Yanda Phiri

The film excels in its comic book accuracy, particularly in the portrayal of costumes and characters. However, it falls short in exploring the dual identity of Clark Kent and Superman, especially the investigative journalism aspect of Kent’s character—a dimension often overlooked in portrayals of this iconic hero.

"Sinners" has been overblown into a god-like status it doesn't really deserve. First off, it doesn't delve deep into anything—it just skims the surface enough to attract your attention, then leaves you hanging. It tells stories of people who can heal just by singing or call out spirits, yet at the same time, evil spirits rise from there too. In the case of the movie, vampires are summoned. You don't even see the healing in the movie. Just evil and the cheating wife. To its credit, it incorporates multiculturalism, since many different cultures make appearances. For example, Native Americans ("Injuns") chase a vampire, who later kills and turns two KKK members. After that, we never hear from the Native Americans again. I half expected them to reappear and cause some damage—it would have been interesting to see how they explain the vampire angle from their side. People have been saying the movie is rich with African culture and spiritualism. But honestly, the only things it's really full of are Jim Crow-era themes, blues culture, Black people singing in a barn, and a sprinkle of half-baked voodoo—topped off with vampires who just want to integrate into society. Coogler didn't even tell us where the vampire came from, we just saw him being chased by Native Americans. If the story had actually explored those themes deeply, it could have told a meaningful tale about the Black man's experience through the vampire metaphor. But then again, Hollywood is Hollywood. What can we say?

I always trust Gareth Evans for the action. He has done it this time. Very excellent. These are the type of movies Hollywood doesn't get. Full of action and mayhem.

the concept for the story is good, the plot could have been better. it lurks the engaging factor, it doesn't have that oomph that is in many conspiracy type stories. i started watching it two weeks back and haven't past the 5th episode, that says a lot since i'm a binge watcher.

The cringeworthy writing portrays whiny spies. They're like those couples who complain about everything. John didn't look like a returned soldier, and Jane certainly didn't look like she came from any three-letter agency. It felt forced, even though they were supposedly getting together. The story has potential, but I can't recommend it to anyone, unless they identify with the characters John and Jane represent.

This story had the potential to be excellent, but it's riddled with plot holes that hinder comprehension. Several key elements are unclear. For instance, what exactly is Project Felix, and what is its purpose in Ukraine? The character of Coyote is equally ambiguous. Who is he, what was his mission, and how does he connect to the overall narrative? Dr. Samir's role is also unclear. What is her purpose in the story? The CIA's involvement in the Sudanese peace talks with the Chinese raises further questions. What were these talks concealing that so alarmed the Americans and the CIA regarding national security? Finally, what is occurring in Iran that necessitates sending a spy there? This series raises far more questions than it answers, leaving the audience confused and frustrated.

It's 21 Bridges on a cheap budget. But it's still good.

After the blonde got out of the cage, I was like that's a great idea. Then because writers are writers they didn't want the movie to be 79 minutes long, so they dumbed it down. Crap. Could have been great.

This is like Phonebooth, but with a car.