I don't even know why I was so negative about "X" when I first saw it a few years ago. Yes, Ti West's film follows a fairly generic slasher plot. But the selling point is rather how stylistically sound the 70s aesthetic is realized. Mia Goth is already strong in the first installment of the trilogy, even if she is on a completely different level in "Pearl." And the rest of the cast, especially Brittany Snow and Jenna Ortega, are also solid. Overall, I szill believe "X" lacks a bit of surprise and gore, but I had a much better time watching it a second time than I did on the first viewing.
As a teenager, I used to read a magazine called "Power Wrestling" on long train rides. That was also when I first came across the story of the Von Erich family, and even then, I thought it would make an interesting template for a film. The only thing that spoke against it was that the whole thing might even be too depressing for a drama, and indeed, some of the family suffering was left out of "The Iron Claw."
But that doesn't mean it's suddenly a feel-good sports film. All the more so, as the wrestling scenes, although well realized, are certainly not the focus. Instead, it's all about the family dynamics. Kevin Von Erich (Zac Efron) takes center stage, and the family's story is told around him. And my God, is it all depressing.
Efron is completely convincing in the role. The other family members, on the other hand, are perhaps a little underserved at times, though Jeremy Allen White, as the most successful brother Kerry, does shine from time to time. The tragic events were staged a little too subdued in places, but they are still usually a punch in the gut. And anyone who doesn't shed a few tears at the last scene has no heart.
If you know anything about wrestling, you will be aware that the industry has had its fair share of tragic events throughout its history. "The Iron Claw" demonstrates how this can be transformed into an excellent film with a focus on the characters. As a result, I can wholeheartedly recommend the wrestling drama.
I would love to give "The Beekeeper" a rating of one and ten at the same time. It's perhaps one of the silliest films I've ever seen, but you can also have a really good time. Jason Statham definitely knows his job; he plays the main character, who is both a beekeeper and a "Beekeeper" (a type of over-the-top assassin), with his usual coolness. And, of course, he doesn't skimp on the bee puns either.
As part of the story, the beekeeper/"Beekeeper" wants revenge for his neighbor falling for a phishing scam. And, believe me, the portrayal of the scam here is unparalleled in terms of ridiculousness. Be that as it may, laughably evil written antagonists get a proper smack in the mouth from Staham, which is staged in a bruising and brutal manner throughout. I definitely enjoyed the action.
As I said, the stupidity of the film almost hurts. But that's probably what makes it stand out. However, it is clear that "The Beekeeper" is certainly not for everyone.
Pixar has released numerous great films over the years, of which "Inside Out" is definitely one of the studio's very best. However, the sequels to Pixar hits rarely come close to the originals, and this is also the case with "Inside Out 2."
Nevertheless, it is certainly one of the better sequels. The film is entertaining, and like its predecessor, it tackles the coming-of-age theme in a very colorful and profound way while also impressing with its humor. However, it lacks any surprise factor. The concept is familiar, and the new additions to the emotions are more of a consistent continuation than a reinvention.
Meanwhile, on a technical level, there is nothing to complain about. As usual with Pixar, the film looks great, and the voice cast is also convincing. Overall, "Inside Out 2" is worth a clear recommendation for families, and I didn't regret going to the cinema either. Nevertheless, I don't think the film will remain as engraved in my memory as the first installment.
At the beginning of "Angel," 15-year-old schoolgirl Molly tells a classmate that her mom thinks she's too young to date. If only he knew that the girl was prostituting on Hollywood Boulevard at night. Nowadays, a film with such a premise would certainly never be released, but as an exploitation film from the 80s, it works surprisingly well. Quirky characters and a serial killer plot certainly provide a high entertainment value and even some suspense. On a positive note, I also have to emphasize that there are no sex scenes with Molly, which makes the premise a little more bearable. As an "LA film," "Angel" is also compelling. However, I would advise not taking the film too seriously overall.
With "Repo Man," I once again had the problem that I usually struggle to get into absurd, surrealistic plots. However, in contrast to "Buckaroo Banzai," which came out in the same year, you can still follow the plot of "Repo Man" pretty well. And yet, the storyline isn't really that important anyway; instead, the film shuffles from scene to scene. It does get a bit silly at times, but in the end, I was always impressed by the level of creativity in the production. All in all, the film is funny and entertaining, and it is certainly a very good example of 80s cinema.
During the opening credits of "Wicked Prayer," I was somewhat surprised that I had already seen every single actor mentioned in several other projects. After watching the film, however, I was more surprised that they all found work afterward. It almost seems like a competition to see who can deliver the worst performance. In the end, Edward Furlong and Tara Reid probably win, even if David Boreanaz as Satanist cult leader Luc is not far behind. However, it's not just the weak acting that drags the film down, but also the rather cheap look, the amateurish staging, and the story dripping with clichés. After "Wicked Prayer," it would have been appropriate to let the crow rest. The only ray of hope is that things can't get any worse.
For a direct-to-video sequel to "The Crow," I could have imagined a much worse film than "Salvation." I would even say that it is a tad better than "City of Angels." The latter was a little more on point in terms of style, but this third installment has a story that is easier to follow. The surprisingly impressive cast is also noteworthy, though lead actor Eric Mabius is the weakest link in the chain.
Ultimately, however, the film isn't really good, as everything is too generic for my liking. The villains centered around a group of corrupt cops are also super-flat, and the revenge story is ultimately just a half-baked rehash of the plot from the previous films. But at the very least, I wasn't all that bored this time, which is a significant improvement over the previous film.
Of course, I knew going in that this low-budget sequel to "The Crow" would fall far short of the first film with Brandon Lee. But I would at least give "City of Angels" credit for its occasionally atmospheric look. The production design is quite dirty and grimy, which ultimately suits the film quite well. Otherwise, however, it's not a good film. The acting is mainly bad, although I found Mia Kirshner at least likeable. Meanwhile, the staging is anything but dynamic, the effects are weak, and the revenge story definitely won't get anyone excited. Ultimately, the second ‘The Crow’ film is pretty insignificant, so it's neither particularly enjoyable as an example of "so bad it's good" nor as a serious action thriller.
The problem with anthology films is often that the quality of the individual stories varies considerably. But this is hardly the case with “Wild Tales." Every single episode in this vicious black comedy has at least one scene that made me laugh out loud.
The first short story in an airplane immediately sets the right mood, even if it is so nasty that you might have to wince a little. The third episode is also a highlight, showing what happens when “road rage” is taken to extremes. “Bombita” then deals very effectively with the subject of bureaucracy. “La Propuesta” then addresses the issue of corruption, which was the episode that left me the least impressed. However, the wedding story at the end of the movie won me over again.
All in all, the beginning, middle, and end of “Wild Tales” are particularly well done, making it one of the best anthology films of all time. Each individual story would also work very well as a stand-alone short film, which is certainly also a testament to its quality.
I'm not sure why, but I never really seem to get into films by Alfred Hitchcock. I see all of their qualities and can certainly acknowledge the importance they had for the evolution of cinema. But the somewhat sluggish narrative pace, typical of the era, always pulls me out a little. Nevertheless, I still had fun with “North by Northwest”. This is mainly due to the consistently charming leading man Cary Grant and the surprisingly high level of humor. And there's even a bit of action, which of course includes the “cornfield scene” with the crop duster. And the finale also offers plenty of suspense, which ultimately leaves me feeling quite positive about the movie.
Maybe “Your Name” is a bit sappy, but the movie is also so heartwarming that I wasn't annoyed by it at all. The anime genre is not usually my cup of tea, but this coming-of-age movie managed to win me over very quickly with its charm, interesting characters, and some fantastic music. At the same time, the story also has a few mystery elements that keep the viewer guessing, and the answers always come at just the right time. Accordingly, the movie keeps you on your toes throughout. I definitely won't have watched “Your Name” for the last time.
I'm actually a bit ambivalent about “Love Lies Bleeding." The beginning and middle of the movie are fantastic, but the finale takes some getting used to. Director Rose Glass definitely succeeds in establishing the characters and the setting. She doesn't hesitate for long before the romance at the heart of the plot picks up speed. You can definitely expect some sex scenes, but they are pleasantly not voyeuristically staged. It's all very atmospheric, both visually and in terms of the score.
The chemistry between Kristen Stewart and Katy O'Brian should also not be underestimated, as I immediately buy their romance. Many people don't seem to like Stewart, but I've never had a problem with her. She may be a little limited in her acting, but she always excels at portraying slightly odd characters like the one in this movie. The star of the film, however, is O'Brian, who, as a homeless bodybuilder, sets herself up for roles in bigger movies.
But as I said, the movie lost me a bit towards the end. The thriller plot starts off well, but the resolution and some decisions in connection with the finale are just not my cup of tea. Due to some interesting visual ideas by Glass, at least it never gets boring, which is why I can still give it a strong recommendation overall.
I think anyone who liked “Bad Boys for Life” and wouldn't have had a problem if the movie had been significantly dumber will also have fun with “Ride or Die." With this fourth installment, I had the distinct impression that the franchise was moving in the direction of the "Fast and Furious" films. It's constantly about FAMILY, the focus is on somewhat unrealistic action; and even the cliché of the former villain, who is now one of the good guys, is trotted out.
Overall, however, it is much closer in quality to “Fast 5” than to “Fast X." The humor really clicked in some places, at least for me. There are also a few creative action sequences, even if the camera was sometimes a little too close to the actors' faces for my liking. And the story, while very predictable, is at least effective at keeping up the pace. And last but not least, Will Smith and Martin Lawrence's chemistry continues to work very well.
Still, I have to reiterate that it's a very silly movie. If you have a problem with that, you should avoid a trip to the movies. For my part, I may have found the beginning a little sluggish, but after that, I had a lot of fun.
Despite all their flaws, I still enjoy the first two "Bad Boys" films. Maybe it's also a bit of nostalgia; after all, I was probably just the right age, especially for the second movie, for not finding Michael Bay's films stupid. But I really enjoy them both.
However, the third installment is a completely different story. The movie is much more competently written than its two predecessors. The characters are given rough edges, undergo growth, and are allowed to show weaknesses. The humor also departs from the typical Bay formula. And when it comes to staging the action, the directing duo Adil & Bilall also show that they are experts in the genre.
Of course, “Bad Boys for Life” is not a reinvention of the genre, but the movie is quite simply entertaining. Overall, I see it as a step ahead of its two predecessors, which I liked for completely different reasons.
The third “Beverly Hills Cop” movie doesn't even come close to maintaining the quality of the first two installments. Although Eddie Murphy is still solid as Axel Foley, the whole tone is far too goofy to be really enjoyable. And the great chemistry between the trio of Foley, Rosewood, and Taggart is no longer there because John Ashton isn't in it. The villains are also a step down - and they weren't exactly a highlight in the previous installments. All in all, I really can't recommend the trip to Wonder World.
Thanks to an interesting mix of 50s and 80s aesthetics, a few resounding slaps, and a multitude of exploding motorcycles, “Streets of Fire” never gets boring. It certainly helps that the movie opens with a concert sequence that is a real banger. Once the story gets going, it does wear a little thin, but never to the point of being really distracting.
The latter also applies to lead actor Michael Paré's wooden acting, which somehow fits the movie's mood quite well. Meanwhile, Willem Dafoe proved to be able to convincingly portray psychopathic characters early on in his career. And with Diane Lane, Amy Madigan, and Deborah Van Valkenburgh, there are even a few interesting female characters. If you haven't seen “Streets of Fire” yet, you should definitely catch up, especially if you have a soft spot for 80s films.
Whether you can have fun with “The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension” certainly depends to a large extent on your tolerance level for nonsense. Admittedly, mine was already exceeded by the opening crawl. Accordingly, I didn't exactly have the best time. The most interesting thing about the movie is the impressive cast, which includes well-known actors such as Peter Weller, Jeff Goldblum, and John Lithgow. However, each of them is overacting to the max, especially Lithgow. And they can't do anything to change the wacky and unnecessarily complicated plot, either. Ultimately, the movie is extremely tedious, and I therefore can't recommend it.
While I like the original “Mad Max” trilogy, “Fury Road” from 2015 is by far my favorite of the franchise. My expectations for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” were correspondingly high, and unfortunately, I have to report that I was a little disappointed in the end. Aside from the thrilling action, one of my favorite aspects of "Fury Road" was its straightforward storytelling. This prequel also follows a fairly standard revenge plot, but I felt there were too many lengths. Accordingly, I never got into the flow that I felt in the predecessor.
Nevertheless, there are, of course, some bright spots. For example, it is visually impressive. The action sequences are also strong, and the world remains interesting. Of the actors, I was particularly impressed by Chris Hemsworth as the villain Dementus. He at least looks like he had fun with the part. Meanwhile, Anya Taylor-Joy is perfectly fine as Furiosa, but the role is also a bit monotonous, so there probably wasn't much more she could squeeze out of it.
Ultimately, I definitely wouldn't call “Furiosa” a masterpiece. On the one hand, the movie suffers somewhat from being a prequel that doesn't add too much new to what has already been told. On the other hand, the pacing of the story isn't always ideal either, meaning that the movie suffers from a few hiccups. It's a decent addition to the “Mad Max Saga," but unfortunately, not really more than that.
What you definitely notice in every minute of “Beetlejuice” is the creative energy that director Tim Burton had in his early career. Visually, the movie is varied, with the basic mood being bizarre and quirky. I can appreciate all of that, but unfortunately, the story didn't exactly excite me.
Above all, the humor only works to a limited extent. I also had a problem with the characters. While I found the Maitlands (Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis) to be somewhat boring as the main characters, Betelgeuse, who is pronounced Beetlejuice and appears only briefly in the film, is a bit annoying. The only character I liked was Winona Ryder as the goth girl Lydia. But, overall, I just wasn't enthusiastic about this cult hit.
“Candyman” is actually one of my favorite horror films. Because almost everything fits together here. The movie is incredibly atmospheric, which is due to both the score and the great direction. The two sides of the big city are captured perfectly, and when main character Helen (Virginia Madsen) researches the Candyman myth in a social housing project, it gets downright creepy.
Madsen does her job really well, as does Tony Todd as the title character. What I also have to point out is that the movie actually has a few things to say. Topics such as gentrification and segregation are addressed. Overall, this makes “Candyman” a thoroughly exciting horror film that encourages reflection. That said, the sequels (except perhaps the 2021 one) can be skipped.
This month's surprise horror film at my local arthouse cinema was “Night of the Living Dead” - not the original, but the remake from 1990. And even though I thoroughly enjoyed the flick as a B-movie, it's quite clear why Tom Savini hasn't had a successful career as a director. Some of the actors could have used at least a few more takes.
In addition to the sometimes laughable acting and the not always optimal pacing, the characters are also generally written a bit weirdly. Nobody behaves even remotely rationally, and the main character Barbara (Patricia Tallman) can't quite decide whether she wants to be Sarah Connor from Terminator 1 or 2.
In the end, the occasional decent gore and the quite effective finale saved the movie for me. With an audience, you can certainly have a good time.
After “The Rise of Skywalker," it should be clear to everyone that there was no real master plan for the story in the sequel trilogy. J. J. Abrams really is reversing almost all the decisions that Rian Johnson made in “The Last Jedi." Some people will like that, while others will hate it. Either way, it destroys any sense of a cohesive narrative across multiple films.
Overall, I think you can have fun with the movie, but there really isn't much that sticks with you. At some point, it's simply not enough to just present you with great space battles and action sequences. In a space saga, I expect at least a little depth in the story, and this is completely lacking here. Ultimately, it doesn't feel like the grand finale of a decades-old saga. And that is rather disappointing.
I think I like "The Last Jedi" as a movie a little more than as a "Star Wars movie". But I didn't find the eighth episode of the saga as disappointing as I remembered it this time. I have a lot of respect for Rian Johnson as a director, and his talent is evident here from time to time. A few approaches with his view of the Force are interesting but are not really followed up on afterward. Some of the decisions, characters, and entire sections, such as in Canto Bight, I didn't like at all. Furthermore, like in "The Force Awakens," the second part of the trilogy never really gives you a feeling for the state of the galaxy. What remains, however, are a few really beautifully staged sequences, of which I particularly like the beginning and the finale. And that's much more than I would have expected from my memory.
Not everything about "Star Wars" from Disney is bad. The best example of this for me is "Rogue One," a movie that seems like a perfect ompanion piece to the very first movie in the franchise. The look of the original has been perfectly emulated, there are a few interesting characters, and the Darth Vader sequence is perhaps one of the coolest scenes in the entire saga. like Gareth Edwards as a director, and although there were obviously a few minor problems behind the scenes, you can still see his signature style quite clearly. All in all, this leads me to consider "Rogue One" not only the best film of the Disney era, but also one of the best parts of the entire franchise.
By far the biggest flop of the entire “Star Wars” franchise, this is certainly not the worst film in the series. On the contrary, “Solo” is thoroughly entertaining thanks to great casting, a fun crime story, and good effects. Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo and Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian in particular should have taught the producers that it's okay to recast iconic characters. Instead, Disney is now just going for the awful de-aging strategy, which I just can't understand.
Be that as it may, I can only recommend giving “Solo” a chance. Yes, there are some really questionable crumbs of fanservice thrown at you. And it certainly wasn't the right decision to really pack all the experiences that made Han the character we got to know in “Star Wars” into just one story. But the movie is still a lot of fun. It's a flop that shouldn't have been one.
When it comes to the start of the sequel trilogy of Star Wars, I somehow find that I like it a little less every time I watch it. Until now, I still remembered “The Force Awakens” as the best part of Episodes VII through IX. In terms of story, it's a pretty unimaginative rehash of the original “Star Wars." But as a starting point for a new trilogy, there are certainly worse options. And the cast works pretty well for me too. I never had a problem with the new trio of Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, and Oscar Isaac. And there's also something about seeing Harrison Ford reprise his role as Han Solo.
However, a few story decisions really bothered me at the end. And while the prequels overdid it with the politics, the sequels are an overcorrection. Neither this installment nor the sequels provide a true sense of the galaxy's current state. As a result, the world appears smaller than it should be. All in all, I would still say that I like “The Force Awakens," but I definitely can't get behind that statement with much passion.
For a long time, “Jeepers Creepers” feels like a fairly standard highway horror movie. The genre is also handled quite well, and I particularly liked the fact that the two main characters (Gina Philips and Justin Long) are not a couple but siblings. This results in a slightly different character dynamic than what is typically seen in such films. At some point, however, the movie takes a few absurd turns that certainly make it less generic. But I never really got into the twists. By that point, the whole thing is no longer frightening, but it is at least entertaining nonsense.
A group of vampires, who all look like they're performing at the Eurovision Song Contest, causes trouble on a boardwalk while a shirtless Tim Cappello plays the saxophone. In “The Lost Boys," it is clear from the first few minutes that we are at the height of the 80s. You could certainly never accuse director Joel Schumacher of not having a good eye for style.
Accordingly, the result is a stylish vampire movie that doesn't really know whether it wants to be a horror or a comedy. The characters mostly seem like caricatures, and the plot never really gets into gear. But at least the cast is largely convincing. Kiefer Sutherland in particular worked very well for me as the leader of the vampire gang, and the two Coreys were certainly a sign of a certain prestige at the end of the 80s (even if I wouldn't necessarily describe Corey Feldman in particular as “good” here).
All in all, “The Lost Boys” is an example of “style over substance." Some of the dialog is really ridiculous. But because the style is so compelling and the finale in particular is extra fun, I can still appreciate the whole thing. And as a big Buffy fan, I certainly have to be grateful for this movie, without which the series might never have happened.
For me, the recent “Planet of the Apes” trilogy ranks among the best blockbuster movies of the past decades. The last two films by Matt Reeves were particularly impressive, and the task facing director Wes Ball, who is continuing the series with “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes," was accordingly huge.
However, I actually had a pretty good feeling about Ball, who until now was only known for the “Maze Runner” films. Although these were not outstanding, the director demonstrated that he can work very effectively with CGI, even on a limited budget. In other words, perfect conditions for “Planet of the Apes”.
And ultimately, he certainly didn't drop the ball. The visual effects in the movie are fantastic throughout. As in the previous installments, the apes look as alive as possible, so the emotions can be fully conveyed by the motion-capture actors. It should also be mentioned that, apart from Freya Allan's Mae, there are hardly any other human characters. But that's precisely why it's so good that the apes are very effective as substitutes for humans.
In terms of the plot, I would say the first half of the movie is much stronger than the second. A lot of time is initially spent establishing the world and the main characters. This allows you to really get to know them, which is often neglected in other blockbuster films. In the second half, however, too many new plot threads are opened up for my taste, many of which will probably only become relevant in a possible sequel. This makes the movie seem somewhat incomplete at the end.
But if there were to be a sequel, I would definitely be back at the movies without hesitation. And I really hope that Allan will be back as well. Because her character gets a few rough edges in the course of “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes” that I wouldn't necessarily have expected. Another encounter between her and main ape Noa (Owen Teague) should definitely be exciting.
All that remains is the verdict: the “Planet of the Apes” series remains blockbuster cinema at its finest with "Kingdom." I hope that this will be properly rewarded at the box office.
