The Big Lebowski contains memorable and exceptional performances from its cast (especially Jeff Bridges and John Goodman), with excellent self-aware dialogue to go along with it. My main issue is that the film feels like a combination of isolated disjointed sequences haphazardly glued together... Although that was probably the intention all along. Maybe stoner films just aren't my thing. All that being said, this is a good film!

Yes, Mark Zuckerberg is a real person. Yes, he is one of the founders of Facebook. Yes, he went to Harvard. Yes, he did actually create a site that had people rank university students on their level of perceived attractiveness. No, it had nothing to do with getting revenge on any girl. In fact, the site also included pictures of male students, who were also subject to ratings. The site was up for only a weekend. Mark accepted responsibility and apologized fully. This film depicts him as a promiscuous man, at times showing him to ogle his interns. This is total fiction. Mark began dating student Priscilla Chan at Harvard, who is far from a groupie (there was never any groupies)... She is a pediatrician and has a medical degree. They married back in 2012 (two years after this film was made) and have two kids together. The depicted personality of Mark in the film is fictional to the point of absurdity. Mark did not "steal" Facebook from the Winklevoss brothers. The idea of online social networking already existed. Mark did not deprive them of anything. He simply lost interest in their conception of a social networking site, and focused on a better one. As I am not familiar with these brothers, I cannot say if how they are portrayed in the film is accurate or not. Most probably not. A year after this film was released, co-founder Eduardo Saverin fled to Singapore after renouncing his American citizenship in order to avoid paying hundreds of millions in taxes back to the society he had profited so much from. He is a multi-billionaire today, worth an estimated $11.3 billion. Mark had decided to push Saverin out of the company due to his apparent lack of cooperation with Zuckerberg, although the exact details are protected by non-disclosure agreements. Overall, the film is well-acted, directed, but it's not a biography, and would be better suited for maybe satire, or alternate history. And a pretty nonsensical one at that.

A corny vampire flick with decent performances and gruesome special effects... There's some unusually inefficient means of killing vampires used... They could have just set fire to the places isolated in the country suspected of harbouring vampires... It's also improbable that a large organization like the Vatican could be involved in the systematic extermination of vampires, yet have nobody spill the beans. With the dawn of video cameras and the Internet, it should make public's awareness of them spread like wildfire. The master (master?) vampire is recklessly violent, drawing considerable attention to his activities from the authorities... Although this is partly justified due to his desperation to find a particular religious artifact and perform a ceremony... All to gain the ability to move about during the day... Still, even if he achieves such, he would be up against billions of humans with access to weapons of mass destruction. All that aside, the film doesn't take itself too seriously and the vampires are at least depicted as evil and foul rather than romanticized (or worse: sexualized). Given the stresses of having a job killing vampires, the characters are suitably depicted as rough and sleazy-although the maltreatment of sex workers is a bit over the top.

Pulp Fiction is full of absurd violence, endless "tough guy" trash-talking, trigger-happy psychopathic idiots, and a plot about nothing... Those deviating from the mainstream consensus may wonder how this film even reaches the top 100. Its humour is dry and uninspired—with about the only amusing line being about tomatoes. The film is devoid of any soul or humanity and is a good example of style over substance. Who am I supposed to sympathize with? The drug dealers? The gangbangers? No investment, no tension, no nothing—nobody on the screen apart from the background civilians matters one bit. Add in the director's awkward and forcefully out of place cameo... The film's drawn-out length... What does make it watchable is the intense performances by some of the cast and high production values.

I first saw this movie when I was little (much younger than 13) and was somewhat mentally scarred by it for a while... My mother instantly regretted having me see the movie, even though we watched it together... She had forgotten how terrifying it is, I forgive her. As an adult, watching this again, I am reminded and terrifyingly surprised just how scary it is. In the beginning, the movie begins as a somewhat satirical overlook of cookie-cutter "McMansion" American suburban life. The father of the story's family is depicted as a stereotypical simple-minded middle-aged and middle-upper class American male, pregnant with the trademark "beer belly." As the events unfold however, Steven Spielberg's writing, along with the rest of the production, shine through... With horrifying special effects, sound design, and nightmarish imagery make this film unforgettable and captivatingly sublime. The cast performs well and suits their characters near perfectly. The end result is a masterclass surrealist horror that is by far one of the best, if not the best, ghost movies ever made.