Reviews

The film retained everything from the style of the first part and almost nothing from the mind. This is a fun movie that flies by unnoticed, full of fantastic action scenes and hilarious skirmishes, amusing heroes and interesting villains, but there is not even a shadow of that self-irony in it, which the first part was remembered for. There is no famous "scene in the church" here either. There is no special logic to everything that is happening. The whole scenario, all the motivations, all the riddles and, accordingly, the clues are stretched like a thin sheet over a blazing fire: it doesn't burn yet, but it already smells. Even the main message or moral dilemma (whatever) alludes too stubbornly to the political situation in America. Stubbornness is not in the spirit of Kingsman, but there is too much of it in the sequel. That doesn't mean the movie is bad, though. It is extremely pleasant to watch it, but the raw script does not allow the actors, the director, or the viewer to turn around. The sequel turned out surprisingly monotonous.

It turned out to be a pretty good continuation, the film, as for me, is not inferior to the first part as a whole. Drive, thrash, everything is in its place, only more. There were certainly scenes that evoked disgust, but they are few. Of the new characters, I really liked Whiskey with his jump rope, he's cool. Jeff Bridges is very small, as is Tatum, but the first appearance on the screen of the 2nd is just TOP. Halle Berry... Well, damn it's just a typical Merlin in a skirt. Villainess... Valentine is better. As for the old ones - handsome, che. They remained the same in principle, well, Egzy has changed a little as a person, and so in the old way. Of course, I have a question for Vaughn, what the hell is Kane doing there, he's a traitor?! The action is more diverse, the picture is good. In general, as for me, the first sequel in Vaughn's career was a success.

"In the first minutes after leaving the cinema, there was a wild delight, because the jokes, the dynamics of the film and the staging of the fights went into full swing. Well, if you think about it and analyze it: a very bright movie, leaving at the expense of individual fragments, is generally inferior to integrity and the elegance of the plot of the first part. Valentine is more interesting than this frankly exaggerated madam. In the image of Poppy there is more trash than banter and irony. I don't know how successful the move was that Harry Hart was made at times a dull comic element, but thanks at least recovered by the end of the film. But you begin to realize the weakness of the plot only after the fact, the film starts right off the bat, starting with a fight in a car that perfectly inherits all the charm of the fights of the first Kingsman, and then there is no time to take a breath and think. , jokes on the verge of common sense, catchy with their recklessness and drive. It is the case when a movie is an attraction, and this wins.

Sitting and bored, how much is there? 2 hours of drag. No plot, no characters.

Is that honest? Was it worth merging such cool Persians for the sake of introducing zero dummies? Why is Halle Berry there at all? And Bridges? Tatum? Emotionless statues. Dirty jokes do not come in at all (I don't care what kind of humor, as long as it works). But here the writer didn't try at all. The action is all concentrated at the end, but it does not capture or catch at all.

Well, they turned the camera, shook it, but the movie doesn't get any better from this. Already in the middle I just wanted to get out (there is such a useless and boring plot), but I thought "maybe at the end they hid something interesting." Figushki =) I thought, like everyone else, like it "by inertia", because of the first part. But no.... Paid for bad mood. Bravo Won!

Julianna, even despite her n-years with a ponytail, looks great, but alas, the antagonist in her performance looks much weaker than the antagonist created by S. L. Jackson in the first film. The plot is also not very bright, it does not offer anything to surprise, there are no unexpected moves. Some characters are also for beauty. The only thing that attracts is the action scenes (although some of which look very fabulous) and those. Bells and whistles.

After the brilliant first part, I waited with apprehension for the continuation .... And you know, my friends, I was afraid in vain, because the film turned out to be very solid! It is practically impossible to shoot twice on the verge of a foul, for this reason the director added more characters, more locations, more humor, more style! Gone, but this, I repeat, is INEVITABLE !!!!! Everything in the movie, it's worth it.

For starters, what do you like. First of all, staging, camera work and special effects. It is difficult to understand the logic of the producers Anton Zlatopolsky, Sergey Selyanov, and Bakur Bakuradze, who decided to entrust "Salyut-7" to the creator of the drama "How to Raise a Million. Z@drota Confession" Klim Shipenko. Perhaps this was one of the producer's insights, a risky bet on a newcomer who will clearly show more zeal than venerable colleagues. One way or another, this bet fully justified itself: the film came out dynamic, the narration does not sag, the characters of the main characters are obvious, but most importantly (and this is an important distinguishing feature of any good director), it is literally permeated with love for details.

Whether it's the interiors of the mid-80s recreated in the frame, electronic and other toys, cars, clothes and accessories, in the end the ships themselves and the working conditions in space. No ridiculous flights on fire extinguishers, and gold-plated filters completely hide faces while working overboard on the sunny side of the Earth. In general, each scene is built very skillfully and evokes in the viewer exactly the emotions and reflections for which it was designed.

Perhaps the only one. WHY did you need to invent other names for the heroes? For what reason did not commander Vladimir Dzhanibekov and engineer Viktor Savinykh fly to save the inoperative space station Salyut-7, but not existing cosmonauts? The arguments of the filmmakers, voiced at a press conference after the demonstration of the film, did not seem convincing to the author of these lines. Say, the history of the mission is so intertwined with the personal lives of the prototypes that it was considered not very correct to use their real names! But at the same time, real Soviet and foreign conquerors of outer space are mentioned very often in the film, yes, and the station itself is not called the Millennium Falcon, but Salyut-7. How this is consistent with the noble concept "the Motherland must know its heroes" is not at all clear.

If it was originally planned to shoot a space thriller in the spirit of "Gravity", then why was there such an obvious link to a specific historical event. If the task was set to screen a truly extremely dramatic mission to rescue Salyut-7, then why this leapfrog with names and events on Earth and in space that did not really exist? These unanswered questions, alas, will be a negative factor for all viewers who are at least somewhat familiar with this story.

As for the work of the operator and special effects, they are not only not inferior to the best Western models, but in many respects they simply surpass them. Very interesting first-person views as the astronauts move around the outer surface of the station, it will look especially great in stereoscopic format, which will add depth to the projection. The episodes in zero gravity are perfectly recreated, although, as the creators of the picture explain, they were all filmed in the studio using various technical devices. Well, the scenes with water filling the living quarters are just great.

The cast deserves special mention. Vladimir Vdovichenkov and Pavel Derevyanko made a wonderful on-screen duet, looking very natural and trustworthy in the frame. Alexander Samoilenko most plausibly managed to convey the state of the flight director who is (as expected) on the verge of a nervous breakdown and heart attack. The female roles were a little less noticeable, but those couple of episodes in which, say, Maria Mironova appeared, were quite enough to give the story the necessary melodrama.

Now about what I didn't like, although this characteristic is not very suitable in this case. More precisely, what caused the questions.

In my opinion, it turned out quite satisfactory, but it could have been much better. The director managed to convey the spirit of electronics of the late 90s to the screens, showing Vasker's pager and communicator, but for such a film adaptation of the game, it is important that everyone wants to see in such a film at least a good, brutal mochilovo, to some cheerful music. And here there is Music, but there is no meat) And the music in the film is chosen with taste. I am quite satisfied with the work of the composer, operators; the acting ensemble also coped with its task, but they are not satisfied with the non-frightening make-up, special effects, as well as the episodic appearance of Ada Wong) Therefore, 7 out of 10.

The film is slow enough and poor in plot saturation and atmosphere. The characters simply reveal themselves in passing - the permanent here and now, just a modest digression into the past with childhood in the orphanage of a brother and sister, and an Umbrella researcher. All the action of the film is as simple as possible, but at the same time there is no unnecessary attraction and superhero running around. And the characters look life-like, realistic. The atmosphere is supported by songs of that time and technical aspects in the form of pagers, chats on the Internet that have just appeared, VHS cassettes. But the zombies jump out in a very playful way with faces in full screen. Although there is no complete disclosure of the situation in general, only the tip of the iceberg of what happened in Raccoon City is visible. In general, you can see.

Postirony. This is both a sequel, and a reboot, and a rethinking. Strange feeling, aftertaste. It is at least worth watching for the new emotions that the tape certainly gives. For some, positive, but for someone ... Like seeing an old best friend: he is still the same and at the same time different. At the moment, it is difficult for me to imagine another 4e matrix. Perhaps, after all, he measured the flower core for green and made a more serious tonality. It was nice to meet old heroes in a new guise and partly in content.

Duch not all acting work is equally good, as well as casting in general. BUT there are a couple of excellent hits .: the artagonists are excellent (both type and alignment). Against their background, Neo looked like a man without deep principles. Morpheus is good too. Fighter, yes, uneven, torn. Chereshchchur saturated and colorful picture also partly interferes with immersion. There is a lot of fan service and references for the sake of references (as if we don't remember). The ending was too pompous and vulgar. This film will not attract new fans, unfortunately. It's made for oldies. What else could be done with the aged actors, to whom every somersault and blow is given with genuine difficulty? Without them, it would no longer be a matrix. The picture was a victim of past success and wasted time/opportunity to shoot it earlier.

Attempts within the framework of a tortured plot with the basis not even of love, but rather of the purpose of being together with Neo and Trinity, asking philosophical questions and trying deep topics - did not give colorful saturation, and to a large extent passed by. The action was greatly blown away compared to the trilogy, the world has slightly changed its balance in relations between people, machines and programs, but there is no sharp conflict in this, there are rather political games of certain participants. And some intrigue at the beginning with where and what the reality is. Many of the characters just go by the clock without standing out, just almost faceless. Nevertheless, the characters of the new Morpheus and Agent Smith pleased with worthy images and clearly confident performance. But in general, the film after the previous parts feels very mediocre.

A disgusting film that parasitizes on a great trilogy. Absolutely pointless plot and absolutely mediocre action. An absolutely hacky and meaningless work, where the director (sha) tells us his personal experiences and worldview, the worldview of a sick person. The whole film is a veiled and sometimes not very, tribute to the modern agenda. Where the main thing is not the story, not the plot, not the character, and not even the visual picture, but the agenda. Morbius is a laughingstock, compared to the original trilogy, he is such a dummy that you forget about this character as soon as he disappears from the frame. Trinity is a disgrace that goes after Morbius as soon as she disappears from the screens. There are secondary characters because it is necessary, remove them from the film and nothing will change, even now it is difficult to remember who was called and what he did in the film. And once again action, remember the fight when neo freed morbius. Remember those emotions, hail of bullets, epic swings? Well, forget it. Like this movie.

I'll tell you right away. I'm an Oscar Isaac fan. That's just why ZV7 weighs 30-40 percent more for me than it would have weighed without it. Well, I can't calmly relate to a person who so chicly played just an enchanting, brilliant, convincing scum in "Forbidden Reception". Play in such a way that you cease to understand that the actor and the character are different people However, now we are not talking about Zack's work. We're talking about Jay Jay.

We are about Salvation!

Yes - you heard right, it is about Salvation - with a capital letter.

Salvation of what? Franchises.

From what? From that miserable, stupid abomination that Lucas served in episodes 1-3. I remember these episodes most of all because after watching Episode-1 in the cinema, where I tried with all my might, I regretted the free torrent and unlimited Internet for downloading both the first series and the continuation. But, I still watched all three episodes out of principle.

Online.

For the Enemy must be known by sight!

This film was released a year after the successful release of The Avengers. The line with one of the infinity stones was completed and it was necessary to move on, and for this it was necessary to complete the trilogy of films about Iron Man and, as it seems to us, we managed to do it. I would like to note that even so many years later, the film looks great and while watching, I immersed myself in the story as much as possible and enjoyed it. Next, I will try to share my impressions of viewing, share my thoughts on this matter and identify the shortcomings and advantages of the picture, we will subject the picture to a good analysis.

This is the rare case when I don't want to reveal the details of the plot at all, I can only say that the main storyline is tied to Tony Stark's past, how he experiences the events in New York, and for him it was a considerable shock, plus everything, he almost lost his life. And the "life after" storytelling in this film works just fine. Back in 1999, literally an hour before the start of the 2000s, Tony Stark was approached by an obscure botanist with a bunch of ambitions and offered Tony a demo version of the Extremis project, which requires large investments and another brilliant mind for more successful work. Tony promised him sandcastles and blew the meeting, he harbored evil and then the movie begins. In which the family drama is already strung, and the difficulties of accepting that after New York nothing will be the same as before, and the difficult relationship with Pepper Potts, and a new dangerous enemy. This is interesting to watch, because in terms of the overall story, the third iron man is a great conclusion to the story of this character.

Strength and honor As everyone knows, there are two in the world: strength and mind. So we see Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), a man who made incredible power (suit) with his mind (education).

The story of part 3 tells us about the successful life of the well-known Tony Stark. Everything in his life is the same as before: he invents more and more new gadgets, but the past time of his decisions catches up precisely in the third part. Simple frivolous the decisions he makes every day pass without a trace. But in the past, when his thoughts were like the wind, he imperceptibly raised an enemy for himself. A very familiar story, for a person who watched part 3. A bogus terrorist named Mandarin was only a decoy in this great plan. Seeking to humiliate Tony, the Mandarin attacks him and wants to show how defenseless Iron Man is. Moving away from danger, Iron Man hides to strike again. The final fight is very impressive. Nobody expected this, the appearance of a whole group of iron suits. A surprise was also the transformation of Peper (Gwenith Paltrow) like a mutant (walking bomb, super man). But Tony took matters into his own hands and rectified the situation, well done. Pleasant ending part 3: evil defeated, shrapnel pulled from Tony's chest, also hopefully Tony's next wedding with Peper.

Summing up, I can say: the film is well made (there are unexpected situations, good special effects), the appearance of an iron suit in the frame is not enough. The acting is excellent. The change in director significantly affected the character of the film. Overall, a decent ending. I think all fans of "Iron Man" have something to see. The film can be assessed as a success or not everyone's choice. Thank you all for your attention.

My name is Harlem Shake, a regular user who, like all cinephiles, is waiting for the release date of films that are must-see. Just a year ago, I thought that Marvel comics film adaptations had risen to a new level, because before that only a handful of people (fans) were waiting for it. But after the release of The Avengers, Marvel proved that his films are not only for comic book maniacs, but also for people who like to watch a full-fledged movie. Robert Downey Jr. And his Iron Man have clearly influenced the prosperity of this company. The popularity of this person is simply going through the roof, and this is confirmed not only by the box office, but also by VKontakte memes. Yes, Tony Stark is one of the memorable images of cinema, but everything has its end, it's time to finish. The problem is how to finish it with dignity (underline the word "dignified").

My take on how this franchise should have ended.

First: Don't give a damn about the style of the first and second, and make a full-fledged film.

Second: A worthy superhero, a worthy opponent who will humiliate Tony Stark well.

Third: Tony Stark forever goes into the shadows, if necessary, he will return.

This is how I assumed this ending, but I forgot that in front of me is the director, known by the film The Last Action Hero. Let me remind you that The Last Action Hero is a serious, realistic parody of the genre. Taking this project into his own hands, he decided to demonstrate his superiority once again, and he succeeded. Every 8 out of 10 spectators left the hall satisfied, the rest make this film one of the worst.

I will be brief, without courtesy. The film has big problems with the script: the woman Eddie for show, the villain generally forgets his true motives, then he saves the planet, then as soon as he gets a symbiote, he immediately forgets about everything. Eddie himself as a character with no over the top problem he would like to solve. There is also no conflict between him and Venom. The relationship between them just started. You have to believe in them. An example of a good relationship is the film Upgrade. Venom's motivation is simply unfortunate, or maybe the problem is in the original source. The film was cut because everything is too fast. The film will have a box office, 600 mullions. Hardy tried his best. 6/10 if you go with beer. P.s. Expel everyone and take the scriptwriters to the second part of the norms, because the 2nd time will not work.

How I really missed the villains and their competent presentation. Bloom, please make your MCU based on maniacs, because I seriously sat until the end of the session, hoping to see the scene after the credits. The creators now fully understood how to present Michael Myers, because after watching the same original, one gets the feeling that Myers is just a maniac with a knife, who barely walks and he does not cause any threat, these are just idiotic heroes. Here we are shown exactly how he kills, how he acts. How does he compensate for his "walking". But it turns out that he is a genius in the flesh, walks quietly, teases the victim, lures her to where he needs to, waits until the end to achieve his goal. Good jokes, well, plus it's a shame that some scenes from the trailers are not in vain. Looks like these scenes were taken from the original version, which had to be edited. Some heroes disappear from the radar in vain, which is a shame. Pray to Jason Bloom.

To watch a film about the legendary QUEEN, I was looking for the cinema with the best sound in my city. It turned out to be IMAX. The only one in my city. The image quality of the picture is a separate topic for discussion, but the sound ... The sound makes a very strong impression. Absolutely clear, high-quality and surround sound. The film presents an artistic adaptation of the history of well-known musicians, which does not pretend to be ideal. Somewhere the development of the plot is shown in large strokes, events alternate like in a kaleidoscope, and some parts of the film follow smoothly, with meticulous attention to detail. The performer of the main role in some angles on the screen managed to achieve an almost portrait resemblance, but otherwise it is clear that this is an actor in makeup. More important is how he gets used to the role of Freddie. The reconstruction of the Live Aid concert deserves special praise. There is a complete feeling that I visited a live concert in 1985! It's an amazing movie in my opinion!

I admit to someone the film will seem too confusing, and someone will not understand anything at all in children, sisters, uncles. Yes, the lightness is gone, Depp is too cardboard, just like Sauron, a stone dummy, there is no connection at all with that boy from the visions who knew how to love, the platform of his character is somehow indistinct, it is not at all clear what the electorate takes. But Lowe is good, very good. In general, I liked the film, visually very well done.

A film worth watching. On the plus side: excellent visuals, coolly drawn fantastic creatures, a lot of fan service (if you haven't noticed), well-executed action, 3d is very worthy (I haven't gotten such a buzz from watching it in this format for a long time). Of the minuses: this is a script and the plot itself, it is absurd and very poorly implemented. And watching more than 2 hours of a detective about the secret of the name and origin of the protagonist without showing the atrocities of Grindelwald (which the film should have been about, as I hoped) only helped well-made special effects and fan service for people like me who grew up on stories about the boy who survived and who was more interested in finding them than in solving the terrible secret of one name)

Great sequel. For the most part, the scriptwriters should be praised for the sequel, because Disney's visuals are always on the level, but the scripts for sequels are occasionally lame (Finding Dory). In addition to the fact that Disney for some time was not afraid to put a bullet in the history of the characters and finish the cartoon without a happy ending, the scriptwriters managed to develop the story of the heroes of Ralph and Pinelope in a very interesting and touching way, as well as to laugh heartily at popular Internet resources and even Disney itself. At the end, I couldn't stop crying. Thank you Disney for this wonderful sequel. More such creative freedom and other upcoming sequels, such as Toy Story 4. P. S. Stan Lee's cameo hit right in the soul, it's already sad to see him on the screen.

Template pretentious naive blockbuster for a hike with the family. To be honest, it's better not to go. There are a million better movies, even if they don't go to the cinema. Well, point by point: Pianos, accidents, conventions are a sign of a weak script. The actors have nothing to play, the characters are cardboard. The plot is boring. Of the pluses, of course, the technical part: graphics, scenery, more or less sound, costumes. You can scrape together a couple of nominations. $ 100 million can be seen where they went. Well, sho) Fierce guys passerby. Watching the action gets boring already at the 30th minute, because the PLOT always comes first!