jktomas's comments

Comments 1 - 25 of 229

jktomas's avatar

jktomas

The movie is entertaining, but as I was watching it with my mom we were making fun of the movie whole way through. Like that scene where the good guys kill the enemy spy by putting his head in an oven - unintentional comedy :D This film has some genuine funny moments, but a lot of cringe too.
4 years 8 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I'm surprised to see how negative people are towards this movie here. I think it was great fun. A lot of clever uses of shrinking and growing, a lot of cool visuals and a lot of great jokes. It all worked for me.
5 years 9 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I'm hot and you're not!
6 years 3 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

It's like Half in the Bag without the review. Only certain people can appreciate the humor.
7 years 12 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I haven't seen it in a while but I remember liking it. I mean, it's not good or anything, but I just can't hate it. It has some funny moments, it has fun characters and the premise is fun too.
8 years 2 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

The whole series doesn't have a single joke, it's just very very silly and that's why it's so much fun to watch. I recommend it to everyone, but keep in mind that only a few of you will get the humor.
8 years 6 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Too much action and special effects, whole movie felt like a video game.
8 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Another awesome MCU movie. If you enjoyed the first Avengers or any of the Marvel movies I can't imagine you being grumpy about this one (but apparently a lot of people are. Oh well).
It's a lot of fun. Action is outstanding and characters played by incredible actors are lovable. And even the story makes sense, woo! My biggest complains are only tiny nitpicks, that's how good this movie is.
Vision is probably my favorite character of all the Marvel movies. I'm looking forward to seeing more of him in future movies.
8 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

There's only one good scene in the movie - spoiler If you don't care about spoilers, and you shouldn't because this movie is the most boring film you'll ever see, then just watch that scene and skip the rest.
8 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

The moral of the story - men should never work at the nursery. If you do, you might as well start touching children because you will be accused for doing so regardless. :)
At least the movie made clear that Lucas didn't choose to work there, but had to because the school where he worked as a teacher got closed. Otherwise I have no idea why would anyone make such life destroying decision to work at the nursery together with paranoid and stupid people, like Grethe for example. Grethe made me seriously angry at this movie. Other people pissed me off as well, but they were quite believable (and that's the scariest part).
Overall, the movie is great, even if some characters are frustratingly stupid (but so are people in real life). It has a great and mature message about lies and false accusations and everyone should see it. The acting by Mikkelsen is fantastic, but some actors stand out too, especially by the guy who played Theo. And lastly Annika Wedderkopp was so sexy in this movie.
9 years 5 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

As good as the first Hammer's Dracula, but possibly even better. The acting is so entertaining to watch. The story is so fresh and intriguing for a vampire film. The atmosphere is what I love about Hammer films and this film creates it flawlessly. Very good horror movie.
9 years 5 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

The structure of the film is almost identical to the original Dracula story, but it's told in a different way so it's still intriguing. There's a subplot of the main character being an atheist, but it has little payoff. That's a shame because, strangly enough, religion and beliefs are themes hardly explored in vampire stories.
The cinematography is not very good and in many instances quite bizzare. I watched it on bluray and it was easy to tell that some establishment shots were just old pictures (definitely not taken where the filming took place). The movie feels cheap and rushed, it unfortunately doesn't have the atmosphere of Horrors of Dracula which I am a big fan of.
Unintentionally goofy moments make the movie even more flawed. I'm no expert in burning corpses in a fire, but I'm pretty sure a body can't completely disappear in flames of a fireplace in a few minutes. Or did Dracula sucked her so dry? And let me tell you, blood in this film flows in a most physics defying way possible.
All that said, it's not bad. But first 20 minutes were certainly the highlight.
9 years 5 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

ClassicLady Did you mean SNOW building? :)
9 years 6 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I wish they went with "the mysterious and unknown" explanation instead of "God and devil", because if this story happened the same way in real life (which the movie claims it did) it means christianity is the real religion. Kind of a bold statement for a horror movie to make, isn't it?
As for the rest of the movie, the acting is very good, the cinematography is great, and throughout the film I kept wondering what really happened to those families (I'm about to do some research). Worth a watch, but it's nothing spectacular.
9 years 6 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I went from hating this movie to liking it very much.
If you scroll down you'll see my comment from 4 years ago when I watched this movie for the first time. Back then I was very disappointed because my whole knowledge about Bond was from the book which I liked. I expected the film to be something close to the source material since it was praised so much for being "more realistic than previous movies". In reality it's hardly more realistic movie and Craig's Bond is hardly a more developed character than any previous Bonds. But Casino Royale has a different style, it's subtle and well made.
The action looks unnatural and choreographed, Bond is a cold blooded killer, the plot doesn't follow book closely - these things bothered me a lot the first time (stupid, I know, but that's what happens when you read books before watching movies based on them) but I finally got over them.
What made me appreciate this movie mostly is seeing every previous Bond. Knowing what 007 movies are all about as well as the classical tropes and formulas of the films I finally understand what this movie does well and what it is praised for.
Overall, it's not my favorite 007 film (even Skyfall is better in my opinion), but it's very good and I'm glad I finally agree with the majority of Bond fans.
9 years 9 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I have one nitpick - I don't think you can cut perfectly through a 10 cm thick ice just by spinning in a car without a tyre. :)
Other than that it's a nearly perfect James Bond movie, very exciting action and plot twists, great cast too. I liked Dalton as 007, I can't believe how quickly I got used to him in the lead.
9 years 9 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

So from what I gathered A View to a Kill is mostly disliked because: Christopher Walken slaughters a lot of people in one scene, cops in San Francisco are idiots, some bad acting and poor special effects (that's subjective!), Moore is too old to play Bond (though to me he looks like a young boy when he stands next to Moneypenny). Is there anything else? I don't find it to be any better or worse that many other Bond films. I certainly don't see any reasons to call this one the worst, especially in the world where Moonraker exists.
It was enjoyable to me. The villain is fantastic, the Bond girl is likable, the plot is not overly complicated or silly. I see nothing wrong, only mindless entertainment and that's what Bond movies always were. I'd say it's underrated.
9 years 9 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Where does the hate come from? It's a solid Bond film in my opinion. Sure there are clowns, yo-yo saw, Bond does Tarzan scream, wears gorilla suit, wears crocodile suit and drives on railroad tracks with a car. But apart from that it's not that silly, I'd even say it's more serious than the previous one and far more serious that Moonraker.
9 years 10 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Back in shape after the disaster that was Moonraker.
For Your Eyes Only is entertaining all the way, but the second half more so. It has many great action sequencies and some intense breath taking moments (being tied to a moving boat, cliff climbing etc.). My only complain is that it's pretty bland (the title song and sequence is a good example of how forgetable the movie is). Moore is great as 007 as always. I can't wait for Moneypenny to be recasted, I loved Lois Maxwell, but damn she's old. I don't know what else to add, it's a Bond movie and a decent one.
Overall, after watching Moonraker I lost my interest in Bond films but For your Eyes Only brought it back.
9 years 10 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Feels so much like a Toho Godzilla films. Godzilla himself seems very legit too and when he's on screen I held my breath. That's a movie I always wanted to see and it's finally here.
Many people seem to be disappointed which is their own fault. The movie is fine, but you have to have realistic expectations before seeing it. It's a Godzilla film, none of them were particularly great, but they are entertaining. Although I will say Godzilla 2014 is probably the most subtle and well made of them all. A lot of respect went into making of this film and it shows.
Godzilla isn't on screen for very long, but when he is on screen it's glorious. Every single shot of Godzilla in this film it's beautiful to look at and it wouldn't be the case if he was constantly showing-off.
This movie leaves you hungry for more, but it's better than nothing at all or even too much. At very least you should celebrate that Godzilla is finally back and he's not ruined.
I'm personally very happy.
9 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

It's not terribly funny and the acting is bad, but I can see why it became a cult classic.
9 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

I don't think it's that bad, I enjoyed watching it with my family (I thought it's going to be painful to sit through, but it it turned out to be pretty fun). Yeah, the story is nothing new, and yes, some music numbers were yuck, some characters were a bit annoying too. But other than that it was well structured, fun film.
I especially liked Nigel and frog subplot, it was something refreshing for a kids movie.
I haven't seen the first Rio, but I would like to give it a try now, as long as Nigel's sidekicks, the frog and anteater Charlie are in it, but I don't think they are...
I didn't watch the first movie, cause it looked awful based on the trailer. So did this one, but I was kinda forced to go, however I don't regret spending time watching it.
9 years 11 months ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

Monty Python-like humor and animation style before Monty Python.
10 years ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

This is it. This is the weirdest thing I've ever seen. And it's pretty good. I enjoyed the surrealness a lot.
10 years ago
jktomas's avatar

jktomas

@armyofshadows

Well, now we know what happened to the humanity.
10 years 1 month ago

Showing items 1 – 25 of 229

View comments