Reviews

This is the movie that does well on repeat viewings. I watched it over 30 times and stopped counting. It clearly has no flaws that's why repeat viewing is easy. Starts slow win Zane Ziminsky identifies a star with intelligent signals but is fired at NASA, and his boss clearly destroys evidence, and go to unimaginable length to keep it silent. While Zane Ziminsky is worked for a cable television to get by, he tries to construct his own version of radio telescope using Phase Array for a cheaper version, but equally effective. Identifies the signal again, but this comes from the bounce of an earth base signal in Mexico of the same signal, which means they were talking to each other! So he goes see Carl, his assistant, but before that happens, he gets murdered. Another scientist on Green house gases, tries to get data from NASA, but everything seems wrong, no data, but she did identify green house gases comes from Mexico. So both Zeminsky and the women scientist independently traveled to Mexico. This is a classic Sci Fi, introducing the concepts of phase array, green house emissions, global warming, terraforming (to make it inhabitable on earth!), and then some. It is the most seriously under rated movie of all time, and if introduced in theaters it will stun intelligent viewer, but didn't take it, as theaters go for explosions, crashes, etc. but it would have been as good as category as Gattaca, but Gattaca as plot holes, this one is clearly the best.

The story is about Byran Bingham who works as an outside consultant who fires people for a living because their own bosses don't like firing them. So he makes his living flying from one place to another firing people. The story picks up when they hire a new college graduate, Natalie Keener who is to use the internet to fire people to save money by not traveling. This causes Bryan's own zone of comfort outside down and faced being grounded and thinks that Natalie doesn't know the details of what it is like to fire people. Also along the way, Bryan meets a women Alex, who has the same personality of traveling as he does. Unfortunately I won't mention how the story ends, but it has a couple of loose ends, for instance, during the marriage of one of his sisters, the groom asked him about his own married life, and ask him "what's the point?" to which he responds that he needs a "co-pilot" and his life is about getting rid of excess baggage in his life. The story I believes ends being "pointless". It would have improved the plane have crashed, got fired, and had sister to support him that he realized that there is more to life then just flying and firing and people are simply not excess baggage and can be as important to you as your hands and feet. At least this story I prefer to end as less then pointless. There's no spoilers here, just my own alternative ending. I feel the story is somewhat empty.

In the movie, after receiving an award, Gail Gayle mentions "Life is like an Onion, you peel away and the story becomes different, but when you peel everything away, everything is all a lie" as part of her News acceptance award speech. The speech represents the entire story that is like a modern day Aesop fable. Dustin Hoffman plays small time criminal who accidentally saved the life of 54 people when the plane crash landed in front of him, but someone else took the credit. Our life is basically conditioned to think that people should be given credit where credit is due, in real life, credit isn't given where credit is due. The other problem about events or historical events is that life is like an onion. When you peel them all away, nothing is really there. Things we view as hero may be not we think it is, because of our prejudices in what we view them as a perfect hero. A real hero may have none of that, we humans are full of gray areas, some we are good, some we are not so good. There's not such thing as 100% good guys and 100% bad guys. So if you have to watch this movie, what we know what we see, is not what we think it is. If you should die one day, become a spirit, you will realize that everything we hold dear and true, we're not even close. That's the Aesop of the movie. The best part of the movie is Dustin Hoffman's is at his finest, there's simply not enough screen time for him because he's just so interesting to watch. This is a highly underrated film and if you keep the idea mentioned here in perspective, you will enjoy the movie more. Just peel away your onions!

Given any good story you need a good topic, premise, plot, focus and character. Given a story of scientific and legal in nature a writer must have good familiarity in these realm. He has none of it. It's a made for t.v. show. Given a good story line, most amateur writing will focus on too many characters, in this case, a wanted criminal, a rifle crazed man, a rogue FBI agent, two politicians competing for power, an all powerful CDC officer who don't really have a power, and the not too serious emergency response team. Characters are cardboard cliché', a plot whose ending found a cure for her daughter who got Riptide? The premise is too unbelievable, the plot lacks focus. This writer should watch more blockbusters. Originally one of the best movie Rwanda Hotel had too many characters, until the writer found out and decided to focus on one man. Most movies are focused on relatively few major actor not exceeding 2-3. Take Something's Gotta Give, Jerry Maguire, Rain Man, Die Hard, for example focused on relatively few characters, mostly 2-3 making up 80% of the movie screen. And those characters are a strong one, take the Dark Knight, the Joker, Batman, Superman, Snow White, etc. Given the basics, there is problem about the lack of understanding protocols and laws. The CDC, just can't walk around everywhere, certain laws have to be considered when an act of quarantine is considered. For one thing, the first law is Title 42 United States Code Section 264 (Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act) gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) responsibility for preventing the introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and within the United States and its territories/possessions. The second issue of the President, by Executive Order, which is Under the procedures required under the PHS Act, the list of diseases for which quarantine is authorized must first be specified in an Executive Order of the President, on recommendation of the HHS Secretary. By amending the list to include types of influenza that either cause or have the potential to cause a pandemic. As to the knowledge of Tamifl and ways or eradicating the virus, where are sanitation procedures, in place? The seriousness of quarantine, the authority's control over the situation, the closing of public places, the media frenzy into the area, the military action in closing off the area, instead of CDC giving the "idea" of closing off the region. The sudden shock of death. The movie is like there is fire in the house, and people are walking out of the house while they are sleepwalking. If there's any problem about making movies, it's the crappy writing I see all the time. To prevent this I believe that each scenes or plots are organized into modules where parts can be deleted, and characters are focused only 2-3 character through an entire time line of events, and the methodology of quarantine control, should ignore the obvious solution such as vaccines, someone who is immunized to the disease, and other cliché's so common in virus plagued. And in any T.V. drama, people should start being more serious of the circumstances instead of just waking in their sleep. In any event H3N7 virus and other things are interesting, but sanitation, and organized quarantine procedures the writer has difficult understanding the magnitude of the problem, as in most t.v. shows I have seen. To make a good story, the character must huff and puff until the house is blown down. It doesn't start by just sleep walking around the house either.

The original Wicker man had some great things going. It occurred during the hippie revolution and an isolated religious cult, pagan worship, nude woman performing rites, etc. While the investigating police officer was a devoutly Christian religious. It was a clash of Pagan versus Christianity. The new Wicker man, in order to please the general audiences, virtually eliminated all Pagan worship so as not to offend the Christian viewers. At the same time removed the devoutly Christian Sargent so as not to offend the non-Christian viewers. Completely eliminated nudity, so as not to offend the young viewers. Turned the male symbols into somewhat a Freudian joke, instead of Pagan beliefs. Because so many fun elements of witchcraft, sorcery, Pagan worship, secret worship, nudity were all removed, the fun elements were virtually replaced with Giant Beehives, irritating bees, and a black crow that had no meaning to the movie. In this movie, all elements of horror, thrills, suspense were eliminated to be replaced with National Treasure meets the Wicker Man. To make for fun scene, ala National treasure, they let Nicolas Cage fall down in a giant cave like farm, much like that Aztec like cave, but only without the treasure. As to the running and blockbuster sequences, they added a truck hitting the car with the mother in the beginning of the scene, that had no relation to the movie, and the all too exciting bees chase Nicolas Cage. It would have been more exciting to see bees chasing Mr. Bean then Nicolas Cage, since he's more clumsier than Mr. Bean. To me it was a funny disappointing film. The original Wicker Man is in nowhere have a resemblance to this Wicker man at all, despite the fact that 80% of the scripts are the same, the first had horror overtones, while this one had unintended joke overtones. They simply completely ruined this.

Movie of this genre is of a non-linear, basically plot less movie, which has two kinds of audiences. The audiences who will enjoy this movie are movie critics with a great eye for details and a very long attention spans. The audiences who will not enjoy this movie are popcorn type, frame by frame must see, and have a very short attention spans not exceeding 5 seconds and may well enjoy movie such as Bruckheimer Films, as in DeJa Vu, Star Wars, Batman, and other blockbuster film. Ideally a great movie must have BOTH elements, something that is rare today. In any case the dramatic arts, of Shakespeare, are what makes up the critic who love the movie who are of the first group, which I have to say John Schlesinger excels in. However, this movie the most interesting elements are the late 1990s of would be starlets and their failures during that era and what it takes to succeed, or fail and the lonely lives and social degradation that goes with the territory. Most of today's audiences with shorter attention spans may enjoy more thrill seeking. Unfortunately there is a great divide in movie making. The movie must have both thrills and yet depths and plots in movie. A good movie needs both, as in Godfather, or Star Wars. This movie has one element missing, no plots, but good premise. Which is rather risky and some may not enjoy the movie if there are not filled with clear plots. A blockbuster it may not because of the lack of plots. By audiences today the movies 2 hour and 20 minutes can be edited to just one hour and still we can have problems because of the lack of purpose, in American mindset. Although much of the European movies has been mostly non-linear the movie's perception by British was really a Time bomb about to explode if the movie actually bombed, which it did with Honky Tonk Freeway. So I guess much of the movie made by Schlesinger has been really lucky as elements of the movie are not complete. Midnight Cowboy was success because of the pain Jon Voigt character had to endure, and for this movie, it represents how starlets try to succeed whose life is the lack of direction. However what saved the day was the ending and the actress who was clearly a stereotypical Marilyn Monroe who will try to advance her career, although the poignancy of the characters are lacking and there's just too many characters in this movie for me to like anyone except the would be character of Karen Black. As a commentary why John Schlesinger failed after Honky Tonk Freeway is this: drama type movie of non linear are attracted to John Schlesinger movie who are movie critics. His career deathbed was his transition to comedy where the movie critics are basically humorless, so we have the second audiences the thrill seeker. To make a plot less movie with thrill seeking audiences was what really killed John Schlesinger movie. He didn't make mistakes he just failed to realize there were changes in audiences to come to see his movie. I am of the type 2 audiences so I may not tend to look kindly on Day of the Locusts.

Written by the comedian Steve Martin, the story of a relationship of this love triangle - what love triangle? Love in this movie is a matter of seeing each other in restaurants and sex. That's basically it. It's about a rich guy who wants an affair, and it's obvious he did mentioned "temporary" and another young guy whose socially inept moron that couldn't even say more than three words. I hardly see any relationship here. Maybe Steve Martin should stick to comedy, in drama I see nothing to this "relationship". It was much more fun on romantic relationship in Sound of Music or watching other movies. Since when is this a romance anyway? The rich guys sends gifts and they get sex. The other socially inept, well just say she's desperate and might be willing to have sex without a condom using a saran wrap, at least that's the impression. I am willing to sit through a horrible movie as in watching Disaster Movie. As to Clair Danes, I am never a fan. I don't like her movies. The last one was Terminator 3, and she seems out of place and the relationship of his future wife, wasn't even there. Seems to me Claire Danes should avoid romance and drama. But I may be of a minority opinion here. I am a guy who believes romance as in Casablanca, Sound of Music, -the traditional thing. The key in making a good romantic movie is to make sure there IS a relationship. I won't learn anything about love by just going to restaurants, sending gifts, and a meaningless conversation. It's a real drag and the movie I believe is too long.

To be fair I watched this movie before I watched the original story. This movie is convincing mostly because of the story line. It sounds like tall tales. In other words, not convincing as the original Planet of the Apes which do deserve an 8. This one is one of those movie I won't recommend my friends to watch except for the beginning ape chase scenes. The story falls on a couple of things that makes it difficult to accept. Time traveling through the future in an electrical storm in space seems too far fetched compared to the original movie, which traveled near light speed. The fact that the space station had a couple of "space pod" and Standard Operating Procedures, it's unlikely that any space station would be traveling around chasing space pods lost in electrical storms. Space stations' aren't built for chasing or rescue missions. They could have sent a couple of space pods, with a chimp is more plausible. The fact that humans became a slave, and yet they can speak English and talk, makes it unconvincing compared to the original movie which they aren't able to talk as the Apes are convinced that humans are unintelligent. The original movie the Apes assume humans to be stupid since they can't communicate is a more convincing story. The ending of the movie, I believe spoiled the movie completely and this is where the scoring is bad. In any good movie there are three things that's is key to scoring. The plausibility of the story, the beginning movie to pull us into the story, the ending that wraps up the entire move is the most important. The story fails on plausibility as mentioned here. Why are humans too passive is unconvincing. The fact that humans in this movie has no capacity to use weapons and being unorganized is very unconvincing. Humans are well known to be organized in times like these. The ending is really hard to rationalized into the story and no plausibility at all. It creates a Pandora's box. So if I were a movie producer and I was to do something different, time traveling through a wormhole, a black hole is more convincing, if we want to add to the old original story. The fact that a small space pod to travel long distance is unconvincing also even with all the technology in this movie. A human slavery is only possible through greater limitations of freedom as in concentration camps conditions is more convincing I believe, or the fact that the humans brains were "neutered" into stupidity, as in the removal of frontal lobe is another possibility. The fact that human slave they became a butler and a maid is an unintentional comedy and too unbelievable. The fact that they put humans in wood cage and to assume humans are too stupid to find a way to break those bamboo wood sounds unrealistic. Humans intelligence couldn't be that stupid given a slight 2000 years or more of evolution. I can continue to criticized this movie because of it's many mistake. In my opinion the movie compares slightly better than Snakes on the Plane movie. You can make another Planet of the Apes...if the story line is a plausible one, I believe and make some of the fixes mentioned here. As you noticed directors in general ignore good story writing but in animations where changes are very difficult and costly, a good story is much more possible. This is why Pixar Studios and Disney have such an impressive list of classic movies in spite of the fat that its a cartoon. While story writing can be written on the fly, it is this reason why Xanadu flopped, or in more recent one Disaster Movie was a complete flopped. The movie was made before the story and they had no idea as to the title of the movie.

As a small time movie producer adviser, most movies that was made were made in a hurry. That means the story was written on the fly. Xanadu was one disaster where the writing occurred only after the movie was produced. Then there is political war where the head of the production team or director calls all the shots and the argument about production deadlines. Sure there are deadlines, if you got a good script. Things kind of get out of hand when it becomes a dictatorship during movie production. The only way to prevent this is they have to first get a good title, which they did. Second a good premise to the movie (a believable one). Third a good plot outline, which they did to an extent. Next step is the storyboard which they skipped. Then there's the most important make or break editing, which they skipped almost entirely. A lot of scenes of the movie which is roughly 1 hour and 28 minutes if we just eliminated those scenes that didn't relate to the story line a lot goes down the trash. Therefore why you won't like the movie has a lot to do with the fact that almost the entire movie had nothing to do with the disaster. The disaster only took less then 5 minutes of the entire movie's one hour and a half. Scenes relating to disaster or near that took about 20 minutes. The rest of the bulk are scenes you wouldn't want to watch anyway. These are the scenes that should have been removed because it had nothing to do with the movie: 1,000,000 B.C. scene, Woman vampire singing with the caveman, Chipmunks singing Christmas Music, Pregnant Teenager scenes can be eliminated entirely, the guru in a marriage ceremony completely remove, a long 15 minute teen party can be removed completely - had absolutely nothing to do with disasters, Hannah Montana scene, Woman Wrestlers, Tennis Shoe Telepone, Enchanted princess. Now what's missing is the Disaster movie Genre that has not even been shown: Day After Tomorrow, Al Gore (Global Warming), 2012, Nostradamus, Merlin the Magician, Mother Shipton, History Channel, Poseidon, War of the Worlds, Armageddon, Sinking of Japan, for example were not parodied at all. The basic theme of the movie is the core that keeps the entire genre in one piece isn't even in there or can't be seen, which should follow more closely, for example Day After Tomorrow, and from there we throw in Twisters, Tsunamis, and other genre together. and perhaps the movie's ending should be something akin to there's no end of the world, so the schedule is move up to another date,as in Jehovah's witness. Basically the production house has forgotten a few principles, one major one is unavoidable: the movie before any production should be limited to a small play before a live audiences, as in High school or other appropriate place to get people's response before going any further. It won't cost much. So why has Disney made so many home runs? Simple: it required them a year to write a good story before production even starts. The one major mistake is that they simply allow scenes totally unrelated to the title of the movie. The second mistake is they fail to parody disasters. Sure they may have parody some movie characters, but it was unrelated to the disaster movie genre. So before making a movie, they simply need to compile the list of DISASTER MOVIES that needed to be parodied. But the main focus of a success is actually the organization. If the story process is not democratically decide, it's going to fail because the market is basically decided democratically. The more the people like the better the box office. Schedules of writing should not be part of the production process, otherwise the deadlines simply kill the story. And there's plenty of writers we can find over the net to make a good story anyway. So why put writing team as part of the production schedule? You don't need to. Just get a small competition and then use those materials.

Give a serious look what happens if this were true given the facts. If you can imagine the horrors of GMO, micro-chipped Ape-Human, a crazy Dr. Moreau (a symbolism of Monsanto Corporation), create humans from animals using human genes with the likes of a B movie, and somewhat comedic lighter side of devastating effects bioengineering, all owned by Dr. Monsanto. Then what you have is the lighter side of Apocalypse Now but with deadly truth of inescapable fact that we may one day be genetically engineered and owned by corporations is not at all far fetched. Already Monsanto owns GMO Corn, Rapeseed and even pigs. Cows injected with Bovine Growth Hormone o produce more milk. What prevents them to own a pig face humans made from pigs with human genes added? It's the effect of that day of Armageddon and it strikes me what happens if one day Monsanto owned genes accidentally made their way into humans from contaminated GMO foods and courts demand we humans to pay royalty fees to the companies much like the case where GMO seeds accidentally made into an unfortunate farmer in Canada, as in the documentary "The Future of Food", then you have a somewhat somber view of the movie in a new perspective and it's serious human perspective of the effects of bioengineering gone wild, with the legal protection of the court - the skies the limit. Why would the Island of Dr. Monsanto be confined to just this small island when Dr. Monsanto is already doing a great job in U.S. Canada and the world on a much larger scales. Could it be said that they have already done so with Monsanto being the patent owners of Pigs and Cows, with a human gene that produces a nutritious human milk coming straight from a cow? Well an agent from Monsanto told me they were inspired by this film. And inspire is something I need to make a second watching of this film a more serious look ant the possibilities.

I watched the movie DaVinci Code. It was long and boring. However this documentary DaVinci code, whether you believe it or not, has a strange conspiracy while making the movie and makes it all the more intriguing watch. Coverups, strange death of Lord Lichfield before getting interview for this movie, infiltration of the Roman Catholic Church into CIA, and Masonic Lodges, strange man who gave notes to a Priori Scion to shut up (which he did), the going to the location where the "original secret parchment" relating to the Bloodline of Jesus, makes an intriguing Spy vs. Spy type of movie. Mind you, I am not a Christian, have little interests in DaVinci Code or even another DaVinci code movie, got me really up and running as is this documentary is done with the intrigues of a real movie. What makes it so interesting is it's suppose to be a documentary with conspiracy background makes it all too intriguing. A must see movie, for both the skeptics and believers alike.

When I first seen the movie, I didn't like that nudity of Mathilda May that much but the story is very compelling. It's a blockbuster I believe, imagine a living dead, vampires, and the most prophetic of all is the concept of lifeforce, where a space vampires sucks it's energy from humans. And it controls human beings. Mind you all of this doesn't make much sense from fictional point of view, but from a real life, but I can't help but make the connection and parallels that after seeing this movie for the next 25 odd years and I constantly see links of this lifeforce far too many events such as Satanic Rituals, human sacrifice in Bohemian Grove, politicians (George Bush Sr.) secretly talking about Genocide of Katrina long before the events has happened and these events were predicted in documents by FEMA to occur of which two became true in 2001 (see wikipedia Hurricane preparedness for New Orleans), where two of the three events became true. The other is New York terrorist. It is this lifeforce and human sacrifice that makes the movie so compelling against the real events. The story was enough to get me glued throughout the movie and was one of the early movies that showed the living dead years before Living Dead, from 28 days later, 28 weeks later, and other me-too films exploded after 2000. This one movie is years ahead of its time. It makes vague references to Aliens influencing our Political leaders, long before David Icke and his Reptilian ideology became popular. It laid the groundwork for the future of Patrick Stewart (who in this movie was a psychiatrist)to become Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek and subsequent X Men series. He was more fun in this movie! The concepts of lifeforce and the idea of a space aliens eating or sucking this lifeforce is unique and it gave credence before Alex Collier or Peggy Kane made the scene about eating lifeforce and you may youtube these also. What can I say, this movie is a prophetic one that is the foundation for things to come in the next 30 odd years! If lifeforce does exist it gives credence as to why rituals were performed throughout history and cultures or is this lifeforce are a soul that can be trapped by space alien or eaten is why rituals exist. While it is indeed far-fetch, some people such as Peggy Kane, Electronic Voice Phenomenon(EVP), and reverse speech analysis believe them to be a possibility, or at least a point where a debate is brewing. Still true or not, it's prophetic that pre-dates David Icke, Alex Collier, Peggy Kane, the Living Dead series, one of the few movies to explore apocalyptic worlds before they became popular, and the concepts of lifeforce makes for an interesting movie. It's a must see movie.

The movie isn't too much of a blockbuster or anything unique if you took out two face, and the Joker from the equation. It has gotten so boring that the second viewing, I simply can't watch it (unwatchable) that I simply had to fast forward and just look at The Joker. In fact the beginning of the movie, that begins with the robbery is just too much of cliché. Surprise me! This followed by ho hum Bruce Wayne talking to his Butler, and other parts are just humdrum. The only reason why the movie's rating are so high in a 5 minute scene where the Batman interrogates the psychopathic Joker. I think the best part of the movie is actually the makeup artist that makes the Dark Knight like Friday the 13th. In all fairness, this is the only installment of Batman that gives that look and feel of a flick B movie horror, instead of a blockbuster, which I believe a 9.1 IMDb Rating(November 2008)is just a passing fad. I guarantee that it isn't as gripping as The Godfather. A really good dark Batman I believe is the early installment of Batman with the Penguin, which is quite dark. That baby scene when the baby was abandoned into the river and float on one very dark night allowed to float away by their parents just still haunts me. Perhaps the reason why The Dark Knight is highly overrated is the very sad passing away of a really brilliant and promising actor, Heath Ledger. Aside from that, Two face played a fairly good scene, although, I still believe The Oscars should be given to the makeup artist (much like the move The Fly) to give it a look and feel of the only horror movie genre in the Batman series. What the studios are doing I believe is to redefine who is Batman, into horror and psycho (but they didn't they only looked at Joker and Two face completely IGNORING Batman), such as James Bond in Casino Royale, into more meaty type movie such as The Scorpion King genre. I think people today simply got sick and tired of all the polished CGIs and wanted to move to more reality type show, more meat (ala Casino Royale), more horror (ala The Walking Dead) type of movie. In all fairness, the story and directing is woefully sleepy (if it hadn't been for the Joker Scene during interrogation or his blood curdling description of a knife cutting up a smile), it really resembles the same bore I have received watching Angelina Jolie, Tomb Raider The Cradle of Life. Sure all the action sequences are there, but it has been done with outright cliché, that you can just go to sleep as the men jumped from building to building using a wire. Oh I seen that before, I think it was in Mr. and Mrs. Smith, played by Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. Give me a break. Killing the robbers amongst themselves to reduce their share loot is a stale cookies. Do something different! Batman in this movie needs to be a little maniacal or extreme obsession in getting the criminals, that was the key missing issue in this movie. The other thing I would like to see added is hallucinations of dead innocent people, his father, mother, and perhaps his deadly madness for revenge. This would add a little flavor to the vanilla type Batman. If the directors have lack of imagination, learn that a Batman can have the same craze personality and scenery as that of American Psycho that Christian Bale played in. Haven't anybody learned? At least that would give it a kick. Still, personality aside, the plots and story lines doesn't have the twist and turns and emotional element filled atmosphere as that of The Negotiator, played by Samuel L. Jackson. The movie needs to have a more convincing story line. Sure, Mafia are competing for territories and robbery is spoiled by Batman. Gee, what else is new. The basic story premise should be changed when the police are the real mafia who used Batman for their own gains would have been more exciting along the lines of "The Departed" played well by Leonardo DeCaprio. I keep the best for last: the best movies anyone can make is an outstanding premise of the story. The premise of this story is simply Joker wanting to rid of Batman because he is interfering with crime, isn't an interesting premise. It's hardly an interesting story to begin with. Try a more interesting premise: Batman is being used by the police force so that Joker can monopolize the criminal gang warfare. But his methods are psychopathic and strings of "Jack the Ripper" type horrific murder. Isn't that a nicer premise. Greeks teaches the importance of a good story is the plot. Well the Premise is even more important the plots because the premise is the guiding light to the entire plot of the story.

McNamara's movie is an enjoyable one, but it's just an opinion of him and there's hardly any analysis of him or other people's opinion of his statement from other experts in the field. It's the same thing as Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth. When one person monopolizes the party, his opinion may monopolize you. So this review is only a background information before watching the movie not to get lost into the propaganda of things. Public Relations is actually the same word as Propaganda. And the person who coined the word "Public Relations" - a cousin of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays actually mentioned this fact. Hollywood is not supposed to be historically accurate, nor does it really teach us much. It is filled with personalities, drama, action, comedy for the basic purposes of entertainment. I also love entertainment myself. But to confuse reality and semi fiction is dangerous. Remember the movie Blair Witch? People thought they were real people. They were actually actors. Can you tell if a politician is acting or telling the truth? Really. Or have you watched the old 1960s T.V. Show "To tell the truth". The life lessons of McNamara can't be summarized into 11 lessons. It's not even McNamara's lessons. It's Morris interpretation of McNamara. In fact McNamara in the DVD documentary has other lists too, and whether that is what McNamara learned is really anyone's guesses. Also if McNamara were actually agree to do a documentary, the directors BETTER make the look better and improved their image, otherwise there's no incentive to do it in the first place. Few actor in their right mind, would do a movie (.e.g Bruce Willis or Harrison Ford) do a movie for free when his personality and popularity is at his peak. One of the lessons, seems more like lessons of what the public perceives to be true for today (it's much easier to play along public sympathies). Such as war can't be averted, that might be true. But wars are engineered by governments so they can go into war. Pretext of war is a deception of the public opinion that they are indeed our enemy, when the enemy is us. History is filled with U.S. firing on it's own ship and blaming the enemies as a pretext to war. Remember the Lusitania, and the unsuccessful one President Johnson to get Israel to fire on a U.S. ship as a pretext to war with Egypt, unluckily the Russian jet knew and the whole war there had to be discontinued. The reason why war was stopped is not the benevolent government, it came from the Russians. KGB files revealed that the Russian's financed the Peace Protest in the U.S. which lead to Kent State University killing, that finally lead to a withdrawal of Vietnam War. A more accurate history account can't be told from one man's perspective. He can have a monopoly over you. Take for instance, Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth. People now know that it's the Sun, not CO2. In fact it's not even global warming, it's the entire solar system of all our planets that is warming as our solar system reaches an unstable equatorial region of the Milky way with black hole radiation emanating from it. General Idi Dada Amin (A Self Portrait) is interviews by himself, and he seems like a cute and funny guy, but then aren't leaders suppose to be good public relations? He's perhaps one of the most evil men in history. Robert McNamara some think (I don't think so)he's a smart and a man of wisdom. But that's self promotion. While Kennedy was the only one who opposed the war (he was killed for that and other things such as vote cheating by LBJ, firing of Allen Dulles - a powerful Rockfeller backed person), why is it news media avoided that and twisted the fact as if Kennedy was pushing for Vietnam war? A good history lesson I recommend, Professor Carroll Quigley, "Tragedy and Hope", which tells of a powerful economic and consolidation of power behind all the wars. If you are a fan of Carroll (Bill Clinton was one) then our civilization's downfall is near that if you follow his books written in early 60s or late 50s - The Evolution of Civilization. The whole issue of war and why we go into war is a clear one. It is no mistake of the administration. And some people are beginning to believe WTC is an inside job and an controlled demolition (especially thermite bombs and building number 7) as a pretext for the Iraq war. After the U.S. took over Kuwait on the war against Saddam, most of Kuwaiti oil now belongs to the U.S, and the sheiks who owned it was actually never returned. Therefore things is not what it seemed and you just have to dig deeper. You get different realities all together - the blue pill or the red pill. I don't know which, because the media made us color blind.

The basic theme of this episode basically reflects good vs. evil, but you won't like the ending. It's a disappointing watch. Its Trace Adkins versus Piers Morgan. The reputation of the two is very different, one with clean record of ethics and the other is Piers extramarital affairs with two woman, and a shame to his family and children was reflected in Omarossa's attack which turns out to be true. U.S. corporations have a reputation of being sharks who prey on weak people and pounce. This is basically what Donald "The Shark" Trump is. Basically he will judge people on money over ethics and hence the true colors of Trump is a reflection of the corporate world when he decides who the winner is. So if people want to know why corporate backstabbing and unethical behavior occurs, it's because of the CEO's Donald Trump concern for the bottom line. Never mind about ability. That's not important, what you need is a long list of rich people's phone numbers on a Rolodex to win. Is what pulls through the entire 13 episode to win without much ability or any learning experience there is. In fact I prefer to watch Season 1 or Season 2 before giving up and concluding that these people aren't learning anything when they go from one project to another and their lack of disregard of people, as in Pier Morgan's lack of ethics as the epitome of the corporate world. Of course all this pretty much amounts to one thing: Donald Trump will be once again going into financial trouble if he doesn't recognize the long term relationship and ethics can make corporations last. Of course, I can't blame him, he's really no CEO in the long haul and I think idol worship of these people can be done over, he's no guru.

It is hard to believe that a Doomsday movie 2012 can be so moving and inspirational, because of the music and professionally done editing. For me it is best picture Documentary, despite the low budget. This is one of the few films that can inspire just me from the picture, music and the smart scripts used to make the film. While obviously this History Channel has the sufficient slickness to be shown in movie theaters, it was only made for television documentary. Getting these I guess people have to obtain from the History Channel Website, Torrent, or even Youtube. I can't watch youtube because it is censored in my country, so obviously I have to get it somehow. The major weakness is that it relies a bit too much on "oracles" and prophets, but then this IS history channel. There IS an exception when they mentioned using Web-Bot to predict the future. However, this movie makes excellent companion movie as a follow up through The Lost Books of Nostradamus, which explains more in detail about why the Dark Rift Exists as the Pole Shifts, 13th zodiac when the solar system crosses the Milky Way equatorial region, already Uranus and Neptune has 60 degree changes in polar shift and Earth is next as it approaches 21 December 2012. Very interesting watch for those 2012 fans, another one I think is worth watching is Project Horizon Episode 1, but for those faint of heart, than it's 2012 Odyssey, or those who are more factual, then a 6+ Hour movie from Michael Tsarion's 2012 documentary. while Ed Dames' Killshot is somewhat flaky because he keeps making wrong predictions. Otherwise this History Channel movie is the best in a long line of 2012 Doomsday movie, a good follow up will always be the Lost Book of Nostradamus. Watching these two, I find 2012 Doomsday to be exciting and entertaining to watch, not exactly that I would LIKE such dire earthquake and flood to occur but that's another story altogether.

This is what I referred to as Sweet Misery Part II, which explains more of the toxic food additives, but covers more grounds on Monosodium glutamate, plus further toxicity problems of Aspartame, and briefly on food additives. While there may be debate on whether aspartame is dangerous or not, there is actually an easy way to prove it through brain scan imaging studies using SPECT brain scans, which you can clearly the enormous brain metabolic changes just after drinking a bottle of diet Pepsi or Diet Coke. If anyone wants to film, Super Size me, such as drinking diet coke, and diet product for an entire month, the brain may in fact be so damage that it is beyond repair -that's just my personal opinion. I however, prefer to watch Sweet Misery for aspartame, and watch Sweet remedy for more information on Monosodium Glutamate and Aspartame. What is most interesting about this film is that they also added aspartame in Flintstone multivitamins and many pharmaceuticals, which that alone was worth the watch. Most people could not obtain the film from retail sources often ended up downloading from torrent. What I can say about my own personal experiences is that my eye has now a permanent macular degeneration in one eye and nearly went deaf drinking the diet Pepsi for an entire month, until I realized it came from aspartame, but it was too late, disability already effected me from working full time. Therefore it is worth the watch. If anyone denies any brain damage, SPECT scan is one way to prove it, and if it's cellular phones, then cooking boiled eggs using the cellular is enough to find out that talking too long can also cook the brains. No need for "official statements". Even ants, rats, and dogs avoided eating aspartame laced food why did I even bother to take this, is one question that the video also asks.

My personal opinion is the movie was done intentionally bad rather than accidentally bad for a reason: to reduce anxiety of the possibility of another the End of Times by watching this disgusting movie (and getting disgusted with 2012!). But there is a silver lining out of all this and if you read this it will be some redeeming quality here, but not in the movie. There are things people can further the research on the understanding of what is so magic about December 21, 2012. For one thing our solar system, goes around the milky way which wavers up and down the equatorial plane of the milky way every 25,800 years. Every Time it passes through this equatorial plane, there is a pole shift of earth which occurs when it crosses this. The ancient civilizations claims there are 4 civilizations that can exist in earth and we are now on our fourth and last civilization. All the famous seers predict the end of times 2012, from Merlin (yes there's a real Merlin, not from King Arthur), Mother Shipton, Mayan cultures, etc. Now the reason why 2012 has "ended" in the Mayan Calendar is that every time there is pole shift and our solar goes out of alignment from other star systems, and planets mess up the solar cycle time table, badly, such as the planet Nibiru from another solar system coming into our solar system. Yes there is planet Nibiru, but it is only visible in South Pole but will be observable in southern hemisphere using a simple telescope, but in 2 years it will be observable by everyone. As our solar system passes through this critical plane there is "earthquake" throughout our solar system. The sun being most sensitive, and largest, has earthquake too, so it sends out "solar flares" and hence, global warming...or more correctly solar system warming. Yes, all planet in our solar system is "warming". But the catch is when the solar system goes across this flat plane, our solar planet and solar system will meet with another Nibiru planets as well as asteroids and meteorites hitting the Earth. Yes Global warming is real, but it's not the CO2, its the solar flare. There are a couple of other better movie such as "Project Horizon" which deals with end of time that one can youtube, or Doomsday 2012 End of Times by the History Channel, or Zecharia Sitchin, who got the Governmental NSA confiscating his archaelogical findings on end of times. It's got to be good if the Government are seizing his documents and that's what got me interested in looking further, but definitely not this movie and hence my belief that the spent 1,000,000 on this dumb movie, while confiscating Sitchins finding appears to be conspiracly in the making so people WON'T think about 2012, and perhaps there may be some grain of truth after all, as earthquake we experience for the last 10 years is worsen than 100 years of recorded earthquake. However, you won't find the answer in this movie! For those who watch Alternative 3 and Phil Schneider's 4 last lectures concerning vast underground network, and why the Queen of England bought so much land in Denver Colorado (one of highest elevation cities), they all predict this one event will happen and think the elites can survive. This includes the Rockefeller's Doomsday Vault and why the military are now shooting nuclear bombs on asteroids. The pieces come all together if we just talk about 2012. As for me, I'll probably look into remote viewing, web-bot (computer seer), and other things to confirm whether they are all just coincidences. We have been wrong before, and just perhaps, we might be wrong this time too

Most conspiracies movies are quite good, but sometimes it was done intentionally wrong to discredit these new group of people. One event came to mind about an email from Reuters sent to people that Nostradamus predicted the World Trade Center, by misquoting him. When people found out, Nostradamus was eventually discredited. There ARE good movies that relates to this topic and Christianity and source reference materials mentioned in the movie, were incorrect, in fact Zeitgeist the Challenge, which pays people money if they can prove the 50 claims by the movie Zeitgeist shows that the powers that be is trying to infiltrate the conspiracy movement. There are other farce conspiracy movies such as In 9/11 Plane Sight and one on moon hoax, by trying to say the hoax can't be penetrated, of course it can, one obvious one is there's not enough area in the space shuttle for the space suit to get out, and this is verified. However, back to the movie that was made during this same theme that I do recommend is Empire of the City - The Ring of Power, which deals with the issue of Christianity (I am not a Christian) much more better and made a lot more sense as to the origins of Christianity. As to the issue of income tax, Aaron Russo movies are good (he's good because the Oscar didn't even pay tribute to him - if they did, it's not a good movie), but also Edward G. Griffin, which are well accepted by the community, but not for Zeitgeist, and amazingly, Ring of Power is unusually silent or unrated one even by IMDb. So I think some rating by IMDb is bias or manipulated. If you don't believe me just compare Ring of Power and Zeitgeist, read other people who challenged the Zeitgeist claims. Zeitgeist the movie hold no water. The intention of anti-conspiracies movie is basically, infiltrate and to divide and conquer the conspiracy theorist. I think personally that David Icke is infiltrated, by disrepute himself on the alien issue about transforming into another being. The most recent one that the internet community has basically put in disrepute, is The Inconvenient Truth, being effectively overturn by an relatively little known, The Global Warming Swindle. Despite its low budget, the truth speaks for itself. Remember we have seen this before even in the Alien Autopsy, which is also basically overturned by the community. One of the most important thought is, don't allow the powers that be divide and conquer a small but growing conspiracy theorists, on more solid issues, 911 is an inside job, Federal Reserve is a private corporation, or the income tax is illegal. The best judge of anything is simply to check the facts. No one's fact is good, including me, so check them yourself. Independent and critical thinking is one of the last freedom we have.

The trailers for the movie, I understood to be a comedy. When I actually watched this movie, it turns out to be a depressing movie. Catherine Zeta Jones makes great movie, more on block busters, big screen, musicals or playing the bad guys, and other action type movies. This is somewhat of a depressing movie, and a child who is too mysterious, and a competing chef Nick where the scripts are bad, the chemistry is bad. I like movie about cooks like Ratatouille, or Mostly Martha. The characters of the movies should have been the child who is headstrong but clear in her depression (demanding), rather than mysterious. While the Nick the cook, should have lighter and more comedic, but yet has some of his own weaknesses, such as lack of organization, slow orders, extremely emotional, but brilliant in creativity. This is the CLASSIC stereotype and it is more realistic. I mean how could Nick be so perfect as shown in the movie. On the other hand, Kate should have been the staunch disciplinarian, everything on schedule, but aren't too emotional when customers get displeased. Characterization of this movie needs work. Everyone has weaknesses and they try to make amends for each weaknesses. On the other hand, there is a problem about the backstabbing boss and where all this fits in the movie. A movie would be much better focused if the owner is somewhat of a an old restaurant owner overlooking with enough freedom so that both master cooks can fight it out, for better focus. All in all, the marketing people made this movie worse than it really is since I expected to be a comedy, not a drama. If characterization aside, Jodie Foster would better do the drama portion than the shallow Catherine Zeta Jones, for example. So I'd rather watch Mostly Martha than this one. It's a disappointment on characters, casting, and script. Directing is good, production is great, music is wonderful the story needs work. A pure plagiarized movie with newer actors would have worked better then a modified story as this one.