Posts by Melissa Evans

An outstanding film!

This movie is essentially the American reimagining of "Love Actually" (2003). While I would argue that "Love Actually" remains the superior cinematic achievement, "Valentine's Day" possesses its own unique charm.

At first glance, the production feels somewhat misguided; it appears overstuffed with celebrity names, creating an atmosphere that feels artificially polished and perhaps even superficial.

The story kicks off with a disastrous proposal scene, leaving one with the impression that the entire narrative is rushing headlong toward a catastrophe.

However, that disaster never actually materializes.

If you can simply exercise some patience for about twenty minutes,

you will find yourself feeling significantly more satisfied by the conclusion.

The film weaves together several distinct storylines, all of which are masterfully integrated with their respective characters. The narrative progresses with a clever sense of momentum, and by the end, everything clicks perfectly into place.

In truth, it is an excellent film.

Much like "Love Actually," this film explores various demographics and different facets of love. While "Love Actually" holds a slight edge, "Valentine's Day" certainly proves its intelligence.

It is a film I hold quite dear, and it seems to grow on me more deeply the more I reflect upon it.

I am actually considering watching it again; the thought just occurred to me.

I suspect this will become a quintessential film to watch on Valentine's Day. Even if "Love Actually" is better, my advice is to watch both "Love Actually" and "Valentine's Day." Let yourselves get swept up in the experience.

Do not miss this one.

Official Site

Trailer

Trailer 2

IMDb

Rotten Tomatoes Site

Yahoo

Gary Patel said:Watched the movie last night. At first, the plot flows really nicely—but then everything starts to drag and becomes... well, I wouldn't call it boring, because it wasn't quite that—just strange. As the idyllic vibe faded, the pacing slowed down right along with it. It felt like certain scenes were just repeating themselves (like her whole explanation for why skipping college was the better move) rather than building anything—it felt like they were just being tossed in without much connection. I can't say the film was bad, per se, but the characterizations felt—hm—unrealistic. Her relationship with such an older guy, her sheer naivety, how she just gave in... If she were just some airhead, I might get it, but she was clearly smart and intelligent. No matter how much she was in love, I just don't buy that she’d let him push those boundaries throughout the film. Even her parents' reaction to the "relationship" felt off to me. I'm also bummed that we didn't get any closure on what actually happened to him at the end. I don't know—the setup and the ending were great, but there was just a massive gap in the middle. The lead actress did an amazing job. Honestly, the acting was top-notch across the board—it's just that the actual behavior being acted out felt weird to me.
7/10

The main thing is that you didn't find Lady Gaga strange.

As long as you don't find it strange that you chose the name Gary Patel.

Grace White4 said:Caught this at the theater tonight, and honestly? It didn't blow me away. 🤷

Right off the bat, you could write off the "comedy" aspect because the trailer basically spoiled every single joke—and even if I hadn't seen them, would they have actually been funny? I guess you could also toss out the romance since it felt pretty uninspired, though I'll admit there was *something* there. So, what's left? Just the drama, and even that lacks any real punch.

Look, fine, let’s say I just approached the movie the wrong way. Let’s say George Clooney’s performance rubbed me the wrong way for most of it, or maybe I just wasn't feeling that pseudo-philosophical message about karma and all that. But even if I set my personal biases aside and try to look at this objectively, I still don't get it: Why six Oscar nominations? 😕

If I pretend I’ve never seen George Clooney before, I suppose I’d say he did a decent job (though he barely had to act), and sure, little Anna Kendrick did a solid job pivoting from a career woman to someone leaving her partner. But Vera Farmiga? She didn't move me one bit. There. That's my take.

If you ask me, the only thing worth recognizing is the screenplay, which was okay (I see it actually won a Golden Globe for that), but nothing else. Is 2009 really such a bad year for movies, or am I just missing something here? 🙄

Speaking of missing things, I was thinking... my reaction to Up in the Air is almost identical to how I felt about Juno. Neither one of them touched me, even though most other films lately have. To get the full Jason Reitman experience, I should probably watch Thank You for Smoking soon, but I already have a sinking feeling I'll walk away feeling the exact same way.

All in all, if it weren't for everyone else's opinion, I might have given it a 6/10. Instead, I'll settle on a 7/10—mostly because the soundtrack was good and a few other bits worked. I'll just group it with Juno and leave it hanging there; maybe someday I'll finally understand why both are considered "good" movies. For now, I'm just deeply disappointed in the critics. 👎

The film strikes an exceptional balance, weaving together comedic beats and dramatic tension with remarkable precision.

Grace White4 said:Caught this at the theater tonight, and honestly? It didn't blow me away. 🤷

Right off the bat, you could write off the "comedy" aspect because the trailer basically spoiled every single joke—and even if I hadn't seen them, would they have actually been funny? I guess you could also toss out the romance since it felt pretty uninspired, though I'll admit there was *something* there. So, what's left? Just the drama, and even that lacks any real punch.

Look, fine, let’s say I just approached the movie the wrong way. Let’s say George Clooney’s performance rubbed me the wrong way for most of it, or maybe I just wasn't feeling that pseudo-philosophical message about karma and all that. But even if I set my personal biases aside and try to look at this objectively, I still don't get it: Why six Oscar nominations? 😕

If I pretend I’ve never seen George Clooney before, I suppose I’d say he did a decent job (though he barely had to act), and sure, little Anna Kendrick did a solid job pivoting from a career woman to someone leaving her partner. But Vera Farmiga? She didn't move me one bit. There. That's my take.

If you ask me, the only thing worth recognizing is the screenplay, which was okay (I see it actually won a Golden Globe for that), but nothing else. Is 2009 really such a bad year for movies, or am I just missing something here? 🙄

Speaking of missing things, I was thinking... my reaction to Up in the Air is almost identical to how I felt about Juno. Neither one of them touched me, even though most other films lately have. To get the full Jason Reitman experience, I should probably watch Thank You for Smoking soon, but I already have a sinking feeling I'll walk away feeling the exact same way.

All in all, if it weren't for everyone else's opinion, I might have given it a 6/10. Instead, I'll settle on a 7/10—mostly because the soundtrack was good and a few other bits worked. I'll just group it with Juno and leave it hanging there; maybe someday I'll finally understand why both are considered "good" movies. For now, I'm just deeply disappointed in the critics. 👎

That cardboard cutout George Clooney carries around captures every ounce of romance this movie needs to succeed—and then you’ve got a wedding on top of it all.

Grace White4 said:Caught this at the theater tonight, and honestly? It didn't blow me away. 🤷

Right off the bat, you could write off the "comedy" aspect because the trailer basically spoiled every single joke—and even if I hadn't seen them, would they have actually been funny? I guess you could also toss out the romance since it felt pretty uninspired, though I'll admit there was *something* there. So, what's left? Just the drama, and even that lacks any real punch.

Look, fine, let’s say I just approached the movie the wrong way. Let’s say George Clooney’s performance rubbed me the wrong way for most of it, or maybe I just wasn't feeling that pseudo-philosophical message about karma and all that. But even if I set my personal biases aside and try to look at this objectively, I still don't get it: Why six Oscar nominations? 😕

If I pretend I’ve never seen George Clooney before, I suppose I’d say he did a decent job (though he barely had to act), and sure, little Anna Kendrick did a solid job pivoting from a career woman to someone leaving her partner. But Vera Farmiga? She didn't move me one bit. There. That's my take.

If you ask me, the only thing worth recognizing is the screenplay, which was okay (I see it actually won a Golden Globe for that), but nothing else. Is 2009 really such a bad year for movies, or am I just missing something here? 🙄

Speaking of missing things, I was thinking... my reaction to Up in the Air is almost identical to how I felt about Juno. Neither one of them touched me, even though most other films lately have. To get the full Jason Reitman experience, I should probably watch Thank You for Smoking soon, but I already have a sinking feeling I'll walk away feeling the exact same way.

All in all, if it weren't for everyone else's opinion, I might have given it a 6/10. Instead, I'll settle on a 7/10—mostly because the soundtrack was good and a few other bits worked. I'll just group it with Juno and leave it hanging there; maybe someday I'll finally understand why both are considered "good" movies. For now, I'm just deeply disappointed in the critics. 👎

The drama is just too intense.

Grace White4 said:Caught this at the theater tonight, and honestly? It didn't blow me away. 🤷

Right off the bat, you could write off the "comedy" aspect because the trailer basically spoiled every single joke—and even if I hadn't seen them, would they have actually been funny? I guess you could also toss out the romance since it felt pretty uninspired, though I'll admit there was *something* there. So, what's left? Just the drama, and even that lacks any real punch.

Look, fine, let’s say I just approached the movie the wrong way. Let’s say George Clooney’s performance rubbed me the wrong way for most of it, or maybe I just wasn't feeling that pseudo-philosophical message about karma and all that. But even if I set my personal biases aside and try to look at this objectively, I still don't get it: Why six Oscar nominations? 😕

If I pretend I’ve never seen George Clooney before, I suppose I’d say he did a decent job (though he barely had to act), and sure, little Anna Kendrick did a solid job pivoting from a career woman to someone leaving her partner. But Vera Farmiga? She didn't move me one bit. There. That's my take.

If you ask me, the only thing worth recognizing is the screenplay, which was okay (I see it actually won a Golden Globe for that), but nothing else. Is 2009 really such a bad year for movies, or am I just missing something here? 🙄

Speaking of missing things, I was thinking... my reaction to Up in the Air is almost identical to how I felt about Juno. Neither one of them touched me, even though most other films lately have. To get the full Jason Reitman experience, I should probably watch Thank You for Smoking soon, but I already have a sinking feeling I'll walk away feeling the exact same way.

All in all, if it weren't for everyone else's opinion, I might have given it a 6/10. Instead, I'll settle on a 7/10—mostly because the soundtrack was good and a few other bits worked. I'll just group it with Juno and leave it hanging there; maybe someday I'll finally understand why both are considered "good" movies. For now, I'm just deeply disappointed in the critics. 👎

What exactly is it about George Clooney that people find so polarizing? To be honest, I’ve never been his biggest fan either—I usually skip over movies starring him. But I decided to give this one a shot, and I am glad I did. In fact, passing this one up would have been a genuine mistake.

The film is nothing short of a masterpiece, driven by an absolutely exceptional screenplay.

The film is nothing short of extraordinary—truly a masterpiece. Every single element is executed flawlessly, from the cast to the crew. Even George Clooney delivers a performance that is absolutely stellar.

In this film, George Clooney is worth a hundred times more than that total loser Guido from the movie Nine.

A true masterpiece.

You really need to see this.

I’m genuinely puzzled as to why there hasn't been more discussion surrounding the film "The Truth."

A true masterpiece.

official site

Trailer

IMDb

Rotten Tomatoes

Yahoo

Amazon

A true masterpiece. I absolutely love it.

The movie is scheduled to air this Tuesday, December 29th, on CNN at 9:00 PM.

A true masterpiece.

In my estimation, this stands as my second favorite film of all time, surpassed only by Chicago.

You can catch the broadcast this Friday, December 18th, on CNN at 8:20 PM.

It is the kind of cinematic experience you can revisit a million times, yet it manages to surprise and delight you with every single viewing.

This is a film you simply cannot afford to miss.

It’s a brilliant dark comedy, though I feel the impact is slightly diminished by its bleak conclusion.

Trailer

IMDb site

RottenTomatoes site

Yahoo

Amazon site

An exceptional film for the whole family! 👍

Watch the Trailer here

IMDb site RottenTomatoes

RottenTomatoes site

Yahoo site

Amazon site

An outstanding adventure film for kids! Honestly, it caught me completely off guard. Based on the trailer, I expected a low-budget production that might fall flat, but it was anything but mediocre. The visual effects are top-tier and utilized with incredible precision. The direction is solid, and the screenplay holds its own quite well. Even though much of the action is confined to the immediate vicinity of the house, the storytelling remains gripping and the execution is masterful.

For any fan of the fantasy genre, this movie is an absolute must-watch!

I just went back and rewatched parts one and two. While the first installment serves as an absolutely stellar opening for the series, the second part doesn't quite reach those same heights—though it remains perfectly enjoyable in its own right!

In my estimation, the first and third installments are the standout achievements, but honestly, all three are well worth your time!

ruggedharbor37 said:Well... it's pretty obvious you didn't actually watch the movie... because there is absolutely no question about who the killer is... just some girl who met an unfortunate end at the hands of her own sisters from her sorority... all because of one lame prank...

I have no idea what you're talking about. She isn't the killer.

So, everyone who thinks that was a spoiler can finally breathe easy. 😁

An exceptional horror film. A pure, unadulterated horror experience. It functions as an anthology of multiple tales.

Prior to viewing this motion picture, I didn't truly feel the spirit of Halloween, but after experiencing this, I find myself hesitant to even step outside after dark on October 31st.

You can find this film available for rent at your local video rental shop.

Official Site

Trailer

Trailer 2

IMDb site

Rotten Tomatoes Site

Yahoo Site

Amazon site

I have finished watching the film.

It is mediocre at best.

The killings lack any real ingenuity, and the resolution feels incredibly weak. As for the humor, I failed to notice much of it at all.

While there are perhaps eight murders throughout the movie, one shouldn't get too excited; only about three of them offer any actual hints of intrigue.

One aspect I did find interesting was that although the cast features six main female characters who all seem ready to face a fight, the killer occasionally targets secondary characters as well.

Even though the characterization and visual cues make it painfully obvious who the "good girl" is and who is most likely to survive, the story doesn't center on her. Instead, she remains on the periphery. The spotlight is instead placed on the so-called "bitch," Jessica, who doesn't quite live up to her reputation but does take the most initiative in the plot.

In the end, three characters survive, though I feel very little connection to any of them. Furthermore, one of the survivors is a particularly frustrating choice, as they are a totally minor character who barely appears more than three times in the entire film.

Visually, the cinematography is somewhat grainy. I initially assumed this was just an effect used during the opening, but the graininess persists throughout the entire movie, which I found quite unappealing.

The beginning of the film does a decent job of capturing a sense of fun and chaos, but the narrative should have moved on after that first party rather than repeating the same theme shortly after. It also feels somewhat unrealistic that such debauchery would be hidden behind such a deathly silence.

The killer is poorly executed; specifically, the reveal and the motives behind the murders are lackluster. Since a significant portion of the film's quality relies on these elements, the movie fails almost entirely in this regard.

The killer lacks any distinct identity, looking quite unremarkable, and their scenes pass by far too quickly.

You can safely skip this one in theaters.

I finally sat down and watched the third installment! It was absolutely fantastic!

It’s difficult to say if this stands as the absolute best entry in the trilogy—to be honest, the details of the first two have already begun to fade from my memory—but I can say with certainty that I have never felt more exhilarated while watching a film!

It goes without saying that this movie has earned a top spot on my personal list of the best films of 2008.!

This franchise has officially become one of my all-time favorites!

I find myself wondering why they haven't developed a television series yet. If they were able to retain the original cast, it would be nothing short of spectacular; I struggle to imagine how a series might function with a different ensemble of actors!

That said, even if they continue through the film medium, I am sure the quality will remain high. My only hope is that future sequels don't suffer a decline in caliber.

There is also immense potential for a video game adaptation. They could model it after Tomb Raider or perhaps craft a dedicated adventure title! Or better yet, they could do both! I certainly wouldn't complain. 😁

I just finished watching I Hate Valentine's Day, and honestly, it was fantastic! 😍 😍 Nia Vardalos is absolutely brilliant in this. It’s even more impressive considering she wrote the screenplay and directed the entire film herself!

I just finished watching the movie.

It is certainly an improvement over the third installment; that one was easily the weakest of the bunch.

The screenplay feels mediocre at best. The one-liners delivered right before a character meets their end are quite poor, though fortunately, there are only two instances of them.

As for the 3D effects, they are decent, yet nothing extraordinary. In my estimation, the film could have been produced entirely in 2D; the 3D feels more like a marketing gimmick than a necessity. The production seems to lean heavily into the 3D effect during the opening, but that focus tapers off significantly as the story progresses. There is one effective moment early on involving a small object that feels genuinely startling—as if it might actually strike you—but the filmmakers fail to design subsequent moments with that same level of ingenuity.

Now, let us discuss the opening accident.

The initial disaster is executed somewhat better than the sloppy sequence we saw in the third part. However, the highway accident from the second film remains more skillfully captured and engaging. There are perhaps two standout deaths (a sharpened board and a heavy object falling onto a woman), but there are also several poorly handled deaths, such as the fall involving concrete and the final death in the vision, which felt like a mere variation of a previous scene.

Regarding the other accidents, they are unremarkable, though still superior to those found in the third film.

The worst sequences are the first one (a tow truck involving a semi where everything is obscured, resulting in a severed head) and the incident at the beauty salon (a chaotic chain reaction in the salon that lacks clear logic, followed by a woman dying far too quickly from a stone to the eye).

The highlight of the film is the car wash scene.

This includes everything from the very beginning, starting when the woman hands money to the panhandler.

I will never step foot in a car wash again.

And I certainly won't look at a swimming pool with the same indifference.

There is a clever twist involving suicide, though the narrative didn't give it enough room to breathe.

The start of the film serves as a sort of tribute to the first three entries, utilizing an X-ray aesthetic.

The acting and character development aren't any worse than what we saw in the third film, but I found myself much more invested in the characters from the second part, particularly the first.

The final scene takes place in an AMC Theatres located inside a shopping mall.

It is a clever way to play with the audience's expectations.

And there I was, sitting in an AMC Theatres inside a mall myself.

Even if that specific scene wasn't necessarily the best part of the movie.

When I walked out of the theater, I felt a genuine sense of unease.

I will never look at escalators the same way again.

The conclusion of the film is somewhat underdeveloped; the direction could have been much stronger.

Mark Wood79 said:And the Basis of Film Theory from 1977 is a total treasure trove and essential reading for any cinephile.

A "treasure trove" and "essential reading"? Give me a break. I borrowed the Basis of Film Theory recently, and frankly, I didn't find anything particularly compelling in its pages. While I suspect Ante Peterlić possessed a wealth of knowledge, I haven't spent enough time studying his body of work to say for sure; however, this specific book failed to offer any groundbreaking insights, nor did it provide any tools to help me refine my own film criticism. That said, I might dive back into it once more to see if I missed something.