sergius1970
Joined Feb 2006
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews11
sergius1970's rating
Given all the negative reviews I was pleasantly surprised. Hardly very original, plus 1 or 3 plot holes, but something sinister attacks Hollyoaks turned out to be interesting premise.
So Hollyoaks-level acting from the human cast is what to expect, but when it all went tits-up foor the good guys it was all the more impactful.
(In fact a malevolent force terrorising the population of Hollyoaks would be quite a good idea for another movie.)
I doubt it was in the production team's mind, but there's a sort of allusion here to a tradition in the English gothic thriller; the sinister and the macabre gradually intruding upon safe, ordinary provincial life (arsenic and old lace.)
I also suspect there may be something of a pilot here for a TV series, and I'd say it does have potential
Nowhere near as sophisticated as "Humans" (2015-18) which it was patently lifted from, but definitely recommended if you're in a tolerant frame of mind.
So Hollyoaks-level acting from the human cast is what to expect, but when it all went tits-up foor the good guys it was all the more impactful.
(In fact a malevolent force terrorising the population of Hollyoaks would be quite a good idea for another movie.)
I doubt it was in the production team's mind, but there's a sort of allusion here to a tradition in the English gothic thriller; the sinister and the macabre gradually intruding upon safe, ordinary provincial life (arsenic and old lace.)
I also suspect there may be something of a pilot here for a TV series, and I'd say it does have potential
Nowhere near as sophisticated as "Humans" (2015-18) which it was patently lifted from, but definitely recommended if you're in a tolerant frame of mind.
Not bad I guess, but a tad conceited on the part of the scriptwriters. They may think they can write like Roald Dahl but they're wrong. To do so you actually have to be Roald Dahl.
Charlie & The Chocolate Factory is rich in satire. In this film Wonka there's none, nor any ironically funny characters like Veruca Salt, Mike TeeVee etc. The method acting is also rather annoying in that it's hardly appropriate for what is essentially a kids' fairy story
This film is well designed and well acted, but not exactly original (I've see all the plot elements elsewhere.)
Still, it's recommended as light and fluffy fun if you're in a tolerant frame of mind, but I can't think of a funny line.
Charlie & The Chocolate Factory is rich in satire. In this film Wonka there's none, nor any ironically funny characters like Veruca Salt, Mike TeeVee etc. The method acting is also rather annoying in that it's hardly appropriate for what is essentially a kids' fairy story
This film is well designed and well acted, but not exactly original (I've see all the plot elements elsewhere.)
Still, it's recommended as light and fluffy fun if you're in a tolerant frame of mind, but I can't think of a funny line.
Why are women in police procedurals always thin?
This was actually a very good premise; industrial espionage and corruption, this stuff really does happen.
The difficulty is that Paranoid was sometimes overwritten, sometimes oversimplified in all the wrong places.
Did we really need all the Bridget Jones stuff with Indira Varma who was otherwise supposed to be the tough female cop? (I found myself fast forwarding through those bits.)
And we could also have done without all that Freudian, oedipus complex padding with Dino Fetscher and his mum, especially as far from being the tough police officer, he came across like he'd wandered out of Hollyoaks (and mum came across like a standard red herring in maternal form from an Agatha Christie melodrama.)
There was even a touch of moral polemic, which could have been interesting, but came across here as a bit one-sided and contrived. There are a number of different implications from this story, social, political and ethical which could have been if the author wanted to flesh it out, while leaving out the romantic stuff.
Lesley Sharp and Robert Glennister were by far the most interesting characters, and the fast paced later episodes sure kept me watching till the end.
Would be worth a remake with a better scriptwriter like Jed Mercurio, that is more of the gritty realism of his Line of Duty scripts, and less soap opera.
Recommended, if you're in a tolerant mood, and want a Sunday afternoon thriller while eating popcorn.
This was actually a very good premise; industrial espionage and corruption, this stuff really does happen.
The difficulty is that Paranoid was sometimes overwritten, sometimes oversimplified in all the wrong places.
Did we really need all the Bridget Jones stuff with Indira Varma who was otherwise supposed to be the tough female cop? (I found myself fast forwarding through those bits.)
And we could also have done without all that Freudian, oedipus complex padding with Dino Fetscher and his mum, especially as far from being the tough police officer, he came across like he'd wandered out of Hollyoaks (and mum came across like a standard red herring in maternal form from an Agatha Christie melodrama.)
There was even a touch of moral polemic, which could have been interesting, but came across here as a bit one-sided and contrived. There are a number of different implications from this story, social, political and ethical which could have been if the author wanted to flesh it out, while leaving out the romantic stuff.
Lesley Sharp and Robert Glennister were by far the most interesting characters, and the fast paced later episodes sure kept me watching till the end.
Would be worth a remake with a better scriptwriter like Jed Mercurio, that is more of the gritty realism of his Line of Duty scripts, and less soap opera.
Recommended, if you're in a tolerant mood, and want a Sunday afternoon thriller while eating popcorn.