Change Your Image
gordongm
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Gisaengchung (2019)
Multifaceted fantastic film
After seeing Parasite, I thought the film was perhaps a 7 or 8 out of 10, but having slept on it I've decided it's a 9 or 10. -- And now over a year after I originally watched and reviewed the film (although I've only watched it once) I'd say it's one of my favourite films. --
This review will be full of spoilers, I think fewer expectations will improve the viewing experience.
The reason my opinion of the film went up overnight is that it gives the audience plenty to think over, I believe it can be interpreted in many different ways. Like any great artwork it is filled with memorable details, I think there is a hidden meaning to the film, but at the same time it is a fun film to watch. You could watch this film at a purely surface level and enjoy the experience, but I believe there is some kind of allegorical aspect to the film. A famous allegory would be Animal Farm, which is about animals taking over a farm, but which is actually about the Russian Revolution and the USSR. There is no such obvious allegory to Parasite but I do believe there is a hidden meaning. The main thing that points to allegory is the strangeness of the story - particularly at the moment of greatest drama, where the father kills his employer virtually unprovoked. Really what we see here as an audience is that the disgust which the wealthy man feels to his employee is more hurtful than the murder and severe wounding of the poor man's children.
At the surface level we can see this is a film about class. Very visibly we can see the people living in (or just below) the gutter, contrasted with the splendor of wealth. The film largely tells the story of a poor family taking over, several servants' jobs in the household of a wealthy family. The poor family are able to do so through insider connections and duplicity in a way which entirely conforms to the saying "it's not what you know it's who you know". There are few job interviews, just recommendations, and so the people with contacts are rewarded while the people with skills are not aware there is a job vacancy.
And how is one to interpret the word parasite? Who is the parasite? Let me state here that in one interpretation of communism the wealthy class i.e. The land owners and shareholders are parasites living off of the wealth of the workers. But in this film the wealthy man appears to be a hard-worker, so presumably he's not the parasite. Is it the poor family who takes over the servant jobs of the house? The poor father certainly reacts angrily to being compared to a cockroach. They are the most obvious candidates. Also the cook's husband who lives in the cellar is a parasite who lives off the scraps of the wealthy family and who also lives off of the work of his wife. Even the ditzy, wealthy wife might be thought a parasite who lives off of her husband. The poor husband, Mr Kim, makes some enigmatic comments to the wealthy husband about the wife and whether he really loves her. The wealthy husband talks of him over-stepping the mark. While playing Indians he does pretty much say to Mr Kim something like, I'm paying you to be here, don't overstep the mark - in other words we are not equals.
Visually, this is a good looking film, imaginitive camera angles. As an audience we can feel the moments of panic, the fear of being caught hiding around the house. There are parts of the film I didn't understand but which presumably make sense to Koreans, like the meaning of that ornamental rock.
Anyway a great film, highly recommended.
Bridge of Lies (2022)
Some good qualities but frustrating to watch
I have a caveat that I've only seen parts of a few episodes, and not a whole episode start to finish. Anyway this is my opinion based on limited information.
The format here is simple: find the most ignorant contestants possible and put them on a simple quiz hosted by Ross Kemp. Ross Kemp is a good host, the questions are unbelievably easy, and anyone who watches quiz shows or takes part in quizzes would complete an episode in half the time, and would most likely walk away with the money.
I would recommend any dishonest person who can fake a fun personality to apply for this show. Just lie to the producers of Bridge of Lies and pretend to be unable to answer many questions, also dither a lot before answering. I am quite sure these are the qualities the producers are looking for.
Early Man (2018)
Gave up watching, a bit too stupid even for the likes of me
I haven't given a star rating as I only watched half the film, but what I did see I disliked. The thing I really disliked was the historical inaccuracy and a lack of care or originality, because it seems like the only research the writers did on this film was watching old episodes of the Flintstones.
In Pixar films the team do some research, for example for Up some animators went to Venezuela to do justice to the landscape, similar story for Disney's Moana, Encanto.
Aardman themselves accurately portray English towns in their great Wallace and Gromit animations. The Heath-Robinsonesque inventions make some sense in that setting. We have a charming, accurate background and upon this a slightly ridiculous story can be built and provide entertainment and maybe teach us something.
Aardman simply don't care about early man and are happy to regurgitate whatever stereotypes they had as children. The whole world makes no sense - a rabbit to feed a whole tribe, huge technologically advanced cities appearing out of nowhere...
Of course the story of an animation doesn't have to make sense, but it would help if something made sense in the film.
The Snowman and the Snowdog (2012)
Sequel to classic turns out to be cynical remake
I watched this right after watching the original Snowman. The newer film unfortunately pales in comparison to the original - the storyline is virtually the same but worse, and the same can be said for the animation and the music. With apologies to all those who I'm sure worked hard to bring the film to screen, this film was unable to live up to the original and one wonders why this sequel was made.
While the original animation shimmered across the whole screen, the remake had animated characters over a succession of virtually still backdrops. In the original I was impressed by the attention to detail in the shadows, whereas in the remake there were no shadows.
Again the music is very similar to the original, largely violin based and with similar themes. There is more guitar based music and later the song while the characters are flying is more pop and less choral. Still reasonably moving music, but slightly worse than the original.
Probably the worst thing about this film is its plot, really just a rehash of the old plot, except there's now a dog which comes to life by the end of the film. While not a scene for scene remake the plot points are virtually identical.
There is simply very little original brought to the film, and everything that has changed in the sequel turns out to have reduced the quality of the film rather than improved it.
Columbo: Columbo Goes to College (1990)
A fantastic Columbo
This episode is particularly good because of the murderers - arrogant, rich and mocking, but also fun and smart, as a viewer I couldn't wait for them to get their comeuppance. As usual there's humour, an implausible but not ridiculously implausible murder, and Columbo uses his typical tricks to ensnare the killers. And there's good music too.
Just caught the start of this episode again, and I love the moment where Coop's dad and Coop have a conversation along the lines of:
"That was x's dad on the phone, she's had an abortion"
"We could have made it work but..."
"Oh, so you wanted to keep the baby? That's the third girl in 18 months Coop! One more screw-up and you're out!"
Here We Go (2020)
Here We Go
Here We Go is a 6 part sitcom from 2022, based on a one off pandemic-themed comedy from 2020 called Pandemonium. I initially watched Here We Go without having heard of Pandemonium.
To start with the bad: the camerawork is shaky and disorienting, the idea that this has been made as a documentary by the teenage son is not believable, and the father at times seems to be doing a bad impression of David Brent from the Office. Nevertheless I like this show very much.
The frequent time jumps work well, there is quick witty dialogue, it's cleverer than you might first think. I don't really know what it is I like so much about the show, I think the storylines fit together quite pleasingly, although you do have to suspend your disbelief at times. Actors are very good, characters relatable.
I've gone back and rewatched the series and picked up jokes I didn't notice the first round. There's a blatant reference to episode 3 (Cherry's Salsa Class) in episode 1 (Mum's Birthday Voucher), which is impossible to spot if watching episodes in order. Also a reference to episode 2 in episode 3.
Watching Pandemonium, I can see where the whole idea of this sitcom comes from but it's a bit on the nose. The family documentary style makes more sense as a project the son is doing over lockdown. The grandmother is representative of those who keep breaking lockdown. The father of the family (Paul Jessop) is the man on furlough. Uncle Robin is the man whose wedding plans and relationship have been ruined by covid. The daughter has opted out of University due to covid. Katherine Parkinson plays the person working from home and bank-rolling the family. And the time jumps exist so we can see them doing the worst things imaginable in January 2020 followed by the consequences however many months later.
While Pandemonium gave birth to these characters, they become more rounded in the subsequent series. Most of the reviews on IMDB are of Pandemonium.
Meet the Richardsons (2020)
Reality tv, but I like it
I really like this show, but I'm not sure if I should be embarrassed to admit it.
This is a semi-scripted reality show, perhaps similar to The Only Way is Essex, where cameras follow married comedians Lucy and Jon around various fictional and non-fictional scenarios.
The show is at its best when it appears to be unscripted, when Jon and Lucy are simply sitting on the sofa making each other laugh. Various celebrities make an appearance.
I think the real shameful joy of the show comes from its ambiguity. To what extent is it reality? Which parts are scripted? How different are the true Lucy and Jon from their comedy personas? To what extent are they just joking and to what extent do they genuinely hate/love each other?