Reviews

This series has the same premise as the very successful "Bones". The brilliant but socially awkward forensic doctor that solves crimes that nobody else is capable of. The only redeeming element of this series is the presence of Jeri Ryan of Voyage fame (7 of 9, anyone?) as part of the regular cast.

Because the wife wanted to watch something different I was forced to endure a few episodes of season 1 and those really felt like a rehash of situations previously seen in the other, older, but better series. By the way, the wife agreed. It became boring pretty soon.

Do yourself a favor and go watch the original.

I saw the first episode and it didn't make it for me. No showing the restoration process, too much talk with little to no flesh, characters that I can't care less about, cheap stereotypes of Mexico and mexicans, no exposition of the motives behind everything, except "to make a ton of cash and earn 250K". How silly can a show be?. It is just a bad ripoff of Car Masters - Rust to Riches but without the heart of that show.

C'mon, Netflix. If you're going to copy your own show, at least make something at least mildly interesting. This looks as if K. Kennedy saw Car Masters and decided on doing a sequel.

Just bring more seasons of the original.

We all know rom-coms are completely predictable but when well done they can be fun. This one fails miserably. The main character is despicable. Liar, fake, frivolous... The dialog is cringe-worthy. The situations are completely unbelievable. Deux-is-macchina in every threat to the main character. Cliches right and left. Plot twist that you can see from one hundred miles Away. I mean, who wrote this? More to the point. Who greenlit this? The movie is so bad thet doesn't make it desirable to read the novel. They tried to bank on Devil wears Prada but they didn't eve reach the level of the bacteria that inhabit the dirt in the floor that DWP walked on. Just do yourself a favor and avoid it.

The title I put on this review IS the review. Don't waste your time watching this. It will be 57 minutes you'll never get back. Poorly produced, poorly written and poorly edited. There are videos in youtube way better than this.

From the very first minute the quality of production is evident. The acting is natural and believable. The close-quarter-filming is engaging. The pace is slow but nevertheless I was constantly glued to the screen. This is a fine example that fancy special effects and multimillion budgets aren't a must to create a product of high quality. Kudos to the cast and crew.

The series has been going down the drain since season 4 started. They are so careful to keep a politically correct tone that everything else is subordinated to that. This episode shows that very clearly. No a real plot, acting that falls short of barely convincing, pure sentimentalism, motivational speeches (sorry Burnham), everybody just mushy-mushy friendly/lovey. nearly 60 minutes of screen time filled with internal conflcts, sefl-help dialogue and corny sentimental interactions. I mean, who wrote this script? Pablo Coelho?. It is becoming less and less worthy to be seen.

This is an uncommon movie. It shows us the events and outlook on life of an eccentric painter, representing the freedom of spirit, and its influence in a young boy (his grandson) who's left in his care during his mother's acting tour. Some clashes take place between the young boy, the grandfather and the daughter, that are inevitable, but very well acted and presented. I feel the movie is like a story of growth, maturation and learning more than anything else, and as such, is a process that is disorderly at best, and its portrayed that way. Acting is solid. Anthony Quinn's portrayal of the eccentric painter is full of energy, of passion and extremely believable. Ray Walston is his usual solid character actor, and his rendering of Basilio is so lovable. R.J. Williams, as the kid, shows a good performance, even though sometimes overacted. The photography is stunning, the supporting cast is extremely solid, and the script is easy to follow and understand. Only complain, is the editing, with some large leaps from one scene to another, that could get you lost if you haven't been keen on paying close attention. A beautifully symbolic piece, easily enjoyable, and perfect for a quite afternoon at home with your loved one.

This is so far one of the greatest movies I have ever seen. It has everything, but mainly, it's based on two superb performances, namely Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson. This doesn't mean that the rest of the cast is to be dismissed, They did great!. It's just that this two did so awesome. The role of Jack Lewis is freshly played by the late Reeves, in a very good performance. The script, moves flawlessly and slowly toward a logical end, and even though it does not gives any surprise, it tell the story in a very good way. Anthony Hopkins portrait of a Head Butler is brilliant. No wonder!. He spent a year working as a butler to get the ins and outs of the job for his performance in this movie. Emma Thompson plays a fresh Mary Kenton (Mrs. Kenton), and gives warmth and believability to her character. The photography, the set decoration, the costumes, everything rings authenticity and superb attention to detail. James Ivory at par. If it were possible I would have give it more than 10.

It's a funny render of the reality vs. non-reality that Hollywood has tried more than a couple of times. Has it good moments, but the plot and the script I found lacking. Bill Murray is really funny, as usual. Peter Galagher (I don't remember seeing him in another comedy besides "while you were sleeping), but his acting is good also. The situations, the chase-scenes, and the clashing between British characters and American ones in regard of culture and language are OK, though a little subdued. On the not too good side of the movie, well, there is the implausibility, but this is a comedy, and not required to be too plausible. Some characters were not fully developed, and the plot seem a little too jerky.

All in all, is a nice movie for a rainy weekend, to enjoy with some friends, providing you're not expecting too much.

I saw this movie for the first time with a group of friends in a special show at midnight. We had just seen an awful movie called "A Hot Party" and were so mad. I picked up a torn newspaper from the floor and saw the ad for this special show. We decided on the spot that nothing could be worse than what we just saw and went over. Great Choice!. Fonda's character is so full of conflicts, but her struggle to keep objectivity is showed masterfully, Ann Bancroft is great as the Mother Superior, supportive of her flock, and protective; but trying to help the good doctor as a way to extricate Agnes (Meg Tilly) from her "delusions". And Meg Tilly, what a find she was for us. The photography, with dominating earthy colors, delivers the ambient of the movie in such a beautiful way.

I can say that this is clearly, one of the best movies I've ever seen. Highly recommended.

This is movie is a trademark of Rubartelli's work. Its photography is amazingly beautiful and portraits accurately the mystery of the rain forest that cover one third of Venezuela. It portraits the life of a small Yanomami kid and how he changes when he meets the white man (in this case, woman as performed by Flor Nuñez). It delivers all the magic of a virgin culture.

The most appealing feature of the film is the masterful photography in the lens of Rubartelli and the performance of Nuñez and the little Yanimami kid.

If you love films that are just natural , not commercial and not main-frame, please, don't miss this jewel. It is just precious. 10/10

I have read the book and then I just was compelled to see the movie. The adaptation from book to film is very good. And I mean Veeeeeery good. I was amazed at the way the plot was developed in the screen. Even though I'm no film maker, I think it was quite a difficult book to turn into a movie. Probably the presence of Dan Brown helped and the directorial talent of Ron Howard was no small thing either. Hanks and Tautou deliver the strength of their characters and Reno's role is simply delightful to watch. All in all, a very tight production, deserving (I think), some nominations for the BIG Academy Awards.

On another side, I've read a lot of reviews posted here by people that seem to have lost the real meaning of what they are criticizing. This is just a work of fiction (both the movie and the book, of course), and as such, a SUPERB work of fiction. Who cares if Phillip's gospel was written in Arameic, Copt, or English, for that matter?. It is just a literary license, useful to tell a story. Who cares if the Nicea Council was held to determine Jesus' divinity, to unify concepts between ancient christians or whatever?. Again, it's just a literary "trick" to tell a story. And Brown uses these (as well as others) brilliantly. The way that he combines symbology, bigotry and criminal investigation is simply great.

I think that if someone is too dogmatic and narrow minded, you should not get close to something that, even being fiction, could threaten your closely held beliefs. After all, the role of education is to take an empty mind and turn it into an open mind.

This movie is sure a classic and it will stand the test of time. It's a story about rebellion against fossilized views. It's a story about the beauty of freedom. It a story about the struggle to find your own niche in society. It's a movie about loyalty, cowardice, prejudices, breaking the cast, leaving the coop. It's a movie with great actors, from Ethan Hawke (Todd Anderson) to Dylan Kusman (Richard Cameron). It's one of the best performances by that unbelievably versatile actor Robin Williams. It's simply a great movie. The plot is very well told, the photography is astounding in portraying the oppressive atmosphere of an ultraconservative private boarding school in New England (it looks like New England. Sorry if I'm wrong). It certainly a movie deserving a place in every movie-lover collection. A must see.