Reviews

This is a classic case of where it's better to know nothing about the movie before you watch it. Sadly, I had seen trailers and read reviews before I watched it and as a result I was left feeling it didn't live up to the hype. I think if you watched it 'cold' then you might come away thinking it was a gem. Brendan Gleeson was excellent in his usual deadpan way but Don Cheadle was horribly miscast. A fine actor normally, he seemed as uncomfortable playing the role as his character was in the story. The whole FBI sub-plot could easily have been left out without any detriment to the storyline. Also some of the funnier dialog at times would've benefited from subtitles for the non-Irish. The movie doesn't have many laugh out loud moments but remains amusing throughout. As the story is too ludicrous to be taken seriously, I could only rate it as an average comedy. I'm sure it would benefit from repeat viewings, particularly for those that had difficulty keeping up with some of the dialog. Worth watching, but no classic. 7/10

Okay, there's been a plethora of serial murder type movies in the last 20 years. Is this just another one ? Probably. It's not exactly ground breaking but it is fast paced and keeps you guessing. It is unique in some ways because although it exposes the killer fairly early on it conceals their motive until late in the movie. I've always considered Ray Liotta a 'B Grade' actor, guilty far too often of merely reading his lines and showing fake emotion. Whilst there are times when he's guilty of these shortcomings again in this movie, his performance for most part is solid and convincing. The support cast is equally strong and the underrated Christian Slater also shines but is sadly lacking in screen time. A haunting soundtrack and tight dialogue makes for enjoyable movie if the genre is your thing. Recommended viewing 8/10

If you were to only ever watch one movie about WW2 then this should be it. An absolutely fabulous interpretation of the last days of one of history's most infamous characters. Incredibly acted by Bruno Ganz, it leaves you wondering how he could possibly not receive the Oscar for his work. It must go down as one of the finest acting performances in history. As others have said, Ganz is Hitler. To say that the movie runs over two hours and is largely shot inside Hitler's bunk, it rarely if ever loses interest. A splendid support cast, authentic if limited action scenes around Berlin and a surprise twist at the end with the secondary story line, all adds up to a magnificent movie. I must say though that the scene involving the fate of Josef Goebbels children is extremely difficult to watch and may haunt you for some time to come after the movie has finished. Superior to even the marvelous Das Boot, this movie is a triumph for all concerned. Without doubt the greatest Anti War movie I have ever watched. 10/10

I'll keep it simple. If you are in the same age group as the main stars (the kids) in the movie, then you'll probably love it. If you're an adult who goes to the movies once a year, then you'll probably thinks it's okay. If you're an adult regular moviegoer with more than half a brain then you'll hate it. The movie would've been so much better if the train crash scene had happened ten minutes earlier and the train had wiped out all the kids. Then roll the credits. I rarely write negative comments about movies on this site but I couldn't help myself with this pile of rubbish. Comparing this B Grade movie with E.T or Alien as some people have is an insult to those great films.

Watch it if you must but you've been warned.

I'll keep it short. Putrid. Banderas can't act to save his life. He looked and sounded like a cross between Mr.Bean and Manuel from Fawlty Towers. He's now on my black list of actors never to watch again. The story line was farcical especially the "Big Bang" part. How anyone could find all the scientific mumbo jumbo entertaining beats me. The only thing saving it form a zero rating was a couple of hot chicks and the nice twist at the end involving the cops. Unless you're infatuated with Banderas then I advise you to stay well away from this turkey. I was tempted to switch off after ten minutes but stuck it out till the end. I wish I had gone with my gut instinct. One last bit of advice for American movie makers wishing to use Banderas in the future. Let him speak in Spanish and display English subtitles for all his lines in the movie. It would be more coherent and better all round for everybody. Hopeless - 1/5 stars.

I have to say this movie started with a bang but went downhill from there. It never gets to the "switching off" or "walking out" stage but the pay off for staying the distance is poor. Clooney is excellent as usual and the supporting cast are solid, but the story just goes nowhere. What appeared at first as a sub plot involving the construction of a specialized gun becomes the whole plot. Apparent subplots involving the priest and the Swedes go nowhere and are left hanging totally unexplained and unconnected.

I lost count of the number of times we saw Clooney walking around the deserted streets at night with the expectation that danger was lurking around the next corner. Each scene ending with him awakening in bed unharmed and ready for the next day. The first once or twice it was okay but after that it became plain boring and a waste of movie time.

Overall the movie was a bit like setting out on a road trip from New York to L.A but getting off in New Jersey.

Good intentions but poor delivery. 5/10 at best

This whole movie was just a platform to warn the uneducated about the potential problems of using the internet. Please, spare me the lecture next time. A reasonably good premise for a psycho serial killer flick weighed down with an overdose of Internet morality. A few examples -

1. If you look at stuff that you shouldn't on the net you are as guilty as the perpetrators. Yeah, really. 2. If you download movies you are a video pirate. The FBI are warning you !! 3. If you innocently download a game you might get a Trojan on your computer that will discover your most intimate details. 4. If you engage in Chat room social networking beware that the cute voice on the other end of the line or keyboard could in all reality be a serious piece of human nastiness.

Okay, all valid points but I think the average intelligent viewer and internet user are well aware of those issues already. I for one don't need it rammed down my throat at the movies. A pity really because the movie had potential to be something quite good within its genre. Well paced and decent acting for the most part. They even avoided the formulaistic ending of having the lead cop's child brought in as the final victim. Cred for that.

Overall, worth watching if you can tune out from all the lecturing going on. 6/10

I was born in Nottingham but have lived my life in Australia. I've always found the The Robin Hood legend interesting but largely unbelievable in it's traditional telling. So when this release was touted, promising a retelling of the legend, I keenly looked forward to it. Especially with a couple of Aussies as the two main leads and legendary director, Ridley Scott at the helm.

Wow, what a let down. A boring, slow paced telling of the tale that should more accurately have been titled "Robin Hood - The Early Years." OK, I wasn't looking for "Robin Hood and his merry men, riding through the glen" but where was the excitement and the character development between Robin and Marion. None existent.

The battle scenes were lame, inferior to better offerings on show 20 years ago. And don't start me on the dialogue. I'm sure it was scripted by John Cleese, Michael Palin and the Python crew. When they threw in the line "None shall pass" and started asking riddles I was looking about for an attack by a "killer rabbit". Apologies to those who aren't acquainted with MP and the Holy Grail.

Some of King John's lines were amusing at first but did he have to keep it up for the whole movie ? As for the actors, Russell Crowe seemed largely disinterested except for a few late opportunities to kiss Cate Blanchett. She gave her usually strong performance despite looking decidedly unglamorous (don't know why they chose to make her look so manly). Max Von Sydow was a standout and deserves credit for putting his heart into his role. William Hurt was solid, if miscast. Sorry, but I'm over Mark Strong playing the bad guy. And as for Oscar Isaac as King John, well I suggest he contacts Terry Gilliam for his next gig. He seemed as suitable to the role as Mr.Bean.

Oh, did I mention the cross channel invasion. OK, no Saving Private Ryan jokes but it did kinda look like DDay in reverse, complete with wooden landing craft.

All in all it was a total flop considering the talent available in front of the camera and behind it. Its without doubt the worst Ridley Scott movie I've seen to date. They said the movie had a lot of problems pre production. Boy does it show.

Finally, like many others I consider Kate Winslet and Cate Blanchett two of the best female leads going around. It's surprising to many people that Winslet seems to always pip Blanchett come Award time. I noticed that Winslet turned down the role of Marion and Blanchett snapped it up. Maybe their decision making when choosing their movies has something to do with it.

Sorry, two stars.

In some ways reviewing Band of Brothers ten years on is superfluous. Its already received every accolade possible and deservingly so. You would've needed to be living on Mars to not know that it is seriously good television.

Strangely for me, I have never watched the full series till recently. I can't fathom for the life of me why since my father was a WW2 veteran and I have an interest in the events.

I recently watched The Pacific series and unlike many I thought it was excellent. However, having now watched Band of Brothers in entirety I can see why some fans felt short changed by Pacific. The character development in Band of Brothers is first rate. Having watched Pacific three months back I have trouble recalling more than 4 or 5 characters. With BofB its full of interesting characters and leaves you wanting more information on all of them. Anyway, enough of the comparisons. The Pacific was an excellent production in its own right.

Band of Brothers succeeds on all levels. Whether capturing the realism of the battlefield action, the strength of the human spirit or the futility of war, BofB is a masterpiece on all levels.

Sure you could nitpick if you really wanted to. A piece of dialogue here or a small scene there but really why would you bother ?

Just embrace the series for what it is. A timeless memorial to thousands of gallant men and women and to a tragic time in human history.

And probably the greatest television series ever made. 10/10

I can't understand the negative reviews on here. Some people are hard to please. One reviewer commented about the shallow depth of the characters, only then to pick fault at what he referred to as "soap opera type scenes" and not enough action. Perhaps, they should stick to the Transformers and Terminator series so they can watch non-stop explosions and fake killings. I found episode 8, in which the Iwo Jima scenes took up only the last 10 minutes, to be a particularly moving episode. It's also interesting that a lot of the negative reviews seem to be emanating from the UK. Maybe they don't like the thought that there was a War going on, as equally brutal, outside of Europe. My father was English and fought in WW2 in North Africa. I know if he was alive he would be enjoying the recreation of little analyzed but equally important part of the conflict. My only complaint is that The Pacific isn't long enough. An extra 15-20 minutes per episode and another 5 episodes would do me just fine. I was a huge fan of Band of Brothers and feel The Pacific is an excellent companion piece. A top series that would be even better enjoyed if the episodes were viewed back to back.