Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

jasonyoungcebu Good actors, good locations, good production. But needed more thrill in the script. And still doesn't really explain much of this person.

Gino Cox The Catcher Was a Spy (2018) seems more concerned with making a political statement than a dramatic one, but fails to make a compelling statement of either description. Moe Berg (Paul Rudd) is a man of exceptional intellect and talents: fluent in several languages, a prodigious reader, a chess prodigy, an eidetic, a champion game show contestant (when shows were about knowledge), and a fair-to-middling professional baseball player. He's also a politically correct protagonist. He's bisexual, enabling the producers to appeal to the LGBTQIAPK community, a victim of anti-Semitism, and a pacifist. The outbreak of WWII gives Berg an opportunity to enter the social circles that had previously excluded him, due to his modest finances and Jewish heritage. The OSS needs linguists and Berg is able to leverage his skills into a position as an intelligence analyst, despite his Jewish heritage and sexual orientation. Ultimately, Berg is confronted with a moral decision. His orders are clear. Will he mindlessly obey or will he RESIST? Will he tear open his shirt to reveal a decidedly anachronistic "Hillary for America" T-shirt? His ultimate decision is broadcast well in advance. There is little soul-searching and no decisive actions in the earlier scenes to establish his willingness, commitment, courage or ability to act otherwise. Consequently, the film offers no compelling moral, political statement, ethical quandary or dramatic experience. Paul Rudd delivers a credible performance as a sexually ambivalent intellectual. Guy Pierce sheds his accent to sound like an authentic American. Paul Giamatti is credible as a German Jew. The settings, costumes and props seem authentic. Production values are solid. However, excessive reliance on jiggly-cam shots constantly disrupt the audience's willful suspension of disbelief, reminding them that they are viewing the action through a hand-held camera. The title could be stronger. Berg doesn't engage in officially-sanctioned espionage activities while engaged as a ball player, although he voluntarily collects some information and gives it to an intelligence officer. It's not really an action film, although there is a battle scene. It isn't very suspenseful. There isn't nearly as much intelligence gathering and analysis as there is in Spy Game or Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Part of the problem is that Berg never confronts an enemy, much less fight his way through a hierarchy of increasingly capable and dangerous adversaries to a final one-on-one conflict. There are Nazis out there, somewhere, and they're trying to build a weapon of mass destruction. Although no coherent parallels are drawn to Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong-Un, some doubt they pose an immediate risk of success. The film is watchable but not exciting, rewarding or cathartic. The end titles, which attempt to justify Berg's choice, serve as mute testament to the film's failure to convey a complete story. In real life, Berg was given an additional assignment by the CIA, but provided no valuable intelligence. He lived out his twilight years in obscurity as an affable mooch.

vandelour Slow. Well, methodical anyway. Enough slow parts that last long enough to use the toilet and not miss anything. The interesting parts are dialog-driven and the dull parts are when we're supposed to be stupified at the hidden parts of Bergs personality. Problem is they're so hidden we can't see 'em either. I gave it a 5 because I'm feeling generous today.

smannion-475-512539 Amazing cast, nice design. Good director. Unfortunately the writing is a big problem. An inactive protagonist, things simply happen to him, he solves none of the problems of the film, he's along for the ride. Take a lesson from Bridge of Spies: there you have an active protagonist actively taking action to solve the film's problems. There's not one thing the lead solves in this film. He's passive and he's got nothing to offer in terms of skills. And when he does take action, he's shown as incompetent. Very strange choices with the writing. Had they have done the opposite in most of their choices they'd have had a good movie. A real shame they green lit this before they had a script. Now this story will never be told with good writing.