that if you enjoy a Christopher Nolan movie, you are a fanboy and the film couldn't really be that good. That is not true. He has never made a bad movie, Insomnia is probably his worst and it is still an excellent movie.
Interstellar is up there in his top 3, with The Dark Knight being number 1 and Inception in number 2. I don't think he will ever make a better movie than The Dark Knight, it is without a doubt a masterpiece of cinema in my opinion. It can be enjoyed on so many levels.
I remember seeing Interstellar in the movie theater and being on the edge of my seat the whole time. It was breathtaking but the end left me confused so i walked out disappointed.
Since then i have watched it many times but it only took a second viewing to realize what a great ending it is and here is why. How many people discuss the end, was the wormhole open or closed for him to make it to Brand, what happens next, is there a sequel. I discuss this with people who hate the movie and the debate will still last a good 30 minutes if not more without getting heated. It is a wonderful story told through the eyes of a genius film maker who deserves more than he receives, an oscar would be nice start.
I read hat his next movie is to be released in July 2017, I can't wait to find out everything about it like i have since he began.
If you're unsure about Christopher Nolan, watch his career from the beginning starting with Doodlebug.

Well, one off from two of this year's most expected movies alongside 'The Battle of Five Armies'. Like all the Chris Nolan fans, I was equally excited to see the movie on the opening day opening show. But I slightly disappointed that it was not a digital 3D film. I agree, this science-fiction was more dramatized than usual space travel stories does with an adventure-thriller. Almost a 3 hour long stretch movie did not waste much time to take us to the core of the story. Get prepared for this extremely rare voyage into the space with a logical explanation for everything you see on the screen. Well done research for the most matured and intelligent writing. All the credit must go to Nolan brothers. A good sign from Jonathan Nolan, who can make big in the entertainment industry in a future like his brother.
As we know many had liked 'Inception', to me that was a simple multi-layered action movie, that's all. But the same stuffs that used in this film makes sense. In fact, you have to have a little knowledge over how the universe works, so then it will be easy to catch the scene and situations while watching the movie. Totally like a documentary style concept, but with the additional stuffs like characters and its emotions add flavor that gives a movie look. An educational movie, though it also can work for those who wants just entertainment. Only the slow movie pace would test their patience.
It all begins like Shyamalan's 'Signs' movie with a family living surrounded by corn field. Then switches to 'The Astronaut Farmer' and going through 'Gravity', finally meets the 'Inception'. It was just a reference to call the movie setting that brings constant change for every half an hour. Like the opening scene and the end scene had over a 100 years difference.
As I earlier said it was the story of a family alongside the future of humankind and decoding universal mysteries through travelling in space and time. This movie would a reasonable for those who thought '2001: A Space Odyssey' is a boring piece, Cleverly written cinematic piece especially for science geeks. I don't know how perfect the movie to the actual present astrophysics, but will justify for the common people's capacity of understanding with an encourageable amount of commercial elements in it to entertain as well.
The first three quarters of the movie was well made. It puts me in a unblinkable position like a story was narrated by Brian Cox in a television series. Like I said, lots of astrophysics involved in it, but strangely human emotions were also exhibited equally that I never expected one from Nolan film. It was not an ordinary sentiment, but was strong enough to make a man cry for happy and sad situations in the movie. I liked science and emotion coming together. In fact, it saved the movie, otherwise it would have been a science documentary straight from NASA production through Nolan direction.
There are many surprise elements in the movie and of course there is a twist at the end. We can call it a series of twists like the layers. Compared to last quarter of the movie to the rest, it completely detaches which opens broadly to the different directions. And that happens so fast rushing towards the other end. Which give an impression of the movie 'Inception'. In a perfect way to say the first 75% was 'The Tree of Life' and the remains are 'Inception'.
‘‘This world's a treasure,
but it's been telling us to leave for a while now.’’
All the actors were so good. Matthew McConaughey steals the show as he dominates the majority of the screen space in the story presentation. There's no ruling out the fine performance executions from Anne Hathaway and the young star from the Twilight movie, Mackenzie Foy. The remaining cast was having less scope which were like the guest appearances that was widened a little broader, but was perfectly fitted for the story. Especially Matt Damon's was the crucial one.
Remember the movie 'Contact', a lovely movie, which was ruined by its fictional ending. Something like that happened in this film as well. The story was initiated with a realistic approach with actual scientific contents as per the present understanding about the universe. But the end was let me down with the layered contents that kind of impossible to agree with it. As a cinematic theme it worked, yeah, a good solution for this wonderfully written story. We know that the time can't run backwards, so that's the trouble.
Anyway, this movie defines in a new way, I mean scientifically the existence of ghost. It was not a horror movie, but I liked supernatural force that merged with this science fiction theme. That explains and gives vast ideas to expand our physics beyond something and somewhere yet to reach. Hats off to the director, because he was not thinking of making money here. His idea was to implement what the humans are understood so far about the cosmos. And he very nicely transformed those into the silver screen with the blend of human emotions. In my opinion, this will replace '2001: A Space Odyssey' for sometime till another one make this way.
I could have not asked a better space travel drama than this, especially when I heard Nolan doing a science-fiction I believed he gonna rock it. He was so true to the science and the human feelings in this film. If you had seen enough movies before like this one, you can recall your memories like the Tom Hanks parts from 'Cloud Atlas'. But still independently stands strong and falls in a never seen before category.
‘‘Maybe we've spent too long
trying to figure all this out with theory.’’
The end scene leaves a hint of a possible sequel. I would be happy if that happen in a near future, but definitely that would be a completely different cinema as per how this one ended. I know his fans want that to happen and so am I.
The visuals were not that great, but simply very good. To see those in digital 3D would have given us a different experience, sadly Nolan was not in favor of that technology. Hoping this movie would get as many as the Oscars nod. Especially not getting into the best motion picture shortlist would be a shame. Like I said I'm no one fan, I just love watching everyone's every movie. I would have went to see it again if it was converted into digital 3D, since I'm modern tech geek when it comes to the films.
It will become a talk of the week, perhaps month all over the world, so don't leave behind when your friends talk about it. What I gonna say is it is a must see asap if you are a movie fanatic like me otherwise Nolan movies does not need anyone's recommendation because his movies usually sell itself like the hot samosa.

If you had a whole collection of secret information why would you keep it all in one place and put it all on something as easily stolen as a ring? That's what's happened here only there are two rings and they contain all the details of the folks on the witness protection scheme. When they both fall into dangerously unscrupulous hands, and the body count starts to mount up, it falls to the lithe "Natalie" (Cameron Diaz), "Alex" (Lucy Liu) and "Dylan" (Drew Barrymore) to fly into action and save the day. Bill Murray decided to sit this one out, but luckily there's a "Jimmy Bosley" (Bernie Mac) there to keep them all co-ordinated and to hone in on their prime suspect. She's a former angel, herself, only this time "Madison" (Demi Moore) is not in a forgiving vein. It's all fairly standard action fayre that's largely the same as the last one from three years ago. There's a decent dynamic between the three women but the slo-motion action scenes, pyrotechnics and pretty banal dialogue don't really do it any favours as it lumbers along predictably. There's the usual soupçon of glittering faces to top it up, and a small slice of menace from both Robert Patrick and from the star of the film for me - Crispin Glover as the "Thin Man" or maybe that's "Thin Men". I still miss Kate Duncan's "Sabrina" and the more investigative nature of these mysteries. This is all just too blandly kick-ass and attitudinal for me providing nothing really new. It passes the time easily enough but you'll never remember it.

Not as good as the 1st. It was still pretty funny. The sexy trio's fight scenes were a little better in this one.

Charlie’s Angels Full Throttle fully accelerates whilst narratively stuck in second gear. Can I order a McG sandwich please? Huh? You have no filling? Sure, I’ll just take the overly stylised sauce. My personal adoration for this sequel’s predecessor is one that cannot be described fully without tackling the realms of lunacy and diminishing my own critical insight. It’s just a special piece of camp nostalgia for me, even if its construction is more amateurish than Diaz’ dance moves. Interestingly, this continuation was also on repeat as I galloped around the room to the soundtrack of The Prodigy and The Chemical Brothers, witnessing physically impossible aerobatic stunts. However, after all these years, it’s time to succumb to the realisation that Full Throttle is a bad film.
Much like the first feature, its plot is a secondary product to the outlandish femme fatale antics. This time the angels must secure two H.A.L.O. rings which probably has something to do with monetisation and greed. Don’t ask me! For I honestly do not know. A stationery Barrymore sliding fully under a low table without the use of her arms had me entranced. Liu leaping sixty feet into the air by just jumping off a table had me hypnotised. And of course, Diaz bopping to MC Hammer’s “U Can’t Touch This” had me salivating. These, including the last point (have you tried side stepping that rapidly!?), are physically impossible to perform.
The wired stunts and choreography are so exaggerated that it becomes laughably terrible, juxtaposing the semi-realistic narrative that McG is attempting to convey. Driving off a dam whilst trying to fly into a helicopter and take off (all in mid-air by the way...) before it crashes? Sure. Why not. Performing motocross stunts whilst upside down and shooting the angels? Eh. I’ll let it slide. Using a lace cape as a squirrel suit, throwing a bomb into a film premiere and perfectly landing in a car whilst being pursed by the angels who are hanging onto illuminated wires? Ummm. I guess. Being tossed through a shop window, like a rag doll, and walking it off before getting changed for the premiere? Now wait just a minute! Heightened stunts and ‘Matrix’-styled slow motion is all fine and dandy, but I need an ounce of realism in order to feel threatened by the danger on screen. The angels are invulnerable to everything, making the entire ordeal worthless.
Yes, using a flamethrower to “Firestarter” is bonafide brilliance and shaped me to be the man that I am today. Yet the random action set pieces (to which there are loads!) cannot justify the narrative’s direction. Again, frustrating considering the onscreen chemistry of Diaz, Barrymore and Liu. The one and only Demi Moore is used for an underdeveloped plot twist, as she suggestively licks Diaz’ face. Oh, and Bernie Mac replaced Murray. A fine replacement, but again, under-utilised. Let’s not even discuss Theroux’s insulting Irish accent. The technical aspects, especially the garish green screen and floaty human CGI, unintentionally adds characteristics to the film in general, yet still executed terribly. And the callback “humour”, mostly consisting of the “creepy thin man” and the angels’ relationship, were cringeworthy at best. Although, the ongoing innuendos between Alex and her father did make me chuckle continuously.
Is it enough to substantiate a sequel that showcases the apparent curse of “more is better”? Absolutely not. Whilst the heart of Charlie’s Angels resides within, its discombobulated exterior diminished most of the heavenly fun to be had.

Really poor sequel that has outlandish action scenes and lame jokes. If there's such a thing as a movie that epitomizes the early 2000s, this is it. Maybe it's my older age, but the T&A aspect holds little weight anymore. **1.75/5**

**This movie makes the 2007 Hitman movie look like a freaking masterpiece**. The source material is thrown completely out of the window. The story is now about super-powered Terminator-like assassins and some woman trying to find her father. The methodical stealth game is turned into a brainless action movie with no originality or stakes. Fans of action movies are going to fall asleep. Fans of the game are going to hate it. **Just watch the 2007 Hitman**. It is a bit more respectful of the source material, it's more fun and it's even somewhat smart in places.

I know, I know, this movie is rather superficial and simple. More effort has been spent on cool action than on depth of the story. Well, you know what? I do not care! I quite liked this movie. Agent 47 is cool and kicks ass. The bad guys gets plenty of ass whooping. The action is good. There is quite a lot of high tech and gadgets. What is there not to like?
The movie starts of with a quite cool sequence introducing Agent 47. I have to say that I got into quite a bit of “wow” mode right a way there. The movie continues with plenty of action sequences with just a wee bit of slowdown in between. Actually the first-half, at least, of the movie is pretty much one long chase.
Perhaps I should point out that I have not played Hitman and do not really know what the original story is about. From a lot of the comments I have read it appears That this might be to my advantage when it comes to enjoying the movie.
Some people are probably complaining about bad acting since Agent 47 do not really show much in terms of facial expressions or emotions. Well, news for you, he is not supposed to! He is supposed to be a cold emotionless killing machine so stop whining. Personally I found Agent 47 to be an excellent character. the re is on scene in particular that I liked where Agent 47 intentionally allows himself to be caught in a embassy. Once inside he, to no one in the audience surprise starts to tear the place apart. You have to see it to know what I mean.
The second part, or perhaps just the last third, of the movie turns into more of a search and destroy for Agent 47 and his new “partner”. this part is of course as action filled as the first part of the movie. Naturally it all leads to a big show down between the Agent 47 & Co. The end itself did not really deliver any surprises but was satisfying.
The one thing in the movie that annoyed me was this subdermal armor stuff. The idea was not a too bad one but they really overplayed it. Come on! Just shoot him in the head or an eye or some other “sensitive” part for Christ sake. Bulletproof my arse!
I honestly do not understand the low rating this movie has received. 5.7 at IMDb is really a bit harsh. Rotten Tomatoes rating is, not very surprisingly, abysmal. Rotten Tomatoes and their “critics” ratings must be the worst of any ratings site. When these dickwads rate down a movie, that’s when I start to get interested. First step is to drill down into the real audience ratings which more often that not gives a different picture.
Any way I digress. Bottom line is that, for me, this is a simple, straightforward, high octane action movie and I quite enjoyed it.

> A complete action pack, with not so popular actors.
This is the second version, or we could say the reboot after the 2007 film did not receive well. This should have been a franchisee with at least 3-4 films by now. It's very clear that something is not working out for it. As for this film, there are several issues. But fairly did at the box office, which is poor for an action film like this. From the director who had never worked on any project before and the writers with good experiences.
The money was well spent, the production quality was so good, then what is the trouble? Well, my first point out is the casting. Preferably someone top star who can pull the crowd into the cinema halls. Perhaps Jason Statham would have been a better choice, after Paul Walter's death who was suppose to play the lead. I'm not denying, but Rupert Friend was very good in the replace. But my point is there's no star value in this project, especially for the foreign markets, these lead stars are the strangers.
The other drawbacks are, this film rated R, which is utterly pointless. Because there are no kisses, no sexy outfits, or drugs consumption, but only violence and gore which are mostly CGI works. Could you believe what the films are turned out to be nowadays. LOL. Though, I enjoyed the action sequences, so I can't thumb down and it does not enough to me to thumb up as well. Decent story with a speedy narration. Definitely an average film. Never seen Singapore better than in this film before. You could watch it for the time-pass and for the stunts, or in a situation when there are no other options available.
6/10

"Honey, I Shrunk the Kids" employs a large quota of traditional values which many people still unashamedly cherish and use as the corner stone in the foundation of their lives: Children, family, and friends. Of course, the children must always be the most important people in your life and they make everything worthwhile even though they often misbehave and are unappreciative and downright ungrateful at times. Unfortunately such rapidly outdated sentiments as these will undoubtedly ring hollow for many people, but in any case the miniaturised children in jeopardy here are the main focus - the backyard itself has never looked so daunting before - and their adventures are filled with varying degrees of action and danger and fun making this a solid slice of family entertainment which showcases the forementioned traditional values to illustrate what we would like life to be, so it is a shame the reality we see around us each day is completely different.

Rick Moranis is the geeky scientist working on a means by which he can shrink matter. Using a complex series of gadgets and a laser - he is confident the his Eureka moment is close when... a baseball shatters a window, activates his equipment and suddenly his children and those of the family next door have essentially disappeared! Where can they have gone? Well we all know that they are now playing a dangerous game with the tiniest of creatures that would normally go unnoticed. "Giant" ants and beetles... Meantime, dad "Szalinski" realises just what has happened and sets up some rather fanciful experiments to try and find their diminutive families before they starve, are eaten or just get trodden on! The events on the adult side are all a bit unremarkable, but there are some fun escapades as the youngsters have to take refuge in a discarded Lego brick whilst fending off the new giants of the lawn! A sort of "Lost World" environment where sticks, stones and their own ingenuity are their only defence. I aways like films where man is pitched against nature without the advantages of weapons - it makes me realise just how incompetent we are at feeding and defending ourselves. For me, that's where much of the humour comes from here rather than the over-scripted dialogue. The kids' acting is fine, there's even a little hint of romance as they try desperately to get back home and attract the attention of their folks. Nope, there's no jeopardy and it's got sequel written all over the last half hour, but it's enjoyable enough in a predicable sort of fashion with some decent visual effects and daft antics with a lawn mower and a washing line!

Well, it didn't age well. At least not the special effects. But, they were more practical than digital and that makes a difference. You get the feeling that the people are actually there when the effects are practical and not digital, and you don't have that sensation that you are watching other people play a video game like you do with a lot of the digital effects heavy movies these days.
It's just, the practical effects weren't that great and kind of cheap, even in 89, because they figured... kid movie.
However, it's still more Family Movie than Kid Movie. It has enough in the way of adventure and fun to appeal to all age groups, and it knows how to keep things clean without dumbing them down... and that is something that a lot of family films do NOT know how to do.
It has enough where, the only people that don't like it are the people that need everything deadly serious, and they aren't going to like much

Very well made, up until that ending anyway.
It's not a bad conclusion, but man is it cringe-inducing. It seems they were going for an end to match 'A Few Good Men', which was also written by Aaron Sorkin of course. From the overly uplifting score, to the slow clap, to the freeze-frame. Per Esquire, the scene is not even how it went down IRL either. I'm all for 'Hollywood endings', just less of the cheese please.
The rest of 'The Trial of the Chicago 7' is, though, very good. Sacha Baron Cohen (Abbie) is the greatest performer, the role is mostly comedic - which he nails - but even in the more serious moments he is terrific. Jeremy Strong (Jerry) is notable alongside him, also. Eddie Redmayne, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Frank Langella, Mark Rylance and Joseph Gordon-Levitt merit props, too.
I did enjoy how it portrays the (true) story, one that is very interesting no doubt. Overall, I had a pleasant time watching this - though I'd rate it a tad higher if not for that (not negative, just a bit lame) ending.

It is important for a film to say what it wants to say correctly and to somehow overcome its claim. "The Trial of the Chicago 7" is one of these films. A coherent narrative with a perfectly acceptable script and no extra glamor. Adapting in cinema has always been a difficult task, whether from another literary work or a real event. The film also manages to make this historical adaptation and not only shows the details well, which gives it a new spirit with the art of cinema, so that it has the necessary impact on the audience. An important point is that the film is successful in creating a feeling and does not seek to hide its weaknesses by crowding the film by using unnecessary Techniques or tricks. Throughout the film, we see a variety of emotional atmospheres that are sometimes very lively and sometimes very calm and quiet. The director, however, has been able to create emotion both in crowded spaces and in the silences, that sometimes take the audience to a deeper layer of the movie. The actors in the film are all acceptable, However, some of them do not become characters in the script, and in the meantime, “Langella” acting as the judge and “Sacha Baron Cohen” as Abbie was better than others. “Sorkin” has once again shown that he has an acceptable ability in screenwriting, and this time he has performed well in directing too. “The Trial of the Chicago 7” is a compact movie that works to the best of its ability And it tries to get closer to the form, though it cannot be said that it has done it completely, but in some places it gets close to the form. It should be noted that the film is very successful in its purpose and the use of old images and videos helps to convey this purpose to the viewer. What this film has done, that is, create a sense of criticism and sometimes hatred for a corrupt system, is something that not every film can easily do. In general, “The Trial of the Chicago 7” is a good movie that will be alive for a long time and anyone of any age and period can communicate with it.

Sacha Baron Cohen has now delivered my 2 favourite & memorable characters of the year in the same fortnight.
This movie is a strange incongruence. It inspired/engaged/enraged me at the same time as it made me feel flat. It could have been longer (the time flew by) and drawn out the characters more, but I felt that it had said what it needed to say. And the melodrama felt just above where it needed to be. Having said that, the editing is top notch and the performances are at least "on par", if not outstanding (Baron Cohen, Abdul-Mateen II, Rylance and Langela).
And regarding the Direction - its not perfect, it likely would have been better done in the hands of a master. But if this was my second film, I would be f$%^ing stoked.
Watch this movie.

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
Aaron Sorkin has been around for quite some time. A Few Good Men, Moneyball, Steve Jobs, and arguably one of the best movies of the last decade, The Social Network, all have one thing in common: Sorkin as a screenwriter, but not as the director. Molly's Game was Sorkin's directorial debut, which makes The Trial of the Chicago 7 only his second time in the director's chair. I've either loved or liked every film from him, so obviously, my expectations were already high enough solely due to his presence. However, with the announcement of such a stellar cast, it's impossible not to expect one of the best movies of the year to come out of this project...
Expectations fulfilled. This is, in fact, one of 2020's very best films, without the shadow of a doubt. Based on real events, the movie quickly jumps to the main point of action: the trial. Only twenty minutes in, the viewer is already inside the famous courtroom where the expected and the unexpected occur simultaneously. Sorkin's employs a narrative structure that keeps me captivated until the final credits start to roll. The actions that led to this court case are demonstrated throughout the same instead of being shown through a linear timeline, which would reduce the trial's value. It's the main reason why such a simple premise turns into a phenomenal adaptation of the historical event.
I couldn't take my eyes off-screen for a single second or lose one of the many incredible dialogues. Every conversation, every argument, every objection, overrule, or "motion denied" is transmitted to the viewer in an exceptionally captivating manner. It's one of those movies where the "action" belongs to words instead of fists. I felt tremendously invested in the trial. It never loses a gram of interest, it's full-on exciting all the time. I desperately wanted to find out the result of the case (I didn't possess knowledge of the real story, but I'll address this further down). I really wanted to witness the events that put the defendants in their respective positions. I strongly desired to see the end of the situation.
As soon as the film ends, I felt the urge to immediately research everything about the true story. I spent close to forty-five minutes reading many articles about the 1968 Democratic National Convention, the riots, the presidential nominees... everything. This is one of the most important criteria I have to define how successful a historical flick truly is: how much does it compel me to research everything about it. The Trial of the Chicago 7 convinces me to study the real events with significant impact. From what I've read, Sorkin changes a few details timeline-wise (something pretty common in this type of movie), but overall, it's a pretty accurate, realistic adaptation.
Technically, every component is remarkable, as expected from a Netflix-Sorkin partnership. However, the score plays a special part since its volume in crescendo elevates several escalating situations, leaving me at the edge of my couch, biting my nails. It's a fantastic achievement from Daniel Pemberton, who also scored Birds of Prey and Enola Holmes this year. Additionally, this might not be a one-location film, but Sorkin keeps the camera so focused on the courtroom that it feels like the audience is stuck in there with the defendants.
Besides Sorkin's screenplay, the cast obviously plays a massive role. Just like I mentioned above, this is a movie where the "action" is played out through words. Inside the courtroom, there are constant arguments, countless contempts of court, a voir dire (it doesn't hurt to google courtroom terminology before the film), and so much more that leads the judge to make questionable decisions based on shocking evidence. Every actor is absolutely outstanding, I was able to feel everything during that trial, but I do have four standouts.
Sacha Baron Cohen (Abbie Hoffman) shares the laugh spotlight with Jeremy Strong (Jerry Rubin), but he ends up being the ultimate comic relief. His delivery and timing are pure gold. I can't deny that I was surprised by his performance since I've only seen him in Borat. He's extremely funny, but don't be mistaken by my words: Abbie proves to be one of the most essential defendants in the trial, offering a memorable testimony and demonstrating his real purpose. Eddie Redmayne brings his Oscar-winner face to the game by interpreting Tom Hayden. A vital character that lets the viewer know that while they might not all be completely guilty, they're not all exactly innocent as well. Hayden's final speech is one of Redmayne's best scenes of his career.
Mark Rylance plays the role of the public, portraying the defendants' lawyer, William Kunstler. He shares the viewer's frustration with the judge's decisions but never gives up, trying to bring justice to the case. If I had to bet on an actor to get awards buzz by the end of the year, it would be Rylance due to his powerful display. My last standout is Frank Langella as the judge Julius Hoffman. I believe a lot of people will give credit to every actor for portraying characters they love, but most will forget the actor that interprets the character everyone hates. Langella deserves all of the praise in the world for making me despise completely such an unfair, racist, unqualified judge. His performance is simply extraordinary.
These are my four standouts, but the entire cast is phenomenal. I'm a bit disappointed that I didn't get to see more from Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (Bobby Seale), but after researching Bobby's involvement in this story, I understand his lack of relevance to the main narrative. He plays more of a modern parallel to the 60s in the sense that the judge heavily discriminates against him during the trial, transmitting a message that humanity's behavior may have evolved regarding racism, but there's still a long way to go. A final shoutout to Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who is also excellent as Richard Schultz.
I only have one issue. In terms of entertainment, the viewer entering the main stage after only twenty minutes is a bold yet efficient move. However, the introduction to the characters and the story itself goes by so fast that I could only understand who's who and their purpose during the trial. Sorkin assumes people know everything about who these characters are, what they did, and where the narrative is driving towards, skipping through dozens of details that (mostly) non-American audiences will struggle to understand in time. Sorkin could have given these characters more depth initially, offering the viewer time to get familiar with their names and organizations.
All in all, The Trial of the Chicago 7 is undoubtedly one of the best movies of the year, probably the best at the date of this review. Aaron Sorkin's narrative structure and the brilliant cast are the two main reasons why this film succeeds so well. Sorkin's screenplay is organized in a way that keeps the viewer astonishingly captivated throughout the entire runtime by following a nonlinear structure. Maintaining the focus on a single location is an exceptional decision for a movie where words are the action of the story. Inside the courtroom is where every fascinating argument ensues, never losing steam until the very end. It's also a lot funnier than I expected. Regarding the cast, Sacha Baron Cohen, Mark Rylance, Eddie Redmayne, and Frank Langella are my standouts, but every actor delivers outstanding performances. Daniel Pemberton's score shines in an overall very well-produced film. The first twenty minutes fly by in favor of entertainment by quickly placing the viewer inside the courtroom, but it's so rushed that it makes it difficult for the audience to remember everyone's names and purposes. Assuming everyone knows the true story and the people involved is a risky move, especially for non-Americans. Nevertheless, this minor issue doesn't affect an otherwise flawless movie. Obviously, I strongly recommend it! Maybe reading a bit about the real events beforehand will help the eventual viewing, but don't read too much due to the usual spoilers.
Rating: A