Reviews

He's in peak form here... The jokes are hilarious and the rants are so on-the-bullseye that you can't help but laugh. Bill Burr is willing to cross any line and articulate his view on it and deliver some super funny jokes. He sprinkles in some excellent parodies and impersonations too that will have you rolling... He lashes out at the right and the left in a very fair way...

Like a Jester telling the king/queen (audience) all their mistakes in a funny comedic rant, the king/queen can't get mad but can only look at themselves and what they have become.

What a great talent...

I don't think it's fair of me to judge this without a season 2, because of how much the writers/director seem to put mystery-above-all. We still don't know what the "sides" or factions are by the end of the show. There's a cold war still going on, but at the same time some Orwellian system continues although it hints that Poland is somehow free of USSR Orwellian control yet still behind Iron Curtain? Makes little sense. The story is very disjointed and doesn't flow.

Too many backstories, flashbacks, character mini-dramas. It's like we're trying to follow the lives of 10-20 people and they're all so selfish and only care about themselves and won't explain anything about what they're doing. Again, mystery above all.

The TV show and its plot has ridiculously high potential! The setting, the amount of factions is very high, but it's not clear who's side is on who's. This could mean they could make an incredible 2nd season, but in the 1st season we just have no idea what's happening most of the time...

The potential is there, the cinematography is there, the costumes are great, the "wise quotes" are good.

However, it constantly leaves the audience confused. The funny part is this TV series seems more like the history of Russia after 1999 (apartment complex false-flag attack that Putin did on his own Russian citizens)...

Other than the hot actors and actresses... the movie is just bad. They show some disgusting scenes. The acting is bad. The dialogue is cliché and amateur. The characters are one-dimensional except for one lawyer and one crook.

The story doesn't know what to do, except it is like as if a woman writer wrote a novella about a sexy bad-boy criminal who does horrible things but justifiably, and so the sexy psychologist falls in love with him.

They try to make a scene reminiscent of Silence of the Lambs, except it's horrible and cheesy. Then they lavish on the disgusting political message and bash you over the head with it: violence bad... and "stop perpetuating the cycle"... but it provides ZERO justifications for it. Other than the sexy psychologist's lust for a sexy criminal (perpetuating the stereotype of going after bad boys).

And the criminal on death row, is not even much of a criminal. He does crimes but it's all not his fault. Like as if evil doesn't exist. Or bad people don't exist. Or it's the "system" causing it.

So it's like a collaborative movie written by a girl who likes bad boys, and a hippie who hates the system... man...

Just a horrible preachy movie. There was zero suspense, almost zero action, and the comedy was terrible. The point of the movie is to preach this bizarre anti-war philosophy, that completely ignores the history of human wars (where insurgencies were defeated. It's not like Afghans invented insurgency).

The one-dimensional characters shows how black-and-white and simple- minded people wrote this movie.

What a waste of money and acting power too. The actors are good but the characters and plot is just boring and bland.

It's like watching a 2 hour movie of someone angry at a general, so they made a movie whining about a general or a war.

So it started off great with lots of action.

But quickly turned into conspiracy theorist paranoia, unrealistic decisions by "leaders" who shouldn't ever have become leaders. Unrealistic drama, overreactions, under-reactions. The plots in each episode are too far-fetched. The conversations are too bland.

The people who hired the actors clearly don't know the type of people to hire for certain roles, they just don't look like they belong in the jobs they have.

The main star of the show is the only decent part of the show but the script and plots are just bad for him and again: under-react, overreact.

They introduce a bad guy, then they get rid of the bad guy, it's just random conspiracy plots essentially with little meaning.

A good bit of political correctness too, where suspected bad guys turn out to be misunderstood good guys. Know-it-all irritating analysts in the show can't even pronounce H&K correctly.

Suspense & a sense of danger/urgency is not being established in the show. It's too predictable.

He's not a particularly funny guy, but why does he insert himself into the gun debate and politics when he doesn't do the research? People hire him for laughs and instead he does faulty research and then tries to turn faulty research into a joke.

Michael Che has made himself into a partisan hack who uses comedy as a way to promote his political beliefs. I say this as a liberal who believes in many progressive policies, he's made himself into an extreme left-wing person who does poor research.

AR does not stand for "assault rifle" and arguing against ownership of rifles is exactly what he claimed he never would do (previously, now he is fine with arguing against gun ownership). He says you can't own a rifle, but he doesn't understand that rifles are no different than handguns and rifles are 0.6% of gun-deaths per year. So why attack rifles when handguns murder over 10,000 people yearly? When heart disease kills 600,000 people yearly? When car accidents kill 35,000 people yearly? If you add up hands/feet deaths from DoJ statistics with club-deaths, you get more deaths than rifles. So why doesn't he want to ban hands/feet/clubs? It can't get any less logical than this. It's an emotional argument and emotional arguments make for poor comedy.

When Michael Che tried to attack guns on Weekend Update SNL, he backed Hillary Clinton and claimed "no one is trying to take away your guns." This is unequivocally false. It's a false statement because that's exactly what Bill Clinton's "assault weapon ban" did. It took away guns. Hillary herself has said she wants to review the Australian gun ban. Obama himself has said on CNN that China banned guns and everything is just fine there and the criminals have to use knives. He literally used that example. So "no one is trying to take away guns" is a LIE.

Lies like this give fuel to right-wing movements. They can point to your lies, and gather recruits. So why is he lying, misinforming his audiences, and sabotaging the Democratic cause? It's only gonna hurt himself in the end.

How can you turn falsehoods into comedy? Comedy and hilarity comes from TRUTH. It comes from Satire and irony based on the truth. He's not a very funny guy and he's trying to make a name for himself by being extremely left. Don't bother watching this on Netflix. Waste of time.

There are just constant errors throughout the movie even though it tries to be realistic. The police are incompetent. The detective is even more incompetent and naive. The main character is an incompetent "spiritual french hippie" who constantly ACTS on FEEEEEEEELINGS over logic.

Other errors include the nonsense and falsehood known as "depleted uranium" making someone sick. This is simply not true. There is no such sickness. There is no "radiation" that people get from "depleted uranium". It would be like getting radiation from tungsten or other heavy elements that aren't lead. People constantly shoot lead bullets and yet they don't get poisoned or irradiated. There is no SUCH THING. It's a hippie myth.

The movie is basically about a sexually repressed woman who becomes a stupid slut and a hobo and leeches off of others.

A few of the worst behaviors a woman can do in life. Living life through unplanned emotions/feelings/thrills. Making child-like decisions. Hurting other people along the way...

She's not an adult. She's a child who cares about nothing but her own selfish feelings.

There are also constant filming of Western/Mid-western American culture and portraying it as inbred, violent, and backwards, which yes there could be such characters but I don't know why the movie director or script writer decides to focus so closely on this.

Characters in the movie keep doing illegal things or things that can get them fired and trying to make it seem "Oh it's OKAY and NORMAL."

Then she finds spirituality and native Americans and other nonsense.

The Native Americans are portrayed in their typical clichés as super-connected with spirits.

This movie was written by children who have only had a few bad experiences with love.

The jokes are very intelligent and satirical but it takes some effort or knowledge to understand some of them. Much of the plot is based on Trump's real life. That's the key to satire, showing the absurdity of Trump's candidacy without exaggerating much at all and everything is 100% true.

Trump's cult of personality will of course not be swayed but that's the thing about cults, their spread slows and eventually the cultists just go away into the forest with their own nuttery as people start to see just how insane they are.

The jokes were not only smart but very offensive which I find to be exactly what I'm looking for in a comedy.

I swear this movie is designed for emotional people who have very little logical capacity.

The plot makes no sense. The point of extortion and kidnapping is to get the victim's family to do something, that the kidnappers themselves cannot do. In this plot, they can do it themselves but just want someone else to do it essentially (which makes no sense).

Of course the title suggests "two wrongs... don't make a right"... but that is absolutely silly. Self-defense, war, criminal justice, these are all committing acts against another human to correct a WRONG by doing something that is usually WRONG. So what you do doesn't matter unless it's particularly heinous but WHO you do it to, does matter.

Behavior itself is not immoral. Context of the behavior and the perpetrator and victim can make something moral or immoral. If a mom bear kills the wolf threatening its cubs, that mom bear is not immoral.

The only person talking sense in this movie, is the man who did the worst crimes possible...and the old mother who's too weak to just do things herself. A perpetrator who's a coward.

It's just a bizarre drama for the sake of drama.

It's ridiculous how grandiose and narcissistic these neckbeards in this documentary are. They by their own admission are committing crimes, stealing emails, giving protected emails to the public, and committing espionage, and then they are getting upset when the government arrests them.

The documentary focuses mostly on Weev, an internet troll, who even blames the Jews all the time just to be controversial and obnoxious, who was arrested because he hacked AT&T by "just doing arithmetic" which revealed some email addresses.

The problem is that he thinks he was arrested for free speech or arithmetic. When in fact, he was arrested because he hacked a list of emails and gave it to the public, trying to expose and embarrass AT&T and government in essence VIOLATING THE PRIVACY of individuals working for government. It's hilarious how hypocritically they defend privacy rights while violating privacy rights of others using hacks.

None of these hackers contacted the company to say "hey you have a security flaw here, let me help you." They all hacked, embarrassed, and publicly showed off their hacks to others. It's criminal.

Ironically, they say things like "this government is oppressing me and all I do is speak out using 1st amendment." When in fact, they are literally encouraging people to commit crimes against the US. They are labeled the enemy of the state, because they literally admit to being the enemy of the state.

They are literally attacking and hacking the United States... And then pretending like they are only doing free speech and being persecuted unfairly.

PRO-TIP: IF YOU ARE ATTACKING A COUNTRY, ITS GOVERNMENT, ITS CORPORATIONS, YOU ARE THE ENEMY OF THAT COUNTRY AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROSECUTE YOU.

I'm not sure where these people learn comedy from. They watch a comedy movie, and then they think "hmm I can be a comedic writer too" and they mistake humor for dumbness and awkwardness of the characters. So they make all the characters, weird, autistic, incredibly stupid, and then show their awkward interactions hoping that someone will laugh?

If you adored MAD TV and you thought every dumb scene in MAD TV was funny (not just a select few), then you'll love this show. If you are looking for intelligent, ironic, dark humor this is not the show for you.

It's a TV show where the writers purposefully thought "hmm wouldn't it be really awkward if the characters just made an awkward scene here and showed their lack of social awareness? How funny would that be? hahahahahahhahahahah" This is how stupid the writers are.

This movie is pretty politicized but more importantly it will not satisfy Armenians who thirst for information about 1915. It will not satisfy those who don't know much about the issue or history. It will definitely not satisfy any Turks, Kurds, Circassians, Assyrians, or anyone else involved in the 30-years of historical events.

It's basically a movie trying to profit by confusing the issue about a dark chapter in history and monetizing this sacred issue for Armenians.

The way that the film turns a play into a sort of historical event with unprofessional actors and ridiculous scenarios is just upsetting and a disgusting way of looking at a very SERIOUS issue.

Sam Page is probably the worst actor in the movie. It's just sort of strange and amateurish the whole way it's put together. It tries to dramatize it by watering it down and politicize something that should be seriously studied and remembered. Also I was a bit disturbed and felt weirded out with the way the movie describes as "a crime was invented" like as if extermination or mass murder is something new or like colonialism or conquest or extermination never happened before. The crime cannot be forgotten just because someone wants it to be but it surely wasn't invented in 1915.

I mean the movie has a line like "maybe the play should have a happy endings" and "you are destroying the Armenian people." Like it's hammering you over the head with its obvious message by saying how naive the audience is.

Never Again.

The documentary does a great job of telling the various stories and building up suspense while showing us the beauty of the country.

The only historical "inaccuracy" was that they didn't flat out say that King Leopold of Belgium literally committed genocide in the Free Congo State by killing 10-30 million people for his own personal financial gains. It was in fact the first genocide of the 20th century. I wouldn't say it was corporations, King of Belgium is a government not a corporation.

Other than that everything about the movie was great. It had great emotions and the characters showed a lot of character.

The absurdity of the corporations attempt to try to get oil by damaging environmental or animal conservation efforts is ridiculous. They can just as easily provide for the animals and their habitat and it would not cost much.

The show is anti-technology, religious, and absurdly unrealistic.

Anti-technology:

The show always tries to drive the point home that technology is not the answer. UV lights need batteries. The infected can disable our technologies. The "evil spirit" can manipulate humans and hackers to disable technologies. Guns may not work. Modern medicine may do nothing.

Anti-government:

Government is incapable, incompetent, or corrupted by the "evil spirit".

Religious:

After every person dies, a prayer is sung and there are constant themes of religion throughout the movie. In addition, they try to have a flashback to history, trying to paint the Nazis as anti-religious when that is historically incorrect because they were very religious.

Unrealistic:

People refuse to believe in obvious threats to their lives. Governments refuse to take anything seriously. Can't find the military anywhere in this TV show. Video evidence is not believed either. Everyone purposefully endangers themselves for stupid reasons. No one seems to know or want to fight these things as incompetence seems to be more prevalent in the TV show than the disease itself.

Plot is boring and doesn't seem to move forward. We're always bogged down by "encounters". And these "encounters" are all you see throughout the show with no progress to the plot.

Evil characters have "evil motivations" but no one can explain why or what their plan is. They're just evil for inexplicable reasons.

Occasionally they have good stuff about cults etc. But then they go right back around and make some stuff up just for the ratings.

They continue to talk about conspiracy theories that have been debunked like "Fake moon landing" and "freemasons" and "Gold conspiracies" and EVEN BIGFOOT. I MEAN SERIOUSLY?!?!

Bringing up nut cases like Ron Paul. Talking about Fort Knox conspiracies. It's just things they don't know so they make up a story behind it.

It's so easy when someone doesn't give you access to something so these people make up stories about these things for fun and there's always an audience to believe in it. Just gotta find the right audience.

These theories and ideas accomplish nothing. It's like Nostradamus predictions. Even if Nostradamus got one thing right so what? He made thousands of guesses--you're bound to get SOMETHING right just by GUESSING.

But you don't guess for entertainment, that's just pointless waste of everyone's time if you turn out to be wrong.

I was very much a big fan of this. And I watch a lot of Vice News stuff because of their brave journalists willing to go anywhere. Except that they aren't journalists. They're like stunt doubles who go anywhere and have no idea how to interpret anything or present it to the audience. It's like they signed a contract to risk their lives but not trained in any journalistic ethics or understanding of world events.

It's sad because it had a lot of potential.

But then it's become all about propaganda. Presenting only ONE side of every issue.

They just present the views of the owner: Shane Smith.

When he wants to do a propaganda piece he doesn't interview anyone from the opposing side. He won't interview any officials or experts.

He's more into interviewing random people "on the ground". He interviews non-experts but people whom he thinks "might be involved" and "on his side."

I was at first a little afraid because of the nerdy portrayal of hackers and the weird graphics. But the show really started to put perspective. Creating debate by arguing both sides of the issue: Whether to release or whether to edit or whether to not even be involved.

The movie makes you think about it, that people don't usually do when they simply see a video on youtube/internet about US and automatically assume the most evil things are happening.

Everything Assange does can be considered dangerous to the lives of people around the world. It can start wars. It can destroy diplomatic relations and talks. And I'm glad the movie at least acknowledged the consequences.

The movie also acknowledged the protection of whistlers and how the WL website has exposed much corruption and embarrassed authoritarian nations as well.

As always, when there is such a vast debate on this issue--it's best to examine the best arguments of each side. A perfect balance.

For the record, I'm not Muslim or Tatar or anything like that. But this movie was disgraceful. The whole movie seems like a youtube video made by amateurs who want to portray some sort of evil group of humans--who act anything BUT human. Just killing random people, torturing people, etc. etc.

There isn't a fight scene in the whole movie. So don't expect a war movie, from something called "The Horde".

Just shows a fake story about how awful life is like under the Golden Horde.

Even the Russian-expert hired to tell the director/writers about Golden Horde history, condemned the movie and said this is just a sickening evil portrayal of the Golden Horde and has nothing to do with reality.

It's as if the Russian director thought about how he could make Christians look good and how he could make Tatars look like inhumane animals. This was his goal and this is what he portrayed in his film.

It was incredibly boring and a waste of my time.

I love Christina Cox, her performances are always amazing and she's clearly the star of this show. However, the plot is nonsensical and irrational. The scenes are nice and special effects are not bad.

But the biggest problem with this series is the PLOT and MESSAGE being sent to people that is completely the wrong message to send to people. Your typical UNORIGINAL Frankenstein message "Stop playing God, scientists!" This is by far the dumbest, anti-intellectual message movies/films have spread throughout the decades.

Without spoiling anything... Scientists discover a source of energy but certain things happen that cause disasters and it simply logically doesn't follow why they would happen in other random areas. It also doesn't make sense that they can't just pull the plug. It further doesn't make sense why an evil CEO would risk jail time and possible catastrophic results just to not have a "bad quarterly review." A lot of plot holes are included in the movie, such as the Russian-sub-plot as to how something could be kept under wraps.

Essentially the conclusion the filmmakers want you to draw is: Science is crazy, magical, and accidents "might" happen. Which is simply the antithesis of what science is about and accidents such as this never happen on this scale in scientific experiments by scientists. There's a reason they do pre-tests to pre-tests to tests, and in this film, they act like even those pre-tests can go wrong.

The worst "energy-related disaster" in our REAL world, such as chernobyl, was because of engineers who didn't know what they were doing. It was because of lack of safety protocols, lack of computer automated systems, and outdated equipment that was UNDERFUNDED. That is the lesson to learn from Chernobyl, when you don't invest in a technology for increasing its safety standards.

So if anyone thinks that they should draw the lesson of: "We shouldn't fund such experiments, we don't fully understand!" -- That is the incorrect lesson. The mere act of not-funding-something, is the lesson to be drawn from real life events like Chernobyl, because machines and systems get too old; protocols become outdated; and these technologies never improve and become safer.

As for the "Don't play God" nonsense, why would God give humans the ability to do these things if he didn't want you to discover them? Or why would he allow millions of people to die, in such a "failed experiment" just to teach a simple lesson about that? It makes no sense logically or philosophically, and filmmakers should stop trying to create conclusions for their audience that they probably never even asked a philosopher about.