***One of the greatest films ever made***
The original "Apocalypse Now" is an awe-inspiring masterpiece and is my all-time favorite film. Memorable scenes abound, starting with the mind-blowing opening with Willard (Martin Sheen) having a mental breakdown in his sweltering Saigon hotel room to the tune of The Doors' "The End."
Speaking of Sheen, people overlook the fact that he expertly carries the film. His haunting commentary is one of the most effective narrations in cinematic history and hooks the viewer into the nightmare-adventure.
I could go on and on about the noteworthy scenes, but I'll resist, except to comment on Col. Kurtz: Was he really insane or actually a bold genius? General Corman informs Willard: "He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And he is still in the field commanding troops." And, yet, Kurtz was accomplishing what the US military couldn't or wouldn't do because of political complications and niceties. I bring this up because, as I've aged, I've come to see that I'M Kurtz in some ways -- operating "out there" beyond the parameters and restrictions typically linked to my work.
The script was written by John Milius with alterations by Coppola as he shot the film whilst the narration was written by Michael Herr. The meaning of the story is obvious: The trip up the river led by Capt. Willard exposes him to two extreme viewpoints of war represented by the two colonels he encounters on his long journey, both of whose names start with 'K,' which is no accident:
Lt. COL. KILGORE (Duvall) is a romantic who embraces war as a lifestyle and even feeds off it, i.e. glorifies it. The fact that he's a romantic can be observed in the air-raid on the village where he literally plays Wagner as a prologue. He feeds off the war to the extent that he "loves the smell of napalm in the morning." War is just another day to him so why not go surfing? Since he lives off of the war there's no way it can kill him or even give him a scratch. Kilgore naturally has the support of the top brass because he's part of the system and plays the game of war.
COL. KURTZ (Brando), by contrast, sees through this hypocrisy. He realizes that being in a state of war is humanity gone mad. It's living horror and therefore must be ended through the quickest means possible at whatever cost. He refuses to play the game of war as he expertly takes out double agents, etc. Of course the brass can't have this so they put out a hit on Kurtz via Willard. The existential Kurtz becomes increasingly disillusioned -- even crazy -- after jumping ship from the system and now has no sanctuary. Death is the only way out. His consolation is that Willard will tell his son the truth.
The "Redux" version was put together by Coppola and released in 2001 with the addition of 49 minutes of material that he originally cut, not to mention placing Clean's surfing scene later in the story.
Coppola made the right decisions with his original 1979 edit of the film (2 hours, 33 minutes) since the extra footage of "Redux" tends to drag the film down with 1 or 2 scenes being dubiously scripted, e.g. the theft of Kilgore's surf board. Not every idea that is birthed during the creative process is worthy of the final product and "Redux" illustrates this. Thus the new footage of "Redux" should've arguably been relegated to the "deleted scenes" section.
That said, I've warmed up to "Redux" and feel it's a worthy version of the film, but only _if_ you've watched the Theatrical Cut and **want more**. "Redux" successfully fleshes out the characters and gives them more dimension, especially Willard and Kurtz. Plus the sequence involving Kurtz reading a couple of TIME magazine articles illustrates beyond any shadow of doubt that he _wasn't_ insane and that the brass simply slandered him as crazy in order to justify the assassination of a decorated American officer.
Coppola's preferred cut of the film is the "Final Cut," released in 2019, which runs a half hour longer than the Theatrical Cut. In other words, it trims the fat off of "Redux." There's also a "First Assembly" version, a bootleg, that runs 4 hours, 49 minutes.
The film was shot in the Philippines.
GRADE: A+

I think a lot of people who think this film is a classic are deranged, the only memorable scene in the film is when they drop exploding napalm and the guy in the hat says "I love the smell of napalm in the morning", the rest of the film is a completely boring bombshell and it's like the film was high on drugs as there's this one part where people are butchering a cow in the most grotesque way possible... poor cow, now I'm offended by this film.
This film is just weird, the characters are not memorable at all not even Marlon Brando's character, the story is non-existent and the ending just sucks. Overall this film is absolutely terrible and I don't care what others think, I did not enjoy this film at all.

**Ponderous, meandering epic with a few bright spots.**
This film is about a soldiers quest to find a renegade and insane Colonel (a bald Brando in an extended cameo) who has hidden himself away in the depths of the jungle and is causing all manner of commotion. Quite what it was - I can't remember, but it _was_ important enough to go down stream in search of him.
Sheen's character decides to head down river with his fellow soldiers and seek out the bald lunatic before its too late. Robert Duvall is hilarious as a war immune soldier - especially when a shell explodes near him and he merely gives it a disinterested glance. Amusing!
On the whole, though, this is a ponderous trip - the film seems to meander aimlessly with little to keep this viewer interested.
- Ian Beale

Now this is a much better outing for our IMF pals - much sharper pace and direction than the meandering "Ghost Protocol". This one sees "Ethan" (Tom Cruise) with "Luther" (Ving Rhames) and the still frequently irritating Simon Pegg ("Benji") having to track down some plutonium balls after an earlier mission went a bit awry, and before lunatic ecologist Sean Harris ("Solomon Lane") commits an atrocity to end all atrocities in the name of creating a new world order! The first twenty minutes are poor; predictable and formulaic and I will admit to having started to write it off, Once Henry Cavill ("August Walker") joins the gang, however, and they start to search for the missing cores it becomes fast-moving, action-packed and enjoyable - with plenty of crosses and double-crosses. Rebecca Ferguson still always comes across the same, whomever she plays, but that works for this one and the team spirit really comes across. Sure, it isn't going to win a Booker for the writing, but it travels the world showing off some fine locations (many of which are actually left intact, afterwards!!) before heading to an exciting denouement with helicopters and Cruise's favourite mountain-top pinnacle combat. All good stuff.

They just keep getting better, but they never get good.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

Movie was good but its not better than ghost protocol.

I have to say I have not been a great fan of the Mission Impossible movies. Sure, there’s plenty of action and cool stunts but I do not feel they follow the spirit of the TV-show. In the TV-show they got their mission and then they completed it, tricking the bad guys, with the full backing of the IMF team. No political bullshit, betrayal of the team and such like nonsense.
However, in pretty much every movie Ethan or the entire IMF team was betrayed or set up and he had to, not only complete his mission but, clear IMF from whatever shenanigans the story writers had dreamed up. The movies have been Mission Impossible in name only. I wonder if the moron script writers has ever watched the show.
In this movie too there is indeed a bunch of political nonsense and betrayal. Shit that I could be without. But at least IMF and Ethan’s team are on his side throughout the movie. There are also a few clever parts where they trick the bad guys in a good old fashioned Mission Impossible style.
Otherwise the movie is mostly a classical Hollywood action adventure/thriller movie. Plenty of, more or less, non stop action. There are a few of the usual WTF story holes and defiance of physics when it comes to the stunts of course. The dumbass CIA director was a completely unnecessary element though.
Still, overall I found this installment in the franchise to be one of the better ones. Maybe even the best one yet.

Excellent story line with tremendous stunts by Tom Cruise himself. This movie is worth every penny that you spend.

Mission Impossible - Fallout is a continuation of Mission Impossible - Rogue Nation. It is directed by Christopher McQuarrie who also directed Rogue Nation and also has the return of the psycho villain Solomon Lane (Sean Harris) who the bad guys want to set free.
Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is after the mysterious John Lark and a terrorist group called the Apostles who have stolen three plutonium grade devices and plan to set them off.
Hunt has to reluctantly accept a new team member. CIA operative August Walker (Henry Cavill) because the IMF team were responsible for losing the plutonium in Berlin.
As a spy thriller there is enough tension, thrills and a serpentine story with several twists.
However the film is overlong and I felt that some of the action scenes consisted of myriad chase scenes that were stylishly done but nothing really memorable liked the Burj Khalifa climbing scene.

Some things age like fine wine and in the cinematic world the ‘Mission: Impossible’ franchise is a great example of the adage. Perhaps it has to do with the 56-year-old Tom Cruise who defies age and pushes his physical boundaries for our viewing pleasure? The answer is quite evident in ‘Fallout’ as his Ethan Hunt is as good as a caped superhero in the sixth film of the series. The story isn't all that new with its twists and turns. But ‘Fallout’ manages to build on the previous films in the series by bringing back old friends and foes, besides adding some new ones. Henry Cavill as August Walker fits right into this universe as the hammer to the scalpel that is Ethan Hunt. His presence is looming enough to fill the entire screen whenever he appears. Simon Pegg takes on the status of a series regular alongside Ving Rhames, whose Benji and Luther respectively play more than just mere sidekicks as they add comic levity and heart. Alec Baldwin and Angela Bassett also make a mark in their brief appearances but watch out for impactful turns by Rebecca Ferguson and Michelle Monaghan along the way.
Writer & Director Christopher McQuarrie allows each character to shine while building on their history with each other, thus making them endearing to the audience. This only serves to up the ante when they’re in danger. McQuarrie also lets the story breathe by bringing some calm before the storm hits. Which leads to the most crucial aspect of the series, and one that McQuarrie clearly excels at in this film – the action sequences. Not only are they meticulously planned; they are executed with precision, even when the fist fights are gritty and gruesome. Rob Hardy beautifully choreographs the camerawork following these intricate set-pieces, either allowing you to take in the expanse or bringing you up close and personal when required. This is paired with a soundtrack by Lorne Balfe that lends to the tension by giving the iconic ‘Mission Impossible’ theme a sinister sense of urgency.
McQuarrie has now directed two ‘Mission: Impossible’ films; his understanding of the franchise and its characters proves to be the secret weapon of the series. The fact that the stunts are largely done with practical effects featuring the cast, and most prominently Cruise himself, sets a whole new standard for action films. ‘Mission: Impossible – Fallout’ is a great mix of plot, pacing and performances that is undeniably the best entry in the franchise, while it re-establishes Cruise’s status as an action superstar.
Review by Times of India (TOI)
Final Rating - 4.0/5

I just watched this, Sep 24, two years after its release.
I actually liked it much better than the rest of the woky crap they have been putting out ever since this one.
I do not known why I keep watching this MCU stuff, I guess I am a worm and I deserve it xD.

It was an ok movie. Just hard for me to get into. The movie is just to hard to fathom as a real possibility. With their powers it's dumb they only can fight the machine things.

The Eternals have lived on Earth for 7,000 years. That’s a long time, but their movie somehow manages to feel even longer than that. Now, if the Eternals predate the Avengers by a few millennia, and have been actively and openly involved in various periods of human history, where where they during the events of the last two Avengers movies?
Since those (mis)adventures had nothing to do with “Deviants”, the Eternals presumably couldn't be bothered to lift a finger. If that’s the case, why did they stay on Earth so long after the Deviants had supposedly been eradicated?
And if the Deviants are at least as old as the Eternals, why are they called after a word in a language that wasn't going to exist until eons later? This question actually has an answer, albeit a nonsensical one: as far as I can discern English is, for some unfathomable reason, the lingua franca of the Universe, which of course includes both the Earth and Olympia.
One Eternal even communicates with sign language, which I guess means she invented it. Moreover, several Eternals have an unambiguous ethnicity; are we to understand that they originated these, for lack of a better term, races on our planet?
Or is it just a big coincidence that Olympia has Mexicans, Irish, Scottish, Pakistanis, and South Koreans? And speaking of inventions, it seems that ancient civilizations were more (or less, as the case may be) technologically advanced than we had previously thought; specifically when it comes to the CGI that they apparently used to build their cities.
This imagery that looks straight out of Age of Empires is the reason that Eternals never generates the slightest sense of urgency (and if it did, it could never keep it up for the more than two and a half hours of running time).
Who cares about the destruction of the world when the world in the first place is plainly phonier than a diploma issued by Megatrend University? Hell, the entire Universe seems to consist almost exclusively of green screens.
How much respect or fear can Arishem and the Deviants respectively inspire or instill when they are nothing more than shapeless masses of pixels? All things considered, the only redeeming thing about this film is that it points out (unwittingly, I must assume) the arbitrariness of everything that has to do with the MCU: "Five years ago, Thanos wiped out half the population of the universe ... But the people of this planet brought them all back with a snap of the fingers." Now imagine a 7,000-year long finger-snap.

Although it was nice to watch a Marvel movie which is not just a rehash of the same old universe and which was reasonably woke-free for once this movie was unfortunately pretty meh. It is not as bad as many of the detractors claim but it is miles away from being as good as some of those who liked it claims. It is actually pretty meh.
On the good side there are some decent special effects but that is more or less to be expected. It is the one thing that Marvel movies usually have going for them after all.
It is a fairly serious movie that is not so polluted with comic relief as some of the Marvel movies.
The story is a interesting one but it is unfortunately a bit wasted by the implementation in this movie. Also, it pretty much screws up evolution from the extinction of the dinosaurs as well as any form of religious theories (not that I am a great believer in those though). But then this is pure superhero fantasy so I’m not too bothered by that.
My main gripe with this movie is that it, as is way to often the case with Hollywood, portrays the Eternals more like a bunch of bickering dysfunctional children than the wise thousands of years old beings that they are supposed to be.
Ikarus in particular is a pure Hollywood asshat. He reminds me of that pervert asshole Homelander in the depraved Hollywood creation The Boys. However Druig and Sprite also grated on me in a lot of the scenes. I never like characters that betray people, stick knifes in peoples backs (literally) and so on.
The movie also felt a bit slow. There was a lot of rather boring filler material between the actual action or advancement of the story, and a shitload of flashbacks. I hate flashbacks but then that is probably personal. To me they just interrupt the flow.
The movie also does not really feel very positive. It ends rather sadly actually. Also, at the end they may have saved Earth but, if the story is to believed, by doing so they prevented billions and billions of beings from ever being created. Not really a win-win is it?
It is clear that this movie was setting things up for a continuation and, despite my reservations about this one, I think there is a pretty good oportunity to create something decent from this. It all depends on whether they pick a decent write/director or one of the woke Marvel hacks.

The premiss here is quite fun - 7,000 years ago a diverse race of immortals arrive on Earth to protect the population from a monstrous race of "Deviants" who are bent on eating us all up. Their "Prime Directive", if you will, is that they must not interfere in human conflict, so once they have cleared away the beasties, they split up and lead separate lives. That is, until "Sersi" (Gemma Chan), her pal "Sprite" (Lia McHugh) and her beau "Dane" (Kit Harrington) are set upon in London by a newly empowered creature only to be rescued by "Ikaris" (Richard Madden) - and that incident forces them all to reassemble. Pretty soon they discover the body of their erstwhile leader "Ajak" (Selma Hayek) and must now combine their forces to thwart their ever strengthening enemy and learn why they have resurfaced. Unfortunately, what now follows is a stunning looking, but really pretty dull series of set-piece scenarios that rather clunkily combine mythology and melodrama, romance and action. The camera loves Madden, but as an actor - even clad in blue leather - he is little better than a handsome man. Kumail Nanjiani ("KIngo") has a soupçon of charisma, but the rest of the cast including the really out of place Angelina Jolie ("Thena") and Harish Patel ("Karun") who is intent on videoing everthing at considerable risk to himself, really offer little by way of characterisation and the attempts at humour misfire most of the time. The story has some great effects, but so what? That's what we expect from the most mediocre of productions nowadays. What was needed here were far fewer actors and a much more robust story - and, yes, it could probably have lost the half an hour spent justifying the enormous budget in far-lung locations (real and imaginary). There's a final scene midway through the credits that really does not bode well for the sequel either. I was really pretty bored with this film and though undoubtedly a colourful, action-packed big screen experience, it is an entirely forgettable film to watch.

As Simon Cowell would say:
That was the worst we've seen all day"

When I started watching this picture, I did not expect anything supernatural or something new, and as usual with films from the Marvel film studio, it turned out to be right.
the authors of the script decided not to break the tradition and, as usual, took the path of least resistance, there are heroes, there are villains, they are fighting each other for the fate of all mankind. The plot revolves around the fact that a certain deity sends detachments of superheroes endowed with superpowers to protect intelligent life on different planets from evil predatory creatures remotely resembling ancient lizards, which they almost successfully cope with, but it turns out that the main characters fought absolutely the wrong evil and the main battle they are ahead. The first hour of the film is mostly banal chatter and shots telling about previous events, but towards the end there is an increase in the intensity of events up to an epic massacre of good and evil. The plot does not carry a global mystery and everything is clear from the very beginning, and small plot twists are guessed even before the viewer sees them. And judging by the finale, the audience will be fed one more, and maybe several films on the topic.

I found Eternals to be entertaining in the way I often do with superhero movies: the plot and dialogue were sharp enough to keep me interested enough to watch the whole movie, but it did not hold me in thrall so much that I will be watching it again. Let’s face it: unless we are very intelligent or very beautiful, if a Marvel film actually came to life around us, our roles would be as helpless victims either saved or killed as collateral damage. So we are talking vicarious involvement here. The only Marvel film I would keep watching any time it comes on is Ant Man and the Wasp, as I find its wit and humor irresistible.
As I watched Eternals, I absorbed what I felt were a couple of plot holes large enough for an eternal to fly through. And I am not talking about the science; I give a lot of leeway to scence fiction and similar genres in order to serve the plot. I mean, they went to the trouble of explaining why the Eternals weren’t around to help out with our boy Thanos, but considering the origin story of the Eternals, I did wonder why there didn’t all have every superpower rather than one each.
Anyway, I will not do a deep dive into how this entry serves the overarching Marvel story arc, because I am not a Marvel fan, per se. (After all, I was a DC comic reader as a young lad!) Suffice to say Eternals did not insult my intelligence as a movie viewer but rather, as mentioned at the outset, it held me all the way through it.

Large to its own deficit. Enjoyable to its own demise.
Emotion is lost in the density of the film much too much is crammed into the time, the viewer cannot feel 10 different emotion for 10 different people in 2h30 it isnt possible the film is structure well and cinematically (no one doubted) beautiful visuals. For the casual viewer this film is entertaining with no excitment or attachement. The marvel enthusiast will find this film exciting but numb: full but empty.
One could say this film is ambitious, it is, but now it is purely a wallpaper cinematic event.

**1ST TIME: "Fun, Albeit A Bit TOO Revisionist.... { & _FANTASTICAL_ }". 2ND VIEWING: I Was Utterly -{ " D A Z Z L E D " }- By Chloé Zhao's VISUAL "MAGIC" ....& Her { _ENTIRE_ } Cast & Crew 🌠**
A **-{ _B I G_ }-** Screen Review ; Film Watched **TWICE** .
______________________________________________________
Druig : " I've watched humans destroy each other when I could stop it all in a heartbeat. Do you know what that does to someone after centuries...??? Could our mission have been a mistake..?! Are we really helping these people build a better world..?! We're just like the soldiers down there: pawns to their leaders... BLINDED BY LOYALTY!!! ".
______________________________________________________
**A " HIGH POINTS " :** 1- Just to "Keep Things Fresh", I'm going to shake it up a bit, & start with the Musical side of things, this time around. Ergo : " So -{ Completely }- Enchanting, Engrossing, & just downright 'On-Point was the -entire- soundtrack for "Eternals" ; with its -Utterly- captivating blend of Soft Rock, Celestial Choirists, 'Heavenly-Ethereal', Soprano Soloists & even a plain good old-fashioned 'silky smooth guitar-synth-vocal ensemble' from Pink Floyd . . . . . that I simply couldn't help but have the -Nagging- feeling that this goliath movie's veteran Music Director, ( Ramin Djawadi ), took an 'Inspirational' page out of Tom Holkenborg's sheerly -Fantastic- 'Musical Playbook' for 'GVK' ( 2021 ), & just ran with it, in the 'best way possible' ". 2- Visually, the picture is nothing short of -{ MESMERIZING 🌌 }- , comfortably living up to the "Super"-high standards set by -{ ALL }- of the past 25 MCU ( Marvel Cinematic Universe ) Creations, starting with the "Fabulous" And Indeed, -Groundbreaking- 'Ironman', all those years ago in '08 ( with Ramin -Also- doing the whole score for -that- particular Marvel film, incidentally ! ). The Art Direction, Fight Choreography, Stuntwork, Post-Production Digital Effects -and- the Live 'On-Set' - Physical- Special Effects are -all- 'Par Excellence', & well and -{ Truly }- leave little to be desired.
3- Eternals's cinematography, entirely -Unsurprisingly- , is for the most part 'Lavish, Pristine, & often just outright Gorgeous' ; as is only be -expected- , I suppose, of a movie shot by the likes of -Veteran- lensman Ben Davis . . . . who clearly worked 'Hand-In-Glove' with its "Frightfully" Talented Directress, the one & only Chloé Zhao 🔥. At a 'diminutive' 5 feet 4 inches, the ever 'decorous', some might even say 'demure' "Miz" Zhao is fast becoming a veritable 'come-from-behind' " CINEMATIC POWDER KEG", in the world of all things Hollywood. When Marvel undertook its -{ "Massive }- gamble by hiring the -Relatively- unknown ( at -that- point ) filmmaker to direct Eternals in Sept.'18 . . . . little did they know that she would not only go on to direct what was to later become the "Best Picture" Oscar Winner 2021 ( "Nomadland" - 2020 - Indie ) ; but that she would -Also- take home "Best Director" ; with the picture having been nominated in -YET ANOTHER FOUR- categories ; and having gone on to -Win- one more Oscar Award -Still- 👏❗ So in a nutshell, if you saw Nomadland and thoroughly appreciated its wide, expansive, & breathtakingly lovely shots, then Eternals -Is- likely to be immensely gratifying to you in -that- respect, without a question . . . with the latter -Not Only- 'generously' providing many, many -{ S P R A W L I N G L Y }- Beautiful Vistas for the eyes to 'feast' on . . . but -Also- giving you a few Mind Numbingly Stellar SPACE shots, as well.
**B " DRAW BACKS " :** 1- I suppose I would be -Well- advised to say, at this point, 'Right-off-the-bat' , that Eternals is well and truly a -Genuinely- difficult film to fully, well . . . . -{ " U N P A C K " }- . . . . what with its myriad "Revisions" of not only Earth's natural history, but of that of the -Entire- Cosmos 🤷 ♂️❗, as well ; not to mention some -OUTRIGHT- "Dichotomies", -{ And }- a truly 'Massive' -Gaping- Hole in the story, towards the end of said movie. The 'gaff' in question is quite -literally- ...{ "COLOSSAL" }... as it pertains to a pointedly "Spatial" aspect relating to the Celestial 'Tiamut'-s "Emergence" ...( hinted at in multiple -Official- previews for the Eternals )... and occurs within the picture's grand finale. I won't reveal any more details about said mistake, because I'm trying very hard to keep this a -NON- spoiler review, ( and what's more, I am confident that if you pay close enough attention to said finale, you are -Very- unlikely, to miss it ). 2- Also, the 'Deviants', ( a.k.a alien ' Apex Predators 👾 ', one of whom is prominently seen fighting Angelina Jolie's 'Thena' on a beach in the aforementioned trailers ), appear a bit too "Wire Fram-ey" ....for lack of a better phrase.... for at least the -Entire- first half of the film. In other words: the WIRE-FRAME look that they embody hurts that whole proverbial 'Suspension-Of-Disbelief' thing . . . . to a small, albeit -{ Significant }- . . . . degree. Other than that, as I'm -Immensely- pleased to report, the film boasts nothing less than a -{ "Stunning" }- level of CGI prowess, all the way through.
**C " FINAL SUMMARY " :** This is EASILY Marvel s -{ Most }- "Thought-Provoking" movie, Although 'Infinity War' and 'Endgame', ( with all of their -Own- varied and multitudinous complexities ), are not necessarily -All- that far behind. The fact is, this veritable cinematic collosus boasts not only -Several- Intensely { HUMAN } moments . . . . but also a level of -Philosophical- , ( and I'm going to be -Very- honest here ), 'straightup', you guessed it, -{ EXISTENTIALIST }- mind fodder, as well . . . which most certainly makes it 'the exception and -Not- the rule', in the world of modern day, massive-scale, 'Contemporary Popular Entertainment'. What's more, the absolute- totality of the -Principal- actresses and actors, bar -NONE- .....( it's a sheer 'Who's Who' ensemble cast of about 13, hence too many to mention here )..... do an undeniably -Wonderful- job bringing these 'super-Exotic' characters to life ( almost ) -directly- out of the late great Jack Kirby's ( Rest In Love ! ) comic-book pages. If I just -Had- to pick the performance that stood out for me though, it would unquestionably be Miz. Chan's ( 'Sersi'-s ) truly august & dignified, um, " Gemma 💎 👏❗Of A Performance" ( sorry peeps, -Just- couldn't resist that one ! ) . . . on account of the Deeply Beautiful "HUMANITY-AND-EMPATHY" that she so effortlessly appears to bring to her -Leader's- role, in Eternals. **Thus, it's going to be : A " Solid, Whole Hearted . . . . And Indeed, -{ "Super" }- Appreciative 8.75 Marks Out Of 10 Marks ", From Yours Truly.**

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/eternals-spoiler-free-review
"Eternals boasts evident narrative issues that affect its overall structure and pacing, but Chloé Zhao still manages to deliver a solid MCU installment.
Packed with outstanding performances from the stellar ensemble cast, Zhao still follows some of Marvel's success formulas, but her unique style brings new attributes to the cinematic universe, such as the distinctly gorgeous cinematography and the profound themes of faith and humanity.
Despite the exposition-driven screenplay, the admittedly underdeveloped yet inclusive, diverse group of characters hold genuinely compelling relationships. For fans of the mandatory action, the extraordinary entertainment levels are still present, but it's definitely the furthest from the MCU a film has ever been.
It's meant to be divisive, but fortunately, I fall on the positive side."
Rating: B

A friend recommended this film to me. I was reluctant because I am no big fan of Micheal Keaton. But I watched it anyway purely because of the disturbing subject matter.
Clearly this cover-up resonates throughout the US a great deal, but living in England for most of my life I don't think the shocking revelations ever rang out much other than for a random story-line that probably got buried after the immediate events of 9/11.
I won't repeat the story here because other reviewers have already covered that; but what I really admired about the film was how very underplayed it felt throughout. The pacing, the somber soundtrack, the unhurried editing, even the narration all helped capture the suffocating mood of the story as it unraveled in shocking detail.
There was no histrionics that you sometimes get with films that are about to expose something deeply shocking. I am reminded of films such as "The Insider" and "All the President's Men" where the the lives of the investigators/victims/whistle-blowers are put into immediate danger by a "dark force" should they expose their findings to the public.
But with Spotlight, such things were avoided. Instead everything was kept at a "civil" level between The Boston Globe and The Church, even though you could feel an underlying dread or threat simmering throughout.
I particularly liked the ending because even though the story was published and the victims finally came forward before the credits rolled, there was no big fanfare declaring how wonderful the Spotlight team were in exposing this evil. Instead it left us with a reminder that the abuse of children by the RC church was (and probably still is) a world-wide problem; not helped when you learn that Cardinal Law was never arrested, but was later reassigned to a high ranking position in the Vatican, even though both he and the Vatican itself was perfectly aware of the crimes committed by the Church against innocent boys and girls.

A true account of the Boston Globe's investigative reporting on the vatican's approval of sexual predator priests over many decades. Disturbing to say the least. Excellent performances from Mark Ruffalo and Michael Keaton. It's easy for movies like this to get bogged down in the details but the pacing here is remarkably fluid, just a bit over 2 hours very well spent.

This was a very shocking and well made film. It is about the scandal involving a cover-up of Catholic priests molesting children in the Boston area. I was surprised with the delicate nature of the film's script and how well it was handled. It had a very solid ensemble cast which helped make the film moving and horrific in parts.
I am glad that a film like this won Best Picture at the Academy Awards as it had a very important message (even if I was rooting for 'The Revenant').
★★★★

Spotlight story is interesting and has a good cast which performs very well, but the feeling of the story is flat.
First, they are talking about abuses to children but you feel almost the whole time that they are following the lead of any other story almost as bureaucrats. There is not much of sensitivity put into the matter.
Second, they are exposing a huge case of system "missbehavior" (to say the least) in the Catholic Church hierarchy and you see how the whole city of Boston is treating this institution with great care. Then, this movie is about showing to the world how the exposition was done and the treatment to the Catholic Church is almost as exquisite as the one that has enabled this institution to hide all this cases.
For gods sake! These people are criminals covering the crimes of even bigger criminals and it seems like we still cannot face them and tell them clearly and to their faces the horrible things they have tolerated and hidden.

> Uncovering the sins committed by whom the millions of people believe in.
A documentary film would show the real faces of those offenders to shame them. That's the reason I desperately wanted it to be a documentary, then I would have definitely given a maximum mark. There's no complaint about this movie, but adaptation means fakes acting, fake settings and awards goes to non real achievers. Anyway, this movie kind looked a semi documentary and liked the way it was made.
The movie exposed a very important scandal. If something is open for a debate in the US means, the rest of the world would follow the same route. That's where this theme was inspired by. It all begins with a group of journalists from the Boston Globe with their new editor instruct them to research on sexual abuse of children by priests. So their lead only gets bigger and puts them to recover more evidence in order to publish. How they come up with the story that shake up not only the nation, but the entire world is the remaining.
A collection of bunch fine performances. There's no lead actors in this. Everyone is in the supporting roles. Out of 6, it got nominated both male and female in the category of supporting role for the Academy Awards. I am very disappointed, Mark Ruffalo's performance in 'Infinitely Polar Bear' deserved another nominee. Anyway, this 15 year old story still looks a hot topic. It was a great comeback for the director after critics assaulted him with their words for his previous film 'The Cobbler' only to show their rage on Sandler. It is a must-must see. Beware, is is not your weekend entertainer, but based on the real.
8/10

I hadn’t quite realised the extent to which racial segregation laws permeated into every day life, especially when a black person couldn't cut a white child’s hair or write anything remotely disparaging about their white brethren. “Skeeter” (Emma Stone) returns from college and decides there might be a way around this. She will write the book, but a selection of women from their Mississippi homes will provide the meat for this literary sandwich. These women are maids who all have stories to tell, but she faces quite a battle convincing them to spill any beans. That’s partly from loyalty, partly from fear and also because they all know that the local community on all sides is disinclined to rock the boat. It’s to “Aibileen” (Viola Davis) she initially turns and after some persuasion she begins to open up - and boy is it juicy! It’s not just a chance to open some eyes, but it gives the author a chance to re-evaluate her relationship with her own mother (Allison Janney) and with friends “Hilly” (Bruce Dallas Howard) and their odious friend “Celia” (Jessica Chastain) as well as a cast of family retainers who had more to do with bring up the children than any of their privileged parents ever did. When “Minny” (Octavia Spencer) gets sacked and a second source comes on stream for the book, the ridiculousness of, and hypocrisies that prevail in, this society are increasingly laid bare amidst attitudes of visceral hatred. Janney and Howard deliver well, crafting characters it’s easy to relate to - even in quiet a loathsome fashion, and both Spencer and Davis elicit sympathy but not cloyingly - it’s clear that they are worth ten of their wealthier and entitled employers. The boys don’t really feature so much here which allows a focus on the narrative uncluttered by romance, and there’s even a little from Sissy Spacek to add a little extra finesse to what is at times quite a subtly performed indictment of ignorance and bullying. Chocolate pie, anyone?

Great watch, probably won't watch again, and can recommend.
To be fair, you should watch this prepared for what it is:
a racial suffrage movie.
That means that it is filled with racism and unfair strife, and stupid jerks of the elite class that are under the impression that they can still buy and sell people because they do.
This is a fantastic movie, but it is a heavy, serious story, and the humor in it barely makes it more palatable in that regard.
The cast is filled with great actresses who give excellent performances, the script is well written, and the production value is great.
It isn't going to provide a level of escapism from worldly problems, but I don't have to like a movie to recognize its greatness.

I just watched The Help, almost immediately after finishing the book. Now, when comparing The Film to The Book it was based on (generally speaking), one major rule of thumb almost always applies: The Book is better. The Help is no exception.
Accordingly, with the novel still so fresh in the back of my mind, separating my mind from the book in order to enjoy the film was an almost impossible task. No matter how hard you try, you just can't quit comparing the two, nitpicking every detail and being frustrated with everything they changed. Nevertheless, I was still able to enjoy the film for what it was, though I am glad that I possessed full knowledge of the actual story.
The Help tells the story of black domestic servants in 1960's Jackson, Mississippi. It focuses on white Miss Eugenia 'Skeeter' Phelan, and her efforts to give a voice to black maids by writing their stories from their perspective and thus giving them an opportunity to be heard for the first time in their lives. Among the black women, Aibileen and Minny are the two key characters.
So let's just get the "bad" stuff out of the way. One of the elements in the novel that I enjoyed the most was the incredibly delicate bond of trust and understanding that builds up (over an extensive period of time) between Aibileen and Skeeter. It really does take Skeeter a long time before she finally wins Aibileen over and convinces her to share her deepest feelings with a white woman. In the film, this process felt rather rushed, like Aibileen just woke up the next morning and decided to do it. What bothers me about this is not just the fact that (oh, cliché) it was "better" in the book, but mostly because the film forgets to underline WHY it took so long. Not only is it much more clearly explained in writing that these black women face an incredible danger in divulging their true feelings about the white women they work for, the film also fails to capture the palpable tension and sense of urgency of the book. These women aren't just risking their jobs, they are risking their lives, AND the lives of their loved ones. They're in danger just for being seen talking to a white lady. I found this to be a rather big flaw of the film.
The film also lacks a lot of the character development I was hoping for. Quite a few character changes were made, so that in the film they all just kind of appear out of nowhere, and more or less seem to go about their business without – again – the big "why" of it all. One of the most underexposed characters was a woman named Celia Foote, who is a poor white trash girl who married way out of her league – and because of it, has to face the constant disgrace and condescension from the other stuck-up, "sophisticated" white ladies. Celia is just the sweetest, loveliest person in the entire story, and her relationship with her maid Minny is heart warming. The fact that they barely included this in the film is a real shame.
OK – if I keep comparing the film to the book, this review will never reach its end. Obviously, there is a lot more I could (and certainly want to) say, but it's not really relevant to the effectiveness of this review. So, moving on.
At least they got the actors right! Each and every one of them was cast spot-on to their character. Emma Stone is wonderful as Skeeter –capturing her youthful daring and naiveté perfectly. There's also something about her voice and attitude that make it clear that this girl is different from her snooty bridge club peers. Viola Davis is the perfect Aibileen – all I kept thinking was, damn, she should have gotten that Oscar. Her performance is very moving and heartfelt. Octavia Spencer did actually win an Oscar for her role as Minny, and it was well deserved. She is exactly as I imagined Minny to be – sassy, smart-mouthed and with an attitude that could render any white woman speechless, even if it means losing her job a dozen times. Celia Foote is played by Jessica Chastain, and I fear I'm at risk of doubling over in superlatives to describe how perfect she was, so I'll just leave it at this.
The Evil Witch in this story is Hilly Holbrook, played by Bryce Dallas Howard. I'm not sure how big of a compliment it is to say that she is very good at playing a snide, cunning racist – so let's just say she is a very good actress. Another actress worth mentioning is Allison Janney, who plays the role of Skeeter's mother. Though she is not quite like I imagined her the way she was in the book (there we go again...), I always enjoy her performances very much and this one's no exception. Oh, and Sissy Spacek plays Hilly's mother, and she is a delight to watch. I got the feeling that the director extended her role to a little more than what it was in the book, just to give her more screen time. I don't blame him.
Overall, the film is properly paced and reasonably well-constructed, though some creative liberties are taken here and there considering the timeline. In comparison to the book, it is a little disappointing, but I can't think of a single book-to-film adaptation where this wasn't the case.
I still rate The Help 8 out of 10, because I think it is an important story to be told and the performances are stellar, but if you have a little more patience, I strongly recommend reading the book instead.
_(March 2013)_

Great setting, cast, story and performances. A must to be seen.