Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
peteranderson
Reviews
V for Vendetta (2005)
I loved it!!!!
I really enjoyed this film from start to finish. I just thought the film flowed really nicely for the two or more hours it was shown and never got boring. The theme of the movie all centred around 5th November (guy Fawkes night) and some psycho man who wore a mask for the entire film whose aim was to kill certain individuals and destroy Parliament.
So with that being the background- Things I enjoyed- The acting of Natalie Portman (Evey Hammond) and Hugo Weaving (V) is excellent, both of them give really dramatic and outstandingly frightening performances for the genre of the film. There was a lot of moments which made you jump and get a fright and a lot of tension, atmosphere and suspension was create in certain moments through certain elements. I really enjoyed this and hope everyone else does too.
All in all, not the best film I have seen, but a truly great, action packed, thriller with great characters and a futuristic look of England and terrorism. It was brilliant. An 8!!!
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie (1969)
Average
This film made for average viewing. The film was just really average, the acting, the writing and the plot everything to do with it was just average.
Maggie Smith's acting at times was powerful and stunning, yet other times was dreary and dull. I don't think Maggie's acting was worthy of an Oscar in this film and maybe Liza Minelli or Jane Fonda (other nominees for the Oscar) should have won.
Pamela Franklin was in my opinion the best actor and I feel that the whole film was very good for her. Everything in the film was basic however and it could have been improved a lot.
A reasonable effort, but could have been improved.
Walk the Line (2005)
Really Good!
I absolutely loved this film. Walk the line basically is a biography of Johnny Cash's life. The film was really really good.
From start to finish the film flew pleasantly and the acting from Reece Witherspoon was absolutely outstanding!!! All of the cast acted really well, the film flowed magically and the film was just really good! The storyline was a very basic plot, however it was written very well into a 2 hour slot. The storyline flowed well, the acting was outstanding and everything about the film was just really good above standard and I hope they are honoured with a few Oscars too, come Sunday! Good Luck!!!!
A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004)
Entertaining!
The film was very well done.
The plot and storyline were very well done, childish yet family humour together with good stunts, scenes and happenings a good portrayal of what happens in the book. Very funny in parts, a good family movie.
Ther acting was just fantastic from the 3 children, Jim Carey and Meryl Streep who all fitted into their roles amazingly well. Acting from the rest of the cast was also very well done. The sets were good as well, a lot of time has clearly been spent on designing them. Scenes which happened in the play, such as Aunt Josephine's house collapsing was great as well and all the scenes were very well done again. All the acting was good, the film itself was a good family movie and it was enjoyable on the whole not to be taken to seriously just a good film that can be enjoyed by the family.
Recommended. A 7!
The Graduate (1967)
Good, but could be better!
I give the film a 7. It was a really good film however, Anne Bancroft was legendary, Dustin Hoffman was good and Katharine Ross was good. The plot was just fantastic and will be remembered always, the acting was of a high quality, script writing high as well. Some good lines, good soundtracks, fabulous acting and amazing directing. I felt all the performances were good and shone, the plot was good and showed unique understanding of the issues it dealt with, some good entertainment. I felt the script was written and acted well, there was a good plot and everything needing to be their was. It was a straight forward plot but could have been better. A 7!
Un tè con Mussolini (1999)
Fabulous.
An amazing, fantastic film.
Let me start with the outline, a group of elderly women who live in Florence, Italy decide to look after a boy during the war. They take good care of him and there are lots of nice scenes there.
The plot on its own was great- captured the heart of the war, really moulded it well. Fantastic. The script was written very well indeed and a large audience would have been able to enjoy the script on its own for the way in which it was written. Loved the plot, loved the scenes, loved the acting.
Now the acting- underestimated. Maggie Smith, deserved to win an Oscar for her outstanding portrayal as she was absolutely outstandingly good , Cher and Joan Plowright, were just fantastic and the rest of the cast including Judi Dench were also above average. But for me, Maggie, Cher and Joan stood out for being outstandingly good. The acting was real, true to life and sensitive.
Genre- Captured the essence of the war very well indeed and an enjoyable film. Lots of drama and special moments in their too, and some light humour moments for comedy. So all genres of the film were done to a good standard as well.
Overall, because of the outstanding acting, amazing scenes, amazing plots, lots of special sad moments, brilliant work and a fabulous portrayal- I give this film an 8, a close 9.
To improve the film, the whole cast could have been superb and the plot could have been outstanding throughout, but very nearly perfection for me. A true good film. One of the best of the 90's.
True quality. 8/10. Near 9 out of 10.
Iris (2001)
Good, but not effective.
Good, but not effective. This is my summary and it means a great deal. The lead actor- Jim Broadbent was really good in the film and indeed most believable, however Judi Dench was very disappointing. I felt she didn't sensitively deal with the storyline and her acting was awful. The plot was realistic enough, but rushed and ruined. I felt very little sympathy for Alzheimer's disease was appreciated in the film and this was disappointing, it was rushed and ruined as a result. Itb was quite dramatic, but I felt very disappointed on a whole for the film.
Acting- Average. Genre- Average. Plot/Storyline- Poor.
4.
Fun with Dick and Jane (2005)
Reasonable but not great.
I feel that the film was overall, a reasonable effort but not however, altogether great. I feel the acting from Jim Carrey and Tea Leoni, create a good chemistry and atmosphere and was at times funny, however the acting was average, not great.
The plot itself- was quite unrealistic and handed I felt quite badly, for what the plot and storyline actually was, it could have been much funnier and more humorous however it wasn't and in parts it was actually quite dull and boring yet in other parts lightly humorous.
The Genre- Was comedy, and for comedy, the one liners and situations were quite good but could have been better, I feel. Good funny though.
I feel that overall, despite being boring in parts and the acting being average, the plot could have been better and could have hit its genre better with more comedy and funny situations. Overall, I give this 4 for being lightly entertaining and a reasonable effort at a film. Nowhere near as good as expected however.
4/10
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)
Average.
An average effort, but a brilliant cast.
This brilliant cast consisted of Jack Nicholson, Danny Devito and Louise Fletcher.
I was expecting better- Acting was average, funny and talented in parts yet dreadfully bad in others. Fletcher certainly didn't deserve an Oscar for that. She gave the weak, feeble performance but didn't deserve an Oscar. Nicholson shouldn't have been cats in the film seeing as how supposedly good he is. He didn't shine. Nobody else in the cast shone either.
Genre- Was quite amusing in parts and dramatic in others. I thought the genre was done well and some particularly dramatic scenes were done really well, not Oscar winning but well.
Overall, a very average effort and very average results.
King Kong (2005)
Good.
King Kong was really good.
Genre- Thriller- The best thriller of 2005, a true adventure following tales of King Kong for over 3 hours, the genres and therefore target audiences were all hit to perfection, really good.
Special Effects- All the special effects were really good it mist have taken a lot of time to make but well worth it. Really well done.
Acting- The acting from Naomi Watts was really good and talented. The rest of the acting was good, above average and entertaining. All the actors were above average well done.
Because of the above was done really well near to perfection, the only thing for me bringing it down to a 7 was the 3 hours, too long, some unnecessary scenes which dragged on and certain other minor changes could have been made to help it get a 10 too, could have been better but could have been worse.
A truly good thriller! 7 close to 8.
Bedknobs and Broomsticks (1971)
A Musical!
This Musical receives a 6 from me- What it did well to achieve a 6- Acting- Angela Lansbury was really good, very good acting, eccentric over the top acting, but all worth it to suit the character. The three children were also fantastic as well. The acting was really good from all.
Genres/Target Audiences- Well Comedy and Family were two of the genres they did this well as it was a real family movie, a real family film and comedy with lots of family and childish humour it was great!
Badly- The plot and the structure- I'm afraid the plot and the structure didn't go together- The plot was too unrealistic for a comedy and the plot could have been more inventive I think, more entertaining and appealing to those who wouldn't normally be interested and at times the film was hard to follow.
So overall weighing it up- 6!
Hot Millions (1968)
Reasonable Effort.
A reasonable effort is summary for this film. A good sixties film but lacking any sense of achievement. Maggie Smith gave a decent performance which was believable enough but not as good as she could have given, other actors were just dreadful! A terrible portrayal. It wasn't very funny and so it didn't really achieve its genres as it wasn't particularly funny and it wasn't dramatic. The only genre achieved to a satisfactory level was romance. Target Audiences were not hit and the movie sent out confusing messages. A very basic plot and a very basic storyline were not pulled off or performed at all well and people were left confused as to why the film wasn't as good and who the target audiences were etc. However Maggie was quite good and the storyline was alright with moments of capability.
4.
Women of Coronation Street (1998)
Good!
This was a good video! It showed Hilda Ogden talking to Betty Williams/Turpin about the old times. Sort of a reminiscing about the old times and the old characters who have walked the street. It was really good. Betty was Betty and Hilda was superb. Jean got straight back into the famous role she played after an absence of over 10 years. Great!
The archive footage was good and acted very well and the scenes between Hilda and Betty were good, funny and very memorable. Great! Well done to the makers of Coronation STreet for this. Well done! A 6 close to a 7!
Christmas with the Kranks (2004)
Quite good!
The acting from some actors was very good. Jamie Lee Curtis and her husband were both very funny and obviously talented, as this movie shows. Some good one liners and classic comedy situations. It brought a festive mood to the world of cinema as well. The genre was comedy and it hit that making a good family movie. Some good situation, slap stick comedy a few good stunts which brought humour and a realistic tale, in a family movie.
Good acting, hit genres, sort of hit target audiences- reasonable a 6!
The Problems were- - Target Audience, I think more were expecting Father of the Bride type comedy and target audiences were only slightly impressed. As a film a 6!
The Importance of Being Earnest (2002)
Poor!
Well, poor! That is what I say! How was this a good adaption? It was shoddy! The acting from Dench and Firth was abysmal. These two high class actors who are really good were very poor in their adaption and their acting, not in character and not focused. The rest of the actors performed very averagely with only Witherspoon standing out to be the best! The script was adapted averagely to fit the original play and the genres were not really hit very well, it provided light entertainment for target audience but still very poor! A poor effort, a poor try and a poor gain! POOR!
I was disappointed with it all, the only reason it gets a 3 was because it provided some light entertainment, some comedy and light humour and a little of average acting. Parts of the film shone and made it to a 3, the rest dragged it down, pathetically.
A 3!
Meet the Fockers (2004)
A reasonable effort!
A reasonable effort was my summary, that was true.
Acting- Very good acting. Ben Stiller led the cast with high quality acting and Robert De Niro was also extremely funny. Barbara Straisand and Dustin Hoffman were good additions as well to the film. The only acting which was not up to standard was that of Blythe Danner, dreadful. Her acting was awful. It was good others made up for her loss, but the cast overall dealt with the script and screenplay well and made the film very funny.
Genre- The film hit all its genres reasonably well. Comedy, it had very good moments of humour in it with all different types of comedy, so that was good. Drama it didn't really hit that, so drama needs to be improved.
Target Audience- It hit its target audience, slightly. As, people were expecting better than before with "Meet the parents" yet, were still sort of pleased with Meet the Fockers.
Scripts- Good Scripts, providing good comedy moments and good suspense too. Could have worked on the drama more too.
Overall- I think the acting was good, the scripts were very average, It hit Genre but not target audience and it was nowhere near as good as Meet the parents, but you could see they had tried and it was occasionally funny.
Overall, I am tempted to go 7 but I will go 6.
Shrek (2001)
A Good Film! (Contains Spoilers)
A good film! Enjoyable. A good family movie which was one of the best animated films I have ever seen. Really good family viewing. I bet families flocked to the cinemas worldwide to see this. It was well worth it! Good family film. Good acting and voice overs, performed well, good acting abilities from all, good one liners, good script, performed well, hit target audiences and genres it set out to achieve, really good and amazing. Slightly better than Shrek 2 as well. Well done to all cast and crew who put in all efforts to make this movie great family viewing.
Well done, great for children. Overall, I give this an 8. Well done.
Shrek 2 (2004)
Very good. (CONTAINS SPOILERS)
Very Good. High Comedy and High Animation.
Children will love to see this comedy about an ogre. It is very good. The plots and story lines hit right on target, good one liners, good moments and generally very funny. Acting- (Voice Over Animations) Very good. All of the actors performed a highly successful animation. They all provided the correct tone of voice for their characters and performed very well to fit with the scripts, its clear they have really got behind their character and tried to make them into a figure of delight for their viewers.
Genre- They have tried to hit all genres they featured. Comedy, good one liners, acting was good and was funny (comedy) a few sad dramatic moments were performed well with acting and romance and fairytale all in their performed well. A good story.
Screenplay- This was good, well written good funny, enjoyable family humour. A good film for all to enjoy courtesy of the screenplay. A very well done!
Overall a good film, performed well, animated really good. But not as good as its predecessor!
A 7!
Spice World (1997)
Dreadful, but good for fans!
I give this a 3.
Singers can never ever act so what is the point in them acting? That is the question I raise. Dreadful, Hiddious and bad. The acting was unbelievable. It didn't hit target audiences who were left disappointed, it didn't reach out it's goals for genre as they were barely hit either. The only comedy came from a few humourers one liners which proved the films success. A few dramatic stunts and a reasonable storyline saw this through. It was a good film for fans, but for everyone else and on a judging point of view it wasn't very good at all! A 3.
The Family Stone (2005)
A Good Film! (Contains Spoilers)
Contains Spoilers!
I enjoyed this film! A good film and a god effort. The genre of this film was drama and comedy. And a perfect comedy drama it was. The comedy was certainly their from fantastic one liners and from the plot itself with a funny outline of Sarah Jessica Parker going to meet her boyfriends family for the first time. Great one liners, fantastic comedy situations and really funny elements. The drama made the film be very moving also. Many near me were crying when certain dramatic moments occurred such as when Diane Keaton's Character passed away. The dramatic story lines which occurred happened to a high level of drama and the comedy which occurred happened to a high level of comedy, so therefore the film was good because it hit its genre and target audience very well. The acting was superb. Diane Keaton was great, if she doesn't win an award for her performance it will be criminal. She was extremely funny and comical when appropriate and extremely dramatic and moving when appropriate. Overall a great actress, probably one of her best roles. Rachel McAdams has yet again improved with time. In my red eye review I said she was good and will be offered better roles in future as she was good in Red Eye, she was even better in this as the stroppy young adult, very funny. All the actors and acting were and was amazing apart from Sarah Jessica Parker who I didn't think adjusted to the role as well as she should have. Bar minor problems like that a good movie. But overall a good movie. Highly successful in what it set out to do. An 8.
Just Friends (2005)
Diabolical
Diabolical. That one word sums up the whole sorry mess. I laughed once, slightly. The plot is so old and done so many times I knew it was bound to fail especially with the dreadful actors on hand to help. The genre, comedy it wasn't at all funny, the one lines which were meant to be funny were badly done, no lines showed any true passion for anything or the story, no meaning and just awful comedy situations awful comedy plots, awful plot and all acted badly to bonus that. Moving onto the other genre, romance. This was poor also. Done better with a bit more passion and humour than before but nowhere near excellent. Just poor. The acting was appalling from the "Two Guys and a Girl" actor who because he was on that dire TV show presumes he can act. He can't believe me. No talent. The whole movie was a sorry, sorry mess and I regret seeing it. In summary- Plot was bad Genres and target audiences were NOT hit! Acting was just unbelievably bad!
I give this whole sorry mess a 2 out of 10!
The Untouchables (1987)
A Seven!
Another overall score of 7 out of 10. -Prohibition was a main, huge and big point of the 1930's and its good that it has been brought up in this film alongside gangster Al Capone. What the film does well is their capacity to keep level the gangster side of the movie and the crime and the 1920's feel with an American feel. All the theme and genres are kept to well they hit their targets with success and the acting is reasonably good. Kevin Costner is excellent in this, a few others could improve but Kevin is still very good. It had moments of tension and moments which ensured it hit its genre and target audience. A typical 80's gangster movie which proved very good. The writing was also very good as well, good lines, good camera work and good stunts. A 7 is a good mark from me personally it is above average and therefore a good movie and an excellent attempt at making a movie. Despite this I feel Kevin Costner was good in his role and I would reward the film with 3 awards for Writing (Screenplay), Director (Film) and Acting (Kevin Costner and him alone).
7.
Mrs. Henderson Presents (2005)
A Good Effort!
I thought it was a very good effort. The film was just good. Judi Dench was superb however, she put in amazing talent to her role. She was very funny at times with her one liners which were classic and other times she was highly dramatic giving good performances. However Judi's good acting was one of the only highlights of the movie. Thelma Barlow (Coronation Street star Mavis Riley/Wilton) was also good. Delivering lines to a high entertainment value. She too was extremely funny and was purely their as a supporting character. She was very good. Judi and Thelma excelled in this film. Another good point was the scenery. The London streets, the theatre, The theatre rooftop and a lake. Also France which featured was also good. The film was based on true events and therefore was also very pleasing. However, the bad points must come. Will Young cannot act and nor could a few others. The film got a rather bit too tedious in parts as lots of dancing and music was shown and the production of the shows at the theatre which got quite boring and was overly played out. Overall I think fair play to the cast for a good effort and a well done to Thelma Barlow and Judi Dench as they really did act and were outstanding, just a little let down by the sickening, dreadful and frankly appalling Will Young, who should stick to singing not acting. Parts of the film were dramatic and parts were comical and both were done well. A good effort, I reward 7 points.
Misery (1990)
Good.
A good film. I thought the film was good and hit it's target audience. For a genre of horror and thriller it hit right on. People had a few moments when they were scared, lots of anticipation and moments of building up which were all done really well I thought. The acting from Kathy Bates was outstanding. I thought the plot was good, wasn't boring and it just was really good. Moments of shock, horror, scary moments and it was just really good. I thought parts could be better. I think a few more moments of scarier scenes, more anticipation, more characters and some was done a little unrealistically and fast and skipped a lot. Some of it was untrue to the nature of what humans would do and what would happen, etc.
But for everything else, good. Well done a good try. I reward an 8.
The First Wives Club (1996)
Average.
Average. Average effort was given and poor performances I must say. As a whole and on a whole the film wasn't very good. A weak, poor and insulting performance was given by the cast and grew. Screenplay did, acting did, but nothing was good or outstanding, nothing was funny in it's comedy genre it was OK, nothing was hitting the target audience, it was OK, everything was OK, never good or outstanding, always OK or average.
With the script and acting they had they could have made that movie so much more successful yet the didn't. A poor effort and Bette and Co, I agree with the producers, best not make a sequel.
Average in terms of what was achieved, poor in terms of what wasn't achieved that could have been.