Spielberg Wasted Too Much Time In the Build-up Including...
926351
...a laughably-contrived exchange of dialogue in which an African character actually tells a jewish character words to the effect of: he's "sorry that the jewish people have suffered so much." Really? This poor guy is locked-up due to killing a bunch of slavers in an attempt to free himself and he's going to take time to get weepy about oppression of jews? Seems Spielberg wanted to steer any conversation (of the time) away from the heavy and obvious jewish involvement in slave trafficking and as well as use. I credit him for continuing the barrage of self pity, but he needs to mask that crap a little better. That's right, go ahead and research their role in the slave trade for yourself.

Matthew McCawnuh-huh-ay (I'll spell his name correctly when he drops his fake southern drawl) and Morgan Freeman have absolutely no apparent role in this film. I'm serious, especially when juxtaposed with Anthony Hopkins's terrific portrayal of J.Q. Adams. The scenes trying to feature Freeman and McCawnuhwhatevs were boring, meandering and weak. Had Spielberg simply gone with a more authentic telling, it would have made for a better film. Hopkins flies to the rescue in the end because it was a great character played by a (at the time) great actor. However, the contrivance of myths surrounding a period of history like this is insulting. I would suggest Spielberg stick with the facts, but Schindler's List proved he is more interested in manipulating audiences with cartoonish, overly-fictionalized villains, so why would this film be any different.
4787250
I was excited to see this movie originally.  I wanted it to be a darker and more complex version of the intriguing myth of Arthur and his knights.  After Camelot the musical, King Arthur and his story needed a bit of darkness and complexity.  But this movie feeds off that want to merely give a sketch of something that could have been unique.
The script doesn't allow its characters to do much of anything other than fight with one another and their enemies.  The main point of the movie is lost because the audience has no real reason to care for these men.  We all know the main story of Arthur and Camelot, but if you're trying to give a new feeling/edge to an old story you should start by redescribing your characters to the audience, which is what the writers try to do but ultimately fail.  And in this film all we're left to see is a ragtag team of soldiers who only talk to going home.  If only the writers could have taken a little more time to explore who these characters are the film may have meant more.
I feel bad for the excellent actors who were used in this film.  Clive Owen is a great actor of independent films, who should be famous by now.  Ioan Gruffudd is wonderful in Horatio Hornblower.  And Keira Knightley has shown her blooming talent in Bruckheimer's Pirates of the Carribbean.  They all try to lift this film to a higher level but the script leaves very little for them to do other than show their spectacularly staged fighting skills. Even the love triangle, one of the most famous aspects of the legend, feels strained, overly simplified, and not that interesting.
710935
Saw this in a theater, and thought the 3D effects were good, but often contrived, as if they belatedly remembered they had 3D. 2 stars at best for use of 3D and all the missed opportunities to make this a truly spectacular feast for the eyes.

The first half of this movie held a lot of promise as it set up the story. Once the story was in place, the second half was simply an epic fail. Predictable in spots, and when not predictable, I couldn't help wondering if the scene only made it to the final script and then through the editing process because they needed the movie to be longer than 60 minutes.

I love Sandra Bullock's acting, normally. Not in this.  I don't blame her because I know she could have done better. I'm sure she did what she was told by the director or the script or both. She did her usual stellar job in the first half, but it's almost as if she knew this movie was a dud by the second half and just did whatever she was told.

I think George Clooney is extremely overrated. I never have understood the fuss over him. I've long since given up on him, he apparently sees no need to even try to live up to his hype, but a friend dragged me to see The Descendants. I thought I'd give him another chance. Waste of money. And I liked that story line, but his acting was clearly not up to the story. The only help he gave to THIS film was the use of his name, which I'm sure got many people who don't care one fig about sci-fi to spend their money to see him in action.
3908655
I thought this film was a step up from T3's Terminatrix nonsense, but it still went downhill in the final 30 minutes as far as plot points go (thus getting four stars). The entire film relies on the predictions of the nature of time travel. Several very bad military errors were made, even some by Connor himself, that made me want to choke those who wrote the script. This just takes away from any enjoyment of or engrossment in the action and possible emotions of the film. Cameron's vision is ultimately lost where characters have not been developed to their full potential.

As a woman, I see a failed role model in Blair Williams, who, far from what it appears they were going for, is more of a slut than a girl looking for comfort. I'm sure the boobery helped to sell the movie, however.

The corroborating plot points with T2 are extremely overt and annoying. They were not well-thought out, but thrown in to give a sense of continuity.

The parts of Kyle Reese, Sam Worthington, and John Connor are played by excellent actors, and it is their performance that carries this movie along. If not for the bad writing, this film could have been absolutely amazing. For those excellent actors, I still retain that 4 star rating.

Even so, the recordings Linda Hamilton made were obviously rushed and I don't blame her. She was too good for this film.

That said, this film should have been the real T3. I consider it so in my collection. It deserves a place because the predicted War Against the Machines has come. It had to come, and it had to be told, to give any weight to the prophecies of the first two films. Or.. maybe the mystery was better.

As for allegations to the Director's cut not being worth it: it is nonsense to say that getting more film and features is worse than getting a theatrical version. Two minutes is two minutes, and I wanted to see it.
65492
Of course I LOVE Harry Potter and could watch HP marathons all day, every day. However! I am frustrated they split this film into two parts. It is definitely not short of drama and excitement but unless you watch PT 1 immediately beforehand, this one lacks a good build up. Even compared to Part One, which really did feel like a complete story.  And the end, with the Star Wars"esk" light saber effects it all just gets rather boring and unoriginal.  I think too that they should have left the final scenes under the cloak of darkness rather than morning dawn. It also added to its anti-climatic disappointment.
2947249
Awful lot of build up for an anticlimactic finish.  Just sort of matter-of-fact.  A little hard to get into and keep straight in the beginning because it was going back and forth in time and characters
3825965
The evocative, dreamy, slow-motion previews for this movie are largely from the fascinating, eerie opening 10 or 15 minutes of the film-- with the Wagner soundtrack and the images of the Earth frankly being destroyed. I was hooked by the preview and I was riveted by these picturesque vignettes. The bulk of the film, however, consists of the plodding, repetitive, stilted Part 1: Justine (focusing on one sister's escalating depression during the night of her horrific bourgeois wedding reception) and the more interesting Part 2: Claire (which centers on the other sister's escalating panic at the thought of the earth being destroyed). For me, Part 1 was too long, and Part 2 should have been developed-- it could have been the entire movie. I wanted to love it. I only liked it. The film just doesn't deliver on the promise of the opening montage.
2882697
Chock full of LOTR, Arthurian, Star Wars and Harry Potter inspired elements; there's even a Sleeping Beauty component including it's own version of Maleficent.  It's really that obvious.

Unfortunately the script is like an old tried and true recipe gone awry; it's nothing more than a "me too" film with a flimsy attempt at originality by introducing the Seventh Son of a Seventh Son mythology.
This strategy might have worked beautifully except that they do nothing with the wide range of creative possibilities inherent in the Seventh Son premise.
The spiritual components of such an illustrious and mystical lineage are approached in a very matter of fact sort of way; actually ignored, thus wasting a valuable opportunity to elaborate and expound on the legend and create a truly strong and sustainable cinematic lineage of it's own.
In more capable hands, this movie based on the Seventh Son storyline could have been a viable contender to Yoda and the Jedi Knights.

The production values and CG effects are very well done which makes for a delightful visual treat but that only goes so far.
Jeff Bridges is way too overbearing.
2075865
Too much time spent setting up next movie and looking at logistics of how Aaron Cross comes to be and functions rather than seeing him at work.  Should have started with him on a mission and ended with him firing a warning shot at those coming after him.  Weak transition from Bourne trilogy but still worth watching.
1062244
too much going on and not enough action in the sequel. Iron man was made to look like a doofus.
4362700
I think they should have given a better explanation of the 'rift', at the beginning of the movie, not the end.  And why such a weak hero, next to the tall, dark, handsome man?  He was just a big mouth and you couldn't see him very well.  I thought the action scenes were well performed, couldn't a missile take them out better?  It would have been a MUCH BETTER film; without the tall, dark, handsome man in it, who added nothing, but an antagonistic attitude.  I couldn't figure out if the movie was about him or the monsters. ???  Poorly scripted.  But, they got the actions scenes down pat.
4788860
The movie was pretty good. There are plenty of critiques of the factuality of the movie's statements, so I won't bother with those. Instead, I'll talk about my opinions of the style and content.

It begins very well. It's easy to follow as long as you pay attention, and keeps a good fast pace. It slows down dramatically when the story visits Moore's hometown and goes on to cover the soldiers fighting in Iraq.

It's almost like the coverage of his hometown and Iraq is a different movie, inserted into the middle of the real show. It's different in pace, style, and purpose. As I mentioned above, it's a slow pace. It also tries to illicit sorrow and emotional pain with the audience, with scenes and stories about loss of loved ones and ruined lives. Perhaps he should have made a separate movie about the personal loss, as a tribute and healing aid to those families and individuals who have had so much taken away from them by this war. The slower, more deliberate pace would have been well served with this separate movie.

But, that aside, the rest of the movie was very entertaining. It definitely makes George W. Bush look like a complete and total idiot with multiple clips of media coverage. I do believe that Bush is an idiot, and am ashamed of him being our president just for that alone. There are those who claim those clips are taken out of context, without any of Bush's intelligent moments taken into account as well. I defend my view against that by pointing out that the simple fact that Bush has said and done those things, out of context or not, shows he's a selfish idiot. No caring, intelligent person would have spoken or done most of the things Bush is shown in the movie, whether they were at a formal dinner or hanging out with friends. A competent president wouldn't make those mistakes, or at least would be competent enough to minimize the damage. Bush isn't competent.

The final comment I have on the movie is about the opening scene where he tries to make many of the Bush administration's officials look foolish as they prepare to be on camera. Paul Wolfowitz using his own saliva to comb his hair is an example. I've been working in TV broadcasting for almost a year now, and I've seen stranger. I also say "So what? Do whatever works to get ready." If spit is what it takes to make last-minute hair and makeup adjustments, so be it.

But, other than those problems, a good movie.
1992634
It was/is a congested movie.  does not flow smoothly from scene to scene.  Actually to many subplots.  It the fault of the writers/directors, because there are just too many fine actors for this not to work better
1052561
Has potential though I think just spends too long on building the story at the beginning.  You are watching it for the action and it seems like it took almost an hour to get there.
983988
What a movie this could or should have been. Just think of it, Robert De Niro in front of and behind the camera, Francis Ford Coppola as one of the executive producers and starring Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie. Honey, get the popcorn!

At least that's how it should have gone. Unfortunately the recent '06 film `The Good Shepherd' falls far short of my pre-viewing expectations. It is exceedingly slow, too long and the farthest thing from being a thriller than one could imagine. Damon sleep walks through this 2 hour, 48 minute snooze fest and Angelina is delegated to the role of a long suffering ignored housewife (as if that could happen).

Alas, it could have been great. Who wouldn't enjoy a good conspiracy film involving an all powerful secret society like the infamous "Skull and Bones" working their way through the highest levels of American society and politics. I sure would, have you seen one?
3911491
I confess I was entertained by the movie -in those moments when I wasn't screaming at the TV. Some of the historical inaccuracies were so glaring that even for a work of fiction it was hard to swallow. At the beginning the movie states that 9 million would eventually die in WWI - soliders perhaps. That total is nowhere complete if you add in the civillian dead. A good number of which would have come from the area in which the characters were fighting. The Verdun front was a wasteland for miles - towns were obliterated from the shelling - the area around the fronts were ruined for not years but decades. No cheery farmhouse with well-fed children, no trees or plowed fields visible from the air, nothing but death and destruction for miles and miles. Trench warfare was not confined to a thin sliver. Though the front itself moved only yards the shelling and death reigned over an extended area. There are villages in the area that never returned and if you drive over the battlefield even now 90 years later as I did, you can still see the craters and hills caused by the shelling. The aviators were above the day to day merciless killing field but they were not untouched by it. My biggest problem with the film was the complete santization of WWI. The northern part of France and southern Belgium were devasted far more thoroughly than even Germany in WWII. It was truely hell on earth. Other reviewers have addresed the inaccuracies in the planes used - do not get me started on the mechanized land transportation. Tanks were only beginning to be developed and would not have been used as shown - also correct me if I am wrong but the Germans had already crossed the Meuse River much earlier in the War. At this point in time they would have been drive back - probably by Black Jack Pershing. The producers could have spent a bit more money on some historical research and less on their computer graphics. They did not get their money's worth there either. As it was, I could never tell who was who during the arial combat sequences. I would have sworn one fellow was dead only to have him reappear later in the movie. I did enjoy the camaraderie and would have like to see more of the unit as a whole.
4458391
I'll cut to the chase: the story takes way too long to get going, and even once it does it feel sluggish.  A pedestrian action film.