Jaime Martinez

Reviews and other content aren't verified by Google

Damn talk about OVERRATED Honestly, the only reason this film gained as much traction as it did was because of the "Barbenheimer" memes rather than actual interest in the history. And the only reason everyone's claims to like it is because all the big Youtubers say it's good, and apparently people can't have their own opinions so they just parrot everyone else and say they enjoyed it too. I actually went because I thought it would be an interesting biopic. Sadly, it wasn't And I think that mainly stems from the fact that Oppenheimer himself is a boring historical figure. Yes, the idea of his morality and his thoughts on what he had created are interesting, but that's really about it. I don't care for anything else about the man. The whole commie subplot is so unbelievably boring and it sucks that it takes up so much time. The only interesting parts is the middle chunk when they actually start building the bomb and the actual bombings of Japan and Oppie's reaction to it all. The beginning is whatever, it's a very basic introduction to who Oppenheimer was(a boring physics student and then a terrible husband). The ending was so annoying because the movie doesn't do anything to push the idea that Lewis Strauss hates Oppenheimer. They share like one major scene towards the start of the film and nothing really happens in it and then he proceeds to try to destroy Oppenheimer? What? It makes no sense. I'm honestly more mad about the fact that it's so popular just because memes while a good historical epic like Killers of the Flower Moon is forgotten. If you're looking for an ENTERTAINING historical epic, you're honestly better off watching something like Gladiator.

When I first heard about this film and what its premise was, I was really intrigued. While I'm not really that into politics, I thought that the story could make for a thrilling mystery film. And I was kind of right? For starters, while I may not be a huge fan of this film, I do respect it for it's direction, acting, cinematography and script. And while I do think that the general public is interested in the whole Nixon scandal, this film clearly did not have in mind of making the film for the general public. This movie is not for everyone. You really need to have some prior knowledge to the whole situation to really become invested in the story. Its beginning and ending are strong, but the middle chunk really bored me out. It introduced so many new characters and it's obvious that the filmmakers expect the audience to just know who they are and why they are being investigated. Again, I'm not a huge political person, so I really had no idea what was going on in certain scenes. Wikipedia couldn't even really help me that much. However, with that being said, it's still a good movie and I only wished I was able to understand it better. 3.8/5 again only for the said reason. Everything else is pretty great.

I'm honestly not a huge fan of Martin Scorcese, but this is probably my favorite film of his and I'm really disappointed in myself for not wanting to watch it sooner. The main reason I did not want to watch the film was because I don't understand business and all of it's inner-mechanisms. I thought this film was going to be more like "Wall Street" by Oliver Stone, which is a lot more focused on the actual business side. However, this story is more focused on Jordan Belfort and his personal life. His rise and fall. Not necessarily on all the business details. Even a dummy like me could understand how he came to power and his fall from grace. But enough about that. This movie is just so much fun. The pure insanity of the entire film is truly unmatched. I see a lot of people who gave this film negative reviews are probably religious fanatics. And while I myself am not a religious fanatic, I do think that despite how fun it is, the movie does overdo the cussing and sex and nudity just a little too much. It's not enough to make me not like it, I still absolutely loved it, but it is enough for me to say it's not a perfect film due to the constant swearing and nudity. The performances are all great, the story is surprisingly bittersweet, and again, there is just so much insanity that you can't help but have a fun time with it. 4.3/5 This truly is the most epic of all epic films to ever be made. Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, and all those other acclaimed epics have nothing on this. This epic is just absolutely insane and fun that it deserves the title of most epic epic film.

For a remake of a 30s monster film, this actually isn't bad at all. When I was growing up, these Mummy films would play all the time on the TV and I would sometimes watch them, but I never actually sat through an entire film. It was until very recently that I watched the entire film. It has a good amount of well-directed action, acting, some comedy and thrust my boy Fraser into the spotlight. The titular Mummy is actually somewhat terrifying, and for some reason the CGI here is better than in the sequel. The story and acting are all good. It is a very GOOD film. Solid 4/5. Not because of nostalgia, but because it actually is good.

A solid sequel to the ambitious Avatar. So it is well known that Avatar is kind of overrated, most notably in the story department. However, I feel that this sequel is much more original story-wise and of course the special effects are deserving of all the praise it gets. I found the idea of whaling a pretty interesting addition. I like the way they brought back the villain, Miles, and he is a highlight of both films. Apart from that, everything else is better than average. The kids are not super annoying like in other films, and actually don't make stupid choices. Jake and his wife honestly feel like side characters, Cameron didn't really use them at all. The character Spider is not bad all things considered, but he might be the weakest part of the film. I really like, however, what they did with him and the Miles, and it adds more depth to the villain, who might seem to be pure evil, but it shows that he isn't. The worst part is definitely the ending, which drags on for a long time. I know the special effects are really good, but enough is enough. I actually felt bad when the oldest son dies, and the scene where Jake reimagines a moment with his son is actually pretty emotional, which I didn't expect. 3.8/5 for sure. I really hope the sequels bring more characterization to Jake since he is the main character.

I really have no idea why this film has positive reviews. I remember I first learned of the film when I saw a list of the top fifty heroes in cinema by the American Film Institute, and the titular protagonists were listed at number 20. When I saw they were historical figures, I wanted to see what the film would be about. And I just want to point out, why are they listed as heroes? They do nothing heroic in the film. They're criminals. But I digress. For taking place in the time period of the Wild West and having the main characters be outlaws, the movie is SO boring. Their heists are boring, their escape is boring. There is no tension. I can appreciate the production values of the film, but that's about it. The main characters are alright, nothing special but I didn't hate them. I just didn't feel anything for them. I didn't care if they were caught or if they lived happily ever after. Despite being almost 2 hours, it feels like nothing ever happens. They make heists, they get chased by law enforcement, they decide to leave for Bolivia, they continue robbing in Bolivia, law enforcement chases them there and they die in a shootout. THAT'S IT. 2/5 Not worth the positive reviews. If you like cinematography, then this film has some good cinematography to enjoy. But if you like being entertained, don't give it a watch.

I'm wondering if those who wrote a bad review and those of us who are writing good reviews saw the same film. Are you sure yall downloaded the right Elvis movie? For starters, of course Austin Butler absolutely kills it as Elvis. And Tom Hanks did really well as Tom Parker, which is weird since I don't think I've ever seen Hanks play a villain before. Regardless, they had great chemistry and you really feel how Parker never really cared about Elvis and just wanted him for money, and how Elvis actually trusted and confided in Parker and how he realizes that the guy never really cared about him. I think what a lot of people don't like is that the film focuses on the duos relationship rather on Elvis and his romantic or family relationships. But that's the whole point of the film. It's supposed to show this side of the Elvis story that not a lot of people know about. We always get biopics about the musical artists romantic life or their family life. Or their downfall via drugs or some other harmful activity they begin to get into. But never have we seen a film about their relationship with their manager. Besides, we do get to see how Elvis really cared about his family and that he was close with them. How Elvis truly did love his wife and kid. And how Parker ruined that all by not allowing Elvis to do what he wants, thus making him unhappy and begin doing drugs and other bad things. And the ending. Damn, what an ending. I'm not one to cry during films, usually I don't even feel the urge to cry. But this one had me on the verge of tears. To see Elvis, barely alive, to get on stage and pour all his life into singing for his fans. Truly heartbreaking. 4.8/5 for some pacing issues, but really that's all I have to say negatively about it. Please don't listen to those who left negative reviews.

Had high hopes for this one, and it kind of delivered, and kind of didn't. The main issue with it is that it wants to add so much in it's three hour run time. Like, they had to extend it to three hours and even then it was too little time to fully capture what the filmmakers had in mind. I will start by saying the positives. The cinematography is really good, and all the actors did a solid job, even Pattinson(however I really couldn't take Batman seriously without the lower growly voice). The true star is Paul Dano, who did a phenomenal job as the Riddler. And honestly, the stuff relating to the Riddler were definitely the best. I have always enjoyed the Batman franchise for its more serious, realistic and human villains, and here it is no exception. I love the way they portrayed him. Not as a flashy supervillain, but a realistic, insane psychopath. Amazing, and probably one of the best villains I've seen of modern films. Some negatives is that, again, it tries to do too much, even for three hours. The runtime is another thing, I don't think any batman film should be this long. Sometimes, it got too focused on the Catwoman and gang side story. They really should have only focused on the Riddler, and not had so many other villains like Falcone or Penguin. 4/5. Really, mostly because of the Riddler. And Andy Serkis as Alfred.

Hilariously, Jordan Peele's least expensive film to make was his most successful, and the one he spent the most money on was the worst so far. I'm not here to rip on the film, I don't think it's a bad movie. I definitely enjoyed some parts of it. But it's not really that or even good either. First off, I'd like to say that I am disappointed that the scariest scenes in the film had nothing to do with the UFO. That leads me to my second point. The pacing. Pacing was kinda bad. Sometimes you'd forget that it's an "alien invasion" film. I feel like too much time was dedicated to off screen scenes on the characters discussing what to do regarding the UFO. Some scenes dragged on for WAY too long, especially the ending. 2.7/5. Not as funny as you'd think, too slow, and only two scary scenes, and neither had to do with the UFO.