#FUuumovies | All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Supersonic

(9620) 7.9 122 min 2016

Supersonic is a movie starring Paul Arthurs, Christine Biller, and Mark Coyle. An in-depth look at the life and music of Manchester-based rock band, Oasis.

Mark Coyle, Paul Arthurs, Christine Biller, Debbie Turner
Documentary, Biography, Music
Mat Whitecross

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres Documentary, Biography, Music
Director Mat Whitecross
Stars Mark Coyle, Paul Arthurs, Christine Biller, Debbie Turner
Country UK
Also Known As オアシス スーパーソニック, Oasis: Supersonic, Untitled Oasis Documentary
Runtime 2H 2M
Description An in-depth look at the life and music of Manchester-based rock band, Oasis.

Top reviews

Saturday, 04 Jul 2020 02:26

How would the film have been better had it been released years ago. The film was advertised like a classic rock documentary. It was a shame that some people saw it this way. When it came out, it did sell out and was released in a theater that had an audience of 150 or so people. That was two bad shows, not two good shows. I was left to wonder how such an audience would have liked this film. As it stands now, people are going to see this film thinking it's going to be just like a great documentary about Tom Waits. That's not what the film is. The film is about the backstage stories and the disappointment of the audience who doesn't really care that much about the music. That's not what the film is about. I think that Tom Waits would have been happier with the film that he made about Michael Jackson and the impact he had on his audience. He would have seen it as more of a celebration of an artist. There is also the fear that if Tom Waits decided to release a new documentary about Tom Waits, the filmmakers would be handed the footage for it. So what I see is that the film is the result of a true story, but it's done in a way that helps people forget that it's a true story. Instead of making the film about Tom Waits and his life, it's about his music and how he inspired many people to go out and be a part of that music. I don't think the film would have been half as successful had it been released today. The big problem is that, aside from the subject matter, the film has little substance. It's a collection of scenes, and a lot of it is "just there." For example, the scene where Tom Waits talks to the television about how he was a rock star. It's just there. The music is not even mentioned. They talk about the record and it is not even that interesting. It is not an important part of the film. They talk about music that's not even the point of the film. I do think that the film did have some positive value, such as the footage of the first concert that was held by Tom Waits. That was very powerful. I think that the film is for those who like documentary style films, and not for the general audience.
Wednesday, 01 Jul 2020 05:44

I think the greatest thing about this film is that we are finally seeing the stories of the kids that used to make the music - the real stories - now almost forgotten by the music industry. There are the struggles of being the underdog, a romantic story about an older woman falling in love with a younger man, a song about a songwriter, the story of a young woman who hates her mother, a story of an African-American woman who felt so angry about the music industry that she had to be a dancer and perform in public, and a story of a jazz musician who really loved and cared about his mother. They are all told beautifully and their stories are all told very well. The best part is that there are no manufactured scenes. It is the same way that a documentary could be. Even though the film is in black and white and the music is mixed, you don't know which side the artist was on - in a way that no film has ever done before. When a filmmaker tries to tell the story of a musician, you don't know the musician - you just know the music. So we have the great musicians telling the story. When the filmmaker tries to tell the story of a young girl, you don't know the story - you just know the music. You can feel the pain in her voice as she tells her story. We can't go back to our own childhood and tell a story about that. This film tells a story of the real people who have been forgotten and the real artistry that was put into the music of the '60s. The music has always been about finding your voice, exploring, exploring, exploring, exploring - and the movies are just a way to get from point A to point B. The music is the voice, the artistry is the artistry, and the film is the artistry - just as music was about music. This film is wonderful and moving. The music is played beautifully, the story is told wonderfully and the way the music and the story are integrated are very important. I have learned so much about the music and the people who played it, and I don't want to miss any of the stories in this movie.
Friday, 12 Jun 2020 04:27

It is not possible to compare this movie with 'Independence Day' or 'Robotech' or 'Anno Domini' and so on. This movie is different. This movie is about the actual war and the war fought against the will of the people of the country where it took place. That's it. If the government hadn't sent a man to the moon in the 1970s, it would not be an even debate as to whether this movie is truthful or not. This movie tells the truth, the bad guys weren't as bad as they have been made out to be in all these 'documentaries' in recent years. They weren't good guys, they were not perfect, but they weren't the bad guys. In all honesty, they did the right thing. They stayed in bed. They knew what was right and what was wrong and there's nothing wrong with that. This is the true story of the Vietnam war. This is the true story of a nation that went to war in Vietnam and fought it out with a country that had never attacked them. The big lie of 'Independence Day' is that it showed the American people not knowing what was going on. Well, they did know, but they didn't know it in the '70s. They knew it in the '60s and the '50s. It was known and the media wasn't all wrong. It wasn't just a bunch of guys in bikinis fighting other guys in bikinis. There were war crimes, no question about that. But the Vietnamese people were living and fighting their war. They knew it and they were fighting their war. They weren't all bad guys, but they weren't good guys. They were fighting what they believed was right. It was fought out in the midst of hatred and rage. And as the news organizations said at the time of the movie, the news agencies weren't being truthful, because they had no other way to get their information. They had nothing to put in the air. They were coming up with all kinds of stories, and it was very hard for them to decide what to put into the news, and what to leave out. It was a difficult task and they worked hard to produce the best possible film. It wasn't a perfect film, but it wasn't a bad film. It wasn't a biased film, either. I think it was telling the truth about what happened in Vietnam, and that's what I think the filmmakers meant by the title of the movie. The 'War Crimes Trials' mentioned in the movie, where the Americans were trying to show the Vietnamese people that they were wrong about what they did and what they were trying to do was wrong. That's what it was all about. And we see this film and think that this is a bad war film, because we had the misinformed media covering the events of the war and everything that happened to us. But it wasn't the misinformed media. There were Vietnam war crimes, and that's what they're about, but it wasn't just a war crime, it was a war crime that had been going on in our country since the '50s. And as the news agencies said at the time of the movie, it wasn't just a bunch of soldiers shooting each other. The same press corps interviewed the Vietnamese people and showed the propaganda in the Vietnamese propaganda. They showed the ridiculous propaganda in the Vietnamese propaganda. They showed the American people being killed. They showed what was happening in Vietnam and what was happening to the Vietnamese people. They showed the fear and anger of the Vietnamese people, and the terror that they felt in Vietnam. There's nothing wrong with showing the truth, but it's not what war is about. War is about killing, and it's about making money, and it's about losing people and getting it back. It's about not being able to watch your country for another twenty years. The film is not about 'the Vietnamese people being wrong', it's about the Vietnamese people being right. It's about them surviving in
Sunday, 24 May 2020 20:42

On a certain level, the movie was an indictment of the success of the music industry. There were musical performances, artists, and characters that were new to the public, and very few "authentic" musicians or musicians themselves. I was reminded of "Citizen Kane," a masterpiece of the movies and art of the time, in that it was about a film that was created to tell a story, but at the end, it all became a surreal mess. This movie was about what happens when a new artist arrives and stars in a movie with all the familiar elements that the artists they portray are known for. You can expect to see one of these performers play a specific instrument, but not show up in a film (maybe a famous one). You can expect a whole film about the performance, and not actually show a performance. There were some story lines that were told with long pauses, that really showed how sad they were for many people that saw these things. The celebrities talked about their love for the music, but what I felt the most was their anger at this new generation of artists that did not have to deal with the people who created them. I felt there was more anger than love for them, and the focus should have been on the person that made the music, not the one that was lucky enough to be there at the right time. I felt many of the actors who acted in the film should have been completely focused on their roles, instead of focusing on the celebrity they have been selected to play. It was clear that most of the actors had only just started to realize how difficult their part was. I feel most of the characters had very little background to tell about their personalities. The most obvious one would be the person who created the new "look." The man who created the new makeup used, had not gotten the proper training and was always quick to anger. I felt the man who created the clothes used in the movie was barely trying to fit in. The woman who sang the songs was not happy at all, except for the few moments that were perhaps a little too frequent. I would recommend seeing this film at the movie theater. I think it is important to see how each individual actor became famous and how they had to deal with the people they were playing, because it is clear the people that created the characters in this movie were not there for the people that created them.
Friday, 22 May 2020 00:00

When I first heard about this documentary, I was curious as to what it was about and who was going to be interviewed. This was not to be the case. While the filmmakers were attempting to show us the film history of the careers of the late 1970's and early 1980's, they were constantly thrown into a mess of choices. In order to capture these moments, they had to cut away from interviews to illustrate the story instead of adding in how these famous acts are a part of our collective heritage and the journey that they take us on. This is the fault of the film. It isn't enough to just capture a moment, but to add to the conversation of the time. Yet I think that the main problem with the film is that the most important moments from these artists are not adequately portrayed. Like with the "Wings" movie, we can tell that these moments were important, but they're often not properly captured. This is not a criticism of the film itself. Rather it's just a comment on the choice of content that was chosen. This is not a criticism of how it's presented. It's just a problem with what was presented, not the content itself. I can appreciate that the content is present in the documentary. The film is a collection of interviews with artists, and it covers many different aspects of their careers, including the time period and how the music grew, their philosophies and the jobs they took on. It covers the different stages of their careers, from being a part of the band, to being a solo artist and so on. The other problem is the choice of interviews. I wasn't disappointed in the interviews, but the choices were disjointed. A good example is with Jerry Reed. Reed made a significant contribution to the punk scene, but there are many interviews with him that are about his solo work. He's often asked about his musical contributions, but he's also asked about his own personal life, including his divorce. If I wanted to know about his personal life, I'd need to know about his career, because the interviews don't tell us about any of the other things he did. I do like that they put a lot of emphasis on the musicians, but it's still a mess. I'm glad that they had many interviews with the artists, but the stories are not always tied together. In the end, I was glad that they were trying to show how artists can be involved in creating their own personal legacy, but I didn't really feel that the stories were connected well. I thought that the clips were a good addition to the documentary, but they weren't really put to use, and when they were, they just didn't convey the full significance of the clip. The acting was fine. I didn't think that I was left with the impression of how good or bad the performances were. I also thought that the interviews were all worth watching, because it was an interesting story about the music and the men involved. I would recommend this film to anyone who likes a good documentary about music. It does have a few plot holes that it does not resolve, but it's still a worthwhile documentary, and worth seeing.
Tuesday, 12 May 2020 20:08

How I would describe this documentary is a combination of the documentary style of a two-man video crew working with a city-destroying meteor. Mr. Haynes, like many film makers in this country, is a former NASA engineer and in the vein of James Cameron or Peter Jackson, his interviewees are technical experts that have many years of experience in the field of spaceflight. Most of them are engineers, yet many of them have never even seen a film or been in the position of an astronaut. As a result, this documentary was extremely fascinating to watch. I would describe this as a portrait of the people that is as much about the people involved in the NASA projects as it is about the people that are living out the lives of these high-flying astronauts. In this respect, the film is wonderful, but it could have been so much more. Because of its structure, it is also about the people's personal relationships with their leaders. People like Dan Kottke and Gwynne Shotwell had to fight with the pressures of being a personal family member of a first-class astronaut. Many people had the opportunity to meet and know these people, but they were not able to use it. What I liked most about the film was that the interviewer was not an engineer. We rarely get a true look at what goes on behind the scenes in NASA. Haynes goes to the ultimate NASA event and interviews the men who work for the shuttle, the astronauts, and the scientists who work with the space programs. This may be the most powerful film about NASA to date. It is also a good film for anyone who is interested in the space program, or just wants to know more about it. You are always able to get a great deal from a documentary that has more than two interviews. My only complaint about the documentary is that it was so long. In the end, I can see how the documentary may be a little bit long. The DVD is absolutely amazing, and features many great extras. I would recommend this documentary to everyone.
Friday, 01 May 2020 21:12

The minute the opening credits began, I knew that this was going to be a film that I was going to want to see. It would be a film that I was going to watch. I was prepared to watch it without thinking that it was going to be very exciting or engaging. However, I didn't expect it to be as good as it turned out to be. While I am an audiophile, I was not aware of this film's relationship with the album soundtrack before seeing it. However, after watching it, I realize that the film is about the soundtrack. It is extremely important to anyone who owns the soundtrack that it be released as an album. It is a true story that a man who had just been fired by his manager, chose to spend the rest of his life listening to this soundtrack that made the album what it is. The music in this film is by far the best I have heard since the Beatles. The songs are sometimes very emotional and sometimes very inspiring. The music in this film is completely different from any other soundtrack. All of the music that I have heard is just that, music. You will not find any music in this film that you will recognize or like. The soundtrack has a very strong sense of order and tradition to it. All of the music that is on this soundtrack is by far the best music that has ever been heard. However, it is not the music that is the greatest of the film. It is the music that makes the film what it is. The music is a conceptually well thought out concept that is tied to the story of the film. I could not think of a better soundtrack. I highly recommend that anyone who owns the soundtrack watch the film with this soundtrack. It is absolutely perfect and should be released as an album. The soundtrack, in all it's entirety, is very entertaining and is the best soundtrack ever. Overall, this film was absolutely amazing. I have never seen a film that so much was made and so much was said about it. I believe that the film was a lot of people's dream of having a film made about them. The film was extremely moving and very exciting. I really enjoyed it and I am now going to make it my only dream to have a film that everyone should watch. However, while I have this film as my first film, I believe that it is not the best film ever made.

Write a review