Change Your Image
steven-langer
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Fury (2014)
Typical American stereotype without substance.
I already quit watching the movie after seeing the lousy performance of those two 7,5cm PAK 40 AT guns, which would had ripped all four Shermans to shreds in seconds at that distance. No, the MG42 nest had to fire first (can't imagine why), and all four Shermans drove in a row towards the AT gun nest, surviving without a scratch. Yeah, sure! Normally those AT guns would had got the initiative, plus with an averagely capable crew firing 15 rounds per minute, meaning a 4 seconds reload time for each shell.
I later saw the Tiger battle on youtube. No better with the Tiger driving towards the Shermans instead of just remaining in place to maintain accuracy and distance.
Would be nice if American's would factor in some true issues the German military had, which wasn't stupid soldiers, but low resources (ammunition and fuel; the Germans even had their ammunition nummarised within each tank, AT gun or artillery piece due to those shortages), while allied forces had air superiority and sufficient ammunition to even constantly bombard and crossroad or important supply route 24/7 with artillery. That WG involvement (counselling?) obviously didn't help much.
That movie just is another proof that aside from Clint Eastwood Americans should probably can't and shouldn't do war movies. Also when looking at 1917, or perhaps Dunkirk the British seem to be better at that. David Ayer clearly achieved nothing here.
Man of Steel (2013)
Not for fan boys
Well, it is really funny to read how this movie is compared to the comics and Donner's movies, but only those aspects are picked, which might have been negative in this movie.
Well going back to Donner's Silver Age movies, I wonder why no one complained about the crappy, ludicrous Lex Luther. Don't get me wrong, I like Gene Hackman (and Kevin Spacey, who acted in Superman Returns), But this IS NOT Lex Luthor. Coz Lex Luthor is no incompetent Jester, but a serious and capable Scientist and a real threat to Superman. He never has been in the movies, though.
Yeah, people died in this movie. And Superman he is not perfect and at every place every time. Also a very hollow critic about Superman being able to save everyone. And he definitely could not save Zod. He had to make a choice. Save humanity, or save Krypton. And if you want an Omelett, you'll have to smash some eggs.
Also the humor issue, there were plenty of scenes, where the audience was laughing (Truck? Jor-El's tricks? Downed drone?, so the movie wasn't that listless at all. It simply didn't want to be a running gag, just like Iron Man 2/3.
Nevertheless, it is an action movie, and it's really good at delivering it.
Fetih 1453 (2012)
A proof that not every rating on IMDb is reasonable or understandable.
Well, after Ridley Scott's "Kingdom of Heaven", which was not historically accurate either, the Turks even exceed my expectations on history-falsifying.
Short insight about KoH. If the crusaders really killed every Muslim in Jerusalem when they reconquered - not invaded - it, why did they leave the mosque intact? Why did they allow Muslims to live there afterwards?
Further Saladin did not grant every Christian save contact to Christian land. Only those, who could pay for it. The rest was enslaved as it is usually done with dhimmis and kaffir. He was no benevolent soul, either.
Now about this movie here, it's even more amusing. In what lies the bravery of besieging a city with 130,000 Ottoman fighters....against only 7,000 Christian city guards and knights?
It is also very interesting that this movie does not show, what the Ottomans did to Christian settlements and villages, which they encountered on their way to Constantinople. Exaclty the same they did with those settlements in Hungary, Austria, Romania, etc...I guess. Which is plundering, enslaving of women and children, while beheading the male inhabitants. But this is what does not fit into the concept of Islam, where the Muslim is always free of guilt.
I guess that the majority of those who rated this movie are Turks, because the West is not really interested in this movie. And if more western people, who have an idea of what really happened back in these days would vote, this rating would immediately fall.
The choreography and acting is nothing to write home about, but still better than in most Turkish productions so far. This and the nice animated and filmed landscapes and OK scenery prevented me from rating this movie with 1.
A final word to both, Ridley Scott and especially Farun Aksoy. (Self-)Critizism and Reflection is nothing, which should only lie on one side, in this case western society. Especially the Turks could use a lot of it.
Trennschärfe (2009)
A formidable debut
The storyline and plot are quite complex and not so easy to look through, especially when you're more accustomed with the "simple entertainment".
However, Mr. Dobrotka and his crew did their homework. The actors, settings and camera are very good and the locations are well picked. The music is completely self-made, sometimes a little bit annoying, but the opening theme is remarkable.
This movie is recommended to those people, who love to analyze a lot afterwards and it's a "must-see" for those, who love movies à la David Lynch.