Change Your Image
Chance_Boudreaux19
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try again
My Dream Mortal Kombat Cast
10 Best bad movies of all time
My Dream 80s Justice League Cast
50 Pure Action movies from 1980-1999 that should be experienced.
Reviews
Band of Angels (1957)
Intriguing but lacking
Band of Angels is an interesting movie that is let down by how "clean" it is. It's an intriguing portrait of the South during the Civil War era but it doesn't push the envelope far enough. Clark Gable's character is the best part of the movie. Well the character himself by the time we meet him isn't that interesting but its his past atrocities that he reveals through speeches that make him compelling. It's hard to find redemption for a person that was as brutal as he was towards slaves and the movie makes that redemption feel unearned. It is still commendable that they gave this character a very dark past, especially when he is meant to be the person we root for heavily in the film. In an ideal world, Clark Gable would've played a full-on mean bastard in this movie. Instead of the southern gentleman, he could've been portrayed as a ruthless slave owner with some hints of humanity. In that scenario, this movie would've been talked about a lot more to this day and we could've gotten the best role of Gable's career but I'm sure neither he nor the studio would've been willing to go that far. An anti Gone with the Wind would've been too much risk for that era of filmmaking and it's unfortunate.
In general, for everything interesting the movie does, it then follows it up with generic melodrama. Yvonne De Carlo is ridiculous in a role where she is meant to be partially black but I've seen Audrey Hepburn play a Kiowa so I can suspend my disbelief. However, her experiences as a slave are much too easy. There is a threat of harm coming to her but she quickly gets bought by Clark Gable and falls in love with him within a couple of days. I know it's a ridiculous romantic drama and all the movie goers at the time probably just wanted to see her and Gable kiss and live happily, ever after but I can't help but see the potential that was there. If her experience was much more gruelling, it would've truly elevated the film. Still, her story is quite interesting and the way she gets treated when her lineage is discovered is portrayed effectively. Overall, it's not a bad movie but it had potential to be much, much more.
Argylle (2024)
Stupid nonsense with a five minute Henry Cavill Bond demo reel
Argylle is a long, dumb, CGI-riddled mess. In other words, it's the standard modern day Hollywood movie. Some aspects are fun but the whole thing drags on and on until you'll be checking your watch every five minutes in hopes that it will be over soon. There is an abundance of CGI and a lot of it is terrible(especially the cat) and it makes the movie look fake but that's the norm these days. I'm not even sure if they filmed any scenes in London because the exterior shots looked really bad to me. Some of the hand to hand combat is pretty decent but for the most part I didn't care about what was happening at all. Additionally, some of the twists in this worked but overall it just kept doing more and more of them and became a convoluted wreck.
Furthermore, the trailers and posters for this film straight up lie. They have you believe that Henry Cavill will be the star of the movie but he's in this for all of maybe five minutes at most. Those five minutes prove that he would be a great James Bond but I bet that will never happen because why make the correct choice and cast someone that is perfect for a role. Additionally, John Cena is in this for even less time and it makes me wonder why they even bothered casting him as he must've cost them a fair amount of money for what amounts to a cameo. The rest of the cast is fine and I like Sam Rockwell so it's nice to see him in a leading role. On the other hand, the comedy doesn't land at all and no one in my screening was laughing at any of the jokes. I think think the PG-13 rating hurts the movie by making it too tame and making it Rated R would've helped it a bit.. If this thing was made in the 90s it would've been much prettier, shorter, bloodier and most importantly, more fun. Argylle, however is just nonsensical, looks awful and overstays its welcome.
Ferrari (2023)
Drags to the finish line
This was a major letdown. Michael Mann is a great director and a prospect of a new movie from him had me excited. The biggest dissapointment of all was the look of the film. It looks so boring and has no visual flair at all. I would blame it on it being shot on digital but that can't be it when Mann made both Collateral and Miami Vice, which looked great and were both shot on digital. On top of that, it's really dull and uninspired. Scenes have no energy to them and many characters are constantly introduced without explaining who they are. Even when their presence is explained the majority of them are simply uninterestingly portrayed. Moreover, the accents are awful. I'd much rather actors do no accents. Either way Italians wouldn't speak English so just skip it altogether because otherwise characters sound like caricatures and scenes become laughable.
Additionally, there are also some sub-par visual effects. On the other hand, the cars do sound and look great but the racing sequences aren't too exciting. They should be but the pace of the movie nullifies their excitement. It's hard to be invested when you are bored and when you don't care about any of the characters. Compare this to Ford v Ferrari or Rush and it's not even a competition. Those movies made the viewers become very invested in the spectactle. I can't believe I will say this but I wish a different director made Ferrari. Clearly Michael Mann is past it and someone else could've added more energy and pizzazz to the whole thing. I can't believe this is the passion project of a once great director thay we had to wait so many years for.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023)
Much better than most of the recent Marvel projects but not as strong as the previous Guardians of the Galaxy instalments
So first of all, everything to do with Rocket in this movie is absolutely incredible and heartfelt. I'd even argue that his flashbacks are some of the best scenes we've seen in any Marvel film to date. On top of that, I really appreciated just how much this whole movie pushes the boundaries of its PG13 rating. We get the first Marvel f-bomb as well as some pretty gory moments by MCU standards. It can clearly be seen that James Gunn was given a lot of leeway to make the movie he wanted and so he was able to get away with a lot more and make callbacks to his horror roots. Additionally, the whole Guardians team has great chemistry together as always and it's great to just be able to see them interact with each other again. I liked the way the movie dealt with Gamora returning and her relationship with Peter Quill. On top of that, I loved the moment when the movie jokingly hinted that we might get something between Star Lord and Nebula which oddly enough I wish we did get, it would've been a great subversion of expectations.
Now onto the stuff I liked less and I'll start with the comedy. This was already beginning to be an issue for me with the 2nd movie and it's a problem that all modern Marvel movies have. The comedy in GOTG 3 often felt forced and the jokes were drawn out for too long. I realize that this series is known for being very comedic but maybe the jokes just needed to be placed more naturally, instead of being forced in so much. However, it's just my opinion though and I at least appreciate that there weren't any jokes in the moments that were supposed to be serious. Furthermore, the soundtrack was less appealing to me this time around but it might just be due to my preference for 70s soft rock and this entry expanding into a different musical era. On top of that, it does what all Marvel projects do which is have a massive CGI battle at the end. And yes, some moments are great in this battle like the one-take corridor sequence but I was still left switching off and thinking about something else when the bloated action sequences were happening. What did keep me engaged for the most part however was the genuine tension that I felt as I was sure that one or more of the Guardians will be dead by the end. The tension however was unwarranted as no characters died and this was a major disappointment.
The lack of character deaths prevented this film from feeling like the finale it was intended to be. If one or two Guardians bit the bullet in a definitive way I would've probably raised my rating to an 8. If Rocket wasn't laid out for most of the film and instead was kidnapped, he could've died during the final battle. The heaven scene could've then actually ended with him following Lylla and thus maximizing the emotional impact. Additionally, I feel like Star Lord perishing would've really been a great way to end it all but maybe in a better manner than with him trying to save his Zune. Also, the Guardians splitting up doesn't feel satisfying at all to me. It's the classic trope of a group of people splitting up only to realize they were the happiest when they were together. This is all just my opinion but the lack of finality and the setup for all of these characters returning in future Marvel movies lessened the supposed impact of this being the last time we see the Guardians together. We might not get Guardians of the Galaxy 4, although I wouldn't be surprised if we do but I bet we will see them team up again together in Avengers or another project, even if briefly. It all just doesn't feel like the epic conclusion that we were promised but rather a setup for how these characters will feature in the MCU going forward. I guess comic book movies can never have proper endings and even something great like Logan proves it with Hugh Jackman set to return for Deadpool 3. Maybe I shouldn't expect these films to provide conclusions because the studios will always try to get more from these characters and actors if there is money to be made. However, overall, even though a lot of this review might've seemed negative I did very much enjoy the movie but it just didn't wow me like it seemed to do most people and it simply lacked the finality that I personally desired from it.
Shazam! Fury of the Gods (2023)
Inconsequential Dross
Yay, another pointless superhero movie. The state of the genre is at its lowest in a while with each new release being more bland and forgettable than the last. Shazam Fuy of the Gods is competing against Ant-Man 3 and Marvel for the crown of who could make a more inconsequential and boring superhero flick this year. Of course last years runaway winner was Morbius but at least that movie had the very random dance scene which I will never forget whereas I probably won't remember anything that happened in Shazam 2 within a month. That's a shame because I really thought this entry in the DCEU will be at least mildly entertaining and not an absolute slog to get through.
The whole thing just feels like it has no meaning and that it's not building towards anything. I guess Shazam will be part of the future of the DCEU but this movie was shot before the new vision for the universe and it shows. I'm fine with Shazam 2 not being a stepping stone towards other things but the problem is that what it is doing is so uninspired and cookie-cutter that I was checking my watch every five minutes. The runtime of this might be just over 2 hours but it felt longer than Ben-Hur. The worst part was the last hour or so of action. It was just a mindless cacophony of CGI fights with no stakes. I didn't care about what happened and couldn't pay attention to what was going on because it was just so visually and narratively dull. At least the CGI was decent for a change but good computer effects are not what makes a movie, they should just be a bonus.
The characters are OK and there is some chemistry but it all feels like everyone is just going though the motions. Furthermore, there are too many characters. I wasn't a fan of there being multiple heroes with Shazam powers in the first movie and I liked it even less in the sequel. If everyone has powers it just makes those powers seem less special. Shazam should be the sole hero, or maybe only have one sidekick in Freddy. I understand that this might be straight from the comics but that's not a good explanation because not everything translates as well from comics to movies. When You have two hours to do something You need to condense things. Additionally, I hate plots where superheroes want to be normal people because it's been done to death. At the start of the movie most of the Shazam family wants to do other things besides being superheroes and it's just a tired plot point. Thankfully, the movie drops this because there is nothing more annoying than superheroes whining about wanting to go to college when most of us would trade our places with them in an instant.
Last but not least, the worst bit of the film is the ending. It's truly one of the dumbest endings I've ever seen but it's to be expected from the genre at this point. For a second I thought maybe they will have the guts to stick with Billy dying but I fully expected them to do some deus ex machina ending in which he comes back to life and they did. Wonder Woman showing up to revive him was extremely idiotic and solidified the pointless nature of this sequel. How are we as an audience supposed to care about these characters when they can just be brought back to life through some dumb magic. The ending is just a cherry on top of this sundae of stupidity and contrivances. And don't even get me started on the terrible romance between a 6000 year old woman and a 16 year old boy. Who in their right mind writes something like that and expects the audience to buy it. I hope this movie does poorly like Ant-Man did so that maybe these studios take notice and stop spewing inconsequential dross out and actually try to make interesting movies with actual stakes in them.
X (2022)
Elevated slasher
I was very pleasantly surprised by X. It's a nice throwback to the slashers of old but it's made with much more care and quality than most of those movies. X only starts going as a slasher an hour into it and I did not mind at all. The first hour is sort of a hang out movie with dark undertones and the thing is, it works very well. If it continued down this path I would've been completely fine with that but the carnage was just an addition to everything that preceded it. The kills were very good and the tension was there because I didn't want any of the characters to die. The pitfall of most slashers or maybe a feature is that the characters are bland/annoying to a point where you are rooting for the killer to murder them. In X the characters are well-established, well-acted and most of all believable. On top of that, the late 70s atmosphere really adds to it and the music choices are great. Additionally, the cinematography is pretty great. It looks almost like it was shot on film despite being shot on digital. In the end the film is still limited by its genre and tropes and you know where it's going to go but as en example of said genre it's definitely above most of them.
Scream VI (2023)
Jason Takes Manhattan did it better
I'm in the minority but this was my least favourite Scream movie. Scream 5, the first one without Wes Craven wasn't great but there was some novelty to it and some good riffs on the concept of a re-quel. I was hoping that Part 6 would be much better, mainly because it was to take place in New York which is a great setting for a slasher. But of course, the movie was done on a lower budget as is usually the case with slashers and didn't take full advantage of its setting because of that. The movie even has a character watching Jason Takes Manhattan which infamously was meant to take place in New York but the majority of it actually takes place on a boat. Still, I think that film did New York better as it at least had that one awesome scene of Jason in Times Square. Otherwise it was mostly some back alleys filmed in Toronto which is the exact same thing that Scream did. The only creative New York thing that Scream does is that it utilizes the Subway and apart from that most of it takes place in locations which you could have anywhere else.
That's not to say I completely disliked this entry into the franchise. It's fine and there were some scenes which I found amusing. Most of it however felt very stale and what it lacked the most was tension. I felt nothing and didn't care whether any of the characters die or survive, apart from Gale. In fact when the film started I had completely forgotten who the characters from Scream 5 were and what happened to them in that movie. That tells you everything as I have a pretty good memory for movies and Scream 5 only came out a year ago. As the movie went on I started recalling the events of that film but it just shows how weak the protagonists are compared to the original group. They were a lot more memorable to me and I missed their presence in this installment. I always cared whenever those characters were in peril in any of the films because I genuinely didn't want any of them to die.
On the other hand, the kills are pretty good and there are some funny moments, although I think some of the dialogue was cringe-worthy, especially one conversation about horror films. It's possible to still do some interesting things with Scream if it follows up on some of the things that part 6 teases but I doubt the producers will have the guts to go in that direction. All in all, it falls into the same category as Jason Takes Manhattan of a franchise promising new things in an exciting setting and not delivering on those promises. However, I much prefer Friday the 13th Part 8 to Scream 6 because it's a lot more fun with some insane and hilarious sequences so in the end I'd have to say that movie did the whole New York thing better.
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023)
Endless Trash
The MCU in its current state is an absolute mess. Up until Endgame the whole series of movies felt like it lead up to something and now it's all over the place. Ant-Man and the Wasp Quantumania was supposed to introduce the next big bad that the Avengers will face in the form of Kang The Conqueror and I guess it did. First of all, Jonathan Majors plays the role well but the character itself seems like a total wimp. This is supposed to be one of the most powerful Kang variants and yet he gets trapped (maybe killed?) by Ant-Man and the Wasp without any sacrifice. Now, if the movie had the audacity to sacrifice both titular characters in order for them to stop Kang from escaping the Quantumverse it would've worked better but as it stands the movie takes no risks and has the villain defeated by characters that aren't even that powerful. After all that how are we as the audience supposed to believe that this guy can be a threat to more powerful Avengers like Thor or Dr Strange. On the other hand, if the movie did sacrifice any of the major characters it still wouldn't change how I feel about it. In fact, it would've maybe been a waste to sacrifice Ant-Man in such a bland and uninteresting film.
The whole thing feels so dull and lifeless that I could not concentrate on what was going on. I was so bored I found myself switching off at various points throughout. Scorcese compared these movies to amusement parks but I wish it was that. I wish it produced moments that would have me entertained but instead it feels on the same level as Morbius. It's certainly more competent than that pile of garbage but I was equally bored whilst watching either of them. On top of that, the characters make nonsensical decisions that I'm supposed to buy without thinking too much about like Michelle Pfeiffer not telling anyone about Kang. Moreover, it's not funny and in general I'm tired of the quippy, inconsequential dross that Marvel is spewing out. Maybe, I'm not the audience for these movies anymore but I don't go into them wanting to dislike them. I want to feel the highs that the Infinity Saga provided again but I don't see it happening. With the exception of No Way Home none of the movies since Endgame have been great and at best they've been mildly entertaining. I also haven't watched any of the MCU shows yet and I'm not planning to because I don't want Marvel to be such a major part of my life, there's too much great cinema out there to devote this much time to something so mediocre. The highest praise I can give Ant-Man and the Wasp is that it's inoffensive and relatively short, although it felt long for me. Also, the performances from Majors, Paul Rudd and others are good. Apart from that, it's just a cookie-cutter husk of a film that looks incredibly artificial and is only designed to set up future events and to sell you on watching more of the current MCU's endless trash content.
Cocaine Bear (2023)
Bearable
Cocaine Bear is very self aware which is exactly what should be expected from a movie with that title but the problem is that it doesn't make it funny. Pretty much none of the jokes landed for me and the movie looked very plain and uninteresting. For a movie set in the 80s I would expect more flair and a better energy from it. I think that problem comes down mainly to the director, Elizabeth Banks. I think she has no sense of comedic timing and her movies look very bland. Additionally, the cast is underwhelming as they weren't the right people to bring the necessary charisma and energy into the movie. A film like Cocaine Bear needs character actors that can liven up the movie whilst chewing the scenery. We get some of that but this movie needed guys like Nicolas Cage or Gary Busey to go make it live up to its title.
Furthermore, the character dynamics and their plots are not what I was looking for. Instead of a family story this should have just followed a few groups of cops and gangsters, maybe some junkies looking for the lost cocaine and getting mauled by the bear. Now, it does sort of happen but the movie tried to have too much of a feel-good story with nice characters that just didn't fit. What it needed was that 70s/80s sleaze that some schlock movies from that era used to have where the majority of the characters are corrupt and we just want the bear to murder them all. That's not to say Cocaine Bear is all bad. I did appreciate some of the gore and despite me complaining about the cast, some of them did a good job like Ray Liotta who fit the movie well but wasn't allowed to do much in it. Also it's nice to get an R-rated movie in the cinema instead of the usual watered down family entertainment that gets released constantly. On top of that, it's nice and short although it does drag a bit. However, I just think the movie could've been more if the director and cast were more suited to the project and if the movie went all out but as it stands it's just bearable.
The Desperate Hours (1955)
Bogart plays a mean bastard in a suspenseful movie
There was a moment in this movie that determined whether my rating would be a 7 or an 8. That moment is when Bogart unbeknowst to him has a gun that's not loaded and is holding a little boy hostage whilst threatening to shoot him. The father of the boy tells the kid to run as he orchestrated the scenario and knows the gun is not loaded, meaning the child can get away. The kid obeys his father and starts running and at this point I expected Bogart to just let the kid go and maybe point the gun at the father but instead he straight up aims at the running boy and tries to shoot him. I respected the meanness of this scene and that it didn't try to redeem the main bad guy in any way, he is straight up malicious and willing to kill a child to get his way.
Bogart and March stand out in this but everyone else is also great, especially Robert Middleton as Kobish, one of the bad guys. Another great moment, that actually made me laugh out loud happens when March comes back home with Kobish and an unexpected visitor spots him. The first hour of the film was a bit unfocused but the second brings all the suspense. It's a simple home invasion movie, at least by today's standards but it works well. You know that the family will most likely survive and the bad guys will all die or get arrested and yet there is plenty of tension which can mainly be attributed to William Wyler's excellent direction. Despite its simplicity, I enjoyed the film a lot and it delivered all that I wanted from it.
Brokedown Palace (1999)
Could've been a lot better but undeniably enjoyable
I found myself very surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. I put it on thinking it's going to be very forgettable but I ended up being engaged in the story for the whole runtime. The movie has a very late 90s/early 2000s feel to it that makes it kind of cheesy and the musical choices make it feel like a music video that would play on MTV at the time but the story makes up for this. I was genuinely intrigued at what will happen to the two main protagonists and that's probably due to a strong screenplay. The twists and turns delivered and I think that majority of the topics the movie covers are true to life in terms of how drug trafficking in Thailand operates and how easily naive people can be framed by a charming stranger.
The main aspect that brings this movie down is the direction. Jonathan Kaplan was a capable director and this movie seems outside his style. I find his choices to be very weird, like the aforementioned MTV inspired style. Now, I don't know if that's his fault as it was probably what the studio mandated but I expect this movie to have a more gritty feel to it. On top of that, the performances vary a lot. Bill Pullman is great as usual but the two main leads aren't. I've seen much better performances from both of them. Claire Danes was ok for the most part and showed some range with a few bad moments but Kate Beckinsale was pretty bad. However, they can be excused due to not having much experience at the time and maybe the director not giving them enough feedback and instructions. All the flaws add up and yet like I said previously I enjoyed watching this, and so I can't judge it unfavorably as I rate movies based on ejoyment. It could've been a better film but what we got is intriguing enough for me to reommend despite all the flaws that it possesses.
Narayama bushikô (1983)
Too much sex, not enough character development
Having watched both versions of Ballad of Narayama I came to the conclusion that neither movie is truly great but if elements of both were to be combined it would create the perfect blend. I still enjoy both films quite a lot, it's just that they could've been more. The main advantage of this version is the great cinematography and the use of real life locations. The 1958 movie looks great too and the sets are fantastic in it but this version in my opinion is more impressive with the beautiful shots of real scenery. Additionally, I enjoyed the often metaphorical footage of animals and nature. On top of that I much prefer the way that this story was told as the main drawback of the original Ballad to me was the kabuki style storytelling which thankfully the newer one dispenses with.
However, what the first Ballad did much, much better was that it made me feel for its characters a lot more. That movie is shorter and yet the characters are more realised and when the ending comes and the inevitable has to happen it made me really sad. In this 1983 version the final choice didn't have the same impact due to me not caring as much about the people. On top of that the main matriarch was played much more sympathetically in the older film, thanks to the actress which helped to add to the emotional punch that the movie was aiming for. Instead of focusing on doing more to make the viewer care for the inhabitants of the village the newer Ballad instead opts for the inclusion of a plethora of mostly comedic sex scenes which whilst often amusing can be a bit too much. I understand that it's a bit of a trademark of director Imamura to do this and I don't have a problem with it but I just wish he substituted some of those scenes with others or made the movie longer to add more of the much needed emotion. All in all this is a very good movie, as is the first one but I still think there is room for another go at this story which if done right has the potential to be better than both its predecessors.
Dark City (1998)
Good concept ruined by terrible editing
I seem to be in the minority on this but I couldn't stand the way that Dark City was edited. Trivia says that it has one of the shortest average shot lengths of any modern movie and for me that was very noticeable and it nearly makes the film unwatchable. I had to pause the movie a few times to get up and do something because it literally made me feel nauseous. I get the intent behind doing that so that the audience feels the confusion of the main character but I could not get behind that at all and it ruined a movie that I would have otherwise enjoyed a lot more.
Still, there is a lot of good stuff in this so that's why I have to give this a positive rating. The version I watched was the director's cut so the twist was very surprising. Additionally, the whole concept was fascinating to me and I liked the design of the movie despite some of the sets looking very fake. In addition the CGI effects also were rather lackluster even when compared to other movies from that era but it's something that I can overlook, unlike the awful editing. Moreover, the performances weren't the best either, especially that of Kiefer Sutherland who was laughably bad at times with his weird speech patterns and mannerisms. Other actors were alright but I find Rufus Swell boring so I couldn't really get behind him as a protagonist.
Even though I complained a lot in this review I can't hate the movie but I believe that it all amounts to squandered potential. Alex Proyas was a fine director at one point which he proved with The Crow but his choices for this ruined what could've been a sci-fi classic. The movie has become a bit of a cult classic but it could've soared higher even though the concept is maybe somewhat schlocky. I can't believe that some people prefer this movie over the Matrix but I guess that's the beauty of cinema and everyone is entitled to their opinion. So in the end I can't get over how frustrating and unwatchable I found some of this movie to be but the last half an hour, mainly the big reveal is so strong that I cannot help but at least somewhat appreciate it.
Sorcerer (1977)
Very good but not as good as Wages of Fear
Sorcerer might not be as good as the original but it's very impressive and well-made. The main thing that it does better over the French film is the cinematography. Wages was shot in France whilst Sorcerer was shot in an actual jungle and it shows. Whilst watching it I kept thinking just how hard it must've been to shoot the movie, especially some of the more complicated sequences. From the moment when we get the little town in South America You can just feel the sweat and the grime. Friedkin really wanted to make you feel the struggle and the harshness of the conditions and it shows.
On the other hand, what Wages does better is characters and tension. I respect a movie which has no likable characters like Sorcerer but unfortunately that then leads to a lack of tension as You don't care whether the characters make it out of the tough situations they are placed in. Characters in Wages are more likable and the relationships between them are established much better which in turn makes the viewer care about them. The first half hour of Sorcerer spends more time establishing the situations which drove the characters to escape their respective countries but it doesn't make them more interesting than the characters in Wages. Moreover, the sequences in the older movie despite being less technically impressive build up the excitment much better in my opinion, in terms of the peril the characters find themselves in and the way that those sequences are shot to make them more nerve racking.
Furthermore, the 1950s classic is half an hour longer. Maybe Sorcerer would've benefited from a longer runtime to establish the realtionships and to setup more tension. And finally, Friedkin said that he regrets not casting Steve McQueen and I agree with him that he would've made the movie better. Roy Scheider was a great actor and he gave a great performance but McQueen was a bona fide superstar and his presence would've certainly eleveated the picture in my opinion. It's one of those casting choices which almost happened that makes You think what if... Overall, a very good movie, technically superb but it lacks a little bit to boost it to the status that Wages of Fear has.
A Woman Under the Influence (1974)
2.5 hours of screaming without much to say
I had very high expectations for A Woman Under the Influence, having seen Opening Night and The Killing of a Chinese Bookie, both of which I enjoyed well enough but wasn't wowed by. I finally thought this would be the Cassavetes movie that will knock me off my feet. Unfortunately, it didn't.
My main problem lies within the fact that the movie has nothing much to say in my opinion. Mabel starts off crazy and stays that way, there is no progression or a descent into madness. Her husband seems to be losing his mind throughout the movie but that is literally the only bit of character development in the film. So the movie boils down to both of them screaming at each other for two and a half hours. The thing is you can make a movie like this work if the characters are in interesting and the dialogue is great. It would probably still be a bit too long but there could be something there. But the problem with this film is the characters are not at all interesting but annoying and the dialogue is terrible and stiff. People praise Cassavetes because his movies supposedly feel natural but I don't think that's the case. To me in his quest to feel overly realistic he made his movies feel the opposite of that, they feel very "acted".
Maybe I am just not vibing with Cassavetes. Although I wasn't bored watching the other two movies of his, I still wouldn't call them peak cinema. I really wish I liked this movie but unfortunately this fascinating look at mental ilness as others have described it felt like it might drive me mad instead.
Operation Mincemeat (2021)
A story that could've been told as a short stretched to two hours
The real life story is interesting and if it was told as a 60 minute episode of a WW2 documentary series I would be engaged. However, as a 2 hour movie this is a complete failure. Those 2 hours felt like 4 and I couldn't wait for it to wrap up. The main problem of this film is its boring cast of characters and their extremely dull sub-plots. Not for a moment did I care about what happens to any of them. There are some moments that can be considered somewhat exciting. When they happen You think that the film will start to get better but no, it quickly goes back to being mundane and uninspired.
What also contributes to its complete drabness is the monotonous and sleep inducing way in which the movie is shot. Seriously, there is nothing to be applauded here. The only reasons for my "high" rating are learning about this operation and that the movie is somewhat competent and that the cast do their best with what they were given. I'm sure there are videos or articles on the internet which You can find that explain the operation if anyone's interested but don't watch Operation Mincemeat unless You feel like having a nap in the cinema.
Thir13en Ghosts (2001)
Fun concept ruined by obnoxious editing
Thir13en Ghosts is a fun concept ruined by how the movie is edited. The flashing images got extremely tiresome very quickly. Roger Ebert was right when he said that this movie is an attack on the senses that is literally painful to watch at times. Many times I had to look away due to the fact that I could feel a headache coming on. I can't even imagine watching this in the cinema as I would probably have to walk out. It's a shame because its a horror movie with potential. The practical visual effects are very effective and some of the imagery is genuinely unsettling. On top of that the cast is very fun as it's always great to see recognizable actors in horror movies. Matthew Lillard is once again great in a very over-the-top way as he kind of tries to emulate what he did in the much better Scream. I'm disappointed because the movie had potential to be very entertaining. Steve Beck's other movie, Ghost Ship doesn't have editing as obnoxious as this and because of that I found it much more enjoyable to watch than this.
The Hunting Party (1971)
Exploitation with no moral lesson whatsoever
The Hunting Party is a very simple movie. Really, it's just Gene Hackman chasing the bandits who kidnapped his wife. But what makes it special is how bleak and immoral it is. Candice Bergen's character escapes her sadist husband through kidnapping only to fall into the arms of Oliver Reed's character who isn't all that much better than her husband was. Apart from the kidnapped wife there really is no character you can root for in this movie. You feel sorry for her but you feel nothing when Hackman and his band mow down the outlaws that kidnapped her with no remorse. And you don't want her to return to him as he will probably kill her anyway.
This is a rare movie that is truly devoid of any moral lesson. Really, there is no point the movie is trying to make apart from maybe showing that everything is hopeless and that humanity is doomed to behave like beasts until we go extinct. Bergen's character kind of falls in love with Reed's character but I never bought the romance as more than a means to escape her husband and a kind of lesser evil option. Normally in such a movie the outlaw would turn out to be better than expected and the two love interests would ride into the sunset together but that's not the case here. The ending is perfect in that everyone dies and no one gets a happy ending because such a thing was impossible. This move is just pure bleak exploitation and I can understand how it's not for everyone. However, as much as I can appreciate an uplifting movie a la Spielberg I can also appreciate a movie that doesn't try to preach any message and is just pure mindless violence with no moral core.
Condenados a vivir (1972)
Great nihlistic western
It's interesting how sometimes a director will make many movies throughout their career but only one will get noticed. Having looked at Joaquin Marchent's filmography it seems like most of his movies haven't been watched by many people on IMDb. I haven't seen any of his other movies either and probably never will but I enjoyed Cut Throats Nine a lot. The reputation that it has garnered is most likely due to it being probably the most violent and gruesome euro-western made at a time when a lot of them were getting made. But I would argue that the gore wasn't what makes the movie great and that it was a bit excessive. I'm not bothered by such things and it looks rather fake anyway but the insistence of adding gore by the producers cheapens the movie a bit. Then again maybe without it the movie wouldn't have developed a cult following and I would've never seen it.
What makes this movie special is just how dark it is. It's a snowy western just like The Great Silence but it's even more nihilistic than that movie was. Every character in Cut-Throats Nine apart from the lieutenant and his daughter is deplorable. You don't want any of them to survive yet they are the characters we as viewers follow for the whole movie. I find such movies fascinating but I can understand why some can't connect with them. On top of that, the soundtrack is very ominous and the atmosphere is top-notch. Everything adds up into making the film feel absolutely bleak and with no hope in sight. It's a great example of a euro-western that takes the genre and adds a few things on top to make it more interesting. In this case it's making it a survival movie with despicable characters. I'd recommend it to anyone who likes euro-westerns or hopeless cinema watches it even if they don't like gore as it's a very interesting and incredibly atmospheric western.
House of Gucci (2021)
Too serious for its own good, should've been more of a black comedy that the trailers promised
The trailers for this sold people on a movie with a completely different tone than what we got in the final product. They led me to believe that this would be a high energy black comedy, kind of like Wolf of Wall Street. And I think the movie would've been much better if it decided to go down this path. Some might argue doing this would've been disrespectful to the real people that these events have occurred to like with Pain & Gain. I can understand this sentiment but I enjoyed Pain & Gain quite a lot as trashy and offensive as it was at times. It made me wish that someone else directed this. Maybe not Michael Bay even though it would've been very entertaining if he did. Someone like Martin Scorcese would've been perfect for this, this is the kind of movie he can make in his sleep. His high energy style is what this movie needed as Ridley Scott just makes it feel too serious and lethargic. That style is perfect for something like The Last Duel but not for a story with a cast of colorful characters scheming and plotting.
Another gripe of mine is the cinematography by Dariusz Wolski. I'm getting tired of his washed out , bleak style of shooting movies. That style worked great in the Last Duel or even in All The Money in the World or Alien Covenant but a movie set in the fashion world needed more swagger and vibrancy. The cinematography looks so cold that it doesn't gel at all with the energetic pop songs that this film utilizes at every turn. The songs feel forced and none of them feel like they belong or add energy to the scenes. Once again, if Scorcese made this movie and he had the same songs to work with, I bet he would find the perfect use for them to enhance scenes.
Now, it's not all bad as the story was entertaining and I didn't really know where it was headed but unfortunately a lot of it felt rushed, especially towards the end. The film lacks focus as it can't decide which plot it wants to concentrate on, it's kind of all over the place. On the other hand, the acting is great across the board apart from the dreadful accents. Once again, the Last Duel did this perfectly with English standing in for French without the actors doing any accents. I prefer actors skipping accents altogether like Sean Connery in the Hunt for Red October to them speaking English with an accent. However, this aspect doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the movie especially with Jared Leto doing a very comical over-the-top Italian accent which will go down in history of cinema as one of the worst accents ever. Some are criticizing him but I loved Jared in this movie. His campy style of acting is exactly what the movie needed more of to make it more of a dark comedy. Gaga, Pacino, Driver and all the rest are really good but he was the real standout for me. Overall, House of Gucci is rather decent and entertaining for the most part but it missed many opportunities that could've made it a highly entertaining, energetic dark comedy that it needed to be.
3000 Miles to Graceland (2001)
Entertaining and disappointing at the same time
This movie is a very mixed bag. First of all, it's not at all what I expected. I thought this was going to be a comedy where guys stage a heist dressed up as Elvis impersonators. And whilst it kind of is that, it's more of a crime movie and the heist takes place in the first thirty minutes with the rest of the runtime dealing with its fallout. This was very disappointing because based on the premise I was prepared to watch an Ocean's Eleven type of movie where the majority of it is the gang staging the heist and then executing the plan in the last act. There really is no planning involved in this and it just gets straight to it with the robbery being rather disappointing and unrealistic but also somewhat fun due to to how crazy and violent it is. I also wanted to see more of Kurt Russell's stellar Elvis impersonation which he has done so well in the past. There were a few scenes in which we got to see it but not enough when I expected him to be doing it throughout the whole film.
Surprisingly it is Kevin Costner that steals the show in possibly his only role in which he plays a villain, at least the only one where I've seen him do that. He is really unleashed in this movie in a way that I certainly haven't seen before, acting completely different from his usual shtick. Furthermore, the movie looks decent in terms of cinematography and the rest of the cast is also fine. As bad and insanely stupid as the movie is at times it really is entertaining. I can't give it a bad rating when I genuinely enjoyed watching it for the most part despite my complaints. It's the type of movie where you might be getting bored but suddenly Ice T appears hanging from the ceiling mowing people down with uzi's (this actually happens). At times it's laughably bad, especially during the terrible CGI intro and at times a decent enough crime film. However, the one thing that really annoyed me was the soundtrack which is very much of its time as it mostly consists of terrible early 2000's techno and we only get one or two Elvis songs. I'm sorry but In an Elvis themed movie I expect 90% of the soundtrack to be the King so to get techno instead was really grating. All in all though, despite the awful music the movie is certainly watchable and fun for the most part with the show-stealing performance by Costner being its main selling point.
The Skeleton Key (2005)
Great setting, great atmsophere and an all-time great horror movie ending
The ending to this movie which I won't spoil is truly one of the best I've encountered in a horror movie. Throughout the runtime I was trying to figure out what the inevitable twist will be but there is no way I could've predicted the wild turn of events that unfolds. The conclusion is what made me raise my rating from a 7 to and 8. Ending notwithstanding it is still a very decent and atmospheric horror movie. I love movies set in New Orleans/Louisiana and am always on the lookout for more and this was a major reason why I watched this. I love it when a Louisiana movie embraces the swampy setting so that you can feel the humidity radiating from the screen. Skeleton Key has a lot of great scenes that establish the setting and showcase the culture and myths of the area. Some say the movie is a bit tame but that's not a problem for me. There are some horror movies that are let down by a PG-13 rating but this is not really a movie that needed an R rating as I can't think of many things that it would have changed apart from adding some unnecessary gore. Additionally, the performances are good but the direction could've maybe been improved to give it more of a creepy vibe as there weren't many actual scenes that had me scared. All in all it doesn't matter too much as Skeleton Key is a very decent and rather underrated horror movie that relies on atmosphere and setting rather than cheap thrills and gore.
Nightmare Alley (1947)
Surprising for the era it was made in
What really surprised me about this movie is that all the characters within it are pretty despicable for the most part. In modern movies it's normal to have a main character that is downright evil but back then it must've been hard for the audience to accept which makes the decision of Studio head Darryl F. Zanuck to pull the movie out of circulation somwehat understandable. Stan Carlisle is a really horrible person who will stop at nothing to get what he wants but everyone else around him isn't so great either. Every main and supporting character in this movie is a crook of some sort, even Molly who is meant to be sweet and good natured could be considered a bad person of sort. Sure, she doesn't want to pretend to be a ghost of an old man's former love but she spends most of the movie going along with our charlatan protagonist as he swindles people left and right and sells them lies. It's seriously hard to root for anyone in this movie but that's what makes it unique and great.
The only problem that made me take away a star from my rating is the ending. It ends on a supposedly upbeat note which was done to make the audience happy but did anyone actually want these horrible people to be happy? I certainly didn't and so in my mind even though Stan embraces Molly as the credits fade their future doesn't look too bright. Alcoholism can't be cured with an embrace and so their relationship will probably resemble that of Zeena and Pete where they perform at an inferior standard compared to their previous work as he only does the bare minimum to support his habit. Apparently, the book ends without the reunion of Stan and Molly and with him just being a geek and drinking. I certainly think that's how Guillermo del Toro's version will end, at least I hope so. Time will tell if it will be better than the original version because it definitely has a lot to live up to as Nightmare Alley is a very stellar movie that holds up very well.
I Care a Lot (2020)
Frustrating beyond belief
So first of all, I feel like the movie actively pushes the viewer to root for the morally reprehensible and utterly despicable character of Marla. From the very first scene in which she asserts her female dominance over a man, I felt like the film wanted to make her out to be an anti-hero of sorts. The idea that scamming poor elderly people is in any way badass and bossy is preposterous. Throughout the whole movie I just wanted to see Marla get murdered. It's a rare movie which makes the Russian mob, which at one point holds a conversation about choosing new drug mules look like the good guys. Hey, maybe I'm reading the movie wrong. Some say the movie is a black comedy. To that I say, at which point? It wasn't funny at all and felt like a straight up crime/thriller movie. Others might say that there have been other movies in which the protagonist is a monster. And whilst that is true, most of those movies weren't pushing the viewer to want the monster to succeed and if they did the character had at least some motive that made the viewer connect to them. Additionally, even if the anti-hero was sort of glamourised, there is a huge difference between seeing guys like Henry Hill or Tony Soprano mainly kill other mobsters and someone scamming defenceless old people.
Furthermore, this movie should've been over an hour in. As soon as the Russians get involved that should've been all she wrote if the movie didn't make them out to be complete buffoons. They can't kill anyone due to their incompetence and then the boss somehow gets kidnapped by two women like it's nothing. At least, Rosamund Pike basically plays the same character as she does in Gone Girl and she does it well. If the movie made her out to be a straight up villain and pitted her against a likeable character instead of making her a "lioness" then it would've worked out much better. At least, she dies in the end which I didn't expect. At that point I gave up any hope of her getting her due comeuppance and was resigned to accept that I won't get any satisfaction. However, lo and behold she gets shot by the guy who was trying to save his poor mother but which we were meant to think was a stupid pig at the beginning. Well, that definitely made me add a star to my rating at least. Apart from that, everything about this movie was seriously frustrating and for the most part I hated the experience of watching it.
In the Heart of the Sea (2015)
Too tame and too fake looking
This movie overlies on CGI. Yes, I get that there is a lot of CGI needed to showcase the whale but some elements could be done practically. This is a trend that I noticed with old school directors like Howard, Zemeckis, Spielberg and Peter Jackson. They get lazy and just want everything done with special effects. I am a person that is afraid of the ocean and even some cheap shark movies like The Reef can make me feel tense. I was watching Cast Away the other day and that movie made me feel a lot of tension during its ocean scenes. In The Heart of the Sea however doesn't do that at any point. I never felt the tension that I normally get with movies that take place in the ocean as for the most part the ocean didn't look real enough to invoke those feelings in me.
As for the plot it's decent although I think the conversation between Melville and Nickerson was totally unnecessary. The plot could've just straight up told the story of the whale destroying the ship without it being a sort of a flashback/story within a story. Moreover, what the film lacks was grit. The story is very harrowing and making the movie PG-13 took away from it's impact. If this movie was rated R it would've been incredibly brutal and would've really made the viewers consider the horrors that these sailors had to endure. I can't see the mass appeal of this movie and as such don't understand why it wasn't made strictly for adults. On the other hand, I have to applaud Howard for working within the confines of a PG-13 rating and including some very agonizing scenes with cuts just at the right time but those moments could've hit home ever harder in an R rated film.
It may seem like I didn't enjoy the movie but I did. Chris Hemsworth always makes a movie better through his charisma. The rest of the cast was also good. As fake as some aspects of the movie looked, the whale looked great and I assume most of the CGI work went into making sure that it does. The story is simple but effective and despite its tameness it still made me feel the struggle that the characters faced. There are some really great moments in the film and some rather dull/bad ones but overall it comes together into a coherent whole. I still found plenty of entertainment within this flawed movie but I just wish its full potential was realised which would've happened if it were made for adults and with more emphasis on making the environments feel real through the use of practical effects.