All User Reviews

The husband and wife are the usual beta coward husband to the feminist nasty, rude unlikable wife treating her husband like shit and nothing
is her fault. The acting is ok but this is way to long and boring. The first hour and a half just drags on forever. There are so many red flags
and warning signs here right from the start that they just ignore like its nothing. Even without that it's not like the couple is charming,
personalbe or likeable. They are weird and awkward and hard to believe they are able to get this many people to fall for their bs. Then of course
at the end once it all falls apart the wife is the one fighting back, saving her husbands life and defending everyone while he just does nothing.
Even the daughter manages to do more than the weak beta father.

Nothing really woke. This isn't a bad movie but you've seen it before. It's the typical no budget small business struggling to stay alive against the rich big business down the street. The acting is ok but everything is such a cliché you can see it all coming a mile away. It's an ok watch and probably a little more so for anyone who remembers small local brick and mortar comic shops from the 90's.

Turned it off after 30 minutes

The first thing I noticed is it was trying to be 'quirky' instead of gritty like the original karate kid, and the main character is a nerdy poonce unlike Daniel in the original.

But despite that it was going okay and I was prepared to give it a chance.

Not 'wokeness' as in gay shit, trannies and such in that time.

BUT.. just as bad, like most modern movies and shows there's an unbearable, disrespectful, cuntish girl in it who becomes his friend and constantly is disrespecting her dad. I had enough of that shit and turned it off.

Otherwise it could have been okay. Why do they keep pretending women/girls are meant to be like that, making them completely disrespectful and aggressive which no man with any self respect wants to see or deal with.

Sounds like Dave Reimer is used to his wife and other women being completely disrespectful cunts and has his balls in her handbag so much that he's pretending it's not happening, since he's used to being an emasculated fucktard.

Most likely wrote his review from his chair in the corner of the room while sipping a soy latte while watching his wife bang a black man, while wondering what bs he can make up for his review. Seems like he didn't even watch the original movie.

Murphy's whole career behind a camera...

Written, directed, produced and fronted by Murphy. Also starring his brother and Pryor, his long-time inspiration, girlfriend Guy and friend Hall.
It doesn't get much more personnal than that.

Well, that's not all he wrote, but that's all he directed. Kept on producing, though, cause he's astute and likes making money.

And it didn't deter him from trying to grow out of the outrageous funny man image.

Which he was not completely ready to. There's still much of Axel F in his character.

If memory serves, Pryor had been diagnosed with a life-threatening condition. So, not at his best. But still very good. Foxx, Aiello, Lerner and most of the supporting cast are old grognards by the time of this movie. Pro-level performances all around.

Photography is decent for the time, so, nothing impressive, despite competent lighting and nice colour palettes. The camera work is adequate, but hardly impressive. Not every actor is Eastwood. Or Beaty, in this context.


Not only is it not woke - Murphy's always shown a 80s view on race - but it's not even PC: there are even fights involving women. Which end up as realistically expected.


This movie hesitates between film noir and Murphy comedy, and never finds a balance. Beaty's Dick Tracy the following year puts it to shame, with its assumed comic book looks all the way.
The Godfather it is not; still, it somewhat works, and makes for a pleasant watch.
I suppose it was under-rated at the time, considering Murphy was on top of the world, high expectations included.

Not any more woke than the original

This was a darn good "live action" remake of the original. Scrawny characters are made to be scrawny in this, and the same with the opposite. A bit more diversity in the cast, but I can't quite nail down the homogeneous population of vikings that battled dragons historically to see if these compare.

Disgusting but previzibile

Historical revisionism with brown Anglo saxons in homogeneous Britain

Robert Jordan Plays Revenge Porn From Dusk Till Dawn at the Cotton Club

The bluesman, not the author.

I've heard tons of good about this movie, but from the wrong people and in a very homogeneous message. So, sus.


First, the good, cause there are more uglies than at a pussy hat march.

Jordan does a fine job playing both blue oni / red oni, angel / demon, or whatever colour-coded dichotomy comes to mind. The difference between characters is subtle, let's leave it at that.

Steinfeld does what she does best: she stands there, and is convinced of her own talent. Caton might have a career. Remmick tries hard but does not quite shine. The supporting cast is solid.

The music is an obvious strong point of the movie. No comment, it's well done and well used. Would like to hear that level of effort more often.

Photography is excellent. Reminiscent of Tarantino. In a good way. It sometimes gets ambitious, to its detriment, I think. The changes in aspect ratio are somewhat interesting.

I've briefly read from 'journalists' that the movie was heavily researched. It literally opens by heavily mispronouncing _griots_ (French colonies, so "gree-yo"), and mis-characterizing the filidh, but hey, all white people look the same anyway.


The bad: it's steeped in racial stereotypes. And not the best ones. It briefly represents black Christianity, and promptly contrasts with and glorifies the proto-gangsta rap that served the black community so well until this day. /sarcasm.

On that point, be warned that many black characters talk in heavy vernacular, quite possibly ebonics. So, a creole of West Country English. Not sure if historically accurate. Note that African-American Vernacular English, as a concept, makes about as much sense as Latine-Celtic Vernacular Bantu.
Anyway, I find it hard to understand. So much so, I turned English subtitles on at some point.

Injuns, well, they hunt a vampire without any visible specialized gear, corner it into a small, isolated house, and promptly twerp off when opposed a few harsh words, letting a containable issue flare into a full catastrophe. While being so polite they might as well be Canucks.

Whites, well, here comes the ugly: they're all crackers.

The ugly: the movie is openly racist. Whites are evil. They hold the black man down. They're all MAGA (one can dream). In a bout of common Hollywood revisionism, the movie acts like the KKK / White League / Red Shirts and Jim Crow laws were a majority, and not offshoots of the Democrats. The "it wasn't _real_ communism" crowd.
"Chicago is Mississippi with tall buildings instead of plantations," they say. Sure. Chicago was also at the beginning of a, to this day, uninterrupted string of Democrat mayors. Hasn't changed since then. Go figure.

I digress, Ryan Kyle Coogler. Gaelic given names, German family name. "Cultural appropriation" much?
Then again, Michael B. Jordan. The B is Swahili, but the rest is Hebrew.

Anyway, white people as vampires. That have to be invited in. And a hive mind. Funny, that.
Especially considering the head sucker is Irish, a people that got an even shorter end of the stick than the Chinese or blacks.

I don't know what the director's political angle was, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't supposed to interpret vampirism as socialism. Hive mind, need to be voted in, then drain you and make more of themselves while destroying everything.

As an aside, I'm all for liberty in speech and freedom of association. Which incidentally also entails the freedom to not associate.
Hollywood seems hell-bent of late on establishing the concept of justifiable hatred, often racial. Given the employment and crime statistics of this particular demographic in the last, say, half century, I'm really not certain black people want to entrench that precedent.

Same goes for the strong undertone of separatism.

Again, Kügler does as he wishes, but his kind usually is the first to cry when the same wind blows the other way.


All in all, I'm not impressed with the research, historical or cultural, the imagery lacks subtlety, the social commentary is foreign to the actual world.
The movie is good, but atrociously racist. The kind born of ignorance and ideology that always leads to atrocities.

Rodriguez did it better. Heck, Murphy did it better.

Never reaches the summit

An excellent direct-to-DVD movie (there, I show my age).
As a theatre movie: seriously? Why? Why shoot your whole movie with no depth of field? Why film with a potato?

Also, why does Neeson keep acting in these action flicks? Bloke's past 70 now, and rich as can be. I'll admit he still holds up well for his age, though.
Fan is devastatingly charming, and goes 110% into her role. Morrell is more fun than a barrel of Aussie monkeys.

The storyline is full of holes and less than griping (watched this as a 3-parter, doing something else); exterior shots are nice but could have used professional photography. They're unexpectedly grounded in realism, though; almost part documentary. Or amateur travelogue.


I've watched worse in the 80s. It's still a rather bad movie. But it has a quirky charm.

on par with episode I

So, as Star Wars episodes I-II, it brings shame to the original trilogy, while appearing not so bad compared with subsequent efforts (Rings of Power comes to mind, but thankfully briefly).
Full disclosure, I have not watched the 6 latest SW.

Inexplicable ethnic diversity grows worse, extraneous girl-bosses too.

The elf CGI are atrocious, worse than the oliphant-surfing scene in RotK (I think).
Gandalf looks cool, though. Smaug's alright, although the economics implications of his gold stash are, well, it's fantasy.

Let me not forget Frye: as much as I like the chap, his attempt to portray the evil right-wing capitalistic despot of Laketown is incredibly heavy-handed, and evokes only infamous right-wing dictators such as Stalin, Mao or Pot.
Seriously, Laketown's problem is not free market, it's obviously its socialist utopia, its historic charismatic leader having been overthrown by a garden-variety populist communist.

Visually impressive but regrettably forgettable, my youngest liked it, we bailed out before the end.

Not everything is better reheated

The Hobbit is a children's book, short and self-contained (originally).
It does not contain enough material for a 9-hours trilogy.

This movie massively reuses assets from the LotR movies, not only to reduce costs, but also to score sympathy by association.

By necessity, it adds huge amounts of original material. Original, but lackluster.

What it fails to capture is the epic dimension of the previous movie. One of my gripes at the time was treating the dwarf as a comedic sidekick (because, dwarf tossing).
13 times the dwarves (eat your heart out, Snow White), 13 times the tonal dissonance. It's jarring.

As many movies in the decade since, this one oscillates between heroism and deconstructive, meta-"humour".
The joks are predictable and fall flat, taking with them any aspiration to grandeur.
Because heroism is masculine, and we don't like masculinity, do we.

1 point for wokeness, mostly because irresistible urge to introduce 'original' one-dimensional girl-boss characters, and inexplicable ethnic diversity.

Worse shite has been written around Tolkien (Rings of Power, anyone?), but this is tedious, and made somewhat palatable only because of its forebears.

Troon alert

A black male cast in a female role
Also its obvious they are going to shift it from anti communist to anti white nationalist
Well at least they got a accurate voice actor for the main communist pig

Tired, try-hard and boring

With the French bloke out, it's all females and their gay best friends.

The Noriko - sorry, Quynh - subplot fares barely better. Leaves some room for secondary character to breathe, which they don't really do. Except Booker. Schoenaerts is clutch.

Lots of sudden cuts in the first part, lots of exotic locales.
This movie felt to me as though it was trying real hard to whip itself into a good mood.
Trying - and failing - to establish a lore. The result is muddled, conflicts with the previous movie, and builds nothing.
In that way, it really does emulate the Highlander movies (although there can be only one).
I suspect Rucka's also trying to draw from Vampire the Masquerade lore, in an attempt to bolster his flagging creativity. Metuselah and stuff.


Thurman has grown old. Unkindly so. Especially compared to Theron, who's only 5 years her junior. And she's less than a decade older than Ngo. She still has that effortless elegance, and that genial charm, but not that unexpected beauty. Still a top notch actress, though.

Theron works hard to carry the movie. She's an excellent actress, but still sluggish in fight scenes. Atomic Blonde worked because the choreography was tactical, not physical. And she was younger.
Layne is still young. Meaning she's either badly coordinated, or just lazy with her training.


As a note, the "walking through the ghosts of the past" scene is just brilliant. A minute of grace in an unispired movie.
The rest is trudging through the motion. Anybody with two brain cells knows what is going to happen. But it comes slowly.


Also, this opus is less aggressively anti-male and anti-white than the previous. Studios must be starting to realize which side of the toast is buttered. Maybe they shouldn't grow too lucid, lest they realize most of them are the walking dead.

All-in-all, not bad, just tepid and directionless. Oh wait, this means bad.
Not sure the third movie this is desperately trying to build up to will be made.