Granted, there were a number of stories and scenarios that were interesting to learn about. But, the 'inventiveness' claimed throughout is a serious stretch to those with an intellect. In fact, we found it to be a situation of cultural appropriation - but in reverse. A prime example is their claim to the airfoil via the boomerang, and that one of theirs essentially invented the concept of the helicopter blade. While the boomerang is arguably an airfoil, the details of its cross-section design are lacking. Further, the program's demonstration of the boomerang helicopter showed SIGNIFICANT design changes, to match helicopter pitch angles on each blade (which boomerangs do NOT have), shows poor ethical standards by the producers (they should have at least pointed that out).
Reviews
9 Reviews
Guy Ritchie's the Covenant
(I) (2023)
Needs Another Director
11 June 2023
The last sceen is a perfect analogy to how this movie was directed: receiving a US Passport AND a US Visa. The director thinks you, his audience, are THAT stupid. Really.
Guy Ritchie ruined a perfectly good story, and the performance of two talented actors, with utterly stupid directing decisions throughout the movie... pretty much like any of his movies.
And, I suppose, we're equally stupid to allow ourselves to get roped into watching his movies... though, in defence, I wasn't paying attention to the credits (discredits, in this case).
The movie's entertaining story, descent production budget, and acting earn this review some stars. Whereas the directing, set locations, cinematography and CGI are rubbish.
Please, please(!), PLEASE stop allowing this director to direct movies!!! There are dozens - hundreds - of other directors whom respect their audiences.
Guy Ritchie ruined a perfectly good story, and the performance of two talented actors, with utterly stupid directing decisions throughout the movie... pretty much like any of his movies.
And, I suppose, we're equally stupid to allow ourselves to get roped into watching his movies... though, in defence, I wasn't paying attention to the credits (discredits, in this case).
The movie's entertaining story, descent production budget, and acting earn this review some stars. Whereas the directing, set locations, cinematography and CGI are rubbish.
Please, please(!), PLEASE stop allowing this director to direct movies!!! There are dozens - hundreds - of other directors whom respect their audiences.
The Green Knight
(2021)
Waste of Funding
17 October 2021
This movie is not enjoyable - period. The bi-chromatic 'cinematography' was idiotic, over-emphasized, and annoyed the overall experience. Scenes were not - I repeat NOT - a 'visual beauty' (such reviews are hogwash), and it was clearly evident that there minimal effort to scout locations ('old battlefield' being a perfect example). Key actors were good; but direction given to all remaining actors must have been 'act like you're in a trance' or 'do nothing' as that about sums up their rolls. The "Artistic" label is far-fetched, unless you also define the animated LOTR movie as being the same (similar vibe, yet even the direction of that movie is better). Story: there are obvious reasons why, for decades, no one attempted to make a movie about the poem.
Fathom
(2021)
Movie is a Waste of Funding and Time
31 July 2021
This movie has likely tanked a certain researcher's possibility of getting funding in the future. Changing research plans ad-hoc, inability to keep up on recording data, lack of time-knowledge over inputs (playing whale recordings in the ocean... "I think that's ours"?!?!), and questionable data points to begin with... Why would any agency pay for 'that'? Demonstrably amateurs.
And then there is the movie's director. Barely enough run time to qualify as a 'movie', and stacked with time-wasting scenes that arguably have nothing to do with what the viewer was expecting to see. Given camera technology, anyone can shoot great scenery in Alaska, or people goofing off on a tree swing. An evidentially poor effort; Apple producers are equally to blame. 3 stars is generous.
And then there is the movie's director. Barely enough run time to qualify as a 'movie', and stacked with time-wasting scenes that arguably have nothing to do with what the viewer was expecting to see. Given camera technology, anyone can shoot great scenery in Alaska, or people goofing off on a tree swing. An evidentially poor effort; Apple producers are equally to blame. 3 stars is generous.
Crime (33%), Drama (65%... yawn), Fantasy (2%)
2 August 2020
24 Little Hours
(2020)
Utter Amateur Effort
24 January 2020
Was this a Uni project? I hope they didn't pay the actors, whom they clearly got off the street. Anyone that remotely thinks this 1-take per scene pile of rubbish deserves any credit should avoid poker tables; we now know your bluff. Those listed in the credits should insist that they be struck-off, as this movie is a career wrecker.
Fat: A Documentary
(2019)
Armchair Scientists = "Idiocracy" (Might as well watch that movie instead)
11 January 2020
What do you get when you combine a former male model, a journalist, a software engineer, and a handful of (just) GPs and family anecdotes? This documentary. Zero science was used. Maybe what they claim has a founding, but the lack of any credibility for the 'experts' used should make anyone with two brain cells highly suspect. You deserve better.
Tell Your Friends