siderite
Joined Feb 2004
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings2.5K
siderite's rating
Reviews2.5K
siderite's rating
Well, you can't refuse to watch a Canadian sci-fi film starring Cara Gee and featuring David Hewlett. Bonus points for Amanda Tapping's voice!
It is a proper science fiction story, not perfectly told, though. The pacing is slow, a lot of things happen for no good reason and the whole underlying drive for the plot is a bit... too Canadian? The budget is probably tiny, so I think they did a good thing with what they got.
Without spoiling things too much, although every plot twist is pretty much telegraphed from the very beginning, it's a decent science fantasy romance with some over the top conclusions and a very classical plot.
One thing that did bother me was a movie poster that has nothing to do with reality (heh!) and the trailer featuring every single CGI scene worth its salt from the movie. Why do that when your whole concept is empathy, truth and human value?
Bottom line: don't expect too much, it feels more like an anthology series episode that got stretched to a feature movie length. I probably liked it more for nostalgic reasons.
It is a proper science fiction story, not perfectly told, though. The pacing is slow, a lot of things happen for no good reason and the whole underlying drive for the plot is a bit... too Canadian? The budget is probably tiny, so I think they did a good thing with what they got.
Without spoiling things too much, although every plot twist is pretty much telegraphed from the very beginning, it's a decent science fantasy romance with some over the top conclusions and a very classical plot.
One thing that did bother me was a movie poster that has nothing to do with reality (heh!) and the trailer featuring every single CGI scene worth its salt from the movie. Why do that when your whole concept is empathy, truth and human value?
Bottom line: don't expect too much, it feels more like an anthology series episode that got stretched to a feature movie length. I probably liked it more for nostalgic reasons.
I was wondering what was the purpose of this animation, since Chapter I basically followed the same narrative as the film from 2009. Well, Chapter II does add more stuff in, explaining some things left vague in the film, making the parallels with The Black Freighter subplot more evident and even having a slightly different ending which made a lot more sense to me.
I liked the animation, I found the voice acting good, and I rated this this high because when it came out I was blown away by the 2009 movie. I have to hope that without having seen it, I would have been just as enthusiastic about this animation. As it stands, it brings extra value, but not enough to justify its existence. I've heard a lot of people talking about how the comics are so much deeper and better. Why, then, were these two cinematic versions so similar?
Bottom line: Watchmen is a very deep and interesting story about personal and societal responsibility and moral sense. I think it's great! Whether you chose this or the 2009 movie, I recommend them highly. I just don't see the point of watching both versions, since they are very similar. If you don't have anything against animation, I think I recommend this version to the live one.
I liked the animation, I found the voice acting good, and I rated this this high because when it came out I was blown away by the 2009 movie. I have to hope that without having seen it, I would have been just as enthusiastic about this animation. As it stands, it brings extra value, but not enough to justify its existence. I've heard a lot of people talking about how the comics are so much deeper and better. Why, then, were these two cinematic versions so similar?
Bottom line: Watchmen is a very deep and interesting story about personal and societal responsibility and moral sense. I think it's great! Whether you chose this or the 2009 movie, I recommend them highly. I just don't see the point of watching both versions, since they are very similar. If you don't have anything against animation, I think I recommend this version to the live one.
I had to reread my reviews for the previous Venom movies I remembered nothing from. I liked the first, I hated the second because it had no story and no chemistry. This one has some chemistry between Brock and the symbiont, but man all the rest is a jumbled mess that makes no sense at the best of times. It is a complete waste of time.
First of all, remember that scene at the end of Venom 2 when he was transported into the Spiderman universe? Well, he gets back immediately and says he hates multiverses. Yeah, we hear you, buddy. And with the release of Last Dance, Sony announced the cancelling of all these pointless Spiderman spin-off flops. So with a movie that probably they knew would do nothing at the box office, maybe they could have taken some liberty. Like free Knull and destroy the universe. That would teach them copyright lawyers, right? No. Instead they did... what they usually do. Absolutely nothing.
The problem with the film is that it's not a film. It's a collection of short scenes that don't belong together and of actors that have no business being there. You switch from a comedic bar scene to Venom killing some Mexican dog breeders, from comedic hanging off an airplane and joking about Tom Cruise to Brock personally having to kill someone in self defense, feel bad about it and even express his trauma in like two sentences, from universe ending monsters following a McGuffin to dancing in a hotel in Vegas and bringing said monster to them. It goes on like this. A random hippie family. A scientist with a backstory that ultimately leads nowhere (and played by Juno Temple who looks awful! What the hell happened to her?), another scientist that pretty much fills the whole role, Mulligan is alive (heh, Mulligan, I wonder if that was a joke they knew they were going to make happen), the God of the Void is called Null?! Well, Knull, but whatever, the K is silent.
Even the CGI battles were ridiculous. Multiple symbionts stabbing monsters that can regenerate from being shredded in jet engines, said monsters hitting symbionts when they can emit specific sound to neutralize them, soldiers shooting at both knowing full well it was pointless. Why is Knull a humanoid with white hair? Why does he sound like Gollum? What were they thinking?!
Who the hell was this movie made for? Other than a tiny part rightfully ending the arc of Venom, the rest were like random stuff someone got out from the closet and plastered on. And whatever piece they were putting on was not quality, at all. Comedy was not funny, violence was not really violent, drama was not dramatic, the plot wasn't there, characters were thin and inconsistent, there were multiple contradictions with previous lore. I simply fail to understand what was that audience they were trying to appeal to. Did any of the makers of the movie see it at all? Had anyone a generic idea of what it should have been? It just seems the Franchise series was made about this film.
Bottom line: it was the saddest type of bad.
First of all, remember that scene at the end of Venom 2 when he was transported into the Spiderman universe? Well, he gets back immediately and says he hates multiverses. Yeah, we hear you, buddy. And with the release of Last Dance, Sony announced the cancelling of all these pointless Spiderman spin-off flops. So with a movie that probably they knew would do nothing at the box office, maybe they could have taken some liberty. Like free Knull and destroy the universe. That would teach them copyright lawyers, right? No. Instead they did... what they usually do. Absolutely nothing.
The problem with the film is that it's not a film. It's a collection of short scenes that don't belong together and of actors that have no business being there. You switch from a comedic bar scene to Venom killing some Mexican dog breeders, from comedic hanging off an airplane and joking about Tom Cruise to Brock personally having to kill someone in self defense, feel bad about it and even express his trauma in like two sentences, from universe ending monsters following a McGuffin to dancing in a hotel in Vegas and bringing said monster to them. It goes on like this. A random hippie family. A scientist with a backstory that ultimately leads nowhere (and played by Juno Temple who looks awful! What the hell happened to her?), another scientist that pretty much fills the whole role, Mulligan is alive (heh, Mulligan, I wonder if that was a joke they knew they were going to make happen), the God of the Void is called Null?! Well, Knull, but whatever, the K is silent.
Even the CGI battles were ridiculous. Multiple symbionts stabbing monsters that can regenerate from being shredded in jet engines, said monsters hitting symbionts when they can emit specific sound to neutralize them, soldiers shooting at both knowing full well it was pointless. Why is Knull a humanoid with white hair? Why does he sound like Gollum? What were they thinking?!
Who the hell was this movie made for? Other than a tiny part rightfully ending the arc of Venom, the rest were like random stuff someone got out from the closet and plastered on. And whatever piece they were putting on was not quality, at all. Comedy was not funny, violence was not really violent, drama was not dramatic, the plot wasn't there, characters were thin and inconsistent, there were multiple contradictions with previous lore. I simply fail to understand what was that audience they were trying to appeal to. Did any of the makers of the movie see it at all? Had anyone a generic idea of what it should have been? It just seems the Franchise series was made about this film.
Bottom line: it was the saddest type of bad.