Reviews

Quite a satisfying film overall covering Ernesto's 'road' trip through South America in 1952 with his friend Alberto.

I have to confess that I watched the film mainly for its South American landscapes, of which there are plenty. It was fascinating to see Guevara's character change as the trip progressed, although the portrayal of this was rather heavy handed in places. The film also seemed to change pace two thirds of the way through - this final section didn't work quite so well.

Nevertheless, this film is highly recommended and will appeal to fans of the road trip genre. I'll buy the DVD.

One of the most satisfying films I've seen for a long while. Beautifully photographed, well acted with an intelligent script and believable characters.

The film has the feel of an independent, yet seems to have been put on general release in the UK and deservedly so. The film appears to have become popular by word of mouth and it played to a packed house when I went to see it. "Sideways" is mainly set in the California wine growing region north of Santa Barbara and effective use is made of this location. There is also a road movie element to this film (albeit on a small scale) which for me, adds to its appeal. The characterisation is excellent with the four principals turning in excellent performances - worthy of Oscar nominations if there was any sense in the Hollywood system.

I'll be buying the DVD as soon as it comes out (and probably the soundtrack too).

As an admirer of the original television series and despite the 'mixed' reviews, I decided that I would go and see "Thunderbirds" (I did debate whether to go for some time but knew that I eventually would).

I have to say that the film was not as bad as I had feared - unfortunately it wasn't all that good either. I did feel that the film stayed with the "Thunderbirds" concept as originally conceived but went off at a bit of a tangent.

The main problem with this film is that it is a terrible story. The usual rescue activities of the Tracy brothers are confined to the beginning and end of the picture while the middle is devoted to teenage son Alan Tracy trying to outwit The Hood and his cohorts who have seized control of Tracy Island and orbiting communications station Thunderbird Five. The plot is remarkably shallow and a number of opportunities to develop interesting themes (Why The Hood hates Jeff Tracy, the death of Mrs. Tracy, Jeff and Alan, Tintin and Alan) are missed. Deleted scenes on the DVD perhaps?

The original series of "Thunderbirds" never talked down to its audience. It was not afraid of occasionally making social comment or introducing scientific concepts. "Thunderbirds" in its 2004 incarnation is incredibly bland and appears to have been made for those with a tiny attention span (key facts about the characters were repeated several times during the course of the movie).

No-one comes out of this movie particularly well - Ben Kingsley probably gives the best performance as The Hood. I felt terribly sorry for Anthony Edwards (Brains) who struggled to bring anything to his part - the stammer gags were simply embarrassing and pointless. Director Jonathan Frakes (Star Trek: First Contact, Insurrection) does a competent job with the material - it's just a shame about the material.

I did enjoy most of the CGI, although viewers can see most of this in the trailer. A shot of Thunderbirds 1 and 2 looming over a hospital were particularly impressive and I would have liked to have seen more of the aircraft in action.

I do hope they have another go at "Thunderbirds". If they do, perhaps they could have a decent rescue featured and more made of the Tracy's ingenious machines (perhaps Scott, Virgil, Gordon and John might even get a few lines?). Lady Penelope needs to be a little more resourceful and come out on top occasionally, like her marionette predecessor.

My advice is that if you have to see this movie, wait to rent the DVD.

I've just come back from watching "Troy" and while it wasn't bad, it wasn't actually much good either.

The whole movie lacked vision in my view - the director (Wolfgang Peterson) seemed a little out of his depth and ill at ease with the material. The movie has a fine cast who unfortunately struggled with a poor script. My wife particularly enjoyed Brad Pitt's performance (for reasons other than his vocal delivery) while other good performances came from Peter O'Toole, Brian Cox, Sean Bean and Eric Bana, excellent in the role of Hector.

After the movie, I couldn't help but think another director (an obvious choice would be Peter Jackson) could have done so much better. I also found the CGI tiresome - whereas techniques have improved, CGI for my money still looks like CGI. The sweeping shots of computer generated armies and battlefleets were not impressive and added little to the movie. For students of Greek history, any resemblance to Homer's "Iliad" is purely co-incidental.

I'm pleased that I saw the movie - I just wished I'd waited for the DVD.

I didn't much care for "Deep Impact" on first viewing; it seemed over long and the special effects at the end seemed unconvincing. There were as many holes in the plot as in Wolf-Beiderman, the comet threatening Earth.

However having just watched it for the second time, I have to say that this is an excellent movie, far superior to the truly appalling "Armageddon" of the same year. Comparisons to a 'Lifetime' movie are a little unfair - this is an extremely well crafted, multi layered movie that engages the viewer on many levels.

Highly recommended - and worth repeated viewing.