Reviews

There's few movies that suffered more from poor editing more than Slow Burn. A strong cast with fine performances, but ithe film is sliced and diced until you suspect that you're the only viewer that's confused. All the right scenes are there, just in the wrong order. I get what the movie was TRYING to do: see everything through the eyes of DA Ford Cole (Ray Liotta) as he saw them at the time he saw them. This can work OK (and just OK) in a book where the reader can page back and sort things out but not in a 93 minute movie. This film should be reedited and rereleased.

Worth watching, but it could have been oh so much more.

Sooooo sloooow. No, that Doesn't capture just how slow this movie is. When something, anything finally happens, you have to shake yourself awake to be sure that it's not a boring dream. But then again, boring dreams don't exist. I watched "Wind River" a few weeks ago - THAT movie is a 9 or 10: gripping and edge of your seat suspense!

It's true - the world is round and James Cameron can serve up a stinker.

A complete waste of time - do anything else. Clean the basement, or the toilet bowl. I didn't care about any of the characters because the director didn't do any more than just film them. If you like men (no women on subs yet?) crowded together all yelling at the same time then i guess this is your film. Paula Beer is nice movie candy. Relly, this is a terrible film.

Jumped the shark after a good start, ruining an excellent performance by Dan Stevens. The rogue soldier mystery was never explained. Special forces were seemingly trying to get shot (and doing a fine job of it). The ending just kept getting more ridiculous and absurd. Dan Stevens yes, The Guest no.

Definitely not for everyone. If you're not into the dual genres of sci-fi and horror, skip it. But if you are, It's a movie with a romantic twist. The acting and narration were very good; the score was non-intrusive and effective throughout. Enjoyed this movie - isn't that the point?

Trust me, there's infinitely better uses of your time. Plodding, with "dread" music playing from start to end. It's amateurish to play "dread" music before there's the slightest clue WHAT to fear! Too bad the rest of the movie wasn't up to the acting level, which was quite good. You know the editor(s) needed to wield the scissors when you can fast forward without fear of missing anything ANYTHING.

.

It's the little things that chip away at a film with great actors: editing, script, directing. Despite attempts to maintain suspense, the movie is oddly too slow. Time shifts are for astrophysicists, not struggling movies. Yeah, it's the little things alright.

Only the second movie I didn't finish (Green Inferno). Mel Gibson must have been a consultant on this film with all the torture and disfigurement. Too long, and the time jumps detracted from already deeply flawed and repugnant movie.

I watched it again, like an apprehensive moth pulled to a flame. Galveston will take something from you but leave you with more.

Ben Foster, Elle Fanning, and Beau Bridges are great.

Sure, it's not a perfect movie, but it's plenty good enough to watch and enjoy.

Music What did you expect? It's the BEATLES!

Casting Superb for almost all; wouldn't change much.

Trailer The "Today" segment at the end of the move is just plain wonderful. I play it over and over! If the trailer doesn't make your heart sing (too), then you're way too stressed.

The concept Loved it. Some reviewers complain that "the movie could have been great". Making movies must be really hard because there's so many bad ones, and very few great movies. This is a good movie, and worth your time/money.

MIB movies are supposed to be FUNNY. This one isn't, and with no other redeeming qualities, it falls flat. Liam was good, but to quote a TV commercial, everything else was "just OK".

There's just something missing here. I know, I'm supposed to tell you what it is, Dramatic scenes well acted and stunningly photographed don't make a movie; there must be a story. Great movies, even good movies, start with a coherent story; one that can be told by an elder around a campfire. The director lost the story and his way.

In the end, Dunkirk fails the "I'd watch it again" test. Has there ever been a film you considered the "Best Picture" that you didn't want to watch again? Of course not. It makes you wonder how many of the Academy members saw "Dunkirk"...

P.S. Mr. Dawson, the boat captain/father is masterfully played by Mark Rylance. His performance is the only thing that's Oscar worthy about this film.