Reviews

It's been more than a decade since this movie slipped into cinemas and disappeared without a trace. But it's now offered on Hulu. I'll gladly differ to and concur with the film review master, Roger Ebert who was able to review this one before his death. (It's worth a Google search) He gave it one out of four stars, and his write up says it best: how could a movie with such a talented pedigree of writers and stars be such a listless, boring bomb?

What I will add is that I think this reteaming of the Grand Canyon writers, producers and star Kevin Kline changes is that this is Meg Kasdan project with hubby Lawrence Kasdan helping out; whereas with Grand Canyon it was the other way around. Do a quick IMDB credit search and it will confirm this suspicion and the disappointing result. If you like even passable dog rescue movies, this one will bore you with its tedious human side stories. If you're after an engaging and thoughtful follow up to 1991's Grand Canyon, skip it all together.

My wife wanted to check this one out to see Luke Grimes (Yellowstone) in a light comedy. Well, this one's very light as in no substance at all. It's not a comedy. It fails in being romantic unless you consider spending the whole movie wondering what this younger, handsome guy sees in this irritating, grouchy protagonist as he ines after her like a hypnotized puppy dog. And the drama/character development is so hamfisted and uninteresting that I think time actually stood still when I check my watch numerous times. Again, exactly what is this thing supposed to be and who is it for? Surely, while they were making this there had to be a code word or inside joke on the set to acknowledge "This movie is terrible, but Netflix bought it so, ha,ha"

This is the third major production to recount the horrors, outrage and devastation of America's opioid epidemic with the Sackler family's highly addictive Oxycontin at the center of the storm. HBO's 2021 documentary, "The Crime of the Century" is a top-notch four-hour mini-series that walks us through the origins, nuances, impact and current status of the Oxy wave. The at the end of 2021, Hulu released an excellent, 8-hour dramatization of the Oxy crisis with Michael Keaton starring in Dopesick. So, when Netflix comes along almost two years later with another dramatization, it begs the questions: Why? Is it better or worse or just different?

Sadly, other than a raucous and symbolic Miami party we didn't see in Dopesick, Painkiller's writer and director make some head scratching choices that interfere with the multi-POV story they're trying to tell. For example, the lead actress has one-note for six hours, burning hot, righteous outrage. This gets old after a while. Later we learn more about the reason for her rage but by then we're already exhausted. The performances by Matthew Broderick and Taylor Kitsch are better than the script material they're given. But the director insists on weird and irritating music choices, distracting and disorienting camera shots (yes, I understand the attempt to replicate disorientation and drug intoxication. But the kaleidoscope effect is overused in many other situations to annoying effect. Finally, the story telling in this six-hour version of the tales of Oxycontin, doesn't cohere, instruct and hold our interest the way Dopesick did. It's unfair to compare the two, but it's unavoidable. Painkiller comes up lacking and feels like an unnecessary knockoff.

P. S. One powerful addition Painkiller does have is real life grieving parents and loved ones who lost family to this horrible scourge introduce each episode. This is very powerful and a memorable choice. By far, the best choice of the production team.

Sadly I'm glad that ABC put this show out of its misery. This is a great cast who had all done stellar work in other series (Colony, This is US, Thirty Something --yes, I'm old:) and to their credit, continued to be engaging in this show. The problem is we never knew exactly what is this show supposed to be: it's way too light for a drama even a light drama because it's totally disconnected from reality and it's ridiculous (a beautiful henchwoman from Stanford leading a band of killers). So even if it's trying to imitate something like USA networks "Burn Notice" where the protagonists always outsmart everyone else and there are no real stakes, it ends up just being head scratching and monotonously time filing.

It's definitely not a romantic show either. Even though my Korean-born wife was a big fan of "This is us" so she loves watching Milo smooching a Korean beauty who just happens to work for the CIA and makes us wonder what does the CIA have to do with domestic crime that should be the sole province of the FBI and a handful of other domestic law enforcement agencies? But that's just one of a dozen questions that are never answered for us as the show treats us like morons.

Why is this Asian American family named "Hill?" That's something that needs to be explained. Also in the political arena why is a US Senate candidate for the state of Washington hanging out in Baltimore, MD or around the DC area when he needs to be back in the Pacific Northwest campaigning? And then when we get to what's supposed to be a blackmail scandal. The writers roll out something that's so weak and uninteresting even a third-rate political Blogger would not bother to mention it; something about an affair some washed up politician had three decades ago. Don't the writers know where we're at politically in this country right now? We are basically immune to scandal. This bombshell isn't even a firecracker.

Anyway to get back to the central plot and tone of the show the writers and producers should have made-up their mind to either go full fantasy like ABC 's "Once Upon a time" and have elves and Pixie dust included or grounded the show a little bit more in reality like Netflix "The Diplomat" which has some snappy dialogue and some real bureaucracy but at the same time giving us a lot of made-for-TV poetic license. Anyway all of these actors are top notch and this will just be a blip on their resumes, and we wish them the best in future projects which are hopefully a little bit better thought out and executed.

I don't watch many USA shows because I don't have cable TV. But I liked The Purge movies and now the two-season TV show is on Hulu. As many commentators have noted, season two is stronger and more coherent than season one. But the first season is well worth watching and sets up season two. The world-building and world expanding the writers do in season two is quite gripping and triggers deep reflection. As with any good sci-fi, the show posits a "What if..." that is clearly recognizable and only a few degrees amped up from the social and political chaos that we see today.

The fact that this show was written before Jan 6 and before the insanity of the response to COVID only burnishes its credentials as a must watch. The insane lies and conspiracy nonsense from the NFFA and worship of guns and violence are obvious references to MAGA and the NRA in the US.

In fact, I hate to think of how far a true authoritarian party in power in the US world go to purge its enemies. Recent history sadly shows us that there are no limits and common sense is turned upside down in service to party loyalty.

It's good that there are only two, tight seasons of the show. Much like a good HBO show, rather than dragging out the series with scattered "filler" episodes. Each of these episodes tie into the bigger plot and the show ends with a bang.

As others have noted here, this episode slows the action and gets a bit sluggish as it descends into cliches. One of the most annoying aspects is David's weird party. We get some unbelievable backstory on Jane which forces us to suspend disbelief. Jane is supposed to be struggling with balancing her good looks and her intellect-problem is that she is not good looking. The producers should have swapped out her and Penny, who is beautiful; of course a different actor would have to be her brother. As it is, we're left saying to ourselves, "Really? I don't think David would be after her or add her to his collection."

Off the bat, I'll admit that I don't understand many of the strong negative feelings about this docuseries. I'd never heard of this movement or Anarchapulco. That said, like any good documentary, the filmmaker uses the people themselves to tell the story. And in this case, by shooting over the span of six years, we're given a front-row seat to the sweeping ebb and flow of a movement and its main figures.

By reading the reviews, I definitely get a vibe from people still in this movement or its offshoots who take issue with the choices of the filmmaker in showcasing their goals and lifestyles. That's certainly their right. But for us ignorant "statists" it accomplished what any good documentary should do: 1. Inform us about a topic or subculture we're probably unfamiliar with. 2. Choose the right people to follow and let them tell us in their own words and show us how they live. And 3. Make narrative filming and editing decisions that allow for a coherent and accessible viewing experience. The Anarchists does all three.

Also, I give this series and HBO extra points for keeping this run to six episodes and not dragging it out Netflix style.

After reading all of the positive comments and rave reviews, frankly, I was expecting more. Yes, there is a lot of substance here to chew on. It is not the action-revenge movie we're teased with in the trailers. It is not a thriller in any way. It is a meditation on pain and loss. Mr. Cage is great, if a bit one-note: laconic rage.

The backstory of his stature and fame in the Portland restaurant community would have been so much more interesting to explore. Instead, we're given unsatisfying hints and feints and left feeling that this would have been a great 12-page short story in a well-respected fiction publication. It's just not movie material. Though, honestly, I do have trouble with insomnia on occasion and this baby primed me for a great night's sleep.

(I guess here is where I insert filler. Thankfully, this film is on the short side, but because not much happens, it still feels long:(

I heard Steven Yeun's NPR interview awhile back and finally gave this film a watch. The acting is top-notch and my wife, who herself was born and raised in Seoul, confirmed that Yeun's accent sounded authentic though he was raised in North America.

Anyway, I'm a big fan of story and plot. But not a lot happens here. Many questions go unanswered which fawning critics too often laud as trusting audiences to do the work. OK, but in the Iowa Writers' workshop back in the '70s we were taught that this is lazy writing and cheating the audience. By the end, I not only felt cheated and disinterested, but it was close to midnight and this sleeping pill helped me drift off. I never read the original short-story source material. But many short stories are built to be just that--short and not a 2 1/2 hour slog.

No, I'm not talking about improving the British show upon which this one is based. Nope, we must go back to another classic American sitcom. Epiphany: Jay is Darren and Sam is, well, still Sam (Bewitched). That's the comic rhythm this show reminds me off. But it does the whole supernatural wife, exasperated husband thing better than its 1960s cousin--probably due to its remake DNA from the UK Ghosts. Making this a hybrid of both shows -only the ghosts and the young couple are much funnier and warmer than the recycled punchline humor of Bewitched's nosy neighbor, boorish boss and annoying mother-in-law humor done to death. (Yes, I watched too much TV as a kid.)

Just a quick thanks to the many helpful, well-written reviews that pointed out how this limited series really doesn't go anywhere. I just finished the third episode and wondered: Am I wasting my time? I gave this show a chance because I like the actors (Kidman, Carnivale, McCarthy, Shannon) and showrunner (Kelly). I was even pleased to see the guy from The Good PLace (Jacinto) onboard in a serious/mysterious role. But then halfway through the third episode I found myself watching the clock--that's a good barometer for me. My favorite shows zoom by: 60 minutes and bam--the credits sneak up on you. Some examples are The Sopranos, The Wire, Deadwood, Homeland, even the White Lotus, which many have already noted the similarities to this series. But White Lotus had some real stakes (death, possible incarceration) along with very funny self discovery. Anyway, thanks again, I won't be wasting any more of my time on this one.

At about 48 minutes, this is just about the perfect running time before bed for a little comedy and then read a book and turn off the lights. Sadly, there's no comedy here. The stand-up acts are so weak and lane that Quinn feels compelled to insert reaction cutaways with other comedians during the acts. This is very distracting and the wirse thing is neither the snide comments or the act themselves are remotely funny.

Ok, at many points, this movie doesn't make sense. But it's a stylish, fun ride for those of us who like gritty, dirty cop thrillers. If you liked The Shield, you'll get a kick out of this. Lots of not-so-subtle nods to classic American cop movies including borrowed plot points from To Live and Die in LA with a lot macho atmosphere from the Israeli Fauda's strike team. This is one you shouldn't think too hard on. If you like the preview, you'll probably enjoy the movie.

This one popped up on YouTube with commercials. With its cast of name actors, I struggled to remember if it ever came out in the theaters--I don't think so. Usually, I don;t take a chance on straight-to-video. Especially one with a below 7 IMDB rating. But I'm glad I did. This take on illegal border crossing gives us a story that while sufficiently symbolic is also complicated enough as a drama to hold our interest. I would recommend it as a bookend to John Sayles slightly better "Lone Star" (Note: Eva Longoria tries to ugly herself up to look like more of a plain, Frontera wife and give more gravitas to her performance. Well, her performance is solid but she cannot hide her natural beauty. She is still gorgeous without makeup)

Not dirty enough to be even remotely erotic and not serious enough to be an engaging drama--this unique orphan is like a bad softcore porno, without the porn. So it just lies there. Sadly there are some real actors here trying to act but only reminding us of better days and much better projects: Diane Farr was great in Denis Leary's crazy TV show, "The Job" and her husband here is played a buddy to Christian Bale in the electrify and underseen "Harsh Times"

To piggyback on what another commenter said, this meandering mess is truly only good for one thing: If you find yourself awake at 2 am, start watching and you'll be back in dreamland by 3.

The trailer splices together some intriguing action that hints at an interesting revenge movie -- wrong! Yes, the acting by Lively and Law is good, and the music is a nice touch in spots. However, the plot, the script and direction are a mess. Very quickly, despite the attempts at a gritty vibe (the beautiful Lively is uglied up to look like an emaciated, disease-ridden hooker) the story is so crazy and unbelievable in so many spots that we can never settle in and enjoy the ride. In fact, by the time the third act rolls around, we're really confused (at least I was) and don't know why anyone is doing what they're doing. Yes, there are parts that are unintentionally funny: many of the "training" bits come to mind. But even in straight forward killing scenes the director feels compelled to dilute the narrative by distracting jumps back and forth around the violence.Again, sour notes. The orchestra needs to take it from the top with a different conductor.

I love me some Salma Hayek, and have fond memories of her and Baldwin together on 30 Rock. If I'd watched more of this disaster, those good ol' days might have been forever tarnished. I could only take 35 minutes. My wife spontaneously got up and took the dog for a walk. I apologized for wasting our time. This movie makes absolutely no sense (why the house switcheroo?) and is just an unpleasant, unfunny experience.

OK, I won't even bother with what should be a basic plot point. The movie has no interest in telling or showing us. So, let me bounce to a larger question:

Who is the most active senior? Rambo; Robert McCall (Denzel Washington's Equalizer franchise) or Mike Ehrmantraut (Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul) I think Rambo still has the edge--must be all of those vitamins Sly takes :)

I won't repeat the superlatives others have used to describe this show. It's really top-notch television. Thank you, Amazon Prime. I never would have found this gem on Starz (a poor imitation of Cinemax, which is a lesser version of HBO:). Anyway, I must push back on this lament that the show is only two seasons. Very few tightly written serial dramas can hold together for more than two or three seasons without declining from compelling to unwatchable. HBOs "The Wire" and "The Sopranos" are notable exceptions. But examples of cringeworthy overstay are "BattleStar Galactica," my favorite space opera. Two tight seasons would have been great. But then it spiraled off with loose ends the writers (looking at you Ron Moore) couldn't resolve satisfactorily. "Occupied," the Norwegian drama should have stopped at two seasons. The third season was embarrassing, short and nonsensical. While "The Knick" on Cinemax, like "Counterpart" was a perfectly plotted two, strong seasons.

So, I commend showrunner Justin Marks and his crew for a great season one that builds this world, lays out the stakes and draws us in. Then an outstanding and tight season 2 that resolves many of subplots along with the major storylines and most important, sticks the landing:)