Garden variety coming of age films are so prevalent that it’s all the more refreshing when something truly personal and original like “Lady Bird” comes along. The small scale intimacy of the story about a teenage girl on the cusp of womanhood in Sacramento feels raw and real, its cozy focus creating a universal anecdote that relives (with bittersweet affection) a part of life that’s filled with constantly fluctuating highs and lows. This is exactly the type of indie filmmaking that we need more of, and the awkwardly charming Greta Gerwig has hit a home run with her equally awkwardly charming directorial debut.
The film gives an unromantic glimpse into middle class life in 2002, where we meet Lady Bird (Saoirse Ronan), her recently laid off and depressed dad (Tracy Letts), and her hardworking, steadfast mom (Laurie Metcalf). The film is perfectly cast, with Ronan and Metcalf being the real standouts (the two are at their best when pushed into blow-up clashes between mother and daughter, an emotional tug of war between a teen impatient to break away from a hometown that’s beneath her and a mother so desperately hanging on that she’s unable to express her love and disappointment). It’s apparent the actors felt emotionally connected to the material while on set, and their performances bring a biting honesty and empathy to the family dynamics of Gerwig’s screenplay.
Gerwig has said the film is semi-autobiographical and she writes with an authentic voice, taking great care with her story (a story told with the hindsight of being a grown up). She brings a confident wisdom, an earnest insight, and a fresh voice through a witty and bright script that mirrors her true-to-life, free spirited personality. It’s as if the film exists within its own glowing aura. With Gerwig at the helm, the film has a particular hipster quirkiness written all over it, yet its sunny disposition and sharp humor is abundant with sincerity and avoids falling into the trap of being overly cynical or jaded.
The film is so observant that I could totally and wholly relate to our adolescent heroine through a realism that instantly transported me to the past. While I grew up in a different decade, some of the situations seemed like actual pages ripped out of my own high school experience. There are plenty of moments in a teenage girl’s life where the trivial becomes momentous and the momentous becomes devastating, and they are presented here with a poignant and compassionate vibrancy that I’ve rarely seen so accurately captured on film.

_Lady Bird_ is a fantastic coming of age story that is a lot deeper than its contemporaries in the genre. It deals with more than just boys and self-discovery, but familiar past, the complex relationships between parents, and the deep understanding that home is comfort no matter how terrible it may seem in the moment. It is all crafted so well that the experience is instantly relatable allowing many viewers to resonate with her. Despite this movie being a tad overhyped by many critics, it is still a brilliant film that is easy to watch and can somehow make me laugh and cry at the same time.
**Score:** _90%_ |
**Verdict:** _Excellent_

Full review: https://www.tinakakadelis.com/beyond-the-cinerama-dome/2021/12/28/attention-attention-attention-lady-bird-review
The opening image of writer/director Greta Gerwig’s impressive debut, _Lady Bird_, is of Marion (Laurie Metcalf) and Christine (Saoirse Ronan) asleep together in a hotel bed. Their faces are close, like mirrored images of each other. Not only do they look alike, they are two sides of the same coin. It’s why they get along so well and why they can wound each other so deeply. This mother-daughter relationship is the crux of the story Lady Bird tells. The movie chronicles Lady Bird’s (as Christine insists on being called) last year of high school in Sacramento. She can’t wait to leave, and is hoping to graduate and attend an East Coast liberal arts school. She’s looking for culture, and Sacramento has probably been in her rearview mirror for as long as she’s been alive.

This is one of my absolute favourite movies of all time. I understand why some might give it low ratings as it is directed at a very specific white female audience but all I have to say to that is "they didn't understand it". This is the ultimate comfort movie for me and I will take no criticism.

I think _Lady Bird_ is my film for 2017 where me and everyone else on the planet just straight up do not see eye to eye. At no point during _Lady Bird_ did I feel drawn in. I genuinely did not enjoy my time with Greta Gerwig's directorial debut. I haven't come across a single other person who feels the same, but I must be honest to my experience.
Normally this is where I would say something along the lines of, "It's just because this isn't my sort of movie" except that last year _Edge of Seventeen_ dealt with virtually identical subject matter and that was one of my favourite movies of the year.
So I'm just wrong I guess?
_Final rating:★½: - Boring/disappointing. Avoid where possible._

This movie was ok (it wasn't boring nor was it very entertaining). At first I didn't understand the point it was trying to make. Was it you can shortcut your way to your dreams if you lie, cheat, and steal (as that was exactly what she did)? It wasn't about the pressures of class division (as a review I read states), as no one treated her as any differently regardless of her social status and any division she felt was just in her head. Her anxiety against her parents, the school, and the upper class of her school turned out to be non-issues, and when she got to where or what she wants, she just finds that the grass never gets greener for her once she was on the other side. In fact, she just becomes resented by those she abandons to get there and ultimately ends up longing for the side she left.
If anything the movie was saying that those who are rich aren't as unexclusive as those without think, and they are just like everyone else. Just as the main protagonist was rebelling against her life to gain acceptance, so were the kids of the rich in that they are also just seeking acceptance. That doing anything to get your dreams won't lead to satisfaction as life on the other side isn't any better, you just end up hurting others by getting there that way, and in hindsight blinded you from what you already had.
I guess the movie had something to say after all.
★★½ - Not dull, nor was it very entertaining.

When you watch the movie, you will realize that it gives love to all the characters in the appropriate and best way. The movie is wonderful and beautiful, and I recommend it to all people. I loved it very much, to an indescribable degree.

What.an.adorable.movie.

kind of a dumb movie. he has the ability to time travel for his life but he doesnt do anything worth seeing. they also make a bad looking couple too. im not sure what this movie is suppose to be about because there isnt much of a storyline at all. and he uses his time travel to fix the dumbest stuff. not even worth watching in my opinion.

**My wife was literally tearing up just from me telling her about this movie. It was that good!**
A Delightful, sweet, and optimistic film with an uplifting focus on cherishing time with people we love and valuing family. It’s rare to find a movie that depicts a healthy, caring relationship between family members, so I enjoyed seeing support rather than drama. Expanding the focus of love beyond the main couple to their friends and family is not typical of a romantic comedy but welcomed and appreciated. A great escape film that reminds you what matters most are the people closest to you.

Cute and fun, with great cast and performances and nice English humor.
Just, it is too good, too neat ... but a good movie for getting out of the theater with optimism and faith in life.

Love this movie. This was just like my break up except the babysitter. Really hilarious though. Very entertaining!

**Crazy, Stupid, Love creates contradictory feelings with inconsistent values and judgments, spending too much time glorifying activity that it later condemns.**
Crazy, Stupid, Love had me conflicted. So here are my likes and dislikes since its hard to untangle my feelings for a cohesive review:
> **Pros:**
> - The relationship between Steve Carrell and Ryan Gosling's characters is a unique take on friendship not generally seen in movies, with the characters challenging each other to move beyond their current circumstances and grow.
> - There were some surprising plot twists I didn't see coming that kept a longer rom-com more engaging and interesting than expected.
> - Cal's love and yearning for his family, no matter the hurt and heartbreak they caused, was truly endearing.
> - Steve Carrell is always a pro, a true gem of a human being.
> > **Cons:**
> I should have expected it, but the movie's trivialization of sexual relationships was frustrating. Women were treated poorly and disrespected. It is hard to "root" for characters that are that self-centered and arrogant.
> - I was annoyed with the inconsistency of how the film treated characters' failures and indiscretions. Julianne Moore's character was very unlikable because her character stood on the moral high ground over Steve Carrell's despite cheating on him.
> - The movie is classified as a rom-com, and while it has some funny moments, it's hard to consider it entirely comedic. It grapples with serious subject matter that keeps it from being as lighthearted as the word "comedy" would imply.
Crazy, Stupid, Love has a higher rating from me because of the fun friendship between Carrell and Gosling, the ultimate focus on commitment at the end, and Steve Carrell just being in the movie. It has a different feel than many other films in the genre, which is appreciated. Ultimately, Crazy Stupid Love boasts some great elements and a charming resolution, but the road to get there has some speed bumps.

Really good comedy, following the typical situations but with fresh unexpected turns.

'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen' is much like the original for me, in that I never got hooked into what was being portrayed in front of my eyes; I was more just processing the events, rather than actually absorbing anything. Don't get me wrong, neither flicks are bad, just not good in my opinion.
I personally have a hard time differentiating all of the robots, even main dude Optimus Prime. Their designs aren't eye-catching to me, I don't feel like I'm looking at anything other than metal and tiny little light up eyes. The wall-to-wall action doen't help either, what with them just clattering into each other constantly.
With that said, the aforementioned carnage does help in regards to the pacing and run time. 150 minutes is way too long, though to be honest it flows well for a movie of that length and I was never desperate for the end credits to arrive. I just wasn't properly enjoying myself at any point.
Shia LaBeouf works, a competent and well chosen lead no doubt. Megan Fox really is only there to look beautiful though, eh? No dislike directed at Fox at all, more so at those responsible for the lack of tangible character development offscreen. The rest of the cast are alright, Tyrese Gibson is quite underused though. The voice cast are slightly better than those behind LaBeouf/Fox.
I watched that first film just over five years ago, I hadn't realised until recently that they had made seven (!) of them; plus that bonus one last year. As if I'm going to watch them al... of course I am. I'm bound to like at least one, right?

So "Sam" (Shia LaBeouf) reckons after his first death-defying dose of mechanised shenanigans, that he is done with all things "Autobot" and so looks forward to settling down at college with "Mikaela" (Megan Fox). Nope, not to be. He keeps having dreams, and vivid, mysterious, dreams that feature mysterious writings? Just like with the first outing of this franchise, the story drags the young couple into a battle between the "Autobots" and their foes, the "Decepticons" only this time the rehash of the hidden power-cube story tries to immerse itself in ancient Egyptian mythology as a means of making the never ending assemble/disassemble/reassemble fight scenes emerge as something less repetitive and, frankly, dull. There isn't really a script to speak of, and at 2½ hours this really does feel like you could have actually built one of the pyramids in the time it takes to come to what is the inevitable tee for another sequel. John Turturro steals his scenes as the ultra-hammy agent "Simmons" and we have Josh Duhamel as the eye-candy in an uniform but as with the first film, Fox is as wooden as a skateboard. Although there is pretty much non-stop action throughout, I still couldn't tell who is fighting with whom nor is "Bumblebee" getting any better at the close protection game. One for die hard fans, I think - it certainly left me yawning.

**A powerful film about the will to survive and the coldness of big pharma**
Matthew McConaughey gives an amazing performance as Ron Woodroof the homophobic, hard partying electrician/rodeo cowboy who becomes HIV positive due to some poor lifestyle choices. Ostracised by his friends for having what was at the time considered a gay disease he goes on a damaging bender before discovering he has full blown AIDS.
When faced with a death sentence and ineffective drugs approved by the FDA, he heads to Mexico to source and import medication not available in the US, and decides to sell it to help himself and others while making a tidy profit.
Jared Leto is magnetic as Rayon, a drug addicted gay man who becomes Woodroof's business partner and eventually his friend. Both actors lost a significant amount of weight for the role, which lends real authenticity and gravity to the film.
Made on a shoestring budget, with little to no special effects, this film is all about the story and the performances. The battles with the FDA trying to circumvent red tape, and get people medication they desperately need is frustrating and all too realistic. Big pharma calls the shots, manipulates data and statistics and keeps peddling their toxic expensive medication, while Woodroof battles for the rights to treat himself with medicine he knows works.
It is a David and Goliath story, a look at an era when AIDS was virtually untreatable and running out of control. One man's battle against bureaucracy told with charm and panache.
8/10

Yet another story squeezed into the timeline of this franchise. 'Solo: A Star Wars Story' is a good one, though.
The casting is well done, they are all satisfactory in what they give to the film. Alden Ehrenreich is a solid cast as the titular character, I found him enjoyable. Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover and Paul Bettany, meanwhile, are all positive additions.
I like how it connects into its position in the 'Star Wars' universe, sometimes you can tell they jumped through quite a few hoops just to make certain things work but I think they did an admirable job.
The film looks and sounds the part, it's certainly up to the standard that I expect from these productions. I wouldn't say it is anything all that sensational or anything, but I came away from watching in a pleasant mood.

My, how the mighty have fallen! It used to be that Star Wars could do no wrong. People were even forgiving of the prequel trilogy (eventually) and its many, many flaws to accept them in the multi-billion dollar franchise. There was some trepidation over the whole “Star Wars Story” side story films, but that seemed to be allayed by the excellent “Rogue One.” Then comes “Solo,” and I’m sorry to say that our fears have now been realized.
Starting with Han growing up as a youth on Corellia, we see how each aspect of his character comes into being. Each. Aspect. Even how he gets the name Solo. I mean, seriously! They create a checklist, from his relationships to Chewie and Lando, right down to his blaster, and shows how each one comes to pass or be in his possession.
It’s actually kind of...well, sad. It turns out that every iconic aspect of this character we’ve loved all sprang out of one single caper in his career. Talk about peaking early! They even recreate some famous scenes, but they’re still the same scenes just with a new coat of paint. And paint is a very apt metaphor. “Solo” is very much a paint by numbers Star Wars film. No surprises. Purely for fans, and even then there’s some issues. Even the cameo at the end felt ridiculously overdone. Star Wars fatigue definitely seems to be setting in. Still, as a Star Wars fan, I’m probably being more forgiving even though I rate this movie as just “Okay.”

Let me give you some advice. Assume everyone will betray you. And you will never be disappointed.
So the latest in what is becoming a long running sci-fi franchise sees Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) get his prequel movie. Unsurprisingly, such is the ferocious core fan base of the Star Wars series, it has been met with a mixture of outright hatred to pats on the back appreciation. It really is a case here of jumping in to view it on its own terms to at least give it a chance. The truth is, is that if this was a stand alone movie being judged purely as a science fiction action movie, then it would be better appreciated. For this is cracker jack entertainment in that sphere, with superbly constructed worlds inhabited by delirious looking aliens species, feisty droids hold court, and the humans are daring, cheeky and even sexy. It is in short quality and fantastical sci-fi, even if in truth as per the Solo character trajectory it's safe film making.
We, as in the royal Star Wars fans we, all have our card carrying belief that our opinion on any Star Wars film is correct, but really the only advice I can honestly give here is that if you haven't seen it yet then at least give it a chance. Those that have seen it have their minds made up either way, so personally I can only say how much fun I had watching it - twice! All the dots are joined towards the Solo character I love so dear, from back when with childhood eyes in the late 70s I was transfixed on that big screen. How great to see how Han met Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo) and how their brilliant friendship begins. To witness the birth of the Han/Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover excellent) friendly rivalry - and all that that entails as regards our favourite spaceship - The Millennium Falcon. Yes, I like it well enough for sure, maybe you will as well? 7.5/10

I have to admit that I was a bit hesitant about watching this movie since it seems to have received quite a bit of flak. But then so did The Last Jedi and I liked that one a lot so a few days ago me and the kids sat down to watch Solo on my home cinema rig.
What I found was a quite enjoyable action adventure movie. Yes, the story is simple and quite predictable but that is fine by me. What I wanted was a simple and straightforward action roller coaster and that was pretty much what I got. I did not want some deep crap with a lot of social pointers all over the place. It is Star Wars, it is meant to just entertain. Action and special effects “über alles” plain and simple.
Portraying Han Solo when he was young is of course a quite tall order for any actor. Everyone is going to compare him with Harrison Ford and that is pretty much a recipe for failure. Personally I am happy that they picked an actor that was not especially well known from other movies, at least not to me. If they had not done that I would have compared him not only to Harrison Ford but also to whatever character he had played before. I think Alden Ehrenreich did a fairly good job of portraying a young Han Solo.
Actually, I think most of the actors was fairly okay. It’s not a Shakespeare play after all. It did sadden me that Woody turned out to be such an asshole in the end though. For most of the movie I quite liked the guy.
The story was, as I already wrote, simple and straightforward. Predictable as hell of course but then, in these kind of movies the story is more or less only a means to tie together the action. It worked for me. I am so glad that they actually did tie up a certain loose end at the end of the movie though. If Solo hadn’t been in that last game of cards with Lando and the outcome not been what it was I would have been seriously miffed about the entire movie. Probably one of the scenes I liked the most actually.
As I am writing this the movie has a rating of 7 out of 10 on IMDb and I think that is pretty much spot on. I have to say that I am quite sad about Disney’s knee-jerk reaction to pull the brakes on the Star Wars movies. This is so typical of the Hollywood bean counters nowadays. If a movie is not making an insane amount of money the first couple of weeks it is considered a failure and the standard response is to pull the franchise. That is essentially saying that there is something wrong with the audience. We made a good movie but you did not like it so we kill the franchise way of thinking. Well, news flash dumb asses, if the movie didn’t sell as well as you estimated either there is something wrong with your over-inflated estimates or with the movie you did. It’s your fault, not the audience. Make a better one or fix your estimates! Okay, as a Star Wars fan I am perhaps biased but I am so tired of dumbass bean counters, not just where movie making is concerned.

The public's backlash against _Solo_ has been **severely** diminished when compared to _The Last Jedi_, unfortunately however, so did the box office numbers. Best case scenario, this thing breaks even, and even that is looking unlikely. But I did actually quite enjoy _Solo_. It's not perfect, there are a decent number of problems I had with both the movie itself, and with its connection to the story overall, but I actually had a really good time watching _Solo_ (and seeing as I was probably the most sick I've ever been in my life when I watched it, that's saying something).
_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time_.

Things happen because they're supposed to happen, and not because they would benefit the story. This is well-made but it feels perfunctory, fragmented, and, most importantly, entirely unnecessary. This movie is what happens when you work back from a foregone conclusion that's three decades old. Solo is tired, and it made me feel tired. It should never have been made. P.S. This is the first movie in which I didn't dislike Emilia Clarke! She's improving.

I have been a Star Wars fan since childhood. In fact, Star Wars: A New Hope was one of the first movies I ever saw in a theater. And I really enjoyed this movie. Don't believe the naysayers. There has been a lot of bad press surrounding the movie since the directors got fired and had to be replaced by Ron Howard. There was also some controversy of whether the lead actor was any good as Han Solo. The movie is not the mess we were led to believe. It works pretty well. Good action and special effects and lots of interesting alien creatures, as we would expect from a Star Wars movie. Alden Ehrenreich does a good job to make the role his own instead of doing an impression of Harrison Ford. Woody Harrelson, Phoebe Walter-Bridge, Donald Glover, and Paul Bettany also do good work in the film. Recommended for Star Wars fans.

Not a bad movie, but you cannot replace H. Ford. The new Solo tries to be too much like the old Solo. Also, Lando is way too cool. Fav character was L3.

Back in 1977 I remember going into the original Cine Capri to see “Star Wars” with some friends. I was very young but little did I know that movie would change my life and put me on the path that I am now. Over the decades that have followed I have read the books and comics, played with the toys, played the video games, and eagerly watched any new film or television show related to the franchise.
The fact that Disney has put out a new film every years since “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” is great for fans like me as those three year waits; to say nothing of the 17+ years between the Original and Prequel Trilogies were tough.
Through it all my favorite character has always been Han Solo. I do not know what it is but the brash, cocky, money loving; scoundrel who gets in and out of trouble yet does the right thing in the end has always connected with me.
So when news came that there would be a new movie based on the early years of the title characters I was excited but concerned as Harrison Ford is so iconic in that role I could not see how anyone could measure up.
Combine that with original Directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller being removed from the film after shooting a significant number of weeks, there was ample concern to go around.
Fortunately for fans, Director Ron Howard has crafted a very enjoyable film as “Han Solo: A Star Wars Story” deftly combines the action, visuals, and humor that made the films cinematic legends and in doing so introduces new characters and expands the lore of the Star Wars Universe.
The film follows a young Han (Alden Ehrenreich), who hustles to survive and get off the world of Corrilia.
Han like many kids on the street pull all sorts of scams under the control of various criminals and he plots to escape with his friend Qi’ra (Emilia Clarke).
When an opportunity arises, Han takes it, but finds himself in the Imperial Navy which does not bode well for a person with strong opinions and a mind of his own.
Fate steps in once again and introduces Han to Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo), and a mentor figure in the form of a man named Beckett (Woody Harrelson). Han attempts to prove himself to his new crew as he sees this as his way out to a better life. However with things take a turn for the worse, he must work with his new associates to clear the slate with a deadly crime boss named Dry’den Vos (Paul Bettany).
As anyone who follows the series knows Han has a way of escalating a situation and this leads the crew to recruiting Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover), into the crew as they set off to pull off a risky and dangerous mission to get the much needed resources to save their lives.
What follows is a very enjoyable film that has an appropriate amount of humor and character building as well as plenty of good action and effects which should keep fans of the series happy. The new characters were very enjoyable and added a new depth to Han as well as the Star Wars mythos but what really impressed me was that at no time did I find myself comparing Ehrenreich to Harrison Ford. He was charismatic and enjoyable in the role and I easily believed that this was Han before life, the universe, and circumstances turned him into the man we would know years later.
Glover is uncanny with his version of Lando and he at times almost sounded like Billy Dee Williams and had many of the mannerisms of the character down His back and forth with Han was great to see and we got a much deeper understand of both the characters and their complicated history with one another.
Clark and Harrelson round things out well as they provide a great balance to Han. One is a mentor and one is the link to the life he had and the dreams he wants to achieve. Ron Howard moves things along well without rushing things as while it does take a bit of time getting up to speed, it happens at a natural pace without seeming rushed. Howard also does not rely on an abundance of effects to carry the film. There are plenty of practical FX and makeup creations to make you well aware that this is a vast and diverse galaxy but he uses them and the CGI to enhance the story rather than carry it.
There are numerous nods throughout to past films as well both visual and verbal and a few great surprises along the way. It is believed that more adventures of the younger Han will be coming in the future and I cannot wait for them to arrive as this was a very fun film. Now the only hard part will be the 19 month wait for Episode IX as the five month wait from the last film already seems like ages ago and I cannot wait for more.
4.5 stars out of 5

**With strengths at a visual and technical level, it would be much better with a more developed and better written script.**
I don't know if I'm the only person to say this, but I think a horror movie works better if we see some intelligence in the script and in the characters' attitudes, and if the main antagonist is mysterious and able to surprise us. I liked “Prometheus”, a film better than expected, albeit with a confusing script. This film establishes a clearer, more palpable link between that film and the “Alien” franchise. The script accompanies the “Covenant”, a colony ship filled with people in hypersleep. The ship receives a mysterious signal from a planet that, by all indications, has excellent conditions for life, but quickly realizes that it has stumbled on a place where it should never have landed. After seeing the film, I had the feeling that we were looking at a very solid work that only lost when compared to the original franchise. Perhaps the best way to be fair is really to avoid this comparative exercise, which is seductive and almost impossible not to do.
Shall we start with the good things? Very good! The film is a sight for sore eyes, especially for sci-fi fans and for those who like very visual films with high doses of special effects, CGI or extraordinarily detailed scenarios. There is no doubt that the budget had a generous slice set aside for computer technicians, art and costume designers and cinematography, and this investment has paid off handsomely. Everything is accompanied by an excellent soundtrack and good sound effects. And of course, there are lots of tense scenes. It is one of those films where the tension is permanent, but which never really scares us.
Sadly, that's basically all this movie has to offer us. Fans of the Alien franchise will ensure that the film clarifies several gray points in the narrative of other films, such as “Prometheus”, and I agree with this argument, but this does not seem to me to be something that we should overestimate, because it really was the least that could be done. demanded from this film! At the script level, it is frankly disappointing: in addition to being lazy, making the most of what was done for the other films with which it is linked, it adds few new things. Yes, it creates some new creatures, “cousins” of the original xenomorph, but that's all. The human or semi-human characters are silly, devoid of development and seem to be waiting to be killed.
The film starts out great, but becomes slow and tiresome as it becomes predictable. I have a high regard for Ridley Scott's work, I think he's a very skilled and credited director, but it's hard not to acknowledge that he failed here. The director was dazzled by the amount of CGI potential and neglected the narrative, editing and direction of the actors. Among the actors, Michael Fassbender stands out the most. The actor has given us one of his best works so far. Katherine Waterston also did a very good job. The rest of the cast doesn't have the time or material to do anything special.

**Good Sci-fi** 👍🏾

Well, it's slightly better than Prometheus, that's something. It's a little bit closer to the monster movie that was Alien...but closer does not mean that it comes anywhere near being as epic as it's 1979 mother...queen...whatever.
It's still putting on airs. It's still living under the delusion that it's something closer to "Chinatown" than, well, a monster movie in space.
I don't want to see an Alien movie that thinks its "Raging Bull." It doesn't really work that way. I want to see and Alien movie that knows its an Alien movie.
Simplify Man!!!!!!! You're a monster movie in space...most of the time...and a space marine movie the rest of the time. Either way you have no reason to throw so much crap against the wall. You don't need it all to stick!!!!!
You're an Alien movie, you don't need to be deep, you just need to be scary. that's all you need to do. And, maybe have Ripley, because she rocked.
But, honestly, the Alien movies are monster movies.
These films have forgotten that.

Initially, I thought this was just a pretty shameless attempt to attach the "Alien" brand to the really mediocre "Prometheus" (2012) but to be fair, it is just a little more than that. The crew of a colonial exploration ship are heading to a new word when their crew are tempted by a bit of John Denver, and divert to a seemingly far more suitable planet. Of course, once they land they begin to realise that nothing is as idyllic as they had hoped, and getting off as soon as possible is now the order of the day. It's almost 40 years since the first film of this strand, and that renders most of the shock value pretty impotent. We have all already been through the gamut of terror that these stories deliver and even though Sir Ridley Scott is an old hand at creating a sense of menace, it's all just a bit so what with this predictable plot that ends, then it ends, then it... ends! Michael Fassbender is quite effective as "David" but the rest of the cast, including the usually reliable Billy Crudup have little by way of original substance to get their teeth into. It is certainly a good looking film, but that's what is expected, it is the derivative storyline that lets it down. Indeed, it did remind me of an old "Star Trek" episode with some mythological "Sirens" thrown in for good measure. Still, it is quite watchable, just not a film I expect you will ever remember.