Every week we will give away
four pairs of free movie tickets!
The movie tickets are valid to see
any movie of your choice at any
Cineplex or Galaxy movie theatre!
Just write your own review about any
movie published on CinemaClock.com
and give it a value between 1 and 10.
The promotion is valid for Canadian residents only.
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I’m not going to pretend that “Transformers: Age of Extinction” is a good movie but I’m glad I saw it on the big screen, in 3-D. It’s dumb, loud and way too long. On the other hand, it also contains a scene where Michael Bay and writer Ehren Kruger prove that they’ve lost their god-damned minds and have Optimus Prime riding into battle on a fire-breathing mechanical Tyrannosaurus Rex. Before we get too much into the positive and negative aspects of the film, let me tell you what it’s about. The film is set 5 years after the events of “Dark of the Moon”. Megatron is dead, Starscream is dead, Ironhide is dead, the majority of Chicago is dead. Everyone is dead! Well, not everyone. The United States Government, outraged by the attack on Chicago has dissolved their peace treaty with the Autobots. Now, any lone Autobots remaining on Earth and any still-living Decepticons are being hunted down. Our main character is Cade Yeager (Mark Whalberg) He’s a down-on-his luck inventor that stumbles upon an old, beaten-up cab-over truck... which turns out to be Optimus Prime himself (voiced by Peter Cullen) Cade knows he should turn in the Transformer for a huge reward from the government, but he sympathizes with the alien. Next thing you know, Cade, his daughter Tessa (Nicola Peltz) and Optimus Prime are on the run. It turns out that the Transformers are being hunted down, but not to protect the citizens of Earth. Scientists are after the metal they are made of in order to create their own army of super advanced, shape-changing robots. Our heroes will have to join up with the rag-tag surviving transformers and find a way to clear their name by exposing the actions of the film’s main baddie, Joshua Joyce (Stanley Tucci) If that wasn’t difficult enough, he’s allied with a ruthless transformer named Lockdown (voiced by Mark Ryan) He’s an intergalactic bounty hunter with a particular grudge against the Autobot leader. Oh, and we’ve got some robotic Dinosaurs thrown in there too, the Dinobots! I’m just going to start by naming the bad elements in this film. Despite everything I’m going to list however, I want to remind you that I’m actually glad that I saw this fourth instalment and while I acknowledge that it’s probably the dumbest action movie I will see all year (and I pray that’s the case), there’s some fun to be had with “Dawn of Extinction”. Even as a Transformers film, this movie seems at certain points to make absolutely no sense whatsoever. I don’t care what anyone says, it is more obvious than ever before that there is no clear plan for these films, and certainly no “Bible” that the people in charge can refer themselves to because with every new story, developments contradict each other every time we explore the Transformers’ past. In this case, information we get about these aliens is inconsistent from scene to scene. The most obvious example is a quick explanation we get of how a Transformer’s memories are stored. Apparently, they are stored within the head of the robots. We are also told however, that the personalities of the Transformers are stored within their sparks, the thing that differentiates them from random machines built by humans, and that is located within their chests (as was established in the first two films) As we learn more about the army of robots being created by the villains, you will see that only one of these revelations turn out to be true, or at least is true within this story. It might also dawn on you, while you’re watching this chapter (if you’ve been paying any attention with these films) that the Allspark, that cube everyone was running after in the first movie way way back in 2007 was what created all life in Cybertron. How is it possible, then, that the Transformers have been created by another alien race, if the cube existed before time itself? Maybe that’s a technical detail, nowhere near the biggest problem, but it demonstrates that there is no grand vision or overarching story at work here, just one chapter after another until the people will stop coming to the theatre. Anyway, let’s move on. The biggest problem with the movie is that it’s impossible to get emotionally attached to the characters at this point. Every film introduces new batches of heroes for us to care for and endless ranks of flat, nameless villains for them to annihilate. Sure we get Bumblebee back, but there must be dozens of characters that have appeared in the previous films that are never mentioned and do not appear in this film. You might say that this is because the Autobots have been hunted down to extinction, but if that’s the case, why do all of the Autobots that join Optimus (save for Bumblebee) turn out to be new characters we’ve never heard of before? It’s not like we are re-introduced some Cybertronian that had a small role in the previous movie with a new body; it’s a slew of brand new characters. You don’t know who Drift, Crosshairs or Hound are they’re just there to sell toys. That explains why the villains get so little characterization as well. Heroes sell better than bad guy toys so the Autobots get all of the character development (well, not really but in theory they do) and the villains get none at all. Each evil robot in this film is basically the exact same character except that he looks different. Yes I realize that there are two exceptions, but for the most part, every bad guy is a drone, simply there to be killed in increasingly ridiculous ways by the heroes. The action sequences end up meaning nothing at all because the villains are in no way a threat. It’s a huge missed opportunity because with each film we waste time introducing new allies for Optimus Prime and new villains for them to fight and kill, and it is never as obvious or crippling as it is in this movie because at this point, every character you might have been attached to from the original film are all gone. Instead, we get new heroes who only get the tiniest bit of character development, just enough to make them easily identifiable so you can pretend to yourself that you’re relieved when they don’t end up getting shot in the face. Even then, shortcuts like accents and catch phrases are used in all instances so that you can identify who is who. Another way you can tell this is a brainless action movie is that none of the action done by any of the characters has any real impact on the story whatsoever. The setup of this film is that the battle between the Autobots and the Decepticons got so bad in the previous film that the entire city of Chicago was whipped out and the humans have said ENOUGH! You would think, therefore, that the Autobots would take real care to create as little collateral damage as possible. Not at all. There are scenes where the Autobots are having aerial battles and they casually shoot enemy ships out of the sky. Those ships, even though it’s off-screen, would end up crashing down below into buildings and probably end up killing tons of people. It moves quickly and it’s big and flashy though, so no one put more than a second’s worth of thought into it. Another scene that struck me as one in which the people putting this film together really didn’t think things through was later in the film, when the Autobots are infiltrating Lockdown’s ship. They see that Lockdown has captured all kinds of creatures, many of which are alien and some of which are Transformers, just like our heroes. You can probably theorize that none of these creatures are here willingly, since Lockdown has gone this whole film shooting down anyone in his path and generally not being a terribly nice guy. Anyway, Tessa passes by a cage and a weird multi-legged creature spits at her. An Autobot retaliates by shooting the thing and reducing it to a pile of goopy hamburger. Just think about that scene for a second. That creature was there unwillingly. How do the Autobots, who are supposed to be our heroes, know it wasn’t just crying for help, begging them to return it to its home world so it could feed its sick children? I guess if it doesn’t speak English, then it must be evil. Blow it up! Even from a character design point, it feels like the film is missing something. If you look at the robots as they were introduced in 2007 and on, they just seem to get progressively less interesting. Transformers used to come in all kinds of sizes. We had some that were shorter than people and some that were able to pick up cars and casually throw them over their shoulders like it was nothing. We had some that looked humanoid, some that looked like animals. They had one eye, four eyes, two eyes; characters had no mouths, multiple legs, wheels for legs or even a single leg they hopped around on. We had robots that really looked like alien robots because their proportions were not like human being’s at all. They turned into alien spaceships, jets, helicopters, tanks, motorcycles, human beings, insects, we even had a robot that was nearly invisible because it was a 2-dimensional dinosaur you could only see from the side and another that was so huge it transformed into a dozen vehicles that assembled themselves to build a mechanical giant. In “Age of Extinction”, each character is colour-coded differently, but they’re all basically the same. They all just look like robotic people. They have clothing, facial hair, two arms, two legs and basic human proportions. All I see here are mechanical people running around shooting at each other, not a race of advanced alien robots from a distant galaxy. It’s like these films don’t even fit in the same continuity because what you would expect to be consistent from one film to another, the Transformers don’t look anything like the ones from the first two films. For all of the faults in this film, this one does take some steps in the right direction. With the main female lead being under-aged, gone is the overabundant sexualisation that was constantly present with Megan Fox and Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. Gone also, for the most part, is the parade of comic-relief buffoons that you just wanted to see die. It’s not completely devoid of comedy, but the film is a lot more geared towards the action and, well “story” than it is the comedy. The human characters overall are also a vast improvement over the ones in the previous film. Here, they actually feel integral to the plot and relevant to the action. It’s a lot easier to care for a down-on-his luck inventor that is also a single dad and sympathetic towards Optimus Prime than it is to care about a bumbling young adult with a smokin’ hot girlfriend looking for a job (see “Dark of the Moon”) There are also some nice variations in the locations of the film, with some flashbacks to prehistoric times, the action travelling from the United States to China and some key scenes in the movie set inside of Lockdown’s ship. As usual, the special effects here are very good as well. Say what you will about this franchise, but it delivers when it comes to the spectacle and making the Transformers look very nice on-screen. It’s particularly impressive when Grimlock and the other Dinobots come into the film towards the end of the story. It’s hard to tell if they really are in the film that much, since the whole thing lasts nearly, if not more than two-and-a-half hours, but they’re easily the most memorable aspect of the film. If you struggled with being able to differentiate who was who in the fast-paced action scenes, you will also find that they are much more coherent than before, and if you see the movie in 3-D, the aerial dogfights and battle sequences offer a lot in terms of depth and moments that will make you jump. “Transformers: Age of Extinction” is a polarizing film for me. It’s not really good, but I recommend it anyway. Not in an ironic way either, more of a recommendation with an asterisk. If you are interested in this film because you’ve seen the other movies and you thought they were genuinely good, or you just enjoyed them because sometimes you just like seeing shiny special effects jump around and stuff blow up, then you should see it on the big screen. If you’ve seen “Revenge of the Fallen” and “Dark of the Moon” and you thought they were flat-out bad and you didn’t like them, but you think that maybe this film will be a step in the right direction, you would be correct, but I still wouldn’t recommend you see it because it’s not that much of an improvement overall. The main reason for my asterisk here is that the movie is just so long. If a movie is big, loud and dumb but it features cool special effects and it clocks in at just an hour and a half, that’s not too much of a commitment, but at this length, there is simply no reason why this film has to be this bad. Once again, it’s faint praise but I was glad to have seen “Transformers 4: Age of Extinction”, even if it is a weak film. (Theatrical version on the big screen, July 19, 2014)
|5/10||squirrel_burst@ - 49 reviews|
30.9.2014 - age: 26-35
The storyline and premise are good - political comment on the Philippines, but painfully slow - torture at times. A shame because it had potential, but in the end, its political message is too direct.
|5/10||glegh@ - 110 reviews|
10.9.2014 - age: 50+
One of Denzel's best! A great movie, the story is set up well with a little bit of a slow start, but it only makes the movie better as a whole. If you enjoyed Training Day or Man on Fire, GO SEE THIS MOVIE NOW!
|9/10||conju30@ - 14 reviews|
27.9.2014 - age: 26-35
Pretty predictable presentation entirely from the Allies' point of view. Not too much new stuff that hasn't been presented before. Glad I had a free pass to see it. Of course, great to see Normandy on the really big screen. Someday, but probably impossible, it would be at least interesting to see WW II from the losers' perspective, but, was it Plutarch... ?
|6/10||kencrab@ - 3 reviews|
25.9.2014 - age: 50+
Not a bad thriller. Good acting by Brosnan and co, felt like a poor man's Bourne film. Not worth a trip to the cinema but definitely a DVD watch. Pierce can still move well for an aging Bond type.
|6/10||shelly@ - 11 reviews|
23.9.2014 - age: 36-49
Viewers will recognize this movie as being along the same lines as 'The Hunger Games', complete with plans for a sequel, albeit with slightly different premises. Moviegoers will be dropped into the story not knowing why our hero is there, and they will spend the rest of the movie figuring that out. The film is also redolent of 'Lord of the Flies' with post-pubescent guys running around with pointy sticks. The characters are acted well enough, and the effects of the maze are quite satisfying, but the plot lacks originality.
|6/10||cjuneau@ - 74 reviews|
21.9.2014 - age: 50+
I went into this with the same excitement I felt watching the first Sin City and was not disappointed. This is a thoroughly enjoyable adaptation of the graphic novel and remains true to the style of the first movie. A super fun ride for the Sin City fan.
|8/10||tessroutliffe@ - 13 reviews|
18.9.2014 - age: 18-25
It's just like a charismatic leadership as an ordinary man. The General Yi showed his loyalty with his people and country. In this generation he is inspiring us to be a leader. All of the scenes were showing me a block buster scheme and depictions. Who can say there is the admiral like in all generation as an ordinary leader? I also admired a director in a great artistic expression and a detail and a realistic scene with a great investment in a small market of South Korea.
|9/10||ameridians@ - first review|
23.8.2014 - age: 36-49
Aw, Idris baby, why'd you do it man? You're an A list actor and this is a sub-B movie. They must have paid you a lot of dosh to make something this flat and predictable. You are worthy of so much more than this. And they didn't even light you well, even if you were the bad guy. Don't put this one on your resume, sweetheart.
|5/10||hands4hearts@ - 12 reviews|
16.9.2014 - age: 50+
I enjoyed this movie immensely. Shows how fine art is to some degree smoke and mirrors. I'm a professional artist and found it very interesting. Good going Tim.
|9/10||sculpts@ - 23 reviews|
27.4.2014 - age: 50+
You will feel as though you yourself are the occupied...
|10/10||platinumcritic99@ - 26 reviews|
7.9.2014 - age: 36-49
As always Allen's movies are visually stunning, sophisticated. For those who think about life, love and the soul.
|7/10||afan@ - first review|
28.8.2014 - age: 50+
Excellent movie! It is fun filled and full of laughs. I watched this the day the movie came out. There hasn't been a movie with the same fun feel for the past 10 years. I highly recommend this movie to everyone.
|10/10||riskpack@ - 22 reviews|
7.9.2014 - age: 18-25
All movies ask the viewer to suspend disbelief. But Pacific Rim abuses that entreaty by offering such ridiculous offal that no person with intelligence beyond the average young child's could possibly get through this without several shakes of the head. Other than one of the most ludicrous plots in cinema history, the movie is OK. Acting is at an expected level for this sort of oeuvre (but bad nerds) Production values are high enough. Action is good enough. And a nice throwback to the genre's origins is shown with the creature animation. I did watch to the end, though. But the plot? Seriously, if the lava flows don't melt it, the rocket's red glare won't either.
|3/10||spoxox@ - 31 reviews|
6.9.2014 - age: 50+
A NICE movie. Formulaic. Predictable. Sweet. Very handsome young male lead. Etc., etc... Not riveting for me; found my attention wandering as I could predict (accurately as it turned out) the end. Not a complete waste of time though as nice, sweet movies can be enjoyable too, on occasion!
|6/10||j_ashlie@ - 26 reviews|
4.9.2014 - age: 50+
This is a movie I would (and did) see with family. It's hard-hitting and heart-felt, with very distinctive characters and wonderful morals and story line. I took my husband and he loved it, then took my sister (husband said it was just because I wanted to see it twice; I told him it was also a good excuse to see my sister) and she loved it, AND we told my husband's grandparents about it and THEY saw it and loved it. They came back and he was rubbing his arm because she bruised it with her enthusiasm, but they both loved it despite the age difference between us and even though we don't like the same things most of the time. I tried to send my dad to see it, as I know he'd like it, my mom would probably like it, my grandparents would love it, and I've been recommending it to people at work as well. This movie is based on real events, the people who came together and made the movie all had things in common and some of that shows on screen, and... This is a movie I will buy. Not might, WILL. And probably will buy other copies for other relatives so they can enjoy it, too. Because this movie is too good not to share.
|10/10||wolf.kin.flight@ - first review|
29.8.2014 - age: 18-25
From the demented mind of Frank Miller, this stylized, no-holds-barred, sex and violence-soaked film is a worthy follow-up to the original classic. Eva Green steals every scene she is in, in her portrayal as the sultry, evil seductress. The 3D effects are powerfully rendered, even though this is hard to achieve with a mostly black & white movie which, in my opinion, is the best motion picture released so far this year.
|10/10||chester1958@ - 26 reviews|
22.8.2014 - age: 50+
This old man also enjoyed watching some of my old fabulous actors but I especially enjoyed seeing Mel Gibson at his best being a villain and/or should I say a bad guy of America... I hear YA folks, Mel was not playing a Brave Heart but then again, that part was also no passion of well YA know WHO?.. Go figure? I'm sure that his fans will forgive him for the part that he took after going through a 250 Mill die voice bill... Come on fans, look at the bright side, not every country loves America these days... WHAT! WHAT! WHAT? LOL :) Peace.
|8/10||victorsavard@ - 26 reviews|
30.8.2014 - age: 50+
I loved TMNT as a child... And I still love them now! Story could have been a little cleaner. Disappointed that the writers did not do justice to April's character nor to Splinter's. You just can't learn to be Asian by reading a book! Graphics were great and filled with non stop action but what I would have enjoyed is to have spent MORE time getting reacquainted with each turtle! Everything just seemed so rushed! However even with all its shortcomings I'll still be buying this movie for collection. Last note, I love that they showcased Mikey on his skateboard going through the sewer!!
|8/10||threestarssun@ - 26 reviews|
13.8.2014 - age: 26-35
If I could give this movie a 10+, I would, so a BIG Fat 10 for this wonderful movie! I went to every James Brown concert as a teenager growing up in the New York area! I feel blessed to have experienced the magic of being there! What an incredible Music, Genius and Complex person, Mr. James Brown was and will always be! His band set the stage on FIRE! I continued to attend his concerts right up to The God Father of Soul's exit to 'The Other Side'. He is happy! Putting my coins together to see this moving important work of High Art again and again!
|10/10||d_silverknight@ - first review|
21.8.2014 - age: 50+
As I saw the original french version, at first, I was a little worried to be disappointed as the original version was such a masterpiece of finesse and "humor à la française" with the greatest Quebec cast of actors ( Raymond Bouchard (the mayor), Benoît Brière (the banking manager), Rita Lafontaine (the mayor's wife), David Boutin ( the doctor), Pierre Collin ( the mayor's best friend), Lucie Laurier ( the young doctor's flirt) But this time, the story is taking place in a little harbor in Newfoundland. As in the original version, the photography well captures the beauty of the landscapes of the coast of NF. Further on, we are laughing all along as the story developed. I did not know most of the cast except the great Gordon Pinsent. His character is hilarious and credible as this old fisherman and the mayor's complice. And as a big fan of "This Hour has 22 minutes", I rediscovered Mark Critch, Mary Wlash and Cathy Jones who are hilarious too and well casted in their role. Finally I discovered Brendan Gleeson and Taylor Kitsch whose relationship in the film is the pillar of the whole story.
|7/10||marie_josee456@ - 22 reviews|
1.6.2014 - age: 50+
Ok I don't understand all those bad reviews... I loved it the acting was good, the actions were very good! Pretty good movie.
|10/10||acoriano_marc92@ - 24 reviews|
10.8.2014 - age: 18-25
I was very disappointed by this movie, I just expect more from Woody Allen. Colin Firth and Emma Stone performed okay considering what they had been given though I'm doubt this movie did much for their careers. Great costumes at least.
|5/10||hatros@ - 27 reviews|
13.8.2014 - age: 50+
A moving story about self discovery a major life choice. It is set in gloomy, probably Communist Poland. Ida is an emotional story of a young, innocent woman. She learns from her aunt who she is and why she grew up in a convent. She experiences life outside the convent and has to decide if she wants to become a nun.
|7/10||daylekarsha55@ - first review|
16.8.2014 - age: 50+
The most over rated film of 2013. With such great actors and a great sound track, it would have been complete with a more interesting story line. Way too monotonous. I just kept waiting and waiting for something to happen.
|5/10||katboguski@ - 37 reviews|
5.1.2014 - age: 36-49
One of the top movies from Disney imo. Great soundtrack, beautiful animation and excellent storyline. Compared to Pixar's "Planes" kids in the theater room were hypnotize at what they were seeing vs a "is it done yet" attitude. Great Job! Recommended!
|9/10||mariezd@ - 24 reviews|
17.12.2013 - age: 36-49
I would have given it a 1, but I wasn't sure if it was the worst movie I ever saw, so I gave it a 2. The only reason to see this 3 hour waste of time is if you want to see the concept of a movie that took 12 years to make and physically see the actual aging of the characters in real time and life. Otherwise a complete waste of time.
|2/10||jeffk29@ - 29 reviews|
7.8.2014 - age: 36-49
Loved the music, storyline interesting, good choice of actors including more of Adam Levine. Could do without the foul language - just not necessary.
|8/10||dvissing@ - first review|
4.7.2014 - age: 50+
The only reason I don't give this film the lowest possible rating is so that anyone interested in fashion goes to see this and realizes what shallow, witless, uninteresting, unintelligent, and snarky people work in fashion and at Vogue in particular. One would expect those who work in the upper echelons of the style-making industry would be intelligent, witty or even interesting but I have never had to suffer a more shallow, boring, nasty group of individuals on film: they whine and snipe and pose and pout, petulantly believing that the world is failing to recognize what they consider to be their obvious creative genius. Forget it. What talent is evident here (mostly that of stylist Grace Coddington) is overshadowed by their miserable, self-absorbed sense of self-importance. The best thing I can say about this documentary is that it convinced me to never again waste my time or money on an issue of Vogue.
|5/10||land@ - 20 reviews|
7.8.2014 - age: 36-49
It's a pretty good movie. I'm not sure if it's really worth 10/10 but it's a Canadian film which is a good enough reason to go watch it. So just go. Now.
|10/10||alexandre.pelletier@ - first review|
11.8.2014 - age: 18-25
Just a fun movie. Right up there with The Avengers. If you want to be entertained then just sit back and enjoy... it is entertaining! I'm glad I went.
|9/10||mjhietanen@ - 33 reviews|
7.8.2014 - age: 36-49
Great movie!! Scarlett Johansson is great in this role!! Interesting movie, different from the usual movies out there. Keeps you locked in to see what's next... enjoy!!! A must see!!!
|9/10||silly@ - 23 reviews|
27.7.2014 - age: 36-49
I was not expecting much from this movie, and yet I came away extremly disapointed. I thought it might about the adventures of Hercules, but instead they only allude to his trials. What were they thinking. There is so much story in these trials they could be a series of movies, but for some reason they completely dissmiss them and use something new. The script was bad, acting mediocre at best, the plot felt tacked on as a means to get from one fight scene to the next. Never really cared for the rock. I don't really find him to be a good actor, nor do I think he is all the charsmatic or charming. Casting even went out of their way to make everyone sound british... Except the Rock. I found it distracting whenever he said anything. I do not recomend this to anyone.
|3/10||jarshdarsh@ - 27 reviews|
31.7.2014 - age: 26-35
Godzilla is a wonderful and thrilling throwback to classic monster movies, like Jaws and Jurassic Park. Yes, you have to actually wait a little while for Godzilla to show up, this isn't a modern, cranked up to 11, action packed explosion-fest. This is a carefully crafted story setting up these monsters so that the finale will be that much more exciting. I personally enjoyed the movie thoroughly and loved having my anticipation built up. The ending is so worth the wait and while the human element isn't the best part of the movie, it rarely is in these kinds of films. It was great that nearly every twist and surprise wasn't revealed in the trailer, so expect some genuine gasps when this movie unfolds. This a great movie for those who enjoy creature features and I highly recommend it.
|8/10||bradchase@ - 25 reviews|
27.5.2014 - age: 26-35
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
It started out looking pretty promising what with the ape culture and different personalities in the ape city. Enter the humans, on a mission to restore the power dam. Human are depticted as laughably predictable stereotypes -- good human, bad human! You can tell who the bad humans are, they have long hair or don't shave enough and look kind of smelly. Also, they think apes are dumb animals. But wait! There are 'bad' apes, too so between the bad apes and the bad humans war is inevitable. The 'war' was a little confusing for a while, like who is winning here but don't worry, the music will tell you how to feel. Yes, the score. At every possible opportunity, the score was either very, very moving, or very, very ominous or well, just very, very whatever you the viewer are supposed to be feeling about all this just in case you weren't sure. This sound track re-defined intrusive. During the big battle scene the 'bad' ape actually rides a horse full tilt with a gun in each ala John Wayne in True Grit-- I nearly laughed out loud. The action (when not being interrupted by touching scenes of how nice and family oriented apes are) and clichés, are non-stop. There are a few cute moments of interaction between the 'good' humans (of course) and some of the apes, and the special effects are well done, but overall it's a waste of computer generated effects.
|6/10||dodge@ - 15 reviews|
26.7.2014 - age: 50+
You think Jaws (rated 10!) was the first "scare on the beach movie?". If the criteria is predictability, only David Lynch movies should get above 8! And if we were to sick to original screenplay idea, we would only watch movies made before 1950!
|0/10||charlfrance@ - 15 reviews|
28.7.2014 - age: 36-49
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Overall, this was a very entertaining movie. I was very pleased to see the 2 casts of X-men brought together. It's unfortunate that a few of the roles from great actors i.e. Halle Berry, Anna Paquin, Ian McKellan were diminished. Most of the focus is on the past events surrounding Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique. The SFX were top notch and the action and the suspense throughout was fantastic. There were some really neat action sequences, but nothing mind blowing. You essentially get what you'd expect from the X-Men series. I liked the dark post apocalyptic feel of the movie as it was a definite change for this series. The score is menacing and hopeful, at the same time. I didn't like that Xavier never explained how he survived the events of X-men The Last Stand. This is a glaring plot hole that could have easily been fixed with a quick flashback/expository scene. Please stay until the end of the credits. Might be important for the next sequel!!
|8/10||stan.bordenave@ - 30 reviews|
8.6.2014 - age: 26-35
This was one of the most touching movies I've seen in a long time. I've been a fan of Jonas Armstrong for some years now and he does not fail to disappoint, along with the young lady who played Rachel. She is someone to keep your eye on in the future. I would highly recommend this movie to everyone.
|9/10||cadey.brooke@ - first review|
16.7.2014 - age: 26-35
I enjoyed this movie a lot. The CGI is extremely good, but the plot gets cheesy at times. It is well worth seeing which I did in 3D. Characters were quite predictable (good/bad in everyone), but overall one of the better movies of its type.
|7/10||paulberner@ - 33 reviews|
15.7.2014 - age: 50+
Mais qu'est ce qu'ont tous les critiques dans les journaux avec les comparaisons entre Volcano et Amour? Je viens de voir Volcano, qui est sur la reconquête d'un amour perdu, et la redécouverte de la vie par quelqu'un qui n'en attendait plus rien. Il n'a rien de la froideur clinique du film de Haneke. On est plus proche de Bergman ici, et il faut vraiment ne pas aller chercher bien loin ou bien être aveugle aux subtilités pour s'arrêter à la comparaison entre les deux films. Oui, les deux films parlent de personnes du troisième âge, et de la maladie de l'un d'entre eux. C'est tout, fini la comparaison. Le film de Haneke est très bien, mais Volcano dégage une douceur et une tendresse que j'ai rarement vues au cinéma, et certainement pas chez Haneke. La salle était en pleurs quand le film s'est terminé, je pense que c'est une des plus belles histoires d'amour que j'ai vus au cinéma. Il y avait peu de gens dans la salle quand j'y suis allé, j'espère qu'au moins les commentaires positifs vont encourager d'autres à venir découvrir ce film. Ce serait dommage de passer à côté.
|10/10||anthonybello@ - 30 reviews|
2.10.2013 - age: 26-35
There aren't a lot of movies that I would rate highly (mostly due to major 'suspension of disbelief' or absence of decent story-line or an overabundance of CGI) but I really enjoyed this film. This version of Sleeping Beauty is sweet and amusing (except for the 3 babysitting-fairies that I found too childish/annoying) And I love the music (although I thought it was Angelina who was singing the theme song!)
|9/10||jfk@ - 7 reviews|
16.7.2014 - age: 36-49
Dinesh D'Souza's writing does point out the good in America, but he fails to provide real balance in his point of view, particularly when it comes to slavery.
|5/10||sisharonsi@ - 3 reviews|
17.7.2014 - age: 50+
I really loved this movie, the acting by the 2 leads is excellent, the scenery and the music is soo good! It's nice to see something different out there!
|9/10||francinegizmo@ - 28 reviews|
24.6.2014 - age: 50+
This is a really bad movie. Most of it looks like it was filmed with a cell phone. The story is lame (what there is of it) and it's just boring, and dumb, and stupid, and... I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea.
|3/10||audiobent.com@ - 44 reviews|
10.7.2014 - age: 50+
A light hearted comedy that was interesting but had a little to much Jon and not enough Oliver in it. Acting was good but was anyone else wondering how he got his hot wife in the first place!?!
|7/10||michjulien@ - 168 reviews|
12.7.2014 - age: 36-49
Ritesh Deshmukh did an amazing job. He should get an award for his role. Such a different role from his other movies. The story is really good I love it. Do it watch on the screen and yeah the songs are amazing too.
|9/10||faiza_bluesky@ - 26 reviews|
3.7.2014 - age: 26-35
One of those rare movies that doesn't have one boring scene. Great acting overall. Can't wait to the sequel as it battles HG for the #1 so called 'YA' film.
|9/10||tedbouchard@ - 27 reviews|
4.4.2014 - age: 36-49
What a lame movie. Bad acting, bad story line, lame one-liners. Maybe if you are a pre teen or a teenager you might find it interesting. Unless you are extremely bored and have absolutely nothing to do, then go see this [c…], otherwise your money is best spent elsewhere.
|5/10||bignj@ - 70 reviews|
2.7.2014 - age: 36-49