Reviews

Why such a difference in the ratings?

My guess, we've watched different versions.

I got lucky and watched the long version (nearly 2h long) first; what a movie!! Many fun moments (although tooooo many curse words, at times it just degrades the style) ... funny moments that you don't have in the almost-90min version.

For example with the Scottish aid (which i found kind of cute to insert a Scottish way of talking around American English speakers :), and a few other scenes which have disappeared in the shorter version.

Also the editing in the 90 min version is weirder than in the long version.

To be honest, the 90 min version feels kind of flat ... while i had a real good time when watching the 117 min version.

If you didn't appreciate this movie, maybe check which version it was... You 'might' have missed the one that could provide you a good entertainment!

All in all it is an interesting movie to watch, if you wonder whether to give it a shot, go ahead give it 30 minutes and see if you are taken into the story.

I really appreciate that this movie brings this fact of people suffering from facial deformities ; in itself it IS a very beautiful gesture and it deserves we at least give it a thought ... and not go with our daily life taking every "basic" thing (i.e. Having a whole face, walking, etc.) for granted.

Now this being said ... it realistically doesn't deserve 9 or 10/10 ... reviewers are being fully led by their emotions, and miss some of the hypocrisies in this story.

For time constraint, the movie doesn't expand much on some of the other characters ... who actually DO deserve to be considered.

I actually wanted to stay a little longer on the ark with the sister and J. W. And having an ark on the parents too would have been SOOO instructive: how have they been dealing with the pressure? How are they each feeling about the daughter being left out? What mindset do they each have that helped them going through with their son's childhood? And their relationship, what made them keep being strong TOGETHER from the birth?

This movie wants to give us some lessons and extend our view ... but ... concerning the bully (you'll know when you watch the movie) OF COURSE he has to come from a wealthy family, OF COURSE the parents must behave like snobs, OF COURSE they must play the card "With all the money we donate to your school" ................ Sure ... like bullies shouldn't come from a middle class or lower class family?! I usually don't care that much about that cliche, but in this movie, since they want us to look beyond stereotypes when it comes to people's appearance, why would you make such a series of stereotypes when it comes to that bullying kid's family?? It was a missed opportunity to elevate even more the viewers' mind with demonstrations of empathy, understanding, forgiveness.

And the end - i won't spoil - it felt more like favoritism rather than fairness. J. W. Deserved it much more! (those who saw the film should understand what i mean)

... i am digging into feminism (and the other side) to understand it, and expand my own views. Before watching this documentary, i watched "The Red Pill". However in this documentary, the drive of those women (that i reckon is at times highly justified) and the "facts" being shown tend to put a veil over some reasonable facts. What already annoyed me a lot was when they list recipients of the Oscar for Best Director, from 1990 to 2008 ... only men, ok ... HOWEVER they don't present at all what other movies were in the competition at that time! When you compare winners for movies like "Forrest Gump" or "Saving Private Ryan", what other directors should have deserved the award?

• Forrest Gump, 1994, only one movie made by a woman ("Little Women" by Gillian Armstrong), no discrimination there ... Forrest Gump is just so very well done, it is a classic!
• Saving Private Ryan, 1998, one *animated* movie with a woman as director (The Prince of Egypt by Brenda Chapman & co) ... does Steven Spielberg not deserve his Oscar for directing what has become a classic war movie??
• 1996, there were 5 movies made by women (one made by Barbra Streisand - who hosted the Oscar ceremony in 2004 shown in the documentary, frustrated that no woman has been Best Director yet) ... even spectators reviews find those 5 movies less good than the winner for Best Director: The English Patient ..... Oh! Another classic!

While doing this simple research, you can also notice that the number of movies with strong female characters is much higher than what they have said in the documentary.

There might not be as much representation as they would like to, but facts show that the last years have had far more strong female characters than the last 30 years ... but they refute that in the documentary.

I agree that the industry is difficult for women with many d--ks (pick the meaning you want) around, but it has improved already a lot and it keeps improving; and the mentalities are nothing alike compared to the 50s and 60s. Finally truth be told, a large number of female protagonists have accepted by their own choice to contribute to the general idea the public has had over women. Since Hollywood is Hollywood, why is there not yet a number of very large studio companies of the size of Paramount or 20th Century Fox women-owned and with 90% of the workforce being women?

I am not at all against what the people in the documentary wants to achieve (more recognition and respect), they deserve that right; but when searching deeper some of the arguments they present, you realise there is sometimes a lack of common sense, and at times it plays the card "it's because of men" a little too much.

I have watched this movie twice already, why?

3 main points:

• Winnie the Pooh and his friends are very well done, the textures make them so real and not at all, characters coming from an animated series. Therefore you genuinely attach to them, they become real! And Winnie is so adorable, his clumsiness makes him so caring at the same time.
• Ewan McGregor is a perfect fit, and makes us relate to him through his grown-up life. And that is so important for this story. We can see the mistakes he is doing with his family, and yet ..... so true to reality.
• It is such a fantastic journey to accompany Christopher Robin reconnecting with his inner child ... reevaluating what matters most in Life, and rekindling his friendship with Winnie and his team ...

... You want to be Christopher Robin, you want to make your a-Madeline happy, you want your Evelyn-my-wife feel the love she deserves, and you want to have your Winnie the Pooh put you back on track when you lose your way.

I hope the magic in this movie will reach to your inner child as it has done it with a number of viewers (and reviewers), it is a fantastic emotional journey to be on ... just let yourself accompany Christopher Robin :)

Of course, watch it if you want ... but i hope this review will help to know a little what to expect.

Before watching this 2nd opus, i watched again "Les Petits Mouchoirs" so to remember the relation between the different characters. Then i watch "Little White Lies 2" ... what a disappointment. It almost hurts to see what is going on with these different people when you have seen how growing each of them were as the first movie was ending.

Francois Cluzet plays very well, his anxiety attacks are spot on and not as overacted as some may think (having been through depression myself, i related to what he was expressing: it gets very hard to manage one's emotions) Gilles Lellouche seems to be the only one who has truly grown ... to a point (so disrespectful towards his baby girl and the nanny) ... and Marion Cotillard ........... oh my .... who took the decision to make her fragile but evolving Marie from the first opus to that brainless, crude-mannered, selfish brat??!! - Not only her character is distasteful and not credible at all as Marie, but Marion over does it.

I could go on with everything that makes this second movie a bad sequel: almost each scene portrays wrong choices and bad actions, it is depressing, and it goes for over 2h; some scenes are useless; many are not credible = not fitting the nature of the group of friends we have followed in the first movie ... the list goes on.

What bothers me the most is that all of them behave with so much irresponsibility and stupidity. For example: ordering the kids to go to bed, but being extremely noisy and drunk until late at night; seducing the very young partners who were present for ... their kids; they all seem to have given up on parenting; drinking and smoking to no limit {almost EACH scene} ; "friends" who can't help putting down their friends ... the list goes on ...............

A very disappointing movie with some good actors that made this movie more than 2 very long hours of disappointments.

{I watched it after having an emotionally difficult week, and it was a great cure for the evening!! Thank you so much Dany Boon!!} This movie (not to be mistaken as a sequel for "Bienvenue chez les ch'tis") brings beautiful moments of relationships, and we go through those moments with laughter! ... and some, even bring a delicate tear in the corner of the eye. There are many funny moments and the acting is well done: when it is a comedic scene or a more serious one, the tone is well respected! And if you haven't got enough laughter throughout the movie, stay for the end credits; for sure some of them will bring you a big smile! It makes you wonder why the rating as of May 2020 is 5.7 ??!!

Both Paddington movies are really awesome! These movies have the power to connect to our inner child's heart and joy! Thank you so much for the gift you offer us! Every time there was a scene when my brain was like: "Oh come on! How ... ?" i was immediately telling it: "It is a tale about a talking bear!! Don't think ... accept!" And in a way, Paddington is indeed an inspiration.

Yes, Meryl Streep plays very well ... no doubt about it; she herself deserves 8 stars for her performance. But this movie, no.

It is a mess, you really don't feel (or "think") the struggles MT went through. This movie is bad and doesn't really tell MT's story. Just 6-7 fractions of her life ... and apparently, sorting out the clothes of her late husband has taken the most part of her life!!

Really not a good movie ... i am glad i chose a time i was on my own, with my computer, to fast-forward or accelerate many scenes. You will really not get much (knowledge, entertainment, feelings) from this movie.

In my memories, the movie was full of action, and a background story just enough to explain why the BR Act was on (and the reason to get those kids kill each other); and i often liked Takeshi Kitano's movies (i haven't watched any from him since 2005). It was a cult movie! After just watching it again (5 min later i'm writing this review) Wow ! What a bad movie, with really bad actors (i know there is the Asian style of acting - but honestly, quite a lot of them are really bad at acting), a really bad editing, and ridiculous special effects (mostly just red paint on clothes - reminds me of the 1980s movies) ... And the end story? Oh my ...... so pointless!

The background stories (to try and make us connect with the characters) are just useless ... after the 2nd one, i just skipped them ... as well as the end that i fast forwarded.

Sure, watch it to know what it is about; but don't have high expectations. And if you think you could pass on this one, do it. You will find more drama and better acting in BR-style video games :D

Strangely i feel a bit offended by the reviews below 5 ... i really wonder why they are so against this movie. From the beginning (funny failed accent by Batista) to the credits (pausing captures on funny facial expressions) everything has been made to give a joyful moment to the viewers. In many reviews, they keep repeating "it is cliche" ... YES, it is and THEY PLAY with almost every cliche you can think of!! And they even make fun of a lot of spy movies!! At first i was very concerned about the young actress ... but actually she was good at her role {hateful, mischievous, adorable, cocky, ... not many child actors can pull that off; even some adults aren't able to act it that well} and actually she makes a good fun duo with Batista. I had low expectations at first, but i realised that this movie was genuinely made to give the viewers fun; it is not so centred to the characters or the story itself ... those are just medium to one main purpose: give you fun!! Once i opened to that idea only, man this movie was great for that! What an evening filled with laughter!

{Unlike movies like Ocean 12, Grown ups 2 or Funny People who are telling you it is funny, but it only funny to the actors ... and not truly centred to the viewers' interest}

I often watch Korean movies, and they do have a style that is proper to them. I really appreciate what the Korean artists try out with the cinematographic art. This movie has created a lot of hype in the industry ... even got an Oscar ; by watching the cover and the title, i didn't want to watch this movie. But then it got recommended by a very close friend of mine (who's working in Korean affairs). I gave it a shot ... and ... i was right ; ... i didn't like this movie. To me, i didn't find the "humour" amusing (although quite a lot of Korean movies are really good with humour). The story itself was pathetic (however that is the point with a title like "Parasite"). The end (which for me started at the point they were getting hammered) was overly long and messy. All that being said though, the actors are really good ; the screenplay is most times well done (although too many close ups) ; but frankly ... it is overhyped. I think this movie responds more to those being bourgeois.

There is NO WAY this animation gets a score of 6.3 (as of March 2020) considering all the negative -and just- reviews against it ! As the title says, if you care for what your child watches, do not -PLEASE!- do not give them this to watch ! The manipulation of opinion is really high in this one !

• Superman being Soviet is of course absolutely bad; the American way doing things wrong throughout the whole movie is at the end of course absolutely good!
• Wonderwoman being the extreme impersonation of feminism finds any detail to say men are bad and "my Mom was right!" ... with of course the scenarists doing anything to push into that kind of thinking into that direction ... Superman having a peanut instead of a brain.
• And talking about intelligence ... this animation is a real insult to it; there is so many ways Superman in "reality" would have been acting in a much smarter way, you wonder why the people behind this project makes him so ridiculously dumb! ... and that too is a reason why not to give this to your child - they don't need an idiotic model.
• The language is atrocious ... between insults, bad words, and manipulation (Wonderwoman) it is really not a reference to put in front of kids' eyes and ears.

Considering the drawings ... well the cover of the movie seems to give the impression that you will watch a wonderful animation! It is not!! It is your Sunday morning cartoon quality ! The same ... not beautiful at all, no work on shadows, on details, on gradients, it is just plain, ugly ... the now usual DC quality.

PLEASE for your child, for your intelligence, for your sanity ... move on to something better ! (Charlie Chaplin's Tramp movies are better alternatives !!)

• Ryan Philippe was miscast; the way he plays his character is so arrogant and obnoxious, no one from his peers would accept that as a rookie (lack of respect). And the attitude he has to take every one from his high horse ... Really looks like a brat. Distasteful.
• No explanation is made to why Snipes has become a thug.
• The end is long ... You just want the character of Philippe to finally go to bed ... so we can finally shut down the screen with this movie on.

Some scenes are good for the action, pyrotech, and some ideas in the script ; unfortunately, it wanted to be a smart kind of movie, but it fails, mainly due to the cast (and some of the characters on screen - some seem like to be from a TV series) ... Actually, The Mentalist is a much better watch than this.

This movie is old and not so important so i won't waste much time on a review. Although you expect this movie not to be a brainer and mainly fights ... better not to watch it ... even the fight scenes are becoming so idiotic and repetitive, you just wish for the end of the fight before it gets started. The female antagonist is not even worthy of being played ... her character is just a fantasy of Luc Besson; she is just vulgar, hollow and distasteful (i skipped their fight as i didn't want to waste more time watching, since i knew the final outcome anyway) ... there's plenty of bad things to mention, but my time is more valuable than that movie. Watch it with friends, you will have plenty of "Oh come ooon !! This is SOOO stupid !!" moments, therefore you might laugh together on how bad this movie is !

Sincerely not wanting to be disrespectful to Freddie's family and friends ... My review is solely about the movie. {and please read it full before downvoting}

It is boring. The story is told in a way that is not really interesting: it feels very bland ...

The portrayal of the coach gives the impression he was not really motivating, and basically put all the results of the team on ONE player only ... the movie gives the appearance: "you don't have Freddie, the team will never be able to win at all". {in real life, as a player, i would have never felt really part of such team, because it would not have been OUR team and the team effort ; but more like "Freddie and ... the guys that are here ... because they have to"} <= I guess in reality it wasn't like that, but that is how the movie is portraying the story ... anyway, back to the film's review.

When moments are for excitement, or sadness, in those scenes too, it really felt you were watching a documentary-like story and didn't feel so much involved. I felt much more emotional involvements in movies such as "Gridiron", "Coach Carter", "McFarland, USA" or "Miracle" ... also based on true stories. Sure some of these movies sometimes "play on" the emotional strand too much ... but they still keep close enough to the historical events and manage to tell the story in a captivating way.

And movies like "Rudy", "42", "The Express" telling the story of one single player (respectively Daniel Ruettiger, Jackie Robinson, Ernie Davis) still manage to express clearly the hardships those men had to go through to get where they were ... "My All-American" fails to present that; and maybe this is why there is little attachment to the actor playing Freddie, and to Freddie's story.

Now; if you want to watch a biographical movie about Freddie Steinmark, this movie can be good for you; But if you're looking to watch a sports movie which can bring motivation, excitements, and maybe some life stories; I would suggest other movies instead. (Even the movie "The Game stands tall" which is historically not very accurate - especially with the player Chris Ryan - a composite of players - brings more interest as a sports movie than this one)

The first part with the little Toto is very interesting and touching; then after Toto has grown, it becomes much less attractive ... And because the beginning of the movie already showed us the end ... there wasn't much surprise anyway. The classic last scene (watching the reel) was - for me - so annoyingly repetitive ... and i truly didn't get it ! But then i checked about Cinema Paradiso and learnt there was a Director's Cut; and from what i read, the Director's Cut really gives a lot of sense to the last scene. The deleted parts really give content to the last message of Alfredo to Toto. Finally, i believe the film was awarded because of the Director's Cut version, not the theatrical one. (Or else i would agree with paulclaassen (20 December 2019), this is a movie for movie buffs and nostalgic of the older era of cinematography, which explains the long list of awards and the status of "classic" for this movie)

I won't give much opinion about this movie, it is the kind "or you love it, or you really don't" ... I gave my score. The only thing i don't appreciate with this type of movies (related to poverty and drugs) is that whatever happens, it MUST BE down and sad at the end ... therefore, the background message is "whatever happens, don't expect much anyway"; the main message with such movie is "ONLY money can help us". And because of that, the masses keep putting money as their sole direction for a better life, and nothing can be good if they don't have enough of it. And so, the loop keeps going, mentality doesn't change, values don't get deeper than that... One movie (based on a true story) out of many other real examples presents that fact: 'genuine values first, the money will follow' is "Extraordinary Measures" (2010) - More recommended than Doneybrook

Antonio Benderas deserves 10 stars for his performance in this movies; but the movie itself ... it gets interesting only at the end after going through 90 min (yep ... 90 MINUTES) of watching meaningless scenes, and only 2 or 3 scenes that grab the interest (the Federico arc brought some change through the nonchalant flow; while the old mother part really was mostly wasted time) It is actually the end that has made me give this low score ... it stops so abruptly, i was like: "What? ... what's the point of all this story then?" ... there is actually no message, no laugh, no excitement, ... there is even no attachment to Banderas' character.

Ignorant about the synopsis, i found the story interesting at first (although i found it was rather too "pushed down our throats" about being black or being blue and that is it ... very 3 year-old mentality to my taste). Then step by step, i found more and more dialogues being plain stupid; and SO MANY scenes being ridiculous ... it felt it was a 16 year-old making this movie ("Oh yeah man, that would be so cool if the girl she walks through the middle of the projects, that would be so badass, and she looks tough and every one speaks her down and ..." ..... harf, you get the idea ....) Talking about the "bad guys", the actor playing D (for Darius) is terrible at acting, my god was he comically lame as a bad guy!

Putting aside the strange acting of Jonathan Rhys Meyers (weird stares, monotonous voice ... maybe he wanted to portray a man who was so tired of lying, so lost in being under cover that he could not even project a real personality anymore) the movie reflects somehow a representation rather close to what spies go through in their missions. You start to wonder who to trust, you never know if you are followed, the fact that the viewers are also being lied to adds to the sensation of what a spy lives on daily. Yes the action is limited but check testimonies of real spies and you will see that fights and shooting were on rare (to none) occasions ... their job is not being a James Bond, it is to blend in and get information to report back; thus this movie feels more like a real spy movie.

The editing always going back and forth and mostly on useless frames was such a headache ! Then the action ... oh my god it was so lame ! The final shootout was 100% laughable: dying after being shot in the shoulder, open fracture after twisting an ankle, etc. !! I didn't bother finish the last few minutes remaining ... this movie is really lame.

Although i also didn't like this movie, i found it a little bit better than the 1st one only because of one instant in the car that was very touching ... But honestly speaking, if it had been a real scenario, i were Ethan, i would have left that woman right away ... she is a total mess !!! (On the other hand, if i were Celine, i would clearly see that Ethan is going to be a piece of work to deal with in the future) Anyway, the movie is again too long, the conversations too boring, the events too dull, the end too cringy ... Again, too overrated

The first 10 min are annoying, trying to create some mystery at every encounter. After 20 min or so, you already know what is going on ... making all the rest of the movie not worth watching. The synopsis made me think that it was going to be a mind game and using intellect for the husband (Matthew) to get out of the trap of the ex-wife (Anne) ... well, no! Matthew is playing a VERY dumb person all along the movie and Anne is excruciating to watch and listen to throughout the whole movie (and absolutely not believable in that role - an amateur actress could give the same result) ... the "husband" overacts and efforts are plentiful to try to make us hate the guy when in reality, we would be: "Yeah sure man ... You're just dumb!!" I kept watching because i still believed there would be an interesting twist with the similitude in look-alike between Matthew and the "husband" ... there is no such twist; the movie really is over after 40 min. It is just another movie that wants to be clever in its originality ... but that is not ... "Stupidity" really deserves its name !!

The beginning was ... ok. I personally liked the middle, with the team going on the treasure hunt. Then the end really missed a climatic moment !! And the final part ... i was actually: "Huuuumm ... are you kidding ?! ... He's lost "XXXX" but he's now stuck with "S.SOB" ?! ... ??!!" Knowing the magical potential that Kubo has, it could have been such a breathtaking ending !!!

One more 10 star rating to add to this movie! It deserves it! (The pace is right, not too slow nor too fast; lighting is well used; the camera positions are mostly well done, and the acting and dialogues are right)

• i love this movie for being romantic, but still very true to reality with no over drama, no over romantic, and no Hollywood style romance; in life we meet people, we attach to people, we say good bye to people ... and sometimes we meet again.

• I love that Alice behaves as such at the beginning, it is much closer to reality!

• I love the role that Chris plays throughout the movie. It is a REALLY good interpretation of how a man should behave: being rudely rejected at first from Alice but it's not affecting his ego, and he still behaves as a real centred man should (joking about it and still being his true self); the only time he is being shaken up, is when meeting his ex - which truth be told, is how most people would react when they still have strong LOVE for their ex. Those scenes make it more truthful. (No fun moment, joke moment or over reaction at that time !)

• I love that we don't see what they have drawn, it is THEIR moment of intimacy; and since either one of them have any idea on what the other has created; so why should we?!

• I love that at the end, it is sudden; (again, it is not meant to us to know what is behind the paper, only Alice knows: maybe it is just "I will love you forever", maybe an address, maybe a phone number ... or - why not - another fun surprise from Nick like "see you at -train station- on -time and date")

"Before We Go" feels so right! Because once again: *in life we meet people, we attach to people, we say good bye to people ... and sometimes we meet again!!*