You may also like
Oskar, Oskar torrent reviews
Lisa Marie A (gb) wrote: So sad but what a strong and loving mother...
Harry W (mx) wrote: With zero expectation to like the movie whatsoever, I went into Hannah Montana: The Movie to see precisely who Miley Cyrus was before she became the media-frenzied sex symbol she is today. Hannah Montana: The Movie was essentially everything that I had expected, although admittedly it wasn't as bad as I could have predicted. There were a few moments that had some slight amount of meaning to it even if they were part of a cheesy identity crisis concept usually found in every Disney Channel original movie. The issue about Miley Cyrus being unable to choose between her fame and enjoying the solitary life of who she really is has a short but still present level of depth to it.Some of the music in the film is also decent. Despite the presence of Taylor Swift and an awful scene depicting a poor blend of country music and hip hop taking their toll on the overall soundtrack, the film does manage to capitalise on Miley Cyrus' singing voice pretty well and even has some half decent tunes along the way, even if they are excessively generic. The one song that I found a little bit catchy in Hannah Montana: The Movie was the song "You'll Always Find Your Way Back Home" mainly because of its energy and catchy beat more so than the lyrics, as well as the fact that Miley Cyrus sung it out decently. I didn't expect much at all from the musical numbers in Hannah Montana: The Movie, but the music in the film was not as consistently bad as I had originally predicted. There was a certain level of spirit to it all, and so it is easy to see how fans of the character would get sucked into the film even though it is far from something I would enjoy.But above that, Hannah Montana: The Movie is just as shallow as I could have expected. The central issue in Hannah Montana: The Movie is that it is not funny. Perhaps fans could laugh at a few jokes in the film, but the main problem is that it is an adaptation of a sitcom. Sitcoms are supposed to be consistently funny as a way of making sure the audience is constantly laughing, but Hannah Montana: The Movie does not achieve the same thing because it stretches out the thin gag of the story into 102 minute running time with very little humour and a story that just takes itself way too seriously. Hannah Montana: The Movie is bad because of the limited audience that it attempts to appeal to as well as the fact that it is genuinely not that funny, as I did not laugh once. Maybe the fans of Hannah Montana may think there is a certain level of success in the childish humour of the film, but anyone else is unlikely to find it compelling or funny whatsoever.And the cast of the film really do little to add to the thin premise, lacklustre script and genuine absence of originality.Miley Cyrus is one of the few musicians currently popular among mainstream audiences that I honestly have any respect for. Her performance in Hannah Montana: The Movie is not one of those reasons. You can just tell that she has more talent than the role demands of her because she really has to force herself through the role, the same way that someone who doesn't like the character has to force themselves through the film. That was the case with me, and so I really did not enjoy it. The entire thing feels so fake and you can tell that Miley Cyrus has just really sold out for the part because she has to forcefully put herself into a childish persona for the part while completely ignoring who she truly is. And when she plays herself she does the same. Miley Cyrus is just very artificial in Hannah Montana: The Movie, and since the sitcom format has evolved into a feature length comedy drama project, the lack of meaning in her performance is a lot more notable this time around. Miley Cyrus is not funny in Hannah Montana: The Movie, neither does she really act out the role with any sort of genuine realism in the part so it comes off as really artificial. But it was what I expected. Hannah Montana: The Movie is only good to look back on to see just how Miley Cyrus has changed herself since.Lucas Hill is just terrible in Hannah Montana: The Movie. From the instant he comes on the screen you can see that he is nothing but a cheap country boy archetype and he acts as such. Stuck in the rudimentary script, Lucas Hill gets the worst character and is unable to break free from it with shallow line delivery which makes it hard for viewers to really sympathise for his character, as well as an inability to create any chemistry with Miley Cyrus. He is the one that deserved the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actor, not Billy Ray Cyrus.Why the Golden Raspberry award went to Billy Ray Cyrus is beyond me because even though his role is cheap and tacky, he is the one cast member in the film who comes off as being any form of half decent. He captures a likable persona in a performance which really is of no challenge to him, and although he isn't great or funny, he is the one character with any sense of good in him. Billy Ray Cyrus does not have to force anything in his performance because it all comes to him naturally. Billy Ray Cyrus is the one cast member who really has an easy effort in Hannah Montana: The Movie.So despite having a few minor positive qualities, Hannah Montana: The Movie is a generic film with indifferent acting, a familiar plot and a distinct lack of humour which makes its transition from sitcom to cinema a poor decision.
Garry G (nl) wrote: so predictable...but kinda sweet in parts
James W (de) wrote: Don't you just hate it when your favourite character is killed off, sometimes it can be sad or sometimes comes as a shock. I love it when a movie connects you to characters, Rogue does that very well by confining the main cast into a single boat, and letting them talk, banter, argue and panic together. Radha Mitchell steals the show with her realistic performance, I've seen her in many movies and she comes across as very down to earth, so I was shocked when she met her demise. This feels like a proper real life situation, if a bit exaggerated at times it's bloody good fun but filled with heart pumping suspense. From a visual point of view, Rogue is very nice, the landscape shots are amazing, but it's the relentless moments of suspense that really grab you, sometimes it's unbearable, you don't know what to expect. I've seen a lot of Australian flicks over the years, they are brilliant and I am think Australian cinema really focuses on character. Rogue is a high recommendation.
Matthew H (au) wrote: Beyond the Sea never really moves beyond a skin-deep biopic, and always feels off-beat, but Spacey saves the show. His portrayal of Darin is almost spot on, and he has a surprisingly good singing voice. It may try a bit too hard, but it is worth watching if only for the "Beyond the Sea" number.
Craig M (us) wrote: Awesome installment!!
Jessica D (ca) wrote: I really hate the "politcally correct" complaints. More like historically correct. It tells the story of the wild west and the cavalry. Anyone who knows anything about American history knows how bad and brutal the interactions between the cavalry and natives were during this time, especially General Custer who is the main villain.
Brett H (fr) wrote: Rushmore is the break-out film for both star Jason Schwartzman and director Wes Anderson who established his off-beat, and wickedly funny style early on and has pretty much created his own genre to be identified with! Schwartzman completely owns the screen as a hilariously original character who excels at everything extra-curricular but absolutely fails when it comes to his academics and his quick-witted and pompous attitude lead to some of the funniest moments in the film. Bill Murray is also excellent here playing a varied and somewhat villainous role that reinvigorated his career and started a long-standing friendship with director Wes Anderson and subsequently appeared in every film he's made. The story is very simple with unattainable love being the big conflict, but with Anderson's brilliantly quirky style and hilarious brand of dark comedy the bigger moments are the exchanges between the characters with flawless dialogue. Schwartzman's character Max also writes and performs in elaborate plays that use as many special effects as an actual film and these are easily my favourite scenes in the film; the ending Vietnam play is outrageous! Wes Anderson films are one of a kind and if you're a fan of his work or off-beat films in general, this is a must-see.
Janten V (mx) wrote: Pretty solid low budget comedy with some good performances. Jack Black and Brittany Murphy stood out from many funny characters and cameos.
John W (ca) wrote: Packed tight with hot guys in revealing outfits and genuine extreme fetish (an amputee, mummification, S&M, etc), but that's about all there is -- "shock" value. It's amateur at best, but there is some good music. Hard to believe that Labruce went on to make such an intelligent, witty, fun, political, and yet still hot flick like Raspberry Reich.
Lee M (de) wrote: It's the kind of movie that deals with unspeakable subjects while keeping a certain ironic distance, and using dialogue that seems funny, although the characters never seem in on the joke.
Eric R (ag) wrote: A Warlock from the 1600s arrives in 1980s Los Angeles to continue his devotion to the devil. On his trail, a warlock hunter from the 1600s who has followed the warlock forward in time. WARLOCK is essentially a b-movie supernatural version of The Terminator. It's an entertaining film which features some fun gruesome deaths, courteousy of our Warlock. Julian Sands is extremely creepy as the Warlock. He oozes unease and really does a great job at creating a memorable villain. This film has a good amount of 80s cheese but its damn entertaining.
Byron B (es) wrote: nominated for best picture at the oscars
Scott R (gb) wrote: A film that almost was good, blending the black and white of good and evil into a confusing grey.
Roland P (ca) wrote: Pretty poor movie. Sort of bad.