Change Your Image
digdog-785-717538
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Knowing (2009)
bad from start to end
It doesn't actually matter that the ending is forced and out of place with the main plot, because the entire film is constantly trying far too hard to create suspense, where there is none. I say this because the main plot, given away in the trailers - of the girl having written a premonition of accidents that will happen (in the US only, obviously) - is suuuuper obvious to the audience, and becomes rapidly obvious to the protagonist as well. So MAYBE having secondary character trying to play off how it could have been a conincidence, is something the film needs to push on harder to create any kind of a suspense, rather than keeping us yawning for an hour to wait for the protagonist to catch us.
And, the whole thing is just not great to look at. Yeah ok, the theme is of (Cage's character) knowing about the accidents but not being able to do anything to change them, and, is that it? Because it seems to me that that's it.
Then you get this shoehorned in horribad ending, and you're left wondering why you had to sit through 90 minutes of this film for nothing of interest to happen that wasn't already in the trailer.
My vote: 5/10 - there's too many good films out there to waste your time on this.
The Penguin (2024)
Yeah but no.
I remember when "The Batman" came out a whole lot of people did not like it, despite having so many things going for it - a new grimdark Batman, the fantastic Zoe Kravitz as Catwoman, an unrecognizable Colin Farrell as the Penguin, a great Batmobile and tons of excellent realistic action. (ok may not the crash in the batsuit)
But yeah, i can see why a 3+ hour film where every.damn.detail needs to be investigated to exhaustion can result in a product that overstays its welcome.
But The Penguin is still more of the same. It may not be as dark (which, to be honest, i a bit weird), and Ferrell is still great, but plot-wise it's just yet-another mafia film, with a too-long runtime, too little content. I won't add spoilers but you've seen the first episode, you already know there's literally 3 things only that happen in it.
At the same time you got masterpieces like Godfather Of Harlem, where every element is better in every way, be it acting, or dialogue, or pacing. Or even the previous Gotham, which was waaay too high-strung and maniacal, but at least it had creativity. The Penguin .. is just a mafia guy.
Idk, maybe it will get better. Maybe not.
My vote: 6/10.
Borderlands (2024)
not as horrible as everyone else says
Ok so, this may sound crazy, but i watched Borderlands, and i thought it was decent.
Certainly not a masterpiece, but it starts strong.. and then slows down. It also doesn't really have a good "beat" (the sense where a film is progressing at a consistent rate, through several scenes that "make a point" or "strike a beat"), and the story suffers because it's very brief.
Cate Blanchett - who as always has a fantastic screen presence - is Lilith the siren, from the games. Except, she doesn't know that she is a siren, she thinks she is a miserable bounty-hunter whose mom abandoned her.
Evil Guy tells her to kidnap a child, and this is a Child Of Prophecy, and with the child then McGuffin Stuff will happen.
She immediately, like, within 5 minutes, finds the unfindable child, and again in the same scene they all make friends and become a Team, and Teams Stick Together(tm).
Then they straight up go to the mine where the Magical Key Needed For The McGuffin is and find it right away in a self-referencing scene ("but how did you find it so quickly?").
Again Evil Guy shows up and they just have a big fight where Lilith just wipes the floor with everyone using her magical powers.
Eh .. it's not GREAT ok, no, but it's not as obscenely bad as i was told it would be. Actually i think that with very slight changes to the direction, this could have been a very satisfying, if simple, popcorn movie.
I thought the costumes were pretty damn great.
I though Kevin Hart was fun, but i also see him playing a spoof of other Kevin Hart roles.
Cate Blanchett was good in every way.
Tiny Tina, i didn't like. But this is because i LOVE the games' version of Tiny Tina and anything less is an abomination, to me.
Moxxi i am not sure why, they decided to make old and ugly. She's supposed to be a fox, but here looks like a spent saloon prostitute.
The Psycho guy was excellent.
Evil Guy was not good. I can't stand evil guys that sit in the middle of the battlefield and do nothing.
Jamie Lee Curtis .. is too old. She can't play any physical roles, and sadly, can't move on a damn movie set. What is it that, she looks always like she's never seen a camera before.
And, the saving grace of this film, Claptrap was actually funny. If anyone thinks this is a bad character because he's ANNOYING, they don't know who Claptrap is.
I'd give it a 5.5/10, almost-decent film score.
The Illusionist (2006)
eeeh .. idk, not great.
It seems that all the components of a good film are present in The Illusionist;
we got a decent villain that looks and acts villanously, while having a reasonable motivation to do this.
We got a formidable sidekick, Paul Giamatti's police inspector, who also doubles as a antagonist.
And we got Norton playing the .. well, the protagonist?
See, my problem with this film is that, while what above is in theory the structure of the film, in reality the protagonist of The Illusionist is the policeman. Giamatti is the character with an arc, the hero who defeats the villain, the one who discovers The Truth.
Norton instead plays a rather mediocre character; as a young boy, he's got a love interest in princess Sofia, but nothing becomes of it for 10+ years. Sure, when he returns with magnificent powers, we'd think he would do the typical Hero stuff, conquer the princess's hand and heart, defeat the villain AND the sidekick antagonist police-guy, but in reality most of this effort is shifted onto Giamatti's character.
So when the film spends time on Norton's doings, focusing on him, and expecting the audience to question what they have understood about this character, really instead the film should have kept him as a background event, while focusing on Giamatti's police-guy.
Idk, it wasn't bad, but the good ideas it has are badly used. Giamatti is absolutely fantastic as always, TO A FAULT, as he completely obscures Norton's mediocre talent.
Would not recommend.
My vote: 5.8/10.
Rick and Morty: The Anime (2024)
absolutely ghastly, and then it gets worse
Really quick review, in case you're having this read to you via text-to-speech and miraculously failed to see the torrent of 1/10 review scores, but this show is not R&M, this is a not-Rick-and-Morty show using the R&M characters as costumes.
In itself, "The Anime" is a extremely mediocre, boring, not at all well animated, tv show about, ermm, not having the talent to write R&M content. Literally these characters will do things as the main plot which in the actual R&M show are just filler; Summer checking a monitor. Rick having a drink. Yep, these are plot points in this MAGNIFICENT show.
But then .. then there's the sponsored reviews. Guys, if your show is being rated 2.7/10 on IMDb, paying a bunch of guys to give you a 10/10 review isn't magically going to change the future of the show.
Your show sucks, admit it and move on.
YES mr "account opened this month with only one review, which is a 10/10, for this show".
My vote: 4/10 as a show in itself, 2/10 if you are seeing this as a Rick & Morty product.
Hundreds of Beavers (2022)
ok wow this was really super weird
Look, i won't lie, this isn't an easy-to-watch film.
Hundred Of Beavers is completely in B&W, and, there is *no* dialogue. When people talk, they just make weird sounds.
There is a clearly explained .. surprisingly clearly explained - given that it's all done in weird game-like symbols and instructions - plot about a fur trapper that needs to trap Hundreds Of Beavers, so that he can marry smoking hot trapper babe (Olivia Graves, sadly here showing not an inch of her super duper bod).
This film is *exceptionally* surreal and abstract, to the point where it leaves in the dust films like Dernier Combat or Dead Man.
There is a particular scene where the protagonist is "talking" (making funny noises and gestures at) to an old trapper, and they are clearly discussing the excellent properties of a horse; and the "horse" is literally just some guy in a horse costume, with his very human face sticking out of the costume.
The costume is badly designed *on purpose*
It took me a lot of courage to watch this film, and a couple good glasses of vodka. I probably wouldn't recommend it over, say, Rubber, but absolutely would recommend it for a night with the boys, beer and vodka and playing this thing, trying to figure out what's happening on-screen.
Maybe not the best film of the year, but absolutely one of the most unique films i have ever seen.
My vote: 7.5/10.
The Holdovers (2023)
this .. was not good.
You know, it's not like Paul Giamatti forgot how to act, of that there's any noticeable holes in the script; but this story has been done before .. like, SO many times. And better.
Giamatti is a professor in a boarding school, set in modern days. Angus is the problem child that can't go on winter break. They are frienemies stuck together, and the prof goes from vaguely stern antagonist to father figure - and the student goes from a**hole to victim - which is a story arc that a blind man can see MILES AWAY, and while it's obviously well made, The Holdovers doesn't exist in a vacuum, it exists in a world where the same story has been done a hundred times and with far more skill. For such a bland drama, there are no grounds to think that playing the story documentary-levels straight would make this in any way better to its many and superior predecessors.
6/10 just barely.
Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1 (2024)
Already horrendous for Part 1
The first 10, maybe 15 minutes of the film show a lot of promise. Great photography, great visuals, a no-nonsense approach to historically-accurate westerns, and the conflict between settlers and indians.
Yeah well, none of that is relevant.
Three hours of runtime, with every character in the show (all 93 credited and 7 uncredited) gets their own subplot, and absolutely no main story short of "whelp, here's some ol'west settlers, doin' stuff, with injuns, n' rattlesnakes, n' shooting n' drinking n' stuff".
THERE. IS. NO. PLOT.
Oh yeah wait, there is, the plot is "wow, wasn't life hard in the west?".
Yep, that's all you get. No spoilers because there is nothing to spoil.
Production-wise, it's certainly expensive (if nothing else, for the literally one-hundred named actors), but even then there is midway through the film a baffling change in photography, that is absolutely inexcusable for a modern production film.
Really, i cannot recommend this. 1883 did this much better, even following the same "a subplot for everyone" formula, obviously Dances With Wolves is on another planet compared to this, even Heaven's Gate has actually more of a discernible plot than Horizon, and without a plot that clearly points out the risks, stakes and motivation of the characters, i can't say much for the acting either.
The only good news is the very brief part of an absolutely stunning Wasé Chief, in a very brief role.
My vote: 5/10 (and even then you got better choices)
Miller's Girl (2024)
perhaps the best film of the year
Ok so, difficult film to review.
MASSIVE SPOILERS BELOW.
Martin "Bilbo Baggins" Freeman is Jon Miller, the titular, but *not* the writer Henry Miller.
Jenna Ortega is Cairo, a precocious and talented literature student.
Jon and Cairo - while being different individuals, rather than falling for the "kindred spirits" trope - do both share a common interest and better-than-average insight into modern literature.
One day Cairo gets the hots for Jon (primarily spurred on by a supporting character, the excellent Dagmara Dominczyk), and decides to do a writing assignment on copying the style of Henry Miller, the author.
She does this, and essentially churns out what is a pornographic fan-fiction of Jon and Cairo having hot, illegal sex.
Obviously adult responsible professor Jon says "i can't grade this, it's too risque' for the world", but what he means is "while i LITERALLY taught you that THIS IS WHAT ART IS, i am too much of a coward to play my part". And for this, Cairo crucifies him.
When Jon tries to look for help in that solid, stable world that he has created elsewhere - his colleagues, his wife, the school - they throw it back in his face, saying "you are as much of a villain as Cairo is"; because Jon loves to praise the revolutionary aspect of art, but is happy to shield himself from any risk and misery that may come with it, and Cairo, she's happy to trample anyone, in the name of that revolution.
This is NOT an easy film to watch. The acting, dialogue, delivery, is absolutely excellent. The soundtrack is very good, the audio itself sometimes is not great, there's some whispered lines that are difficult to understand, the photography and color is excellent in MOST parts (a few ugly out-of-focus scenes), and while the direction isn't perfect, this is a difficult script to work with.
My vote: 8.5/10 for quality, 7.5/10 if you are looking for "entertainment".
The Blue Rose (2023)
shockingly bad
Absolutely horrendous film in that style where, if nobody knows how to act, then everyone is a good actor. Likewise, if you completely ignore every rule of good filmmaking, voila' it becomes "artistic" and "avantgarde".
Two twenty-something spoiled kids read off some dialogue implying that they are "detectives". They do some detectiving and see ghosts, apparitions, scary ladies with knives, all with different filter. So maybe one hallway is ALL BLUE, or a kitchen is ALL YELLOW, because *art*.
Shame because the production looks like they spent some money on it, but it seems that not a single talented filmmaker was involved in any way, because it's atrocious from the first to the last scene.
My vote: 4.5/10.
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
A film about life, but also a film about Life.
Starring AND directed by, Ben Stiller. The man is full of surprises.
Good, if not perfect, film about life. And, about Life (you'll see).
The Life Of .. Walter Mitty, i felt several times that it was a 8/10 film that shoots itself in the foot back to a 7/10.
There is one principal gag, which then repeats itself a dozen times, over and over. By the time i was 47 minutes in, i thought i was near the end of the film, but NOPE, CHUCK TESTA for another hour.
I really liked ALL the versions of this gag, but someone should have told Ben Stiller to streamline the whole affair, even at the cost of losing some scenes which, individually, are worth watching.
But nobody did. And so you got a film that has sooooo many scenes that, you will like, and then you will never want to watch the film again. Because it's too much. Because, it doesn't get to the point.
Take instead, let's pull a random film out of a hat, Zoolander. The first one, not that abomination that is Zool.. ugh .. you know what i mean.
The film is *perfect*. There is not once scene which repeats itself, there is not a scene you need to cut, and they are all good, and they all drive forward the plot from its start to its conclusion.
Well, Walter Mitty doesn't do this. And it's a shame.
My Vote: 7/10.
Only Lovers Left Alive (2013)
it ... sucks.
My first Jaramusch film was Ghost Dog, and i've been since chasing that elusive high, with very poor results. And boy, i've seen them all, Dead Man, Daunbailo',Coffee And Cigarettes ..
Vampires.
Except that they have no trait in common with vampires, aside from the fact that they like to get high drinking blood that they buy from blood banks.
Tom "Loki" Hiddleston is vampire dude, Tilda Swinton is vampire chick. They meet and hang out, occasionally talk to vampire John Hurt and another vampire girl, and THEY. DO. NOTHING.
There is no plot. There is NO story, literally they just meet and talk. There is no antagonist, there is no McGuffin, no object of desire, no challenges to overcome. You can remove the vampire stuff entirely and it's just a couple of emo punks who hang out and "smoke weed" (drink blood). At this point, this isn't even vampire stuff, like a decent vampire film, say, The Lost Boys.
Yeah ok it's well shot, it's well acted, but this is just another non-film, it's just a bunch of guys on camera waiting for a script to arrive.
5/10.
Hit Man (2023)
terribly unfunny
So .. this is a film about a guy who - as a civilian - works helping the police in undercover stings. One day because of circumstances, he is "promoted on the field" to speak to a suspect, pretend to be a contract killer, so the police can use the recording to arrest the suspect.
He's pretty good at it, and THIS IS THE FILM. There is one actor, Glen Powell, who just does this "i'm two people" act throughout the entire film. This film is branded as a comedy, but there is nothing funny about it. The final scene has him become an actual killer, which is phoned in from about a third of the way in, and absolutely nothing worth of notice happens in between.
5/10 - the person who wrote this thought it was waaaay funnier than it actually is. (guess who the writer is? Yup .. it's Glen Powell)
Amsterdam (2022)
Absolutely atrocious
Imagine a film so bad, the idea of having to type out all the bad things that make it bad just takes the wind out of you. Where the neverending torrent of awfulness is just so deep and so wide that you find yourself trying to find a way to skirt the job, to not have to go through with it. I had to suffer through watching the film, now i have to suffer again typing the review.
And now imagine that to bring something THAT BAD to the screen, you needed Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Anya Taylor-Joy, John Washington, Colleen Camp, Rami Malek, Mike Myers, and even Chris Rock and Taylor Swift!!
Amsterdam is the vaguely-inspired-by The Business Plot story of a doctor in Amsterdam, in the pre-war days. He discovers a murder and there's hints of a shadowy plot, but this shadowy plot is taking place *somewhere else* and nearly NONE of it is actually in the film.
The script is also bathed in quasi-nonsensical dialogue that contributes nothing to the story, leaving you with a runtime of 2 full hours and maybe at most 30 minutes of content. It's a thriller that understands nothing of what makes a thriller, even a barely competent one. There's scene after scene after scene of absolutely disgraceful incompetence in filmmaking, from the behaviour of the characters, to the redundant dialogue, to the vulgarly self-indulgence of the tedious plot. This was genuinely one of the worst things i have ever watched and i will remember it for the rest of my life.
My vote: 4/10 i'm being generous.
Doctor Who: Boom (2024)
reasonably good
I tuned in more out of desperation that hope, given how horrible the last several years of Doctor Who have been, with the last few episodes being possibly some of the worst tv material i have ever seen, so much so that i was actually surprised at how competent this episode was.
The Doctor is stuck on a battlefield. He is immobilized and cannot move or interact with the world, if not by talking. He has to reason his way around a brutish war that kills for numbers more than for purpose. The entire episode is centered around dialogue, characters, and a surprisingly well directed sense of urgency.
It's not perfect. It's nowhere near the brilliancy of the early reboot years, the ending is flawed, with the imminent danger just "going away" and a big deus ex machina that is introduced at the very last few seconds, so yeah, the road ahead is still a long uphill climb, but compared to the previous 2 episodes it's a gem. The script does away with all that *you know what* nonsense, which is a saving grace. We can only hope for more of the same.
Lifeforce (1985)
big'ol space-vampire jugs
I know that saying "Lifeforce is good because it's got BIG OL' JUGS" isn't the most serious approach to film review, but i think Lifeforce is unique because it's thoroughly a spectacle. Hear me out.
The film is divided into 4 major acts;
Act 1 is the approach to the alien starship. It has a solid Hard Sci-Fi tone and concludes with the shock of finding the bodies in stasis.
Act 2 has a mystery-horror vibe, the body is brought into the lab and they try to find what it is, and then a Monster(tm) is revealed.
Act 3 is the Monster(tm) running rampage in the city, classic 1960s Monster(tm) film with army guys shooting their completely useless weapons at the Monster(tm) and being totally ineffective.
Act 4 .. we don't speak of Act 4. The church and all that horrible special effects stuff that looks more like a Zombie movie than anything else.
The first 3 acts are all very, very well made. The tone is correct, the pacing is fine, the acting and directing is ok, and the film tropes are all nice and lined up ready to pop out as you'd expect them.
And through this spectacle, that could be the spaceship sections, the shooting sections, the mood lighting of the mystery sections, everything is very visually pleasing.
Now, if you've ever watched films of these genre (Scif / Mystery Horror / Monster) of the 60s and 70s, you would know that the Monster plays a very important part; you show the audience the details of the monster you made, (generally a big ugly rubber suit) and they all go OOoooh! Look at the monster !!
And in Lifeforce instead they replaced the Monster with Mathilda May's big lifeforcebags. With her watermelons. Her humongous jars of baby milk.
Eh, it's one way to make a film. It's not the first time that someone thought of gluing your eyes to the screen with a beautiful woman, and i can't blame them, because it sells.
All in all we need to see past May's enormous gazongas, and appreciate the fact that she's the equivalent of a rubber-suit special effect: something to be appreciated for how visually striking it is.
Now .. if they could only re-shoot that horrible ending ...
My vote: a solid 7.5/10 in Director's Cut edition, because nobody can watch Lifeforce and say it didn't have an impact on them.
Dune: Part Two (2024)
Masterpiece blah blah blah, unforgettable blah blah etc ..
.. there is a wall. Not a shield wall, that protects Arrakeen from the deep desert, but rather a cultural wall. A wall where those who came before are used to a higher quality, a finesse in filmmaking, which is lost on those who came later. Who like LOUD, BIG, and absolutely on-the-nose film.
While i place on a pedestal the immortal masterpiece by Lynch, Dune 2 was just mediocre. Not as bad as Dune .. uh .. 1? But still not really good.
I mean, i can't forget that i have seen 1984 Dune, so maybe i could like this a bit more if the first film never existed. I could forget the magnificent sets, the fantastic costumes, the amazing soundtrack, the superb direction and pacing, the acting of Jose Ferrer, of Kenneth McMillian, of Max von Sydow. We could forget that Lynch figured out that Space Kungfu wouldn't work and fixed the fighting and the ending, but then i would be left only with what little Dune 2 has to offer - a bunch of bland CGI stolen from the internet, horrible costumes, and a story which would maybe have better impact if it had anything like a decent direction. While VIlleneuve did the fairly good Sicario, to me he will always be the guy who made a mockery of Blade Runner.
And here is the wall. You either do, or do not like. You are on one side or the other. You can't like the new Blade Runner and also like the old one, you can't like Dune 2 and Dune 1984 at the same time, because if you grew up with the cinema sensibility that created such masterpieces as the original Dune and Blade Runner, you will simply be bored at the complete lack of artistic quality that their remakes have. And if you DO like the new ones, you don't even know what to look at, when you're shown the old ones.
Dune 2 was bad. Not horrible bad, but disappointing, sad bad. Sad that we insult the intelligence of our audience so much, and sad that they can't even tell.
My vote: i don't know, 10/10 if you are a teenager, 5.5/10 if you are an adult.
Outlaw Johnny Black (2023)
oh good god no
Look, if you came to find another Black Dynamite, stay away for the love of god. BD is as good as this film is bad.
.. same cast & crew as BD, MJ White is still fantastic and charismatic, but he cannot alone carry this film.
Some outlaw guy in the west has a grudge against a bottom-of-the-barrel villain who killed his daddy. The Hero masquerades as a preacher to avoid the law, while pursuing said villain, then finds him and kills him.
.. i mean, you could write a similar bad review of BD that doesn't explain at all the qualities of that film, but the truth is that BD has excellence coming out of every pore, from the quirky characters, the surreal scenes, the excellent editing and direction, the jokes, the soundtrack, everything is good.
And instead OJB has nothing of this; even the character of Johnny Black isn't that great compared to Black Dynamite, but the jokes are bad, the direction is bad, the editing is bad, the sets & photography are bad, the film completely misses that surreal atmosphere, the tight pacing, all the good qualities that make BD and excellent film, and that make this film a waste of time.
My vote: 4.8/10 - really, really bad.
The Outside Story (2020)
VERY good film.
I generally prefer films with complex plots, and i also generally recoil at the very concept of a comedy-drama. But The Outside Story is both these things, but also very good.
Charles is boring, lame Newyorker. He is content with sitting at home doing nothing, he has a stuffy job that he takes way too seriously and it bums him out, and he is generally not fun to be around. Charles' girlfriend Isha has unfortunately come to the same conclusion, and at the very start of the film, she has left him. To make things worse, in a moment of absentmindedness, Charles also locks himself out of his Brooklyn apartment.
No keys, a dying phone battery, no money, no shoes, in order to survive the day, without starving, getting arrested or soiling himself, Charles has to urgently learn how to Deal With People.
.. everything about this film is done the way *I* expect a film to be done; well written, superbly acted, interesting characters that spring out of the setting rather than sticking out, good pacing, good photography, good soundtrack, spotless dialogue, and TOS works both as a comedy, but also as a drama.
I would happily recommend this film. The plot is simple, but do not let that deceive you - there is plenty of enjoyment to be had here.
My vote: 7.5/10 - a lovely, well made film that delivers more than expected.
Radical (2023)
WTH are you even talking about.
Normally when i see a number of 10/10 reviews on such a poor quality film, i think they are "sponsored" reviews (e.g. Paid or otherwise people who have an interest in the film having a higher score, idk maybe the film's own crew), but in this case i think it's genuinely people who have watched this film, and somehow thought it was some kind of a masterpiece.
Radical is the story of a teacher who teaches young kids in a poor city in Mexico.
Than in of itself is fine, there's nothing wrong with this, but the plot isn't really anything more than just this line, "a teacher teaches kids".
The problem is that film is absolutely horrid from a filmmaking point of view. The camera wobbles, and pans incessantly over stand-ins, does not highlight protagonists, even cuts midway the face of a character mid-dialogue.
The photography is absolutely horrid, everything is washed out, no colours, i'm talking gray-white over pale azure over mauve over light brown, the palette is absolutely ghastly.
The dialogue is .. i'm sorry but this is just not film dialogue.
Do you remember "OH CAPTAIN MY CAPTAIN" ?
I just can't wrap my head around the fact that *i* get how films are made, but someone who is paid to make a film doesn't. You can't just have mundane character delivering mundane dialogue in mundane settings because that does not make for a captivating film.
There is barely any acting worth mentioning. The plot is almost nonexistent, and what little "teacher inspires student" we have here has already been done better before - and several times over, while *also* having the issues of poverty and crime.
And if you really, really want to instead watch a film that is about poverty and crime, watch City of God instead.
Sorry but, if you are giving 10/10 to this, you don't know how to review films.
My score: 4.5/10 - a truly mediocre script made even more insufferable by abysmal production qualities.
Saltburn (2023)
i have my limits
I could have managed with a clone of Mr Ripley, and with an unlikable protagonist, both obsessive and psychotic .. but it's just the incessant homosexuality i can't stomach.
I'm sorry, call me a bigot but at some point it's just too much for me. It's not an ideological issue, i'm all for freedom and rainbow flags, but i'm not the target audience, and i can't watch protracted scenes that make me .. uneasy, so to speak.
Otherwise, nice cinematography, and i'm sure others will find this film far superior than i did - happy for you.
I wish there was a way to say "i tried to watch this, couldn't, NO RATING", but there isn't one, so i will give a middle-of-the-board rating,
My Vote: 5/10 - it should probably make it clear that it's not for everyone.
Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)
.. i cannot believe i waited 2 years for this
Look, there's hundreds of reviews that explain this, probably better than mine. If you want more in-depth details about why KOTFM fails, read those.
My simplified review is, that this film has a very, VERY unlikable protagonist, a mediocre villain whose villainy is spelled out from the first dialogue, and yet in theory should remain a surprise, no interesting supporting characters, which leaves you only the script to watch the film for.
And the script is a bland "crime" .. uh .. documentary? Because it has none of the living beat, the sense of urgency that a crime film needs.
And the worst crime is that this film isn't just over 3 hours long, but it has a shockingly complete lack of visual talent. It's just SO UGLY to look at. At least The Revenant had *some* style, it was unique and maybe not to everyone's taste, but it did. Heavens Gate even looks and plays better than this.
Whatever Scorsese had all those many years ago, he's joined the list of filmmakers who have forgotten the basics of how to make a film.
5.5/10.
È già ieri (2004)
surprisingly good. but, also, in Italian.
I happen to be Italian so i speak the language and, i can also experience the joy of explaining endlessly to foreigners how much i hate the neorealism school with Bicycle Thieves n' all that garbage.
And so i have the luck to be able to enjoy what is, essentially, a 1:1 clone of Groundhog Day.
Yeah this film isn't *inspired by*, it's a complete ripoff.
But, it's not bad. It's surprisingly good, i would say. While the setting is different (we have no idea what a groundhog even is) and there are different character in the story, these come as a benefit and not a hindrance. Stork Day (better known as "It's Already Yesterday") is more focused on the romance between the Bill Murray clone and the love interest than the original is (which is more focused on the "finding yourself" aspect), but the jokes are fresh and the performances are solid.
Just goes to show that, if you give an Italian a script that isn't cringeworthy garbage, even they can make a decent film.
My vote: 7/10 IF you speak the language (dont bother with subs)
Less Than Zero (1987)
gaaaaaah 1980s kids drama garbage
I already know i will struggle to separate the film review, from the "reviews review". I can't help but read the reviews of "10/10 and absolute masterpiece" and then feel the need to call them out on how ridiculously wrong they are.
Less Than Zero is a film about kids in that college age when, coming from a good family, they are now due to decide on which path to become millionaires. As you do.
Robert Downey Junior's character decides that this will be via becoming a Record Producer.
His college friends tell him, "we love you RDJ, but you are a bit of a knucklehead". And he's like "NOOOoooo, i am not knucklehead".
Guess what. He is.
So he manages to do very little record producing, but mostly just manages to snort fifty grand worth of coke, all the while becoming an even bigger knucklehead (by now you should have figured out this word is a stand-in for something else).
And then he dies.
Now, certainly the INTENT to do a decent drama is there, but with some massive faults, the very first of which is what i find annoying in all the "ooh such masterpiece" reviews; the acting is ATROCIOUS.
RDJ might be the least horribad of the bunch, but we're seriously talking about Weird Science -level of acting, it's just not good enough to make it into a drama.
The direction is horrible as well, as is the photography, and in general the production is very mediocre.
The script is very weak, the unlikable protagonist (who disappears for about 2/3 of the film, as the directors though that other characters had just as much relevance) has no arc, so i'm not sure in what exactly i'm supposed to get invested in.
.. this is just a bad film. Nothing worth digging for, however your time is your own so if you want to throw it away on this film, be my guest.
My vote: 4/10.
The Burial (2023)
help me pick up my jaw off the floor
You know Jamie Foxx? Yeah, that guy. The clown. The guy from Booty Call, from They Cloned Tyrone ..
man, was i ever wrong about someone.
Elderly Tommy Lee Jones is a funeral-home-business owning guy, not poor, but a working man. Due to faults not of his own, he gets into business with Evil Canadian Corporation, who then try to stiff him.
TLJ resorts to hiring successful TV lawyer Jamie Foxx. Now, this guy is a BLACK lawyer. He exploits this by filing his suits in the poorest, most predominantly black circuits, and plays the Victim Of The Man card to win his cases - with, apparently, massive success.
Evil Corportation puts against him equally black lawyeress Jurnee Smollett, up'n' coming Harvard lawyer ready to throw back in his face the race card.
While the film is not race-based, it does not pretend that race isn't a factor when Evil Corporation is willfully targeting the most impoverished areas of the south. There's a few tinges of Erin Brockovitch, and it's dialogue-heavy throughout, but man, you will not believe the quality of a performance that Jamie Foxx puts in for this movie. I would have never in a million years thought this comedy actor had the talent to pull out of his .. coat .. a straight courtroom drama. Don't get me wrong, Foxx plays to his strengths, but he also shows some finesse that, realistically, nobody could have predicted the man had.
NOT as great as Erin Brockovitch, but absolutely worth it.
8/10.