Change Your Image
chzzyg
Reviews
Gojira -1.0 (2023)
Yes, go see it!
I never thought in my life I'd see a Godzilla movie that would make me emotional, and yet here it is. This movie is incredibly well written. It has no business being this good, but I'm glad it is. TOHO knocked it out of the park, as did the director, cinematographer, set designer, actors, writers, effects artists, they should all be proud of the work they did here. No line of dialogue, nor scene, nor action happens without good reason and callback. I have only a few minor complaints that don't really add up to much but here they are. For one, CG is not scary or realistic looking. It's all very well done, but it still looks like CG, that's just how it is and always will be. The actors still did a great job reacting to it, so it's passable enough. For two, there were only a couple of moments that seemed out of place for the characters, yet they dissipated over time and were forgotten easily enough, as they blended into the overall story. In the end, I loved this movie and hope the follow-up will be just as good. Some may complain that there wasn't enough Godzilla. I'll admit Godzilla seemed more like a background character that showed up a couple of times, but it was acceptable enough for the type of movie this became. The messaging of survival, family, sacrifice, forgiveness, were all felt and admirable. I teared up more times than I'd like to admit. Amazing job TOHO team!!!
The Odyssey (1997)
Curious about it? See it! You won't be let down.
Is it accurate? I don't know. But it is very good. The story telling is spot on perfect for the casual watcher. The makeup is great, the set designs are pretty good, the casting and acting is very good. The one and only gripe I can make is the CG department. The filmmakers obviously didn't have the budget of a high quality triple-A film, but that's okay, the story and the characters carry it well enough to suspend disbelief just enough to get by. 1997 was in that weird period of bad visual effects anyway. This is a story about a man who not only fights as a commanding general in a 10 year war, but spends the majority of the time trying his damndest to get back home to his wife and son, both of which are having their own heart wrenching struggles. If you have time to sit for the three hour presentation you won't be disappointed. I've seen it twice now, and came away both times with tears in my eyes. Beautiful storytelling on the part of the director.
The Munsters (2022)
I liked it...mostly
This movie isn't the greatest, or even that good, but it isn't bad. It has its problems, but I think the harshest criticisms of this movie are overblown. I'm going to go with the Good the Bad and the Ugly layout. First, the good aspects. The foremost standout of this film is the lighting and set design. Absolutely every scene pops with color, texture, and depth, which also ties into pretty good camera work. Every moment looks fantastic. The costumes are pretty good too. Even though he gets a set of negative character traits, Count Orlock looks awesome. Aaaannnnnddd, that's about it for the good. There isn't much positive to say about this film. There is however, a lot of okay to mediocre bits. For the bad, there isn't much of a story going on. It's just a series of events that follow in line. They're all entertaining to a degree, but the plot itself is loose and flimsy. As an audience member, what are you waiting for to happen? Nothing, every scene is just things happening to the characters. For the ugly, the humor is a potential issue. It takes awhile to get into the groove of what Rob Z. Was going for. It's cheese to the max and comes across as 8yr old humor in an adult world. It's one of those things that either grows on you or you will be very bored. The acting; most of the characters were casted well, but there's an elephant in the room. Sheri Moon just doesn't fit. She has some shining moments, but they are few and far between. The standout performances of Jeff Daniel Phillips(Herman), Jorge Garcia(Floop), and Daniel Roebuck(Grandpa), keep the story-less movie alive. In the end it's a very mediocre movie that looks great, is very middling, but it's not that bad. For a final bit, I have a theory that the first half of the movie takes place in the El Superbeasto universe. And just that alone is pretty cool.
Philosophy of a Knife (2008)
Gross and boring. An odd combo.
I can sum up this movie in three words: Boring, Gruesome, and semi-educational; but since reviews need more words, most people are watching this movie to see what a horror/documentary looks like. It's not that special. The horror aspect is pretty gross and fairly well done for the low budget they had to work with, but it gets old fast being a four hour flesh-fest. The documentary side of it seems like it's partially full of crap, and partially more interesting than the horror side which drags on and on and on...and on. As mentioned, the budget they had to work with was luckily not that great because there were moments that had me wanting to vomit had they been any more realistic. A lot of the time moments are left to the imagination because the flesh effects are often bloody rags and rubber chunks; something to be grateful for in some scenes. This movie is way too long for what it does, likely an artistic choice to get the point across of the horrors of war and what mankind is capable of, but I just kept losing interest. If you feel like you want to see it, be ready for a very long series of mutilations broken up by occasional historical tidbits.
Bad Boys (1995)
It's okay'ish
It's not as good as I remember. After rewatching it decades later I'm asking myself why did I like it so much. It follows a cookie cutter plotline that seems as if it was borrowed from any other cop action film of the time, like Lethal Weapon, and recasted with the hot black actors of the time. Not a thing wrong with the casting, but the story is as bland as can be. Not only that, but two top tier comedians of the time not being allowed to make jokes is kind of upsetting. And being directed by Michael Bay really stands out, as in everything blows up and thousands of bullets hit hardly ever anyone. Okay, I'm being a bit shrewd with this, but the movie could've definitely been better had another script been worked out, because these two make a great team. The camera work is excellent. The acting is pretty good. I was just hoping to get a little more humor, a little less broodiness, and some entertainment. I came out of it with boredom. Why did I ever like this movie?
Violent Night (2022)
An 80's style action film that utilizes Marvel level violence and has an "R" rating. Enjoy!
Overall, I mostly liked this movie. The story is good, the acting is good, the cinematography is good, the dialogue is good. It's mostly enjoyable. But it just comes out to good. I went in hoping to see a dual uzi wielding Santa Claus mowing down a snow covered forest full of militant baddies, Rambo style, and came out of it only partially satisfied.
The story contains three plotlines that only feel somewhat partly fulfilled by the end. Plot "A" is about Santa trying to rediscover the magic of Christmas, as stated in the opening bar scene rant that Christmas has turned into a superficial day of meaningless gifts and self gratifying interests(a rant I do just about word for word every year since leaving the military), and by the end of the movie the execution of it feels kinda flimsy. Plot "B" is about the little girl, Trudy, and her hopes to have her mommy and daddy get back together so they can be a family. Trudy, played by Leah Brady, is THE standout actor in this movie. Absolutely adorable. She plays the innocent little girl role so well. She definitely has a bright future ahead of her. Anyway, this is the only plotline that actually feels completed by the end. There is a "C" plot involving a lot of money that comes across as kinda hazy because it's not fully fledged out. After brainstorming it a few times you can figure out what happened off screen, yet a few short lines of dialogue would've cleared up some of the confusion over what happened to the money, both before and after the events.
Now that the plotlines have been covered, where's the violence I was promised? It's in there, but the fight scenes are all shot in the dark! Often times almost too dark to tell what's going on. Who made this decision? It's an "R" rated movie. I payed to see some action and violence. Also, a lot of the kills are cut short by frames, in a way that leaves you to only guess how baddies got killed because there aren't enough frames to highlight the effects. It's like they tried to implement Marvel movie violence into an "R" rated film. It's as if the filmakers were held back from making the movie they wanted, because there's an M240 machinegun somewhere that only gets used one time to scare Santa off a rooftop. Why isn't it in Santa's hands at any point?! One of the lines of dialogue explains that Santa doesn't know how to use guns, fine, however I think the violence could've been ratcheted up a bit more. It needed more baddies, more blood, and more kills. If this film just happens to get released on DVD with more frames added to the action sequences, and brighter imaging, I'll give it an 8/10.
Now, despite my criticims that it's not the movie I wanted, it's still a decent movie worth seeing. The Christmas spirit is still in there along with Santa killing a group of bad guys. If that's what you want that's what you'll get. It's got a good sense of humor and is still enjoyable to watch.
Gaslight (1944)
Watch the 1940 version for the story, and 1944 for the acting.
First off, I'm going to say something controversial that would upset the biggest fans of this classic work of art...i like the 1940 movie better...I know, It's going to rile up someone. However, that's not to say this movie is any worse. The budget in this version is way better, and the acting is incredible. For me it's all about Ingrid Bergman. She gives an awing performance that acting master classes can be taught about. She takes her character on emotional rollercoaster rides multiple times in individual scenes. It's really incredible to watch. Not only that, but the few times you get to hear her speak, Angela Lansbury owns the set. So what's my issue. The storytelling, directing, cinematography, and series of events play out better, in my opinion, in the 1940 movie, which also has pretty good acting but not Ingrid good. Almost like Spanish Dracula vs. US Dracula, I wish there could've been a mashup of the two movies. Those two actresses swapped into the prior movie would've been incredible. As for Charles Boyer, I wasn't much for him. I feel Paul Mallen played a much better narcisist husband. At the end of the day, you can't go wrong with either movie, but one of them tells it 45minutes faster than the other. Just do like I did. Set aside 3 and a half hours, watch them both and decide for yourself.
Man of the Year (2006)
A fairly decent movie
I thought Man of the Year was an okay film. Its heart was in the right place but had nagging issues that kept losing my attention. First and foremost, the cast is awesome. Just about everyone cast is a well known star and each play their roles well. In specific, Laura Linney shines playing the full gamut of emotional positions in believable realism. The story is clever enough to maintain attention, and the camera work is pretty good. So what's the problem? I'm not sure but I think it's the pacing. The beginning of the film moves pretty fast getting Robin Williams into Presidency, and then it slows down to a grueling crawl of slow plot points and me nearly screaming at Laura Linney's character to reveal her key information to get things moving again, which doesn't happen for quite awhile. During these moments Robin Williams picks up the ball with jokes and gags but it gets old after so many scenes of nothing substantial happening. More time could've been spent on digging into the voting machines plotline which is only peppered into a few scenes to break up the monotony. I did go into this movie at a rough time in 2022 but the politics were kept to more of a background fluff than as a key part of the storyline which was a relief. I feel like this movie could've used a few more plot points than it ultimately had and that would've helped with the pacing issue, but other than that it's not a bad popcorn flick. There are fun moments to be had in it and in the end it's just a straightforward story with moments of romance, suspense, humor, and drama sprinkled in.
Arrival (2016)
Doesn't match the hype
None of the characters in this movie are relatable or appealing. There's no sense of time which I guess may have been intentional to the end plot but doesn't work well for a one time viewer. For some reason there was a need to inject partisan politics into the story; take a wild guess which side it portrays as horrible people. And, a lot of the story is just fluff filler that doesn't do much for the overall plot.
Now for the positives. The CG effects are fine enough. The cinematography is good. The directing is good. The writing, while does have the above problems, does have nuggets of caring moments that hold your attention yet they are far and few. And the overarching plot is great.
Overall though, I hated this movie. It constantly felt like being poked in the chest for fictional events. The characters are just unlikable. A bus could've ran any of them over and it wouldn't have affected the story in any way. The direction of the film is brilliant, but the way it gets there is grueling. I was checking my watch every ten minutes. It doesn't match the hype, and it left me wanting to watch something like Contact, instead.
No Such Thing (2001)
Almost a Win
I wanted to like this movie more than I did. By the start of the third act I was starting to get fidgety and irritable. Without walking through the entire movie I can say the first act was a perfect setup for what I thought was going to be an interesting ride. The acting was great, the character dichotomy is excellent, the settings are beautiful, the characters are mostly predictable stereotypes without being annoying about it. Then there's Beatrice. Her character is a puzzle box waiting to be opened. She is written in a way that we don't quite understand her actions and yet she's very likable, independent, and brave. Having survived death numerous times in the first half hour, she's earned an interesting character to look forward to. (potential spoil-It is odd that she doesn't show much emotion over her deceased fiance at the hands of the monster, except for one short moment, but it's forgivable for what she's been through up to this point.) The monster is almost a perfect inversion of Beatrice. Without breaking it all down they are made to be together on this journey.
Now, where the movie loses me is the second act. It feels like a completely different writer took over, or maybe the story was rewritten during the shoot, because the tone is totally different suddenly. In hindsight this was likely to ratchet up the stakes for the third act but it all feels ham fisted. There are dead spots where nothing much happens with our main characters, and the time is spent on creating a side plot villain. While all this is going on I'm dying to know more about our puzzling main characters to see more of how they interact with one another. The opportunity is also a missed for the monster to push the limits of the promise he made to Beatrice.
Now the third act. It felt like the story mostly got back on track from the first act, yet the military is now involved, and at the same time I have zero interest in what the military wants. Not much time in the story is spent on this third faction so I have zero cares about them. The final moment is shot really well. There's a sense of excitement leading up to it, but at the same time all that ham fisting from the second act falls flat. I think this climactic ending would've come across more meaningful had we spent more time with the two main characters rather than shoving in all the extra chatter in the second act.
Overall, I wanted to like it more than I did, but the casting, make up, directing, cinematography, and settings were excellent. It was just a convoluted story that should've been more simplified down to a self vs self that becomes a romantic tale. Instead we get a decaf version that can be construed into a mold that resembles such a film. I wanted to like it more, but it's still a decent watch.