Pete B – Google

Bad writing, characters will do anything to fit the plot, regardless of what they previously said or did. Doesn't matter if they've been against something all season, if the plot requires it they will just do it and the question of why will never be asked. The best example of this is Annalise's prodigy being useless, but wait, she got there by beeping the best of the best. So why is it she makes such a simple mistake as to tell the jury they will find her client guilty? The best law student who's been mentored by an amazing lawyer for years and was hand picked from hundreds of students gets confused between guilty and not guilty? Okay. Then there is the overt racism and misandry. Lines like "how are we meant to be ok with him going to jail, he's innocent...and black". Yeah, because his race is a relevant factor in deciding if this innocent man should go to jail for your crime? Unforgivable really, and that's one of the characters you are meant to be cheering for. Says a lot about the writers. Supporters of critical race theory I'm sure. Or "men lie bonnie, that's all they are good at". Yes men lie and women are perfect. It's not that there is good and bad in all of us, and both genders have those who lie and those who don't. These are all statements (and ideas) that go unopposed in the series.

I'm sure the film is very impressive to analyse in a film studies class etc. Maybe if that was how/when I watched it I'd think differently. However, unfortunately I watched it when I wanted to be entertained. That's one of this films biggest problems, it's not obvious what it is. Not from the name, not from the visuals on the cover, not from the blurb on the back of the dvd case. To me they seem to be trying to be clever, but fail. The plot is very weak (purposely I assume). I didn't want to spend 2 hours thinking about life theory, morals, or how connected we all are, but that is all this film is. Other films manage to raise similar questions and cover similar topics while still being entertaining. This one doesn't, I wasnt invested in any other aspect, if you don't want the existential theory there is nothing else to keep you watching. If you do want something to spark a philosophical discussion or thought, it can do that. If you want to be entertained in any way shape or form, it absolutely won't do that and you should look elsewhere. As a side note (and kind of irrelevant to the review other than to indicate how abstract the film is) there is no other film I can think of where having watched the film, I still can't understand the name of the movie. Huckabee's doesn't play a big part at all and other than being the workplace of some main characters, wasn't part of the story at all. Lastly, there are reviews which basically say if you don't enjoy this film you aren't intelligent enough to understand it. All I'll say is, that elitist attitude is exactly what I'd expect of a fan of this movie. They might not even like it themselves, but showing how intelligent they are is far more important to them than enjoyment! The idea you might understand it but still not like it is incomprehensible to them.

Body on the Beach: What Happened to Annie?

Poor and biased documentary which seems to try and dramatise a young woman's sad death. **SPOILERS** The inclusion of the CIA conspiracy shows the level of crazy this "investigator" reaches. Yes I'm sure the CIA who have beef with Katerina Borjesson in the USA, would confuse her with Annie Katerina Borjesson who is living in Scotland. There are massive leaps in logic, like saying a report showing microscopic fresh water algae in her bone marrow is "evidence she was drowned in fresh water and moved to the beach". No...it's evidence she has ingested fresh water AT SOME POINT. As stated by the expert in drowning. The refusal of the Swedish govt to release all documentation regarding the matter is seen as evidence of a cover up. Couldn't it be that they don't want to release papers showing their criticism of the Scottish authorities and/or investigation? That would fit with their reasons for denying the request being to avoid harm to international relations. Some issues could have been definitively resolved, but they chose not to. The questions are never asked. Like the call that there is no record of, someone heard Annie's side of the conversation. She was speaking with her mum, so ask her mum (who they do interview) did the call take place? What was said? They don't do that. Plus the bruising, the Dr seemed to say you can't bruise after you are dead. The coroners say it is possible it is marks they noted, which became more pronounced. So is that possible or not? Again they don't ever go back to the Dr, or ask anyone else. So you are left unsure how reasonable that is. You get the impression there is a lot that isn't said because it doesn't fit the story they wanted to tell.

Bad in so many ways, but I'm a petrol head so I'll put up with anything to drool over group B cars. The driving is so slow it just looks silly, the real drivers went faster round hairpins than these cars went on the straights. The music drowned out the audio and there appears to have been several sub plots that were edited out leaving pointless scenes in place now with no purpose. People also do complete turns without explanation (Dr is adament she doesn't want the job, then just turns up with no reason given). The nostalgia and the cars are the only thing worth any time in this film. A real disappointment, because it could have been great. Get someone that lived through it tell you the story and you'll have a better experience than watching this film.

I suspect I'm being punkd. There is no way a show this bad could really get to air...it's a prank, right? Such bad writing and acting. The dog is the only likeable character. It's soooo unrealistic, Rex (the dog) can understand every word said to him, and Hudson reacts entirely differently to the same bark depending on what the (lack of a) plot calls for. To top it off, this pos has a 4.7 out of 5 rating on Google!!! Proof that if you have a cute animal people will put up with anything.

Good movie, made me laugh and kept me entertained. If you think movies should always be serious and make a point or "mean something" then this isn't the film for you. If you like laughter and enjoying yourself along with a little bit of sillyness, it is. I find it funny that a lot of the negative comments seem to relate to the age of the 2 leads. As if people getting married later in life is strange (even though it's factually accurate in today's society). Yet the wedding being invaded by terrorists is an everyday occurance and doesn't get a mention? 30 year olds playing 15-20 year olds is common so unsure why this is such a big deal when neither of them look their age anyway. A good entertaining film but it won't change your world.