Reviews

It's not high art but it's great escapism. I must admit to getting a bit confused about timelines, but it didn't really matter.

The acting is fine and the actors themselves are engaging enough. There are plenty of funny lines. Look through the time travel stuff and just enjoy it for what it is.

There are too many films that are overlong (or just way too long for the sake of it). This was just the right length and didn't overstay it's welcome.

It's Ok guys, it's not really a romcom, so you are safe to approach!

I liked it and don't get the low scores - you won't be disappointed if you give this a go.

Overlong and surprisingly boring.

So many of the scenes really dragged and were twice as long as required. The (over) acting by some of the cast really should have been edited out or dealt with at the time. I expected so much more from the genius filmmaker but I wonder if he got carried away with the film and just missed the mark.

No other director would have been allowed to make such an uninspiring movie, it's just a self indulgent dull-fest. You can't fault the cinematography and quality of the filming but it was an hour too long and not much of a story. It could have even been made into a 2 part TV thing.

Look at the cast! Some of the best actors around signed up for this excruciatingly long film and they were given a story that was lacking errrm... a story!

Nothing really happens and yet the director still manages to make every scene feel like an age. With some editing, this could easily have been a 60 minute TV drama. But I suspect it still might feel overlong and a bit dull.

Lovely sets, filming and fine acting can't disguise that the film is lacking any depth.

A missed opportunity.

When describing this to a friend, the film sounded appalling. Well the script, acting (by some) and ways the characters avoid death are just bad. It didn't actually matter.

But.. and it's a big but... it's entertaining throughout and if you appreciate this like the comic absurdity it is, you'll enjoy it too.

I'm not sure how anyone can sustain the injuries that the lead characters get, but it is just a silly road/chase film after all.

Not much story, but plenty of fights and chase scenes and many unnecessary deaths.

The biggest issue is that it's at least 30 minutes too long. Edit the film!!!

It's one of those comedies that forgets to include any funny parts.

Gave up after 30 minutes through boredom.

Brilliantly written comedy that made me laugh out loud so many times. Jonathan Bailey is just brilliant at playing the slightly crazy Sam.

Have watched again and again recently - binge watching on a long ferry journey!

An insult to the first films in this series. It's as if they decided on a few (extremely) overlong set pieces and then fitted a loose narrative around it.

The story could have been a 10 minute subplot in a longer movie. Very amateurish writing.

Just avoid and rewatch the first 2.

Far too many scenes that were obviously improvised and the director didn't know when to say "cut". Poorly shot with fixed camera positions that were just in the wrong position. The scenes dragged and so many seemed completely irrelevant - and if you include some appalling acting, you may begin to understand how annoying this film is.

It's trying to be arty, but fails.

So terrible I didn't even bother watching to the end.

In a word... Amateurish

Although it may be CGI, I can't watch animals dying and suffering just for entertainment. And without doubt the script and story are obvious and lazy.

Just watch the first film and don't waste your time on this rubbish.

Life is too short to waste on awful films.

This film can be summed up in one word... clichéd.

But IMDb won't let me submit at this point as it wants 1000 words. So let me expand a bit - the writing is clichéd and so obvious, that it's embarrassing. I checked to see if an 8 year old had written the story, but that isn't the case.

When you can easily guess where the story goes in the next minute, over and over, you can be sure that it becomes tiring very quickly. Even the funnier parts are ruined by the joke missing the point when it should end.

The acting (and that may be stretching it a bit) is wooden, with plenty of woodworm.

On the plus side... errrrm. Nope, I'm out of ideas.

When you write a review it's important not to give anything away, thereby spoiling it for those who have yet to see the movie.

In this case, that wont be a problem. So little happens over the eight hours that this film runs, oops I mean 88 minutes, that I couldn't include a spoiler if I tried!

It's really dull, arty yes, but very dull.

If you want to sit for a while and let the sights and sounds wash over you with no effort required, then this film is perfect. If you want entertainment, look elsewhere.

3 out of 10, just for the countryside shots.

When I was young and I mean early teens, I saw a film called Kind Hearts And Coronets. I knew that this film made many decades earlier was something very special. It is an Ealing comedy unlike their other offerings.

So how could this movie, released in in 1949 and obviously in black and white, have entertained me to the extent that I can still class it as one of my all time favourites? Answer:... this is near perfect cinema.

The art of making a black comedy is a tough area of film and one that has produced more duds than successes. There are no laughs as such, yet you know that this is a comedy from the start, despite it being dark, moody and serious. To be able to turn the topic of jealousy and death into comedy is an amazing feat and it is not until you realise that Alex Guinness is playing multiple parts that you fully understand that this is not your typical film.

I wont give anything away, but I urge you to watch and enjoy this masterpiece.

This film is a perfect example of where reviewers like to show themselves as being superior to the "common man" by rating an awful film with high marks. They then aim to justify the review by saying that "we" just didn't get the movie.

This is an amateurish film on every level, yet the so called risks it takes in terms of style are seen by professional reviewers as something special. No dear reviewer, the risks made for lazy and ineffective viewing and could, in fact, be classed as simply annoying.

The script takes you nowhere and there are a few scenes which leave you puzzled as to why they were included. Most seem improvised and add nothing to the storyline and just highlight how poor the acting is. A scene about judging the sex of a lobster seemed the worst filler in any movie I have seen in my life.

The camera is fixed rigidly in place, focused on anything other than the action (and I use that word loosely). If the director had used that approach once or perhaps twice, I would consider it to be arty. To have the actors "act" off camera most of the time became baffling. I have no doubt that a group of high school students could have made this film and probably have done a better job.

The film gets one point from me merely for the scenery on the beautiful Scilly Isles.

Sometimes you need to see an awful film to allow you to compare against all of the other films that you watch. This film was truly awful.

The story and script were lazy. If you dress a movie up with great period scenes, including streetcars etc, you can get away with some errors and low quality. Even that doesn't help.

I found myself shouting at the TV asking why the Police would do what they did and why the mother would do what they did.

I actually found that whole thing a bit embarrassing to watch. Angelina Jolie's acting seems to get worse with each film and John Malkovich can only play one character it seems.

Give this bad film a miss unless you are happy to see clichés coming at you from all over the place.

I had intended to give it 1 out of 10, but instead gave 2 for the set showing the Los Angeles of the 1920's.

I actually liked this film. It had a good direction and a welcome approach to an important topic. The angst of youth is bad enough, but mixed in with confusions of sexuality can be very difficult.

But... the acting was quite appalling and the script poor. It is not surprising that a few of the lead characters never made another film, but the lead guy had that "something".

Its such a shame, because I wanted to enjoy this film and had been looking for it cheap on Ebay for about a year.

There are better "coming of age" gay films such as Preque Rien. But if you come across a video or DVD of Defing Gravity in a bargain bin - it's worth a couple of quid.

I like Matt Damon and I like Casey Affleck.

I also like meaningful and arty films.

I hated Gerry. It now stands as the worst film I have EVER seen. It is totally self-indulgent and an ego trip.

Some scenes dragged on for so long that people in the cinema were laughing at how bad it was.

If I had not been with two other people, I would have walked out.

matt, Casey and the director should be ashamed - this is not arty, this is an insult.