Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

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

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Mr-Fusion "White House Down" promises slick action and lots of malicious property destruction. On that basis, it's an enjoyable summer diversion, but it's what Roland Emmerich manages to do with it that's really surprising.It's a Die Hard movie. Not even really a clone, but an actual, honest-to-god, best-we've-gotten-since-1995 Die Hard movie. It blows the last two sequels out of the water and fills in the whole checklist: Down-on-his-luck protagonist (check) Confined space (check) Loved one in danger (check) Black sidekick (check) Outside support (check) (the list goes on)Make no mistake, I don't go into these action movies with an actual checklist. But this was a wholly enjoyable curveball. Seriously, did any of us see this movie coming? It looked terrible!

The Movie Diorama You get yourself a hot young lead actor, a musician turned Oscar winner, a director who essentially ejaculates shoddy visual effects that reek of mediocrity and top it off with a story that feels reminiscent to 'Die Hard'...however feels more like 'Die Soft'. Put them all together and you get White House Down, a film so unnecessary and unfortunate with the timing of its release (the same year as 'Olympus Has Fallen') that you start to question its existence. The White House is under attack, the president and government officials are held hostage as terrorists cause havoc and seek demands. John McClane was busy in Moscow, so they got Channing Tatum instead...honestly, I've already forgotten his character's name. Right, so here's the problem. There are unrealistic films that are fun, and then there are fun films that are unrealistic. This falls into the former category. Why? Well alright, here we go! One scene in particular: the president and a "secret service agent" are driving around the front lawn in an armoured limousine being chased down by three SUVs with machine guns, rocket launchers and assault rifles. The president, and I kid you not, gets a rocket launcher as he peers out of the passenger window and fires it. Seriously? Could you imagine Trump doing that? Sweet lord his hair would be all over the place. To conclude, this film is a visual effects mess weighed down by a "comedic" screenplay that hosts an uninspired plot and derivative action. Foxx and Tatum have good chemistry sure, and Clarke still remains decent (although always chooses poor films). And yes, you could say some parts are enjoyable. But Emmerich is so stuck in the past, that the film immediately feels outdated. It's not 1996 anymore, come on! His excessive patriotism is just too much for me. Don't even get me started on the comedic relief that constantly missed, much like the mercenaries who can't fire their weapons for toffee! Just go watch 'Olympus Has Fallen' instead, as this White House is staying down.

EBJ ​Plot Overview: When terrorists attack the Whitehouse, it's up to John Cale(Channing Tatum), a bodyguard looking to join the secret service, to save the president and stop the terrorists.Directed by Roland EmmerichStarring Channing Tatum, Jamie Foxx and Maggie Gyllenhaal# NO SPOILERS!Overall: This movie has some mild entertainment but I think it was unlucky to be released the same year as 'Olympus has Fallen'. I know it may seem unfair to compare the two because of different tones and whatnot but it's hard not to when they came out in the same year, with the same premise. Taking 'Olympus has Fallen' out of the equation, this movie has some fun, stupid action moments with a decent series of performances and some re-watch value but I don't think it will last long. In conclusion, it's a pretty entertaining movie and I can recommend it.I think that the people who will like this movie will be fans of stupid, harmless action and people who like a more light hearted and less serious action movie.Would Recommend.# POSSIBLE SPOILERS!Channing Tatum was pretty good as John Cale. John Cale was an underdog which was a good idea because it made him seem more human. Giving him a daughter also gave him motivation and gave him more leeway with what he did, even if his daughter was really annoying. Jamie Foxx was good as President Sawyer and he provided a fun, unique take on a previously serious role. Maggie Gyllenhaal was fine as Carol Finnerty. James Woods was good as Agent Walker as was Jason Clarke as Stenz. The villains were reasonably strong. Richard Jenkins was fine as speaker of the house. Nicholas Wright was great as Donnie. Joey King was terrible as Emily Cale and I really, really hated her character. The motivations for the villains were also very weak. They tried to make it personal and I understand that but it was still not an excuse to play with a 'nuclear football'.The overall story was fine but the ending was particularly satisfying. The story is pretty slow starting off and can be pretty boring at first.It was a little hard to see during some action scenes but for the most part the cinematography was fine.The success rate for the effects was around 50/50. Some of them looked pretty good whereas some of them looked terrible.It was fun and mindless entertainment. It only gets properly enjoyable after the first 45 minutes. Some of the jokes worked and I laughed once or twice. ​It includes a scene were Jamie Foxx hangs out a limousine, holding a RPG shooting at the front gate of the Whitehouse while they're shot at by Jason Clarke! You should watch just for that scene.The music was pretty cool. The unit of terrorists felt more like a team than a group of just hired guns which one ups 'Olympus has Fallen' in that category. The actual endgame weapon was pretty weak. Personally, I enjoyed the movie from 45 minutes onward but before that I didn't enjoy it that much.7/10

stephen-317 Up against 'Olympus Has Fallen' in a bizarre year that has two films with identical subjects, this film falls foul of the 5.0 threshold rule. Whilst being an enjoyable romp that get's it edging over the IMDb 5 score, it then enters the zone of 'could this film have been better ?'. Humour around 5, love interest around 4 (after some heavy editing), action around 7 but very unconnected. Channing Tatum's film (he produced it as well) deserves a strong 6 but was looking at a 7 if the points all connected.