Reviews

At the absolute high points in this movie, I was mildly amused - or should I say, not bored. At its low points however, I felt irritated with the characters, exasperated with the story and the way it was unfolding, and generally just not interested. The problem with Flight is that there seem to be more low points than high points.

Denzel Washington plays Whip Whitaker, yes that's his name. It's almost like they put a proxy name in the screenplay drafts and then couldn't be bothered changing it at a later point. Anyway, Whip is a pilot with a drug and drinking problem. If you can get over the fact that pilots go through extensive physiological, psychological and personality evaluations in 'real life', and as a result it would be extremely rare that a man like 'Whip' would ever be licensed to begin with - you might not mind this movie. I got over that part, I also begrudgingly got over the fact that Whip has apparently had a drinking problem for 11 years, yet it seems he's managed to stay licensed this whole time - completely unlikely as it is.

Seriously - I'd believe this character could get away being a bus driver, but not a pilot bu a long shot.

Then there is the flight sequence, which doesn't even last that long. Now that I think about it, it's good it didn't last that long. This film was supposed to be a realistic drama accomplishment. Yet the flight sequence that basically kicks off the events of this movie is something you might see in an action film written by stoned high school drop outs.

It's hard to enjoy the movie to it's potential when you can't really feel sympathy for any of the characters - especially not Whip. The other characters are all one dimensional. Kelly Reilly plays Nicole, who for poorly explained reasons is also a junkie. Her story is touched on at the beginning but seems to falter near the end. Probably for the better, she was a character with an inconsistent background and the movie was already 2 hours long.

The story is a mess and many plot points are not explained in detail. They are just briefly skimmed through in the hope that audiences would get the gist of it by themselves. The point of the story is completely lost on me though. This is not a character study as other reviewers would have you believe. Why? Because most of the characters are only touched on briefly - "Hi I'm Whip, I'm a Pilot, and I like to drink". That sums it up, so how is that a study of a complex character? It's also not an exploration into addiction, because the characters addictions in this film are painfully one dimensional - "I'm an addict" - OK, why? What made you an addict? What made you decide to stop?.

If the 'point' you were trying to preach to us for 2 hours was that addiction is bad - you could have tried with a little less cigarette and alcohol product placement. By a little less, I mean cut down from having brands appear every 2 minutes, to every 5 minutes or something.

The ending is painfully forced on us. Throughout the film, Whip is convinced that his drunken state didn't cause the crash, and goes out of his way to harass people into relaying the same thoughts to interviewers. Yet at the end, he tearfully admits he was drunk so as to avoid having a (dead) stewardess who he had a relationship with be painted in a negative light. I mistakenly took this same stewardess for a hooker at the beginning of the film due to their lack of chemistry. Whip didn't seem to care for her either, yet if you watched the ending without seeing the first 5 minutes of this film - you would think he was deeply in love with her.

While Flight doesn't crash and burn, it doesn't ever really soar to it's potential either.

I'll start this off by saying, if you plan to waste you're money on this movie regardless of all the negative reviews, then watch it in 2-d. DON'T BOTHER with the 3D as it ads NOTHING to the movie. I have watched many films in 3D where it didn't add a whole lot to the movie, this is the first time where I can safely say, not only doesn't it add ANYTHING to the movie, it probably makes the viewing WORSE. So steer clear of 3D.

Now onto the movie, it starts off promising, I'll give it that. The first 5 minutes of this movie are probably the most exciting of the hole movie. The introduction builds suspense, intrigue, and excitement. Remember that feeling as from that point forwards, you won't feel that anymore. Rather, you'll start to feel confusion, frustration, and mild nausea.

Acting is mediocre at best. Micky Rourke's performance is dry in this film, as is Henry Cavills and the rest of the cast. The script is pathetic, really. The dialogue is corny at best.

The story doesn't feel suited for a movie, either that or it hasn't been executed well. Throughout this whole film I kept thinking to myself the story and sequences would be much better suited to a video game. On top of that, there are MAJOR plot holes:

Why is the king after the bow? if world domination is on his mind, then how does freeing the 'titans' going to help him achieve this goal?? Why do the titans run around like thoughtless monkeys? Why in one scene is Phaedra intent on keeping her gift of foresight, and in the next scene gives up the gift to sleep with a man? Why put so much emphasis on her faith and devotion if she plans to give away her gift anyway? Why am I even asking these questions when the director has already cashed out at the bank??

The final blow from this movie is through the trailer. The "action" sequences you see in the trailer are ALL the action sequences you will see in this movie. The trailer is substantially more exciting than the movie.

Don't waste your time with this one.

As for anyone calling this movie "art", I'd suppose they are pompous and pretentious fools who don't know what real art is. I do agree some movies can be considered 'art', but only if they are visually stunning, great story, great acting, soundtrack etc...i.e a whole package. When a movie just has several nice pictures in it, it's not "art", it's just trying to hide the fact that the story and dialogue is lacking..

3/10

First, let me put this out here: this movie is 2 and a half hours....2 and a half friggen hours!!!

Yet I can probably explain the whole story and plot from start to finish in less than one minute.

Here, I'll give an example of how this movie plays along..it's not really a spoiler when you think about it:

1. Soldiers running away from an explosion 2. Soldiers shooting at something 3. Soldiers running towards airplanes 4. Airplanes flying through the sky 5. More explosions 6. Random shot of Megan Fox in miniskirt/slutty outfit 7. Soldiers shooting at machines, machines shooting at each other 8. Blur of CGI, followed by confusion (i.e who's the bad buy, who's the good guy?) 9. Two dogs humping each other on a couch 10. More shots of Megan Fox in slutty outfits. 11. 30 seconds worth of a Porsche driving down the road, filmed at different angles. Put this clip in every 5 or so minutes. Avoid letting the audience forget what sort of car it was by having a close up shot of the logo every so often. 12. More explosions...followed by people running around 13. More footage of two dogs humping

And there you have it ladies and gentlemen, that's the first 25 minutes of this movie.

The length of this movie is absurd..it could have been cut down to be told in 1 and a half hours...two hours max. And then, it might has passed of as watchable. Instead.."Director" Michael Bay decides to have "subtle" product placement and random, confusing, and unessential battle scenes. By "subtle", I mean there is a scene where one character takes out their LG phone...it's not enough to have a clear shot of the phone...no...the camera zooms in just that much more so audiences can clearly see the LG logo.

I'm not a hater of product placement. I'm in the advertising industry. I just hate when product placement is so stupid and blatant. It often ruined the experience. Well then again, this movie was so bad there wasn't much else to ruin.

Megan Fox looked nice but that's all we really see from her in this 'movie'. Her acting is... well let's just say it will be in the best interest of everyone if she just gives up on Hollywood already and releases a porn movie while she's still young.

Shia LaBeouf has superb acting. He does what he can with a dreadful script.

As for the CGI...Overkill..no that's not the right word...more like : overdose. Just too much..felt like I was going to die watching it. I could not tell the difference between more than one of the transformers. Word of advice: when you have a battle scene between 3 transformers and they crash together and roll around, and you BLUR the 'action' with dodgy camera movement, the three robots TRANSFORM into ONE METALLIC TURD!!!!

Camera work. Well, at one point I thought the camera man had a seizure or he just left to go home early. Wild movements of the camera: LEFT! RIGHT! CIRCLE! ZOOM IN! QUICK, ZOOM OUT!...it literally made me feel dizzy.

Don't even get me started on the plot. It's just like the first movie : "We have to get the boy!" *Chase Scene(s)* *Random Explosion(s)* *End of movie*

First movie was OKAY at best, this one is exactly like the first, except more ads and more jumbled storyline, with less of a climax. Seriously, 2 and a half hours, and the final battle between main good guy vs main bad guy lasts a total of 25 seconds MAX...yet an hour earlier the director could afford to have like 5 minutes of pointless sports cars driving around with no real direction. That means, the main bad guy, the one who this movie is named after...the one who is the reason the premise of this movie exists, is whipped out in less than 30 seconds. Great.

Unless you're a child, mentally disabled, or a redneck...don't waste your time with this movie.

This has to be, without a doubt, the worst comedy I have ever seen. If you plan to watch this, watch it with a few friends and you'll all have a laugh.

I've heard of movies using a few clichés here and there, but NOTHING to this extent.

You have the extremely attractive farmer girl, (who looks like she just spent 4 hours working on her hair and make up) handling a chainsaw and driving a tractor.

You have the Greek guy; he's a criminal with long greasy hair. It's almost as if the directors said 'know what? people might not get the hint that he's a criminal bad boy...OK lets have a scene of him walking out of a police station, destroying a cop car and stealing a ladder for no reason...I think that'll get the point across". And if that didn't get the point across, he's also wearing a shirt which blatantly shows the phrase "f#$k the police".

Then there's the annoying bitchy friend and her even more annoying jock boyfriend.

Wait! There's more!

You have the Asian guy, who's naturally gifted at kung fu and who works at a Thai Restaurant. Did I mention his parents don't speak English?

Now here's where it gets interesting, they take TWO STEREOTYPES and make it into one. You have the blonde upper class girl who cares oh-so much about her appearance. Then the same girl also has self esteem problems because she thinks no guy would ever like her, she also finds herself unattractive. In comes bad boy Greek guy, and the girl who would probably never even lay an eye on this guy in real life, is all of a sudden enticed by his...by his...uhhh well I don't know.

The farmer girl also REALLY likes the kung fu Asian guy, and he likes her too!! OHHH doesn't your heart just MELT. It's funny because if you look at them both, you know that THAT type of girl would NEVER look at this guy..well done on the casting there champs.

Oh and to top it all of, there is the Christian girl who follows the bible word for word. If thats not enough, at the end of this "film" she goes Rambo style, picks up an AK47 and kills like 7 soldiers. Did I mention she's about 5'3?

The movie literally made me cringe for 50% of the time and laugh in disbelieve the other 50%

And I would never have believed so many foreigners lived in a rural town like that.

Either way, nice to go into the mind of racists and ignorant people and see what they see when they see an Asian, or a Greek, or a Saudi Arabian.

Im sorry to say this, and I know people will hate me for it, but this must be one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

Visually stunning? Yes it is, for a very short amount of the film however (which makes up for very little of this mess called a film).

The plot is fairly simple, I will not get into that as it has been mentioned before. Simply put, it's a children's tale told through the words of a hospital patient high off morphine to a little girl. No jokes, the plot line has been described as "a hospital patient, who's health is gradually getting worse" and as his "health" deteriorates his story gets increasingly absurd.

The script is very poorly written, before I get into the script however I will talk about the acting, and more importantly, the actors/actresses. In a movie, it's alright if someone has an accent (which is hard to understand, but forgivable as it's not their fault), it's alright to stutter (depending on the role), it's all right to mutter, but when you find a girl (the main character at that) who not only has an accent, but mutters AND stutters while acting out a poorly written script, it just spells TROUBLE. I'm sorry, but I COULDN'T understand what she was saying, no matter how hard I paid attention, I just couldn't. I know it sounds harsh, but if you do decide to watch this disaster of a movie, put on subtitles as you WONT understand the girl. As for the other main actor (I never remember names) he did a very MEDIOCRE job at acting. Although most of the time it wasn't his fault; it was the scriptwriters. Seriously, how do you expect a guy to act a role where he's high off morphine for 90% of the script, and do it to a good standard? Also the chemistry between the two main characters wasn't there, the male actor looked really weird, and really did nothing but give an impression of a pedophile. There was one scene when the little girl is sitting on his bed and he gives her this look, the sort of look a man would give a woman who he lusts (p.s the girl is 6 and the man in his late 20's). Directing was done very poorly and at times you get frustrated with the little girls acting, it's as if she isn't even paying attention to what she's doing, sometimes muttering while the other actor is talking to her etc. it just felt to me as if the script writers just told the actors to sit there and talk about a topic and just wing it, without a script.

Now for the script, oh the script, the script the devil himself wrote, this script could be passed of as a satanic bible, it really could. I don't know where to being, confusions left, right and center came when watching this film. I was still left with questions, from the beginning to the very end. It made no sense, the whole movie gave the impression that the man had injured himself to the point where he couldn't walk anymore (which leads in an attempted suicide), then at the end of the movie it's revealed his legs got better and he can walk again (so what was the point in suicide if he just had broken legs? Or whatever injury he had would heal?). Then there was the whole "what happened between him and his girlfriend?" question that really gets me, anyways I wont bore you with all the questions I had while watching this movie (I'm sure the word limit would not allow it even if I could).

I'd just like to say, the movie IS visually stunning for about five minutes (that's about the only positive..), HOWEVER it doesn't grip you from beginning to end.

I was under the impression that this movie was suited more towards adults (because of it's R rating, and obviously the plot line which seemed fascinating to all ages) instead it turned out to be a children's movie with several scenes which couldn't be deemed 'suitable for children' along with themes such as: murder, suicide, drug abuse etc etc, putting it under the "R" category, even though 90% of the film is for kids.

To sum up:

This film is NOT for children, and NOT for adults. Its for nobody. Watch this 2 hour movie with caution as it WILL waste your time.

1/10

Oh wow.

Where do I begin?

Who would enjoy this movie might you ask?

Well,

1. Someone who's never and will never have sex 2. Someone who's never imagined having sex or watched a porno 3. Someone who doesn't know what sex is or that it existed. 4. Someone who's lived his/her whole life under a rock 5. And finally, someone who was involved with the making of this, making him/her oblivious to the fact that this film SUCKS!

About the acting, I cant really judge, and I wont judge the acting, all I can say is what they were acting out was complete TRASH and anyone could've played the roles and achieved the same results.

The script was hilarious, I mean that, this would've been such a funny film if the writers of it were actually intending to make it funny! But they weren't (or not that I'm aware of), and so it just makes it stupid, with the occasional awkward laugh. Speaking of the writers, where were they? And I don't mean that when they were writing the script of the movie, I mean, where were they during the course which teaches them how to write good comedies at writing school (or whatever they attended). I've seen a few reviews for this movie (some of the ones that convinced me this movie was GOOD), and one particular reviewer said that this movie created a genre of its own... Yes, it did, I'm actually torn between calling it the "comedy genre, which isn't funny" or the "romantic genre, which hasn't got but one trace of romance in it", I guess you can decide that though (that's to say you still want to watch this movie after reading my review).

Whoever created this movie has obviously had a lack of sex experience, or an abundance of very disturbing sex experiences (you decide). This movie makes it seems that sex is like a rocket science, or something so complicated that in times shouldn't even be done.

Reading summaries of this film, I thought it was be something original and good. It wasn't, well it was original, but not good, and just because something is original it doesn't make it good.

The characters aren't introduced properly as I forgot ALL of their names (then again, how could I forget their names when I was never told them?). And the couples weren't distinguishable (I got the exes and co-workers and first daters mixed up, which ones did you get confused with?).

Overall this movie needs to be left where it belongs, on the shelf. And to the people who thought this was a masterpiece, why not go out once in a while and maybe you wont just be watching the boring people f***ing with excitement?

One more thing about the script, seeing as the movie goes through each couple during the stages of sex it seems that at times the script contradicts itself. I picked up on a few contradictions (although there are MANY more, see how many you can spot). One that stuck with me:

Girl: Wow your so great, you made me cum 3 times. Guy: Cool... *Guy walks off, comes back to find girl not as satisfied as she said (I wont get into detail)* Guy: I thought I was good, why aren't you satisfied, didn't I make you cum 4 times? Girl: You did, its just that...etc etc blah blah blah.

This was just one, although there was more.

I think this movie should be renamed "Boring people f***ing" as that title would suit it more.

3/10

I went into this movie thinking it's going to be a sappy romance, full to the brim with the old clichés.

It wasn't.

Don't get me wrong, there was still a bit of clichés (not too much to stop you watching this movie though), but the way it was made just made these clichés funny (I can't explain, you'll just have to see it).

But this movie to me is very original.

Eddie is a 40 year old single, and very unmarried guy, after going to his ex-fiancés wedding (which turned out a complete embarrassment for him) he sees a woman being robbed, after trying, and failing to stop the thief he has a short conversation with the woman. Who would later be his wife after a short 2 months of knowing her.

Anyway I don't want to get too much into this movie, but lets say what hes in for is a honeymoon from hell, or maybe heaven.

This movie uses the romantic comedy genre much differently than a lot of other movies.

Its not a GREAT comedy, one that will have you laughing uncontrollably, but its still a good one with several awkward laughs.

What is weird is, this movie is good in many ways, acting is great, script is alright (could have been better). And the movie gets a bit repetitive near the end (but not at all boring). But I still felt that I should give it only a 6, its not about what it did have, its just how it had it.

Its not a movie that you'd watch a lot of, although I did watch it twice in two days, that is probably all I'd watch from it. So I suggest renting.

Just on the side, just because I gave it a 6 doesn't mean its a BAD movie (in fact its very good and I think everyone should watch it). I'm just saying its not the best.

6/10

Where do I begin? When is a comedy not a comedy? when the movie Isn't FUNNY! Why make this in the first place? It's disgustingly awful. The main character of the movie (I forgot his name, thats how important he is, and the movie really gets your attention doesn't it? you forget the characters names mere hours after watching it) wants to go on a wine tasting holiday with his best friend. His best friend however is only interested in having sex with as many women before he gets married. OK so how many men would do that? none? (I thought so).

The characters are so absurd that you are never emotionally in touch with them throughout the movie, except for the main character and his best friend. PLEASE NOTE: The only reason i say that you would show emotion towards them is because you would feel sorry for them.

Who cheats on a women who hes about to marry? (even in a movie) why marry her if you don't love her? If your so worried about her finding out, why did you cheat on her in the first place? The character makes no sense, and he just gets you sick to your stomach that half way through the movie your hoping he somehow dies because even though you don't know the woman you believe she deserves better than a cheating rat.

As for the other character (Miles, was it?) hes an unsuccessful writer, who lives by himself, and only has one friend who he doesn't even see often. (Thats the one about to get married) You Feel sorry for him, he has a pitiful life.

The script writers. and the directors must have felt very horny when making this movie, about 25% of this movie is dedicated to nudity/sex. (Believe me don't watch it, because its not even the good type of nudity/sex). Its just a way to lure in hopeless individuals who want to see some action and instead sit through the worst movie ever put to film.

In the end of the film nothing really changes, the characters are still themselves, etc etc. Its as if the whole trip didn't even happen. You would think that the main character would (after all that) go to his BEST FRIENDS wedding, but no, he doesn't. Why? no reason, i guess he didn't feel like it.

As for improvements, what would be a good improvement from making the movie better? changing the WHOLE MOVIE!

This would've been a much better idea then what the director came up with:

1. The two friends go on a holiday, shortly before they reach their destination they crash and die.

2. The friends get lost, and he must find a way back so that he doesn't miss the wedding. (Now wouldn't this sound much funnier?)

Let me tell you how funny this movie is, you would find the first idea funnier then Sideways, and thats saying something because there's nothing funny about people dieing.

A pathetic exuse for a movie, 1 out of 10!

There's been a lot of debate about whether this movie is good or bad. I liked it at first, but then I started thinking.

This movie really just consists of a problem, there's a solution to this problem, however as a result of that solution another problem occurs, this is fine until about the 6th problem or so, and then you just get a headache. If you don't understand me let me break it down, for example (this does happen in the movie) problem: they realize the Icarus 1 is still orbiting around the sun, there is a distress call and the crew of the Icarus 2 believe there could be someone still there, or they could take the bomb from the Icarus one and use it in case their bomb doesn't work to restart the sun. Solution: they change course towards the Icarus 1. Problem: they changed course but didn't fix the sheids (which were set for the normal journey, couldn't the super-genius computer have done this? or simply warned them), the ship might be destroyed if they don't fix the sheilds, a fir occurs in the ship (etc etc) Solution:they fix the sheilds. Problem: the captain loses his life in the mission and all hell breaks loose on the ship between the crew. As you see its as if one thing leads to another, but thats not necessarily a good thing.

The whole movie really consists of that. I would describe all the bad things that don't make any sense in this movie but other people have probably named them all.

In some peoples defence to this movie they say things like "you should simply watch it without thinking, don't think about its flaws". OK...

1. If you didn't think about a movies 'flaws' every movie would be perfect, and none would be bad.

2. The movie its self gets you thinking, so who is to blame?

A lot of things are left unanswered, for example the captain dies and one of the crew members is like 'captain...what did you see...what did you see?' this really got my interest for a while, until i realized that the captain didn't see anything, or whatever he did see we would never know. The characters seem to change their personality throughout the movie. For example there is one character who seems to have a fetish for plants, half way through the movie she decides to have a change of heart from treehugger to a "lets kill him, he isn't any use to us" sort of person. In the directors defence he did this to show how people could change in different circumstances...OK?....

Another idea, when your making a movie stick to one set genre, OK? don't decide, hm...im getting bored of sci fi i think im going to move to horror/thriller. The director must have though 3/4 of the film in, that he'd like to have a crazy killer in the movie. OK i really don't want to explain it all... Its worth watching ONCE, rent it, don't buy it.

If you watch it more then once in (for example) a month, then there's something obviously wrong with you, and you should seek counselling.

There's nothing really good about the movie, but its still interesting (for a while).

Id give it a 4 (maybe 5 if im generous) out of 10.

P.S. if the character is close enough to put his hand into the sun and his hand gets burnt, how come the rest of his body doesn't burn as well? This is one of the many unscientific occurings in this movie.

OK, have we seen the same movie? Open Water..."Blair With Project...meets Jaws". Blair Witch Project is an acceptable movie, and so is Jaws, this however is terrible, a disaster of a film. I will try and tell people just how stupid this film is in a simple manner. Imagine going to watch a movie with your friends, on your birthday, your going to watch what you think is a great thriller, you go in excited, if its really as good as they say it must be right? (ok, so i was young and gullible) But NEVER did I think we would end up watching a movie that looked to be filmed on a CAMCORDER. For most of the movie its set in the water, hence the name..open water. A young couple who went on a scuba diving tour are left behind, the boat and all the tourists leave without them, and thats it, the story pretty much finishes there, they stay in the water for the next hour or so, tormented by killer sharks who we don't actually see (lack of money). We know the outcome because...we are TOLD the outcome, so we know what is going to happen. You pretty much have to sit for an hour waiting for it to happen.

By the end of the movie we left the cinemas and i was apologizing to my friends for dragging them along to watch this. Waste of time, and money. Don't even rent this one.

Script. What script? They stay in the water for an hour and this is all you hear 'oh my god, we are dead, we are going to die' And you sit there thinking 'well if your going to die hurry up and die! i got better things to be doing.

This is my first review on IMDb but i felt a duty to warn everyone about how terrible this movie is.

As for the 10/10 comments, come on! 10/10? I'de give that to the titanic or something better than open water. It felt as if the directors of this movie must've wanted more people watching it, so they hired people to write good comments on here. Maybe not, but this movie does not deserve anything higher than a 2.