Great action and combat scenes but save us from Deutermann's Dames
584182
The is my third Deutermann, and as with the earlier works i've read, Deutermann knows how to describe action at sea in the navy of the twentieth century better than any other.

The Sub service is highlighted in this tale and we see the world through the eyes of a tip notch skipper who provides us an insight into what it takes to keep everything in the 'bubble.'

Where Deutermann has issue is his treatment of women. They are cardboard characters, all the same, though talking dames, broads, babes, always beautiful, ice queens to everyone but the hero that is destined to have them. The hero whose one line pickups, terribly and horribly macho, always work with these women who would not let anyone else touch them if they used the same line. Which makes the naval story work so well, and the romance detract from it all.

We don't read these stories for the romance, and since that doesn't work, it would serve us so much better if we had more plot and twists without these dames in the tale.

Still, the action and combat are described so well that the story is very much worth reading. One star lost for the cardboard love interest we have seen before. If WWII naval action is your thing, this is worthwhile.
1325898
Let me make one thing clear: This movie has killer action! I will not deny that and if it weren't for other aspects of the movie it would have gotten a higher rating just for the action. Unfortunately all the bad stuff cancels out the good stuff for me.

There are some things I just can't forgive and one is plain stupidity and lack of continuity. The people in this movie are dumb as dirt. At the beginning of Blade we have him fighting off vampires wearing these neat "day suits" that protect them from UV light. Funny thing is they conveniently forget they have these useful garments when they have to hunt during the day. Talk about stupid. Not only that, it is established that the big bad hybrid vampires that are the main focus of Blade 2 can only be killed by UV light, yet the idiots still pack a ton of firepower instead of a mess of flashlights. Man... brainless testosterone sure does flow thick in that movie. Another thing I felt was overkill was Blade's new chemical formula he laces all of his weapons and bullets with (well the bullets are packed with it... not laced) and the fact that a single drop of this stuff is apparently enough to BBQ a vampire's entire body. Just seems like they are pushing the envelope here.

The plot is somewhat derivative and only gives Blade a reason to kill things. Granted Blade came from a Marvel comic book and the movie does attempt to stick with a comic book styled story, but come on! Give us some depth here! There was a painfully predictable love interest that doesn't do much for the movie at all. There are also a few "surprise" plot twists that are also utterly predictable and bring nothing to the table. And as much as I like Wesley Snipes and as much I like what he brings to the character, the perpetual "cool pose" theme gets old. Just once I would like to see Blade tie his shoe or even just stand still in a non-cool way. Quick Blade! While you answer the phone. Strike a pose!!

Still in all of the story content bashing I make this movie has some of the greatest action scenes ever. The fighting is intense and the choreography is stylish without being campy. I really mean it. The action in Blade 2 is awesome. The special effects are well done for the most part and little things like the lighting, camera angles and sound are also done well. In other words the action scenes and production values are top notch... except for the soundtrack.  The soundtrack is nice but it felt forced fed. It seems every time you're in a club and someone turns away for a minute a new song is on (conveniently being a song from the Blade 2 Soundtrack). One scene in this movie seems to pack at least five songs within ten minutes.

If you're into nothing but action, action, and ACTION then Blade 2 is just the movie for you. If you like both action and good story telling then be forewarned; you will have to weigh great action with lame plot and judge for yourself. Of course if you are all about content and care little for action you might as well save your money and wait until it comes on cable or broadcast TV. Blade 2 is a great action film and nothing more.
1785822
The Medal of Honour that reappears in this expansion pack looks better than ever with explosive special effects and new, blow 'em away weapons. You also get to fight alongside comrades who can hold their own, which lends some authenticity to the game. Just as the first was shamelessly modelled on Saving Private Ryan, this contains scenes straight out of Band of Brothers, which is kinda fun too.
Spearhead, however, is even more tightly scripted (if that is possible) than its predecessor. You can't so much as shoot out of turn if you want to complete your objectives. Annoyingly, a lot of it also takes place in the dark or in murky landscapes.
In tandem with this, it reintroduces some of the most irritating aspects of the last game, such as snipers who are invisible in the gloom and at least one finicky finale in which you have to constantly save just to make it through the scene. Lastly, it does not include enough of the things that made the last one fun, such as rooms full of enemy to shoot at.
Oh, and as others have noted here, it is very short -- too short to be worth 20 bucks. I got through it in a couple of hours without hurrying and have no inclination to play it again.
2424979
The review by Scot Sanders  pretty well sums it all up.  I was enjoying the story as an action piece until the whole improbable section with the German bomber.  Not only did said nurse and crew bomb the base, they also wiped out all of the ready pursuit planes as well.  All of this in the face of fierce fire from security troops, and just 3 of 4 engines working.  And then to wrap it up our hero and heroine get to stand on top of Gibraltar, again after fierce fighting against crack German troops, and pledge their undying love.
As requested by Prologue in Henry V I am willing to suspend my disbelief, but this is too much. More Indiana Jones than alternate history.
283423
camera shaking  gives me a headache, and the color is muted.
IMHO acting is weak and so is the fighting- too much closeup. Guy the squire with Berenger are mercenaries for hire.
What happened to Lady Isabel from first ironclad and why did Guy became a mercenary?
Ironclad 1 was superior in storyline, acting, and filming.
Sad that sequel wasn't made with quality of the first. It would have been better that this sequel not have been made
4011637
It must have taken considerable courage for Hollywood to present the war years of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel just six years after cessation of hostilities. What is of surprise is the type of war picture it was. Rather than unfold another of the wildly popular shoot-em-ups then current, director Henry Hathaway chose a more daring tack: to film a character study of an officer who was widely considered to be one of the best tank generals of all time, even if he fought for Germany. James Mason is Rommel, a man whose strong sense of duty shines clearly in every scene.  Mason speaks in his normal resonant English accent, with no one speaking German. Mason's Rommel is a general staff officer who begins the war with a few reservations about the competency of Hitler.  He keeps these to himself until a rapidly deteriorating and collapsing front forces him to make a choice that afflicted many others in the Wehrmacht. Should he obey the orders of his Fuhrer without question and risk the annihilation of Germany or should he act to remove Hitler in a coup.  The recent film VALKYRIE has Tom Cruise as Colonel Klaus Von Stauffenberg face the same brutal choice, with both officers in each film reaching the same conclusion: namely that Hitler had to go.

Part of the problem I had with THE DESERT FOX lies in director Hathaway's desire to have it both ways--a film that is an actioner and one that explores the inner thoughts of one man at a critical juncture in a world war. The movie begins with a British raid on a chalet in Nazi-occupied Europe for the sole purpose of assassinating Rommel.  There is considerable gunfire and explosions, but after that the audience views the late career of Rommel through the lens of stock footage of war scenes and vignettes that lead Rommel inexorably to conclude that the only way to salvage Germany was to arrest Hitler and the entire leadership of the Nazi party.  Rommel is briefly shown as the commander of the Afrika Corps in 1942, but his appearance is limited mostly to scenes in which he grouses about the idiocy of obeying Hitler's orders to fight to the last man and the last bullet. Fast forward two years to D-Day. Mason shares some revelatory scenes with Leo G. Carroll as Field Marshal von Rundshtet as both similarly realize that the fate of their country lies in the incompetent hands of a corporal with no concept of tactics and leadership. The ending is no surprise to any student of military history. What Mason adds to factual history is his portrayal of a man who must battle his conscience with the same ferocity that he does with the Americans and English.  The scenes with Jessica Tandy as his wife are deeply touching as both face a crunching reality of Hitler's vengeance that reaches out to ensnare even a decorated Field Marshal. THE DESERT FOX is a war film that focuses less on the fox and more on the common sense decency of a general who swore allegiance to one who had none at all.
3776086
Wonderful cinematography on board the Nimitz aircraft carrier in 1979-80 gives a documentary feel.  Air to air shots of F-14's are outstanding.  Movie made before CGI, when you actually had to go shoot stuff with a camera.  Computers are hardly seen on the ship, radar scopes are analog, aircraft instruments are steam gauges.  Actually amazing to see them run a nuclear powered carrier and afterburning jet aircraft with analog controls.  They would be un-hackable in a cyberwar!  It would be fun to see the 1980 Nimitz go through another time storm, to 2020, and win a battle against a drone flying digital adversary!  The movie is well made, but suffers from a major plot weakness where 99% of the time travel issues are solved by the Nimitz getting sucked back to 1980 at the peak of the action.  Hated that in the theater, and it still ruins the movie.
4509909
Here's the problem I have with this otherwise excellent flick: The idea that, somehow, the Avengers need to be reined in because they are responsible for some collateral damage while stopping aliens, a murderous AI creation, and some really bad humans from trying to destroy the Earth and its people is, well, kinda silly. The simple fact is this: We know, as a race that has been almost continually at war for 5,000-plus years, that in a conflict non-combatants die. It's absolutely regrettable but, as Captain America notes at one point in the movie, sometimes you can't save everyone so your only option is to save as many people as possible. How many thousands of men, women and children died, for example, in the bombing raids over Nazi Germany in World War II? That number will likely never be known but - and this is important - after the war we did not condemn the men who flew those missions nor did we condemn the men who ordered them. In addition, the fact those raids took place also - undoubtedly - saved millions of lives that would have been lost if the war had dragged on for two, three or even four more years.
The fact that a highly placed government official - a man who, according to the story, received the Medal of Honor for, perhaps, causing some collateral damage of his own during a time of war - is carrying that message to the Avengers is plausible to a point. The fact that he sympathizes with the politicians who want to control the Avengers is not. He, of all people, should have an understanding of what it means to fight an implacable enemy that is bent on your destruction. Instead, he comes off as a self-serving politician eager to curry favor with his masters.
That Tony Stark, who bears an enormous amount of residual guilt as a result of his career as an arms developer, might go along with the idea that the Avengers need to be monitored isn't implausible. Neither is the idea that Captain America would be foursquare against such meddling by self-serving politicians. What I found hard to accept, however, was how willing some of the other Avengers were to agree with the politicians, Black Widow, for example, has operated "off the books" for a long time and surely knows that having a politically motivated monitor looking over her shoulder would effectively mean the end to her usefulness. Col. Rhodes should have been, at least in my opinion as a former combat infantryman myself, equally uncomfortable with meddling by those who chose to stay home instead of putting on a uniform, swearing the oath, and fighting for their country at a time when it and its people were in danger of being destroyed..
Okay, enough ranting. That somewhat silly premise aside, this is a really good movie with strong character development and some truly spectacular fight scenes. (I mean, can anyone actually say they DON'T enjoy watching Black Widow fight? Her moves are awesome.)
I especially enjoyed the way Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans played their parts in this movie but that doesn't mean I think there were any weak links in the cast. I very much enjoyed them all and, unlike some reviewers, I really enjoyed the light touches provided by the Spider-Man and Ant-Man characters during that monumental fight at the airport.
The special effects and the cinematography were both up to - and in many cases exceeded - Marvel's consistently high standards making "Civil War" a great viewing experience.
I do foresee a problem in future movies, however. With the revelation that Bucky Barnes killed Tony Stark's parents, I am not certain how he and Captain America can ever reconcile. I look forward to seeing how - or should I perhaps say "if" - that conflict can be resolved.
The verdict: This is a 4.5 star movie.
2421716
Excellent action movie with great fight scenes. Denzel was an awesome monk warrior and Mila Kunis was a babe not to be trifled with. The evil boss and his head crony were also well casted. The music and the way this movie was filmed gave it an epic feeling to it, but the story is too one dimensional to be deserving of an epic categorization. To give you an example, the entire movie was probably filmed at no more than ten different locations because that's all it really needed. I thought the ending was good because it was a surprise, but I probably would have preferred a final action scene that left the streets bloody.
1889864
Cardinal Richelieu (Stephen Rea), in his quest to become the premier power in France, disbands the king's musketeers and does his best to wipe them out, discretely, of course.  One of the musketeers killed was D'Artagnan's (Justin Chambers) father and D'Artagnan vows to avenge his father's death and kill the man in black (Tim Roth).  D'Artagnan grows up and begins his quest for vengeance by traveling to Paris and contacting the musketeers.  Unfortunately, he fails his test and instead finds himself aiding the Queen (Catherine Deneuve) in a desperate attempt to avoid war with Great Britain.  Along the way, D'Artagnan falls in love with Francesca bon Ansau (Mena Suvari) and gradually earns the respect of the musketeers.
I quite enjoyed this version of the Three Musketeers, but I would have to agree with other reviewers in that it is not the best version that I have seen.  The strength of this movie is the amazing fighting sequences.  Whether it is a barroom brawl with the fighters dancing over barrels, an attempt to take over the Queen's coach that leaps from coach to horse to ground, or a winner take all fight on ropes and ladders, the fighting sequences are fresh, original and oftentimes, simply amazing.  The costumes and scenery were gorgeous, with the director Peter Hymans' fabulous use of natural light to give the whole film a faded, sepia toned look that really suited the time period.  The supporting cast was quite good, including a deliciously evil man in black played by Tim Roth and an understated, yet humorous musketeer trio played by Nick Moran (Aramis), Steven Spiers (Porthos) and Jan Gregor Kremp (Athos).  The absolute worst part of the film was Justin Chambers, who, unfortunately played D'Artagnan and was in just about every scene.  It is true that Justin, a ex-Calvin Klein model, is quite beautiful, at least he is without that ridiculous long hair that he sported in the film, and it it also true that he is quite athletic and did a fine job on his stunt work, but, sadly, he cannot act and he cannot speak French.  This is a major problem in the film and drags the whole work down.  With a decent actor in the lead role, this could have been a very memorable version of a classic.
4455742
I thought this movie was pretty fun and completely fits in with Verhoeven's state of seeing things on film--however, the scene is which Bacon's character attacks the woman in her apartment was heavily cut for the theatres--which is kinda absurd because Verhoeven sees things through a lens perversely--so when I saw on the dvd that this scene was included on the dvd in the deleted scenes section, I was curious to see what the test audiences deemed too intense, but instead of showing the scene--the people who created this dvd thought it best to include maybe 30 seconds of it and keep Voehoeven's voice running over it.  This is a major disappointment citing that this is one reason we buy dvds, but also with a film that was as trashed as Hollow Man by critics, it would be best to include as much as possible to make ones already unsure about the movie want to buy the dvd.  As it is, there is enough on here to make the movie worth owning, however, please no more deleted scenes where we can't really see the scene. Thanks for hearing me complain.
1303614
they don't bother to make many wwi movies anymore, so i was excited to see this one.  the script is admittedly not very good, and the performances were kind of lame but they did not have good dialogue to work with.  despite this i still enjoyed watching the movie as the combat sequences were very very realistic and had wonderful sound.  it is great to finally see combat the way it probably really happened and feel adrenalin pumping.  i thought that one scene in the howard hughes movie with decaprio got this across, and this movie continues what that scene suggested.  too bad whoever wrote the script was not very smart or this could have been a classic.
4730529
THE FILM: While the first IRONCLAD was a solid medieval action movie, this sequel is essentially the same movie and, even more to it's detriment, is horribly shot and edited. Describing the plot is an easy task. Basically, replace King John's small army with a clan of Scottish raiders and you have this movie. The only connection between the two is a minor character, Guy, who is the main character in this sequel (but played by a different actor). Other than that, the plot plays out, beat for beat, almost exactly like its predecessor. And to top things off, it is worse in almost every department. The acting isn't as good as the first one and there aren't any big-name actors to elevate the material, but no one stuck out as being particularly horrible. Additionally, the violence and gore aren't completely practical this time, instead opting for CGI blood spatter and poor dummy work for the more graphic shots (e.g., beheading). There was also some fairly obvious green screen and CGI enhancements that were really distracting at times. However, the worst aspect of this film is the camerawork, which is mostly "shaky-cam." Handheld camera during the dialogue scenes didn't really bother me, but the vigorous shaking of the camera during the action sequences was nauseating and made them extremely hard to follow. Still, there are a few aspects which aren't too bad. For one the score is appropriate to the material, even though a bit overblown. And even though the action scenes are rather poorly filmed, there are some good kills. They also attempt (with mixed results) to give the characters, including the villains, some depth. Overall, this film is a few steps down from the first in terms of quality across the board, some of it probably due to the reduced budget.

THE DISC: The audiovisual quality is pretty much perfect, although the digital cinematography does look ugly at times. As for special features, there is a single 15-minute behind-the-scenes featurette. The featurette was rather superfluous, and everybody talks enthusiastically about how "great" they think it is (which it isn't).

OVERALL: This sequel follows the law of diminishing returns perfectly, with a serious reduction in quality from the first.  If you saw (and liked) the first one, then maybe give this one a rental if you feel like punishing your eyes. Otherwise, just skip it.
4092321
Jet Li is one of the few redeeming things about this movie. I am being generous giving it three and a half stars mainly because of Li's acting and the new storyline in China. My wife and I felt this was a decent action but it needed Rachel Wiesz badly. The replacement of a main character is never easy and in this case I think they should have waited to make the movie until Wiesz was available. Her replacement, Maria Bello, did not show the special personality quirks, warmth, and depth that endeared us to Wiesz in the first two movies. The movie is a fair action sequel with lots of great scenes of fighting, but it feels strained and misses the fun of the first two. So if you want just action without the warmth of love exhibited in the first two you will probably not be disappointed. In this sequel the O'Connells, lead by their son Alex, fight a risen Chinese emperor. They endeavor to stop him from becoming immortal and raising his army. This feat requires enlisting the aid of a beautiful woman that has guarded the emperors tomb and a pool at Shagri La for centuries. She calls upon abominable snowmen and those killed by the emperor to assist them but the emperor controls all the elements and is a formidable opponent. Well worth at least a rental even with the absence of Wiesz. I bought it because I like the series, I just wish they had kept the same crew. If you enjoyed this catch "Wanted".

CA Luster
2041931
The aerial scenes are the defining moment in this movie. The sub plot of our hero meeting a French farm girl is trite. The pilot having a lion as a pet is a bit ridiculous. How the French officers in charge of these recruits can be snubbed and disrespected is beyond military protocol. I would say if you just concentrate on the aerial action you can get through this movie.
2859177
This was an obvious rip-off and update of the classic German film from the Weimar republic days "Mdchen in uniform" ("Girls in Uniform") from 1931, except here the frauleins are mostly out of their uniforms! As one reviewer said it best "Eine armee gretchen" AKA ("She Devils of the SS", "Frauleins in Uniform") from 1973, was an early take on the 'nazisploitation' films to come (which were mostly made in Italy). If you can ignore the offensive elements this sort of film may have for some people, it's actually pure campy lunacy! These frauleins were almost always nude, and thankfully very shapely and not on the skinny side! The story (like there was one), sort of got serious towards the end, but still only slightly. This film and thousands more like it, I think could only have been made in the 70's. I would not be surprised if the Federal Republic of Germany (the West German economy was booming at the time), financed this film as a way to laugh at their past (it didn't cost much either way, although it might have been made in Switzerland). Anyway, you will laugh at the cartoonish voices, and the crazy lines these chicks had to deliver (I wish we had the original German Language version)! Enjoy it for the bountiful and lovely Teutonic beauties on display. The DVD picture quality by Sinister Cinema was very good. NTSC NR 96 mins. Danke Vielmals! (BTW: This review is for the DVD from Sinister Cinema).

Love and Peace,
Carlos Romero
1370948
This is a pretty good set of war movies.

-I have always loved Dirty Dozen, everyone should see it.
-I appreciate Kelly's Heroes now more than I did when it came out; 28 years in the military gives one more perspective. Catchy theme song too.
-Battleground I saw decades ago as well and liked watching it.
-Where Eagles Dare is a typical Alistair MacLean book and the movie is at par for the genre as well: a MegaBadass overcomes the enemy at every step while dazzling his accomplices with his brilliance and foresight. I think I believe that pretty much all of the movies could have been better.

But the DvDs won't play in my laptop; I had to dig my old DvD player out and hook it up to the TV. PITA. Typical greedy Hollywood attitude: we got their money - not our problem if they cant watch it; the important thing is they cant copy it and have to buy it again when technology moves on.