You may also like
Son of Man torrent reviews
Mike C (es) wrote: If all this is as it seems, and it probably is, Major League Baseball is kind of just another one of those massive, disgusting, exploitative organizations. The documentary follows two "16" year old baseball players as they move through camps in the Dominican Republic...a hot-spot for major league talent. When it comes time to sign these kids - at the ripe old age of 16 - it seems the league does all it can to keep the respectable bonuses from reaching the talent.I'm sure lying about age is a problem, but it seems like a ridiculous problem to begin with. In the US, kids can sign out of high school, around the age of 18. I would venture to say they have to be 18. And they can get millions. Starling got like seven million right out of high school. But rules are different outside of the borders where the ideal draft age is 16. How dare an 18 year old claim to be 16. MLB is losing two goddamn years on that exploitation! So MLB puts the kids through various tests to determine how old they really are. On the one kid, there is no real evidence that he is not 16. But his bonus falls from several million to less than half a mil. Furthermore, one agent begins to tell his family that only Pittsburgh is willing to sign him so he better take that lowball offer. Then an MLB investigator confirms that he should sign with the Pirates, as if that's what investigators do...tell kids where to sign. All of this is down to drive down signing bonuses. Admittedly, it's ridiculous to pay a 16 or 18-year-old kid that much to play ball when he's never even faced a collegiate pitcher. But that's the sport. Money will be made on these guys when they are older. So why are Americans worth so much more than the Dominicans? Just another case of exploiting the poor. Go pick up the poor talent and make up reasons why it's all a gamble and his bonus should be lower. Kind of a joke. I wish I didn't like baseball as much and I would take a few seasons off. Wait...this is all sports. Colleges make millions on the sweat of kids, etc etc. Oh well.
Logan M (it) wrote: It may as well have been direct-to-video.
Jenn T (mx) wrote: Low budget version of RV
Guilherme V (gb) wrote: NAA THIS MOVIE WASNT SOO GREAT
Samuel M (de) wrote: A crappy sequel to a mediocre horror film.
Manpreet R (jp) wrote: It was an alright movie a lot of random meaningless deaths and i get that it suppose to fuel the story but it could have been done another way. Salma Hayeks hottness factored into my rating as well.
Matt R (au) wrote: Campy B-movie fun with the most cringe-worthy dialogue you'll hear in any Crichton adaptation.
Kyle S (us) wrote: Another movie based on a Robert Harris novel...I'm there.
Leslie A (es) wrote: The return of Michael Myers brings back some of the interest to the series. Too bad he couldn't bring a decent plot with him.
Seth B (de) wrote: Absolutely hilarious old movie. James Garner cracks me up!! I can watch this movie over and over again.
Cameron J (de) wrote: It's a film about a man named Wallace Avery - who takes on the identity of Arthur Newman - that stars Colin Firth and Emily Blunt, so, come one, just how American can this film possibly be? Well, Blunt has been doing a decent job of going Brit on us lately, but Firth, now, he's so British that his name is Colin, and if that doesn't make this film British enough, then the dryness might. Well, maybe this film isn't all that bland, but it can't be easy to bring intrigue into the story of a man who takes up a job as a FedEx floor manager after quitting pro golf... and before faking his own death and beginning an adventure with a disturbed young woman who is also running from her past. ...Actually, in all seriousness, golf is so bland that even when there's a death in its industry, it's faked, so, come on, man, where's the juice? I mean, the last FedEx man who became dead to the world at least found himself struggling to survive in harsh island elements, although, in all fairness, where Chuck Noland only had a volley ball to keep him company, the titular Arthur Newman has Emily Blunt. Okay, fine, I've never fully understood everyone's infatuation with Blunt, but she's not too bad, and at any rate, she's better than nothing, so enjoy, Arthur, you cradle robber. I understand that Firth is only in his early 50s, but man, his American accent, while adequately convincing, makes him sound old, and that doesn't exactly help fight the blandness, nor do certain other problems in the film. First off, a lot of the film's problems are natural, as it follows a relatively minimalist, light story concept that, as a dramedy, has a fair bit of meat, but rarely takes itself too seriously, although that's not to say that you can't feel the tonal shifts, perhaps too much. Again, this film doesn't take itself way too seriously, but the relatively light, if not all-out humorous tone is often broken by seriousness, if not a hint of intensity. The film isn't all over the place with its tone, but it is decidedly uneven, even if most every notable aspect in storytelling keeps consistent in holding tropes, which craft a path that is too predictable for the narrative to flow as smoothly as it probably should. Natural shortcomings are considerable and limit bite, which is further staled by familiarity, yet there are more direct instruments of blandness, and, as you can imagine, they pertain to pacing. While the final product is by no means all that long, Becky Johnston's script offers repetitiously draggy story structuring that is made all the more meandering-feeling by meditative direction by Dante Ariola that, due to the aforementioned natural shortcomings, has only so much material to flavor up with thoughtfulness. This results in dry spells, of which there are plenty, and while there is enough heart to this dramedy to keep entertainment value adequate and charm abundant, dull moments ice an under-baked effort that ultimately collapses as fairly underwhelming. That being said, the film doesn't fall as far behind potential as some are saying, having only so much potential, to be sure, but plenty of endearing heart, and even aesthetic value. There's little uniqueness and depth to Eduard Grau's cinematography, but there's a certain lovely ruggedness to it that is still arguably not quite as tasteful as Nick Urata's score, which is formulaic, but has a certain minimalist heart to it that is admittedly pretty beautiful. Sure, aesthetic value is limited, but it is nonetheless present, with slight dynamicity to capture layers that are truly established in Becky Johnston's script. Johnston's writing, while formulaic, flawed in tonal and pacing consistency, and even pretty far-fetched at times, isn't too shabby, offering some subtly witty humor, but being about as dramatic as anything, with a limited attention to intensity that is still deep enough to establish a certain degree of intrigue, particularly behind characterization that is brought to life by the performances. Material is limited, of course, but the talented leads do what they can and end up going pretty far, with Colin Firth being subtly charismatic and subtly layered in a subdued portrayal of a decent, but flawed man seeking a new life, while Emily Blunt proves to be, well, downright excellent, conveying a sense of mystery and expressing a wide range - which covers most everything from free-spiritedness to anguish - that capture the depths of a scarred woman on the run with so much assurance that Blunt ultimately stands as easily one of the most effective attributes of the final product. Blunt's material stands to be more consistent, but there are enough highlights to this performance to make it one of Blunt's best, worthy of being paired up with a performance by Firth that further carries this effort. Really, there are a fair couple of aspects to draw some heart out of an interesting story concept, with one of those aspects being Dante Ariola's direction, which is often too dry for you to overlook shortcomings, but still carries a thoughtfulness to pacing that allows you to also soak up the strengths. Ariola's tasteful plays on filmmaking aspects create a meditativeness that captures certain areas of the drama, and enough of the lightheartedness to create static charm, which may not entertain thoroughly (To tell you the truth, about the funniest thing about this film is the fact that it's director is named Dante [u]Ariola[/u]), but does about as much as anything in establish enough engagement value to make the final product an endearing, if somewhat forgettable dramedy. When the heat has died down, natural limitations in meat are emphasized enough by tonally uneven, formulaic and even blandly draggy storytelling for the final product to sputter out as underwhelming, but through fine cinematography and score work, decent writing, solid performances by Colin Firth and - most of all - Emily Blunt, and endearing direction, "Arthur Newman" is left standing as a charming and sometimes effective light drama, in spite of its problems. 2.5/5 - Fair
Ryan B (ag) wrote: A amazing film of this amazing franchise.
Jocey D (au) wrote: Intense thrill ride. In spite of some plot holes and certain improbabilities, fun yarn about good vs. evil. If I had known how good a movie this was, in spite of all the hype in the day, I would have watched sooner. Great cast did not disappoint with their performances. It's different and has a twisted good ending sort of
Jacob B (kr) wrote: While it is occasionally uneven and isn't exactly an Oscar-worthy film, the chemistry between Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt, the story that's both humourous and heartwarming, a reasonably worthwhile premise and the sure-handed direction of Nancy Meyers elevate What Women Want beyond some of the romantic-comedy cliches the film may have.