Reviews

A smart drama/thriller driven by excellent acting, solid plot, and more-than competent directing and filming.

Instead of relying on 'action' and special effects, this French film builds intrigue and suspense whilst keeping it real and believable.

At two hours, it might seem a little long, yet it never drags, every scene adds meaning and develops the plot, and the emotional ups-and-downs are integral to furthering the story - not just the story itself.

As the plot builds you expect the protagonist to prevail, yet will he in the face of both internal and external difficulties?

Enjoyable, well-paced, this is a film anyone should enjoy.

While UK production values are not the same as USA ones, this show is lacking in some of the basics.

It's not well edited; there are scene changes, and plot elements that suffer from incongruous editing. Wait, what happened there? How did they get from there to there?

A lot of acting seems bad as dialogue is stilted. This 'may' be bad editing, or poor directing, but the actors often appear to be waiting to say the lines, not listening, or when they deliver them the tone is all wrong. Really jars after a while.

The story is fine, generic spy stuff but nothing egregious, and there are a few exciting/surprising moments.

Overall, it's watchable if you are not very critical, but don't expect a lot.

Until I watched Mammals and read the references to James Corden, I'd never heard of him. I still don't know much so this review is based only on the show, nothing else.

The story is nothing special, boy-meets-girl, fall in love and then out of love (will they get back together?), but the low-key presentation and somewhat laconic humour make it mildly amusing. Corden's strength in Mammals is not humour though, but a searing, almost child-like, emotional honesty. This is more interesting than the somewhat 'modern' reliance on bathos (think The Office, or Fleabag). A lot of what passes for humour here is bathetic, but if comedy is the art of saying something serious in an amusing way, then there is enough here to entertain.

Where it falls down, and quite hard, is the meandering fantasy of one of the characters that doesn't seem to serve any purpose in the story arc.

No one comes out of this particularly well, and I was left a bit deflated and wondering why Mammals had been presented this way (the advertising photo is utterly meaningless). It's okay, but there is much better out there.

Whilst French cinema likes to tend to the philosophical, French action films are often well watchable and underrated.

Overdose is well written, acted, directed and edited, and provides a satisfying drama. The villains are villainous, and the cops determined, and although this is only going to end one way, the turns along the way keep you entertained.

In places, it is not an easy watch (I said the villains are villainous), and there is little relief from the relentless focus of both sides. There is a little bit of sex, but it is not very sexy, rather unlike a French film in that respect.

The pacing of the film is enjoyable, through the borderlands between France and Spain, and the camerawork is hard to fault.

Definitely worth a watch if you like action crime drama.

Certainly this series has issues. The acting is patchy, but in some parts truly outstanding. The weekly stories could be a bit repetitive, though several were excellent; unpredictable, imaginative, and gripping. The production values are low, quite budget, and again, at many times this did not detract from the good writing. At times, the dialogue was laugh out loud funny, and at others rather perceptive and insightful.

I certainly got a lot out of watching this. I watched the first season on Amazon, and would like to watch more. It appears not to be available in form anywhere.

It is not 10* as several reviews say, they must be crew as they have made no other reviews.

Give it a go, watch 3/4 episodes and hopefully you will enjoy some pretty good TV.

While comparisons with Black Mirror abound, Soulmates keeps its central theme in each episode. With 6 episodes, naturally some are 'better' than others. However, none of the episodes are bad, at all.

Acting and writing are solid, and the range of plot in each story keeps the viewer engrossed, little is predictable.

The show constantly makes the viewer question what they would do in those situations. We all like to think we would 'do the right thing', yet if guaranteed happiness is at your fingertips would you turn it down?

Thought-provoking, intelligent drama that can still leave you with a warm glow.

After the critical success of The Bridge (2011) I can just see a NZ producer saying "We don't have a 30k international bridge, but we have a one-lane bridge. Let's make a murder mystery!" It's hard to know where to begin. NZ has an international image of equality and tolerance, yet this show depicts racism and homophobia as daily life. Add to this alcoholism and sexism, and you have kitchen sink drama. Hardly any of the characters are decent human beings, and the overly slow lingering camera work makes this program quite painful to watch at times. A lot of the acting is pedestrian at best, though there are a few good turns. Our main protagonist is well portrayed, though do policemen really behave like that? Despite this, the writing is pretty good, and the story sort of manages to lurch from one scene to the next. But the angst is laid on thick. For people who have never visited NZ, the parochial attitudes and small town life might be a bit surprising. The splendour of the vistas that make up the country are hardly used. I assume that to New Zealanders this is normal and not worth bothering with. This is definitely TV for local consumption. Scandi noir need not worry. Based on this, NZ noir is not the new genre.

Beautiful, thought-provoking, gripping, well-written, well-filmed, well-acted, the adjectives cannot begin to describe what a complete package Devs is. Alex Garland has written something that while on the surface looks like another one of 'those' films (13th Floor) is something in a class of its own. Initially, I was not taken by the main actors, and felt it hard to empathise, but the pacing and writing quickly moved the drama along. Intrigue, suspense, ethereal beauty all combined in a great story. The sci-fi is not whizzbang, but eminently believable, maybe just a few years away. A concept easy to swallow and run with, yet leads to so many (infinite) possibilities. I'd like to find some small flaw in Devs, but I am hard pushed to say anything was wrong. A masterpiece.

Having loved the book and season one, I was underwhelmed by the start to season 2. And yet, and yet... By the time I came to the end of season 2, I was utterly captivated and loved how all the disparate elements tied together to explain so much that had remained only alluded to and hinted at. While nothing like the book, season 2 created a tense and intriguing drama, despite the doorstop acting by Anthony Mackie. (How he got the role, or why the director allowed such wooden behaviour is a mystery.) Pretty much sterling performances by all the others involved. If they do season 3, I am eagerly awaiting it.

While many people complain that 'nothing happens' in this dark tale, it is the set, mood and character studies that are on show. It's true, a few scenes could have been trimmed, and some important reveals are passed over too quickly, but overall the pacing and length of the film are acceptable. While Eisenb is competent enough (I imagine he can choose to be in any film he wants) his performance is muted and he doesn't really shine. Maybe this is a director thing. Poots, on the other hand, is amazing, well worth watching the film just to see her performance as she goes down into the depths of her soul. She has a wider role to play than Eisenb and she is the star of the show. Reminiscent of Dogville or Cube with their minimalist sets, the setting for Vivarium also provides a chilling canvas against which the characters are seen to strugggle. There is little distraction from the inner turmoil. Categorizing this pan-European production (you know the film is going to be different when you see the opening credits and who was involved in making it) is not easy. The genre 'comedy' as appears in IMDB is whimsical to say the least. Sci-fi/drama, though horror - not in a traditional sense- could also be used. Vivarium left me thinking, and as I prefer not to have a Hollywood ending (wait for the Holywood remake in a few years with a very different ending) I was curiously satisfied.

An interesting story, extremely well filmed, subtly showing the relationships and motivations of friends and family of some drug dealers in Paris. Surprisingly, many of the characters are likeable, despite their profession and behaviour, and the director keeps the pace moving by never allowing the viewer to choose sides. The story takes place within a 48-hour time period, lending a more frantic air to an already difficult situation. Great camera work and a lack of background music give the actors room to shine. Several scenes in the film allude to the situation at hand, characters speak as if the other person knows what they are talking about, just as in real life. Because, at times, the viewer is not clear, information has to be held on to, and meaning and impact become clear later. This is especially true of the ending. While there is plenty of action, and unpleasantly realistic at times, the film's strength is the pacing and subtle reveals.

How would the world react if the Messiah came back? A thoughtful, superbly written, well-acted, filmed and directed piece of TV, Messiah presents an entirely plausible possibility of the Second Coming. It's contemporary approach makes it seemingly relevant, and there is hardly a wasted scene. This story shows some bad points of religions, yet shows humanity and spirituality can connect us all. This is mostly due to the incredible portrayal of the Messiah by the lead actor. I found the first episode a little tiring, but I was utterly captivated by the end of the second. I don't care for emotional dramas, is there now a category "spiritual drama"? If this story does not move you, maybe you are not human.

Essentially, all Marvel stories are the same. Venom is nothing different. Slow introduction of characters (several of whom I find to be mis-cast), the ordinary guy becomes the 'hero' (SpiderMan infection thing), difficulties are faced and ultimately overcome. What makes Venom at least tolerable is Tom Hardy. He has a depth and presence that compel the viewer and makes the comic light relief believable. Otherwise, Venom would really be less than average. Good SFX, well-filmed, but overly long intro, rushed ending, poor casting and an unoriginal story line make Venom average at best. Sony wanted to make one for the kids - and they have.

There is nothing inherently wrong with AXL, just that it is not very good. The actors are all right, the story predictable, the filming somewhat laborious, the music over-dramatic. It tries hard to be film of substance, but the storyline is too weak. Probably much better suited for 10-year-olds than the teens it seems to be aiming at.

I can't recall seeing another film on IMDB reviewed as '1' with such frequency as Siberia. Nearly all the reviewers have only reviewed this film in their IMDB history. Many of the reviews are nearly identical. Looks like a spam farm was hired to trash the film. Why? Russians upset that they are portrayed as the bad guys? The film is no masterpiece, but to give it '1' is ludicrous. Competently shot, acted and directed, the story keeps you wondering how much deeper the protagonist will go and if he will extricate himself. No Keanu masterpiece, but not terrible either.

This historical drama at 2 hours and 20 minutes is nearly in epic territory. Telling the life story of a 'face reader', a man who predicts people's future by looking at their faces, it is a story of loss, ambition, greed, and how small people are swallowed by the powerful looking to further their goals. Set in 15th century Korea, the costumes are lavish (oh those hats!), the mannerisms accentuated, and societal roles clearly defined. Billed as the story of the rise to the throne of Grand Prince Suyang, who became king Sejo of Joseon, it is historically accurate, with the addition of the face reader to give it human interest. Technically, there is much to like about this film; well shot and acted, with some very pleasing cinematography. It is slightly let down by over-dramatic music at times, and 'generous' editing. It would have come in better at around 2 hours. The story is gripping, and the portrayal of life in that era in Korea is fascinating. It is easy to love the good guys, and hate the bad, and there is enough ambivalance about the two to keep one's interest. I really liked it, and give a solid 8.

What a shame, what a disappointment. What started out as good, intriguing storytelling in season 1, has disintegrated into the lowest form of mass TV; a soap opera. Are we doomed to have the 'back stories' of characters from EVERY historical period? The Raj, Edo Japan, Native Americans, it goes on and on. Bring in another character. Season 2 episode 8; beautifully shot, well-acted, terrific music - sickly false emotional rubbish. Spielberg would be proud. The use of flashbacks and the lack of clarity as to whether they are 'real' or not allows the writers to anything they like, without any consequences. It was brilliant, now I watch just before going to bed to put me to sleep.

For any story about time-travel there are going to be confusing and unclear parts. How these are handled somewhat defines the experience. Altered Hours uses the premise of drug-induced time-travel/viewing to avoid paradoxes such as those encountered in time-machine stories. While the concept is good, the actual film making is pretty woeful, indeed terrible in parts. The main protagonists' acting is bearable, but some of the supporting characters are appalling, really dire in places. However, the outcome of the story, the raison d'être for the behaviour of the characters is finally well explained. I was quite moved by the ending, indeed it was what saved the film for me. It's a clever story, poorly delivered. I look forward to the next story from these writers in the future - hopefully with a better budget and cast!

Well, a 'comedy horror' film really can go one of two ways; either down the pan, or just sit on the edge of the pan. Surprisingly, I found myself laughing, and then laughing some more. Shot in mockumentary style, BM follows the travails of director and crew in the shooting of yet another horror film by a failed director. The acting is tight, the shots well put together, and the laughs keep coming. For what it is, it's pretty good. if it weren't a spoof, it would be cringeworthy, as a spoof, it is well made, and funny!

While everybody has different tastes when it comes to Sci-fi, good TV has a few basics: characters you can root for, or love to hate; ability to identify with central characters; intriguing plots; building and releasing of tension, etc. On every score, Fringe falls down. The best character is the nutty professor (superb acting), but his script and storyline is identical every week. The supporting characters seem as if they are there simply to fill the space and have little to offer in terms of moving the plot forward. And the main character, Agent Dunham? Either it is the teenage script or she can't act. It's painful to watch her struggle through the two emotions of bafflement and irate gung-ho. The over-riding arc of the story seems to drop in and out from week to week, a filler story here and there with no purpose other than to keep the show going. There is much more about Fringe that is lame. I watched all the first season to give it a fair crack, but honestly, this is tepid fare at best.

Somewhat in the vein of 'After Hours' and 'Into the Night' an ineffectual hapless hero finds more than he bargained for with a femme fatale.

A nicely paced comedy that is really only marred by terrible sound editing. Every spoken line of dialogue sounds as it it had been recorded in a cupboard. Consequently, good acting can appear wooden. The characters are nicely characatured, including some fine performances such as by the main female protagonist, Melissa Lewis (whatever happened to her?) and the villain, Kriko Satamian.

Our hero is perhaps a bit too nerdy for the role, but overall the story flows well and is quite amusing. It's shot in a rather 60s style, though it is set in the early to mid-90s.

Worth a watch on a rainy day or when you need light-hearted gentle entertainment.

A cheesy set (maybe made of cheese) of a 'planet'. Black and white, though more black than anything else. Smoke, wind, a house. It's dark. Something is in the house. Maybe. What is it? A man. Sort of. Masked head and strange torso sitting next to him. An eye? It falls. He pockets it. Something outside the window. Need I go on? What possessed someone to make this other than bad drugs? Obviously some effort went into making this, but why? Who cares.

While the initial premise may be a bit fanciful, the execution is truly splendid. In true American TV drama style much is made of emotions and relationships. Yet, since this is central to the whole plot, rather than just being a schmalzy tear-jerker for example, it carries it off rather well. The real strength of the show, though, is the remarkable acting, where one person plays two people, one of whom is often trying to imitate the other. Good writing and good editing can only go so far, here we see what acting can truly be, unusual in many American TV shows. It becomes easy to forget that the two characters are in fact being played by one actor, which I consider to be no mean feat. The story itself has been seen before in many guises, and plot twists are, so far, nothing outstanding. But this in no way diminishes what is one of the best shows out there at the moment. EDIT At the end of season 2, I am awestruck. The intricacy, the subtlety, the phenomenal acting, pacing, terrific writing have made this an absolute masterpiece. One of the best TV shows ever.

While it's true that there has been a rise in many degenerative diseases in the past 60 years, the simplistic message given by this film is wrong. Eating animal fats does not cause, for example, heart disease. Look at the Inuit, whose diet is traditionally 90% seal fat. Or the Masai, whose diet is traditionally 90% meat, milk and blood. This film does raise awareness of the need to change the Western diet, but animal fat and protein are not the culprits. A high fat, lo-carb diet works well. As does a lo-fat, high carb diet. But you can't have both hi-fat and hi-carb. Corn syrup and sugar in everything, additives and preservatives are the dangers. Not fats and a little protein.