Change Your Image
tyrexden
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Army of the Dead (2021)
Best + to the zombie genre since Snyder's DotD.
Snyder gives us something old, something new, plenty of homages from films of past... It was quite a visceral experience... i likened to a George Miller's Mad Max: Fury Road, but with zombies.
I haven't a seen a one-two punch by the same director in a single calendar year since Spielberg did Jurassic Park/Schindler's List.
Well done, Mr. Snyder!
Godzilla vs. Kong (2021)
human drama on par with Sharknado
Look, i get it... this is about monsters fighting.... but thats no excuse. Its same basic plot as Pacific Rim, but that movie was a 1000x more compelling, with character thats were crafted with backstories and motivations that the audience empathizes with. Skarsgard and Rebecca Hall's roles were basically insert, reaction shots. I imagine the direction they received for their scenes were, "okay...pretend like you're seeing Kong do something amazing". Skargard has the same wide-eyed bewildered stare thruout the movie because he probably no clue what he was reacting to, and it was a safe, generic expression. Then, the fact that his character was only on the mission because he authored a book, but then he's barking orders to a freaking Admiral on a SS Destroyer, and then personally piloting a space ship to the center of the earth, having just seen the ship for the first time, moments earlier. If i can't believe it, i can't care about it. There'd be entire scenes of dialog that existed, not to further the story, but to give a half-ass explanation to plot hole from earlier in the film. Lazy! This was the worst film of the recent Godzilla and Kong movies. In fact, i'd rank them in order of release.
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Batter than Marvel!
Have yet to see the movie, but i already know from the trailer this makes Marvel look like trash, and i'm saying that being a huge Marvel fanboy.
In the Tall Grass (2019)
i thought it was compelling
Its not easy to come up with an original story in any genre, particularly the horror genre, so i grade this film on an upward trending curve because it was able to present an intriguing idea that i've not really seen in another story or film.
In fact, as it got more and more literal, with the rock and the additional characters, i liked it a bit less, because i felt the explanations and exposition took away from the (horror) wonderment of it all. But, i see why they had to do it, or else the story would be over in 10 minutes.
There's some nifty little ideas in this one, and the presentation of it... With the sounds and the visual stimuli constantly changing directions.... And having a point of reference (the building) changing perspective whenever you take your eyes off it.
Lots and lots of grass... Looks great in 4K, but i would imagine all those green blades would be less aesthetically interesting at lower resolutions.
Crime and Punishment (1935)
A homogenized, but adequate retelling of the Dosteyevsky classic
My biggest gripe was that the murder played out like Raskolnikov was simply desperate for money and therefore decided to murder the woman on an impulse, but my recollection from the book was much different... That the murder was very well thought out, and that Raskolnikov considered himself special, and performed the murder almost as a test to prove that there would be no moral, repercussions from God. This difference is sort of crucial, because Raskolnikov being tortured by the realization that he was wrong is the central theme to the whole book but in the movie, he's not really conflicted... just trying to get away with the crime.
The major plot points, are otherwise all here. The Inspector was really well played, and they sort of gave him all the dialog to describe Raskolnivof's predicament, stating it out right, rather than a reader of the book having to infer his mental state.
I loved the scene where Raskolnikov goes to the Inspector's office to admit he had pawned a watch with the old woman, and despite the circumstance implying suspicion, he acted very cocky.... overly so. Lorre did a great job.
Joker (2019)
Makes Heath Ledger's performance look like he took a dump on a plate.
Going off the obvious assumption that Nicholson's performance is the best, the JOKER film essentially is to decide who is second best, Ledger or Phoenix. Ledger's performance, while flawed and uneven, still is interesting to look at... but Phoenix takes it to the next level. Don't get me wrong, i'm still going to go see the JOKER next week and confirm my findings, as i feel first-hand viewing is necessary to any unbiased critic, and I respect that.
The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996)
Better than what you might have heard
I saw this theatrically as a kid, and then again as a full-blown adult. My reaction is pretty consistent where i felt it was decent entertainment. Thematically, i can't really argue with how they depicted any of the story or portayals, or action. its a funky story in the first place, and movie does a good job of inflecting some subtle humor here and there, some horror elsewhere (although you can't really say this movie is actually scary), and some off-the wall performances. While one could say Brando probably took this role only for a paycheck, he still creates a bona-fide character who is interesting and you can believe, even though the character is a weirdo. The makeup effects throughout the film are above-average, especially as it shows the animals progress, and while the CGI is spotty sometimes, the technology was only a few years old at that point, and its passably good enough. if this movie starts to fall apart a bit, its the sequences inside the villianeous tribe of animals, because here, its more about showing off the physical performances and some pyrotechnic explosions, and thus the whole thing has a different vibe and directorial style than the rest of the film. Its understandable, because these parts were probably filmed by a different person who specializes in these types of sequences. David Thewlis is great at being constantly and progressively fed up at the whole ordeal, and Val Kilmer brings a certain magneticsm as well. All in all, i'd recommend for a lazy Sunday viewing if you have nothing else going on., if for no other reason other than witnessing the Brando performance which has been references a lot in pop culture.
Brightburn (2019)
Surprised by the mediocre ratings (minor spoilers)
I thought this film was absolutely terrific. Excellent cast, with excellent performances.... And the leads all had compelling conflicts. For a sci-fi movie, i felt the characterizations and motivations were excellent. You could 'believe' why this person was acting this way or doing this... Their reactions were based on reality., even though the story was 'out of this world'.
I honestly thought this film would have universal appeal. I'm guessing perhaps people were disappointed that we don't actually see the kid take over the world (except sort of in the end credits). But heck, this is a 6 million dollar movie... I felt the production value was great. But you're not going to have enough money to show the destruction of the planet, and this wasn't that story, anyway... This was the story of the kid and his family, and the initial discovery of his powers. There's plenty to show of the apocalypse in the teased sequels.
People say this is a one-time see, but i disagree there too. Lots of little foreshadowing and depictions and set elements and shots that won't have context until you know what eventually happens.
This movie made some money, and it deserved to, but it definitely under-performed. I don't think it was marketed very well, but it would be difficult to market this particular storyline. What makes it great are the emotions, but you can't really portray human emotion and motivation in a movie trailer.
I loved the interaction of the mom and kid, but my favorite part of the film was the dad taking the kid hunting (the 2nd time). It was such an ominous sequence of scenes with the music and the staging... really well done. The father / son relationship was really intriguing because the dad was willing to see through the kid's bs while the mother was not. If they do followup to this flick you'll have a lotta folks who missed the boat on this one, going back to check it out. I hope they do.
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
The highest budgeted bonus feature ever (contains spoiles)
Look... i get it. You have to pay service to the fans, because this is the conclusatory film. This film called back previous characters to nod at them, and tidy up any loose pieces. In fact, it did these things well. I have no objection to the approach there. But.... thats ALL this film is. Its one of those bonus features of extra content that doesn't really bring anything new to the table . Its well done... they spent money on it, but does not move the needle.
Defeating Thanos was anticlimatic, because not much effort was spent on fight choreography, but rather was spent on the writing to have brought them back together in the first place. The whole time machine thing was literally the biggest plot point, and because its impossible, they had to gloss over the science specfics in the script... hence we're left with the biggest plot point being pretty hazy and far-fetched. There was no fight in the film that i can even really remember. Captain America fighting himself was cool for about 10 seconds.
All in all, just didn't feel like a movie to me, with any narrative structure. It was like a reunion special, or a bonus feature.... existing soley to wrap it up and put a bow on it.... I DO like what happened to everyone. I think it fitting that the patriach Iron Man dies. I've always felt that putting Captain American back in his own time was proper. That was cool. And i also liked Cap giving the shield to a black guy, metaphorically presenting the concept that America is for all people. That was nice. The movie, as a whole? Forgettable. Not excited to ever watch it again.
Creed II (2018)
Why wasn't it good? Let me explain.
The 'look' and 'feel' of the film is well done. The directing and cinematography was above par. The story was good enough..... But ultimately, i found myself bored throughout the film. Why? What was wrong? Its not easy to put my finger on it, but if I had to throw out a theory, Michael B. Jordan is what was wrong, both portrayal and the writing of his character.
Look, he seems like a nice guy. He's fit. He's popular. I'm sure the ladies like to look at him... But he's not an actor. I won't even say that he's a 'bad' actor, because i don't find his film appearances to classify as acting, good, bad, or otherwise. He's a just a face. I can't really buy into the character, because its so surface level. There's nothing there. So, its not believable. Its almost cartoonish.
There's a problem, when the audience is exponentially more emotionally involved and empathetic to the Viktor Drago character, who is supposed to be the villain, and rarely even speaks! Even Ivan Drago was a character who the audience could relate to where he was coming from. But the Jordan character, carrying over the exact same drama from the first film, "Why do you want to fight?" "I don't know" themes get tiring. In fact, those same questions still haven't been answered. Even though the movie tries to show Jordan's motivations several times, never once are we led to any conclusion about his inner thinking.
I think everything i'm saying was a possible issue in the first film, but there was enough going on, that it wasn't a deal-breaker. But now, with a second movie, and the same issues, not addressed, it becomes a problem.
Just think of the other Rocky movies. Stallone is a good actor. The audience is emotionally invested. But can you honestly say that people 'like' the character of Adonnis Creed? There's nothing there.
Play Misty for Me (1971)
I call it a black comedy
Lots of people referring this as a thriller. To me, Jessica Walter was fantastic, but she was funny (intentionally so), not scary. Basically, did she everything a guy in Clint Eastwood's character's shoes would be upset by, but she did it so gradually and was such a smooth-talker, that Clint permits it to get to the next stage, then the next stage, then the next stage, where pretty soon she is down-right loony tunes and Clint is helplessly trapped in the situation.
I simply don't think Jessica Walter could've pulled off that character without having comedic sensibilities, skills that are readily apparent is straight-up comedic roles she'd subsequently do.
Ever the jazz lover, Clint finds ways to incorporate music into the film even though its not particularly plot point, such as his job as DJ, and they going to the Monterey Music Festival.
All in all, worthwhile, both to see Clint's directorial debut, but mostly to see such a batty character in Jessica Walter, a characterization that also was intriguing because it forced tough-guy Clint to have to react to it and sometimes succumb to it.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Some nice visuals, but ultimately a sh*tfest.
I'm not going to blow your mind with any statements that hasn't already been said countless times over.
How many times on film do we really need to seen the Wayne parents get shot? How many time do we need to see young Bruce fall into the bat hole? I know that stuff was just opening credits, but it totally sets the vibe that Snyder is gonna be wasting your time with useless stuff.
Somehow, the film was pondering and plodding, while at the same time had too much stuff going on. How does do you even achieve a contradiction like that? I truly felt that they'd could've easily eliminated Lois Lane, Holly Hunter, Superman's mom, the handicapped guy, and Larry Fishburne from this movie, and the core story would've remained intact, and in fact would've allowed them to flesh out the main 3 characters; Supe, Batman and Wonderwoman. There's no reason this movie needed to be 2 1/2 hours long.... More is sometimes less. Remove those ancillary character, tighten up all the remaining sequences in editing, and add some motivation to the leads, and the movie would've been back on track.
Prior to seeing the film, i thought it was ridiculous that some people were saying Wonder Woman was the best thing about it... but now i sorta agree. At least she was interesting to look at, and while we don't really know her motivations either (at least nothing i picked up on), at least she gives the vibes that she's mysterious and perhaps has some type agenda.
The dream parts... I didn't mind, and in fact, those were probably my favorite parts of the movie, which is concerning in and of itself because they don't further along the plot. It just indicates to me that I welcomed a reprieve from the main story by looking at mindless eye candy.
The climax fight, i was literally so uninterested, i was surfing on my phone (there weren't any people in the theater to have reproached me). I guess it really does matter to have some type of story.