Change Your Image
Lord-Bigglesworth
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Booksmart (2019)
More drama than comedy
This is a pretty solid film, and I can see it becoming something of a cult-classic the likes of The Breakfast Club (a film that strongly strikes a chord with some people, but not so much for others), but frankly I was a bit let-down. I thought the trailer was absolutely hysterical, but, sadly, most of the funniest bits are in that very trailer. Maybe the jokes hit harder with a different demographic, and, to be fair, there are plenty of laugh-out-loud moments, but it just felt like there was also a lot of dead air. Almost like something that had just happened was supposed to get a big laugh and didn't. Fortunately, the pacing of the film is quick enough to not let any potential misfire moments like these linger. And there are a veritable smorgasbord of entertaining characters (Gigi is MY queen!!) and set pieces to keep things moving at a pleasant, enjoyable speed.
While the movie may not be firing on all cylinders in the comedy department, it excels on the drama side of things. Part of the reason why it reminds me of The Breakfast Club is that it feels that the film's real strength lies in what it has to say about US, society, and the generation to which the film is aimed. You'll come away from Booksmart wanting to be a better person... or at least we hope you will.
Us (2019)
A brilliant film hampered by idiocy--minor spoilers
So at a first, cursory glance, this may strike some as a straight-forward horror movie--albeit extremely weird and confusing. After a bit of reflection and analysis, the vast, meaningful layers of the film start to reveal themselves to you. What the movie is truly trying to say at its core may be different to each person and up for debate; however, the basic idea is that we are our own worst enemies. There is an exorbitant amount of depth and symbolism beyond that, or at least I think there might be--I'm not about to say I truly understand this film.
HOWEVER, the issue with this film, at least for me and presumably people like me, is that there are also numerous cases where the viewer is questioning the logic and realism of what's happening on-screen that it detracts from focusing on the more thematic depths of the film. For such an obviously intelligent film, there are WAAAYYY too many instances of horror-movie cliche events where the characters make a stupid decision seemingly to keep the film and scares going (just how are you going to forget the car keys, for the SECOND TIME, after formulating a plan to drive to mexico? and then why are they suddenly going back to the center of the calamity when there's no apparent no reason to go back there and we just decided to LEAVE? etc) There are also issues concerning the dopplegangers that seem to defy reason, even in this alternate universe the film creates. The actions of the two individuals in each pair seem to only be connected when the film deems it so.
The film brings up a lot of thematic questions, some of them are about who we are and how we treat others, which are important questions for us to ask. Unfortunately, the film also brings up a lot of literal questions about the hows and whys of the events that are unfolding on the screen, distracting the analytic viewer with thoughts of "well, that doesn't make any sense." Perhaps, upon further viewings, all the inane actions of the characters on the screen might reveal themselves to be part of Peele's master plan and were fully intentional. Right now however, I'm thinking: no.
There's a brilliant movie tucked away in here somewhere, it's a shame that it's sharing the screen with a rather idiotic one as well.
Roma (2018)
Beautiful but appallingly boring
Maybe you need to like families and babies to really connect with this film. I don't and maybe that's why it didn't resonate with me at all. Now, I'm a huge fan of Baraka and Samsara where not a single word of dialogue is spoken yet the imagery on-screen absolutely captivates you. Roma is similar in that, well, not a whole lot of anything happens. There is dialogue, there is some drama occasionally, but, for the most part there's absolutely nothing happening. To give you an idea, the film starts with 4 minutes of watching water on the floor. I kept thinking "maybe there will be some profound moment, even just a single line of dialogue, where this all comes together for me" and, for me at least, that never happened.
I am giving this four stars though, because the craftsmanship behind this film is absolutely phenomenal. Cinematography, sound, editing. The film is marvelous in those aspects. But that's quite simply not enough to make a 2 hr 15 minute film worthwhile.
The overwhelmingly glowing praise for this film has me wondering if people actually liked it that much or if they're more akin to the art exhibit patrons lining the block in "Exit Through the Gift Shop".
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)
How is this director not getting more work?
This is a film where the director has an iron-grip on the "feel" that he wants each and every scene to exude. Everything from what each character says, how they say it, the little mannerisms they have, the sound, the music--EVERYTHING works together to convey the emotions and view-point of the film's protagonist. Even when you already know what's going to happen, the film still manages to instill the sense of suspicion and unease that our heroine experiences.
Of course, while the director gets plenty of kudos for allowing the film to accomplish, the other shining star of the show is Goodman, who absolutely slays it. I find it rather shocking that his performance didn't garner him more award attention.
Power Rangers (2017)
For a minute there I thought it was going to be a good movie
The dramatic elements of this film, the character development, the dialogue, and even the acting were all surprisingly great. The issues the characters had with themselves and with each other were believable and very well-developed. Dialogue was a surprising strength, as was the acting. The actor playing Billy was a particular stand-out. Rarely do we see the highly intellectual character, with some form of autism and inability to socialize normally, to be portrayed so convincingly without over-doing it.
However, by about the half-way point of the film, the developmental aspects of the film start to overplay their hand and you find yourself wishing the film would just get on with it. Yes, the character building is intriguing and well-done, but... this is film about giant robots fighting giant monsters.
Frankly, all that exposition and build-up would've been worth it if the third act had been better handled. The director's strengths become obvious once the action lets loose. His/her strengths are in drama, not so much in handling large-scale scenes of mass- destruction. (I'm purposefully not looking up his/her film history until I'm done putting my thoughts out here.)
I'm also a little mixed on Elizabeth Banks. I'm a huge fan of hers but her performance felt a little off-base; however, I'm not sure that's entirely her fault. This film wants to play the whole thing pretty seriously. Which worked with the Power Rangers, the super powers, the robot, and the talking head in the wall. But Rita seems to be uncomfortably stuck between the gleeful ridiculousness of the show and the "dark and serious" tone the movie is going for. The film clearly wants her to be treated as a legitimate threat, but it's hard to take anything she does seriously.
All in all, a film that started off promisingly but ended without fulfilling any of those promises. Not terrible, but not good either. Like Rita, this film is stuck between the two.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)
Funny, beautiful, but a bit forced
So I thought this was a very entertaining ride, possible funnier and with better visuals than the first (which is saying something.) However, I'm starting to notice a trend with Marvel sequels. Some sequels will try to crank up the action or the humor, sometimes effectively, other times less effectively. The issue with Marvel sequels seems to be that they try too hard to push the inter- character drama. We've got no less than four character conflict plot-lines going on in this film and they're all in some way forced on us in a way that does not feel to develop naturally within the confines of the film.
In a way the humor also felt a bit "forced" but it was in rather a good way--kind of like in how explaining a bad joke makes the bad joke even funnier.
Marvel has long been known for their weak villains, but I'm starting to think that it's not necessarily the villains that are the issue, but that, instead of focusing of the conflict that the villain presents to the characters, Marvel films insist on focusing on conflicts between the protagonists. And, in the way that a villain feels weak if we aren't convinced by their motivations in doing their nefarious deeds, neither does the character infighting drama really connect to us if we don't buy their motivation for bickering with one another.
Dope (2015)
Great film, but a bit sloppy in areas.
This was a thoroughly entertaining film with a lot of great things to say, but there are definitely many aspects of this film that could've used a bit more polish. The script is fantastically witty and provides plenty of opportunities not only to entertain the viewer but to give them some mental food to chew on and most of the actors gave great performances.
However, there were some rather jarring aspects of the film that distracted from the viewing experience. Many scenes suffer from continuity and editing issues: like the position or disposition of the actors changes from one cut to the next or what actually happened in the scene is hard to follow because of huge, sudden jumps from one event to the next.
And while most of the actors were great, Zoe Kravitz seemed to be really out of her depth here. I didn't realize it was her until the end credits, but I kept wondering why the chemistry between her character and Malcolm was so incredible confusing: "is she TRYING to put him in the friend-zone?" I kept asking myself. Overall, that entire relationship could've been left completely out of the movie and the film might've been better off for it.
This last film-making gripe probably wouldn't bother too many people, but I also thought the sound was terrible, at least in regard to dialogue. There were many scenes that were out in the open but it was painfully obvious that the dialogue and or "live" music was recorded in a studio.
This is the potential spoiler part...
Oh, and while I thought much of what the film had to say about race or growing-up-in-the-ghetto issues was rather profound and seemed on-point, there's one line from the film on that subject that is still just frustratingly grating on me. On his revised Harvard application, Malcolm ends it with "'So why do I want to go to Harvard??'--if I was white would you even have to ask me that?" Just... WTF dude. YES OF COURSE THEY ASK WHITE PEOPLE WHY THEY WANT TO GO TO HARVARD!!! It's hard for anyone and everyone (except maybe the offspring of rich, heavily-donating Harvard alumni) to get in to Harvard. Talk about a self-created sense of persecution.
Despite all those flaws though, it was still an incredibly entertaining and enjoyable film.
Gokseong (2016)
Say what now?
To me a great film is one that makes the viewer ask questions that relate not only to the film but ones that can give greater insight into the real world. During this film however I found myself asking questions like "is this part SUPPOSED to be funny?" and "what in the hell is going on?" For the first half of this overly long film I was actually praising how well the humor was translating for a foreign language film; during the second half all that praise went away. The film seemed to have taken a turn for the serious but there were several scenes where certain elements were so over-the- top ridiculous that they seemed unintentionally comical.
The second aspect of this could just be a matter of viewer preference. The audience struggles with figuring out just who is to blame for the evil plaguing the characters in the film until the last few minutes. This, in itself, isn't so much the problem as is the questioning that arises concerning certain scenes from earlier in the film. One of the unintentionally funny (and seriously overly-drawn-out) scenes from earlier in the film seems to have little-to-no purpose once the true villain is revealed.
All-in-all it was successfully disturbing horror film but one that seemed to be plagued with the notions that "more is more" and, at times, a difficultly in establishing the right tone. Whether or not the elements I found confusing, redundant, etc are really so I can not truly judge until I give this film a re-watch.
Unfriended (2014)
Great Concept Terrible Execution
While maybe not for everyone, this is actually a fairly fantastic idea for a movie. The entire film takes place having us, the viewer, watching the laptop screen of the movie's main character, Blaire. We see her message with friends, webcam video popups, and web searches. There's no music, aside from the occasional ominous tone or "Scare Chord" that accompanies the pitiful attempts at horror throughout the film. We start with her video chatting with her boyfriend then, eventually we get to a group video chat involving about 4-5 friends. The faces of all participants are there on screen, aside from the anonymous user that has hijacked their chat session and turns their night into a living hell. The anonymous user makes it very clear that he/she/it is in control and if anyone leaves the video chat, they and/or their friends will die.
What makes that such a great premise for a film is that, as each face on the screen befalls their share of horrors, one would think that we would see, as each user would, the terrible, unspeakable horror that their friends are going through on the other side. That, to me, is a truly unsettling and horrific idea--seeing my friends violently meet their dooms, with me powerless to help.
Where the film, absolutely and completely fails with this concept is that, instead of getting the raw, uncut, slow-burn tension of a camera that absolutely refuses to turn away from the horrors the friends are facing, we get a series of spastic, internet-distortion- induced, lightning-fast-cut edits of what's going on. You see an example of this in the trailer for the film. A friend forcing his hand into a blender, cut, now his face is in the blender. Think that was edited down to give a tease of what the film has in store? NO. That's just how it plays out in the film. I don't know if they designed and cut these scenes for reasons of avoiding an R-rating, if they sincerely thought the scenes would be more effective that way, or if they wanted to have the film more resemble "reality" where apparently everyone's internet cuts out at the most obnoxious of times. Whatever they were going for, it does not work in the slightest.
It's not even that the film's problem is lacking violence, it lacks any sort of suspenseful build-up at all. Every time we get any sort of dramatic suspense, the video feeds start to cut, and then moments later, we again see the victim apparently undergoing some sort of awfulness, cut again, and they're dead. Instead of horror, I felt a frustrated confusion as to why the film-makers could possibly choose a route like this. You have such a fantastic opportunity to frighten your audience to the bone and, instead you cheapen everything about the experience. Instead of watching a frightening film, I felt like I was watching an hour and a half long trailer for a much better movie.