Second episode has a very different tone to the first, I thought. It was a lot to take in and I think I enjoyed it a bit less, but still very engrossed. The two newcomers are obviously stand-ins for the two leads in the original film, though they've made their personalities very extreme (Ben Barnes is a monster).
LOVED that disorienting transition from the staging area to suddenly being on a moving train. What on Earth is going on there? Fascinating.
Thandie Newton's stuff was the most interesting, along with Delores' continuing story, though I really wanted to follow her more. The Man In Black's story was odd - I like it, but if he can't be hurt then there isn't much real tension in any of it. It's like he's being cruel just for the sake of it, and I don't see why it's at all necessary right now. Obviously, we need more of his story revealed. Ed Harris is great, anyway.
And as everyone else is saying, Sizemore the scriptwriter is just... appalling. How did this guy get cast? Is it intentional? It's utterly horrendous acting and dialogue. Is it going to turn out that he's a robot that they're trying to teach emotions to? Similarly, I'm not amazed by the female administrator either, and the reveal that she's sleeping with the engineer felt a bit soap opera-esque.
Great use of 'No Surprises'.
Smartest creature ever. Super adaptable, evolutionary. This is by far the bad assiest being ever imagined. The science in the movie was up to my extremely lofty standards. For the first time, ever in a horror movie, this thing could theoretically actually exist makes the movie extremely interesting. The main reason I gave it a 9, is due to the fact, they should have sacrificed the first guy, immediately. I had one other issue, but that would tip spoilers. Other than that, this is a great, thrilling, mind bender of a horror sci-fi movie.
And for those who ridiculously state this was "like Alien". This movie had a super intelligent, highly evolved bacteria. This was never done before. Actual physics and biology was implemented. It wasn't just some creature out of the mind of a teenager. The crew were attempting to contain and survive. Never before have I saw a movie, that was about containing an entity while above the planet. This used an actual space station, that is real and does exist. This was not a fairy tale of a movie, as was Alien. No one was hunting this thing down with guns and such. This movie is about what can actually happen as we go frolicking around our solar system. This is something that we should actually be worried about. That is completely ground breaking in every way possible. The Europa Report was closer related to this film, but even that was not as real of a threat as this movie, since it was on a Saturn moon, using theoretical science and fictional equipment. Life used all actual equipment, actual science, and actual crew reactions, although, I would have sacrificed the first guy, immediately and launched the immature state of Calvin at the first sign of an issue. And one last thing, Calvin didn't even kill anyone, except the first guy, who was attempting to incinerate it. I bet in part two, we will find out he is actually peaceful.
This movie was nothing like Alien. Besides the fact that the setting was in space and there was a creature hunting them down (or was he?). The Alien was killing, Calvin was surviving.
If there are still people complaining about the second season not being here and the first one only having 13 episodes: The original Spanish series currently (June 2018) has 15 episodes (part 1: 9 episodes, part 2: 6 episodes), each episode being 70 minutes long! That‘s what you‘re seeing here. Netflix made 40-55 minute episodes out of them, resulting in 13 episodes for the first part and 9 episodes for the second part, so that’s 22 episodes overall. A little confusing, but everything is right in Trakt.tv. There are 15 episodes in the spanisch release and 22 episodes in the Netflix release. And it‘s two parts in Netflix, not two seasons (yet).
The first 9 episodes aired in spain are the first 13 episodes in Netflix and the last 6 episodes aired in spain as a second part, are also the second part in Netflix, but with 9 episodes. It’s that simple ;)
And for those of you being like „Fix it!“ ... Trakt.TV pulls data from other databases (TMDB, TVDB), so that‘s where data comes from. Those databases are community driven, so if there actually would be an error, you could fix it yourself. But there isn‘t, so everything‘s fine! :)
Weird season finale. After all the build up, everything feels anticlimactic. Right down from A-Train--the reason all this mess started--to Homelander.
Before we get to that, let's talk a bit about how weird the whole prison sequences play out. The joke, the attempted rescue, the shootout, all feel really weak especially compared to well-directed sequences in prior episodes. First of all there is really no need for some jocular banter that went for about two minutes or more. Not to mention the pauses. It feels dragging. This includes the attempted rescue which continues the joke.
Second, the shootout looks really weird. We've seen Frenchie did his weird stuff when it comes to the Female/Kimiko, but this doesn't seem logical. He is a professional killer, why the hell he keeps on showing up his head to look at Kimiko when getting shot at? Is he looking to die? Not to mention he got shot prior, on the stomach, how the hell he can walk and help Kimiko walk that easily? Hughie getting to shoot randomly while saying "I'm sorry! I'm sorry" and miraculously hit trained soldiers is even worse. Even the Starlight rescue looks like a cheap deus ex machina for the plot to goes forward.
The Boys had been attempting to mock the quip-ridden superhero genre--that is, the Marvel Cinematic Universe--but the whole prison sequences makes The Boys looks exactly like an MCU episode.
Now we get to the supes.
The Deep. His subplot has been standing on its for quite a while now. There seems to be no direct connection with the bigger plot that has been going on. And this episode his subplot stays that way, while still giving him enough screen time to focus on his emotion. I'm not sure if that is something we wanted to see for a finale. It feels like something to be saved for future seasons. Even if that doesn't mean it's bad, they could have cut it way shorter than what they did.
Then the thing with A-Train feels very anticlimactic. He just popped up there out of nowhere. We were previously shown his desire, his post-power syndrome, his attempt to be relevant. Then in the supposedly final showdown, we finally see Hughie vs A-Train head on. But we don't see A-Train. We see an injured A-Train, a traumatic supe in his mental and physical breakdown. Now this still could be an interesting, emotional confrontation between our protagonist with the one who murdered his sweetheart. Not to mention, the presence of Starlight could make this dynamic interesting--is Hughie done for, how would he cope between his past and present emotion? What we get instead, however, is a slow motion capture with very minuscule combat and almost none of emotional engagement. Then A-Train just went, just like that.
I feel like they are saving him for future episodes, but this being the finale--the culmination of all emotion that has been built up so far--makes this confrontation very lacking. It feels like we are still on Eps 5 or 6, but with worse pacing.
Now Homelander. He is our another main driver of the plot. Everything that has happened so far always leads us back to him. His dynamics with Madelyn the CEO has been a bizarre Oedipus complex-like situation, What happened between them in this episode is actually very unexpected, though one may sense that it would eventually came to this point through the clues scattered so far. This result should have provided a surprising reveal. However, as it turns out, there seems to be something hollow in the encounter. Given the interesting portrayal of their faux-mother-son-sexual-relationship in the first half of the episode, the second half seems to speed up the climax. As if they were being chased by some deadline, that they have to cut it short, while at the same time giving enough spaces for Homelander to give his, in Maeve's words in previous episodes, "boring speeches."
It feels climactic and inconclusive at the same time. And I guess the same can be said with many encounters in this episode. Starlight with Meave. Billy with the CIA. Hughie with Starlight at the church. It feels like they have to speed it up--to shove in the dialogues--for the sake of putting the plot forward. It's shaky and unreliable.
Now, the end of the episode leads us to a quite intriguing reveal. It's not the direction we--or at least, I--expected to take in the season. However, with such really weak build up throughout the episode, the ending feels like forced. As if they have prepared them to be this way, but still unsure how they would bring it up to this moment. As such, while the scene itself is (should be?) surprising, there is not much surprise when I watch the event unfolds. It's less of a "wow, so this is it?" than a "oh okay, so this happens, and then?"
Credits where it's due: Anthony Starr as Homelander and Karl Urban as Billy Butcher display terrific performances in this episode. Especially Homelander with his extremely erratic, unpredictable behavior. But that alone is not enough to pardon the sloppiness of this episode.
Perhaps because they, like MCU and other superhero movies, seem to busy themselves to prepare for the upcoming season instead of trying to give audience a closure of the plot. And that exact reason is what makes superhero movies went boring for these past years. They are focusing to build an universe, instead of writing a good narrative. Unfortunately, this episode robs the fresh air that The Boys has breathe for quite some time. While I hope for the continuation of the series, I am less excited.
I think this is an important movie, it is also a good movie. Full disclosure: I am a white, middle class, post-graduate educated, Canadian, born in the 50s. This is why this movie was important to me: I live in a city that has unjustly treated black communities and, although I have sought to be better informed about the history and the issues, my perspective has been from a distance. This film helped me understand that the expectational presets of being black are radically different from the presets of being white. Also, my understanding of cultural appropriation grew - I can see why whites emulating black culture is missing the point rather than establishing cultural bridges. But, most importantly, for me, this film underlined the importance of each of us being authentic to who we are and to, humbly, engage in listening conversations, respect our differences and transcend that which divides us. That's was my take away. This is why this is a good film: I found the characters well drawn and the performances convincing (Amandla Stenberg is an actor to watch - she has been a credit to every role she's inhabited). The story was well crafted. The tragedy real and the relationships compelling. In our politically charged culture, there is an audience fatigue for movies with a point (I was disappointed to be only one of three people who came to watch this movie in the theatre), but don't miss this good movie, it's worth the watch. I give this film a 7.9 (very good) out of 10. [Drama]
I've had an amazing experience watching the movie premiere in Venice, I've been waiting for this movie for a long time and I was not disappointed in the slightest.
It's a gorgeous movie, it's disturbing but moving at the same time, violent at times, but also subtle. It's a different and fresh spin on the character and on the cinecomic genre as a whole and Phoenix delivers an amazing performance portraying a version of the Joker we've never seen before, he's not the villain of someone else's story, he is the hero and villain of HIS own story, and the audience can be orrified by him, but we can't help but feel for him at times.
Without giving anything away I would recommend to go and see the movie not expecting to go and see an action packed, but gritty cinecomic, I suggest going in and watch it pretending that it's not even about a famous comic villain, but simply a movie, I think that people will appreciate it more in that way, not comparing it to the cinecomics we've seen before, but thinking of it as a normal movie.
P.S.: People will of course compare Phoenix to Ledger, I don't think it's possible, they give a totally different percormance because they portray totally different versions of the character, and I think it's going to be hard to compare them, you either prefere Ledger's version or Phoenix's but only based on the character, the actor's performances cannot be judged by comparison, they're both great. Just enjoy the movie
Such a mess of a movie.
I didn' t expect much and haven't watched the trailer before but apparently this movie is focusing on the younger audience only and not on the people who watched the first movie back in the day. It's one of these moments when you realize you get old.
Way too young cast, a dumb plot, so no-one needs to think about anything, degrading this movie to a shut-your-brain-off popcorn flick/time waster you forget instantly after leaving the cinema, clichès as far as the eyes can see, cringe dialogues, incredibly studid decisions by humans and aliens.
Liam Hemsworth is the actor to draw in the young audience and a total miscast for this kind of movie but he fits in with all the other young actors who are out of place as well. But that also means he will be the more or less tragic or cool hero and "win" a gorgeous woman at the end of the movie. How could it be different?
Hemsworth's literally horny sidekick is annoying the moment he appears, throughout the whole movie and is the deliberate comic relief and simply hateable as his character is written so blatantly obvious and without any care. You instantly know what trope his character is and what role he will have the rest of the movie.
You are in the alien ship and he carelessly jumpscares you: haha, how funny!
He's talking loudly, called out on it to be quiet and keeps going being loud, endangering all of them: haha, how funny!
He is fawning over the beautiful, "unreachable" daughter of the chief in command on the moonbase we all know he will get later anyway for no reason other than "we went through this sh*t together": soo original.
Liam Hemsworth is peeing in front of the aliens to distract them: haha, how funny and mature.
...and the aliens even fall for that crap.
The whole movie could only happen in its entirety because of the first major decision that was made for no other reason than plot.
Levinson is some kind of an authority when it comes to aliens but he is ignored to enable the movie when he says not to fire at that spherical spaceship, that looks so difficult to the others and behaves totally different as well. That appearance wasn't even foreshadowing, it was an obvious spoiler to how they would be able to win this time against the aliens and took out any kind of suspense there could have been from the get go.
The movie is predictable all the time and doesn't even try to avoid (or hide) it, ultimately leading to me not being entertained at all.
Recurring actors were all a total waste, except perhaps for Goldblum.
Brent Spiner, who plays Dr. Okun, was additionally unbelievable and simply unnecessary.
Using a poweroff button as sign for the resistance against the aliens was preeeetty lazy as well in the design department.
Easy cash grab movie. I have no doubt the next ID movie will be even worse. Here goes my hope for a good Stargate reboot down the drain. I hoped it would give the franchise a possibility to relaunch a series or so but I heavily doubt that now.
But to not only say negative things about this movie: the CGI effects weren't bad.
Ok, let's begin from the easy part: Alicia Vikander as Gerda is the real main character in this movie, she's an amazing actress and her performance is really really good. And even though I really appreciate her performance, I think that point of view contributed to cheapen the movie's message.
Eddie Redmayme, well, I'm quite puzzled, because I loved him on "The Theory of Everything" and on "The Pillars of Earth" but here.. I was positive he would perform this character without falling into an offensive representation of transgender woman, I really hoped it, but at the end overcome clichés, stereotypes on "transvestites of 30s", on femininity, and women. I found it offensive because it's like the representation of a representation of what a man sees about women's way of move, act and think.
I really am disappointed by this movie because I find it dangerous: it does can be misunderstood and manipulated. I would have liked a better representation of context, because that would explain much: to society on 30s women's role was to procreate, to love a man and get married, to be quite shallow; this woman stuck inside a man's body tries to get accepted as woman, adapting to the common vision of that role, but eventually stops being herself, changes her way to move (copying other women), doing what she loves, and loving her wife instead of "bring outside" her true self.
On this movie gender identity and sexuality are mixed up and messed up...! No words! Shame! Shame! Shame!
Contextualization helps understanding and empathizing how confusing should have been being a transgender person those years, with no information, or scientific studies, and no psychological support on that path. The true feelings, and the story, are displayed by little and minimal clues and lines (and unaware people can miss them). Many elements and inattentions switched a prospective good movie to a dangerous message, which can be used by anti-LGBTQ+, transophobes, and populists, because the message passed can be that Einar was a man with some psicological issues and dissociative disorder (because starting a new life of course is talking on 3° person, getting rid of every passion, act litterally different, and switch your sexual orientation, is it?) who had this whim to fight for change his genitalia and died.
A woman is not a vagina, and a woman is not "less woman" if she is bisexual or lesbian, and being a transgender person doesn't mean that every problem is solved with an operation, there is an important and huge path made of self-acceptance, analysis, support, and operations (for those who decide to get it) is just the last step (and actually not really the last). Simplicism isn't always good, sensitive issues can't being tackled like this, expecially during periods in which it is still necessary educating people to awareness and respect. Making a movie in a superficial and approximate way "because this is the right time, it's the fashion" it's dangerous.
Really, the only reason for watching this movie is having the complete portrait of it, understanding critics and create a debate. And Alicia Vikander, I really love her acting, and she is beautiful; Gerda is a strong, independent woman, who loved her husband for who he really was and not for his body, and still continues - despite the difficulties to accept it - when he comes out as a transgender woman.
You love someone for who she is, not for her gender.
Let's make one thing clear, the phrase "it's a movie for fans", is not an argument, let's go to the point.
Director Zack Snyder confirms here that he is a bad director, he doesn't know how to tell stories, he is so desperate to introduce the Justice League that the movie ended up being totally overstuffed and nonsense at some point. The montage of the movie is just HORRIBLE, like... one scene there's some tense moment and then suddenly, the screen turns to black and cut to a stupid scene of Lois Lane investigating something or Diana Prince checking her e-mail. Bruce Wayne's nightmare sequences are just empty, stupid and pointless.
The dark tone of the film is not necessarily bad, is not meant to be a joyfull film.
I still don't understand WHAT THE F*** is Laurence Fishburne doing in this movie, basically the same thing in "Man of Steel", nothing.
The movie it's so rushed for a 2 hours and 40 minutes that the epic battle between the 2 greatest heroes ends up being nothing but disappointing, and almost laughable at the end. Transposing scenes from the comics to the big screen is cool, but where's the context on them ? it's a buy fan ticket.
Doomsday........... Horrible, terrible, a visual rape, an insult to the cinema.
Lex Luthor................ no words worth it.
Wonder Woman: 5 minutes in the film and 5 as Diana Prince. But Gadot does a good job
Superman, it's actually better than in the previous film.
Batman is the best thing from this film, a bloodthirsty dark knight who can finally move his neck. It's the batman i've always wanted to see in the movies. Nice work Ben Affleck.
The other good thing from this film is Hans Zimmer's glorious score... Hans Zimmer is the god from this movie.
Conclusion: Could be the best superhero movie of all time, but ends up being worst as many of.
This is THE DEFINITIVE Superman movie. With truly spectacular cinematography, a heartwarming coming of age story, enthralling action and perhaps the best superhero movie soundtrack ever from Hans Zimmer, this movie hits every beat for Superman fans new and old.
As a DC comics fan growing up, the critical response to this movie prevented me going to watch it at the theatre. I mean who wants one of their favourite superheroes being "humourless", "too violent", and "not epic enough"??? Well, I can truly sit here now having said "lesson learned". Never again will I allow critical response to prevent me from experiencing something I had waited a lifetime for. I will never get to see Man of Steel in the theatre, and this movie was shot for the big screen. Some of the shots are truly beautiful, especially when he wakes up in the ocean with whales, and when he learns to fly in the snowy mountains.
The story is often criticised for not having the kookiness of the original four movies with Christopher Reeve - and don't misunderstand this for hating on the first few iterations, I have nothing but fond memories of growing up with those films - but I challenge anyone to watch those movies now and claim that they still hold up. A truly great movie as well as standing the test of time, has rewatch value, and Man of Steel is one of the few superhero movies that I have watched time and time again. This requires a great story.
The story of this movie focuses on a boys relationship with his fathers, and his coming of age through those guises. His cautious and protective Earth father who tought him the morality and goodness we expect from our Superman, who sacrificed himself in order to keep his sons secret; and his Kryptonian father who encouraged him to embrace his difference and be the man Earth needs him to be.
A bonus is that the relationship between Lois and Clark doesn't seem forced. You get to see how she is a great investigative reporter and through her reporting she discovers Superman's true identity. By protecting it, you can see Clark's appreciation and the weight of not being able to talk about it to anyone - something that bothers him throughout the great flashback scenes as wonderfully portrayed by Dylan Sprayberry and Cooper Timberline - being lifted.
The character development of the antagonist, General Zod is done in a way other superhero movies can only be envious of. The message that this character, like all other Kryptonians are born with a specific purpose, in this case to protect Krypton at all costs, comes across well. From his perspective he is the superhero of his own story, trying to save his planet and his people, and that is the truest of tests for supervillain development.
And this brings me to the epic and controversial (for some reason) third act. As mentioned earlier, Superman has a strong moral code instilled in him by Jonathan Kent, which is shown throughout the flashbacks. Any observer who doesn't see that Snyders portrayal of Superman has the most morality of any Superman in cinematic history is simply not paying attention. He doesn't spin the Earth backwards to rewind time just to save his girlfriend like in the original, and he doesnt go back to Smallville and hook up with Lana because the love of his life Lois is ignoring him a little bit like in Superman III. That Superman, despite all of his displayed morality (e.g. where he refrains from fighting the bullies) feels he must kill General Zod is one of the most powerful moments in superhero movie history. He repeatedly begs Zod to give up his quest to destroy Earth and humans now that his quest to return Krypton has failed. Zod makes it clear as day that he will NEVER give up, and that he will destroy humanity at all costs as an act of revenge. What was Clark supposed to do? He was left with no choice! Add to this the fact that Zod's laser beams were inches away from killing a whole family, Superman reluctantly had to break his neck. Yet unlike other superheroes he did not gloat in victory, the pain and anguish in that scream that follows is filled with the heartbreak of breaking both his moral code and killing one of the few other fellow Kryptonians in the universe.
Overall, this movie gets better every single time I watch it. If you haven't watched it since it came out and had mixed feelings the first time, please give this movie another try without the immediate negative reviews that were extensively covered in the media at the time of release. It truly deserves it. Man of Steel is THE DEFINITIVE Superman movie.
The comment about "screwing the secretary, eh? A bit of a cliché" was brilliant.
"Say goodbye to eternal life", yeah what a threat by a masterkiller like Eph. Cheesy one-liner.
Being the stupid clichéd love affair that it really is, I didn't and don't care for the secretary, but must question the way Palmer was secured. Actually he wasn't secured whatsoever by his bodyguard. He was made a much simpler target instead.
Previously, the bodyguard even directly looked into the scope of Eph's rifle but didn't see anything. It's equally absurd to even think a second about Eph being able to hit Palmer in the first place. He wasn't able to do so with a much lesser distance and a still-standing Eichhorst. He should know it himself that he is incapable of hitting his target. His alcoholism is no excuse here.
Hilarious was also the secretary being operated in Palmer's office. What the actual f. What an unsterile and unprepaired environment. But in a hospital the master's appearance couldn't that easily happen, right?
The script seems pretty rushed, written in a too strict timeframe or too little care or even both. I think it's both.
I bet Palmer is only killed by Eichhorst later on. Cliffhanger was pretty obvious, at least the book part of the cliffhanger.
All in all an okay-ish episode. No Zach, that is worth a bonus point.
The German in the book, was it Google translated?
The complete English title of the Occido Lumen is supposed to read as "Occido Lumen - A complete account of the first rise of the Strigoi and full confutation of all arguments produced against their existence".
German was:
"Ein compleat Konto des ersten Aufstieg der Strigo und volle Widerlegung aller Argumente gegen thier(?) Existenz produziert"
If I translate that back as it is (ignoring that compleat is not German, just like thier), I'd end up with:
A complete bank account of the first rise of the Strigo and full confutation of all arguments against their existence produced.
Better would have been:
Eine gründliche Auseinandersetzung des ersten Aufstiegs der Strigo und eine volle Widerlegung aller aufgestellten Argumente gegen ihre Existenz.
Sounds still somewhat bumpy and lengthy but that's what the English title says. It kinda goes around three edges instead of one.
To say "going to proof the existence of the Strigo" is shorter than saying "going to refute produced arguments against their existence" and means the same. In English the lengthy version sounds better, in German it's the shorter version that sounds better.
In our digital world you might expect maybe not 100% accurate non-English texts but you could demand a little more than that.
Especially considering the actor of Eichhorst is actually German. Shouldn't be a big deal asking him for an appropriate translation of at least the title.
The mythology described on the other page is pretty much accurate but the German is not at all. But interesting nontheless, if you care for mythology that is. The other sides of the book are written awkwardly as well, but most of all umlauts and the ß are missing entirely. This would suggest the used font didn't support umlauts when they copied it from Google to print it out. Seriously, it's no problem to use ue, ae, oe instead of ü, ä, ö or ss instead of ß but leaving them out completely? No-Go.
I know the book thingy is only a minor thing, even though the book itself plays a bigger role, but I like to pay attention of how my native language is (ab)used in fiction.
"Why do you keep looking as if there's something wrong? Everything's fine."
I’ve haven’t cried this hard at a movie since 'I'm Thinking of Ending Things'. This is one of those films that just thinking about it or thinking about a specific scene will get my eyes teary. I’m honestly blown away by how moved I was by it. One of the best movies of 2020.
Anthony Hopkins gives one of the best performance since ‘Silence of the Lambs’. You may think that you've seen everything the veteran actor has to offer, but he continues to surprise and amaze us. He broke my heart a thousand times, especially the last five minutes which was some of the most powerful pieces of acting on screen. On the other hand, he’s also incredibly charming and funny as his character that it made him so mesmerizing to watch. I usually don’t care when it comes to awards, but I genuinely hope he gets some recognition at the Oscars with at least a nomination or maybe a win, because he is truly brilliant in this movie.
Olivia Colman, who plays Anthony's daughter, Anne, was also fantastic in the movie. Her facial expressions solid every emotion that the character was feeling and Colman is an expert at it. The pain, frustration, and the overwhelming love she has for her father, as she tries to find ways of helping him. I can’t imagine a more dreadful sight than watching your loved one decay away before your eyes and there’s nothing you can do about it.
While there have been other movies in the past that tackled the topic of dementia and old age on a surface level, where it mainly focuses on how friends and family coop with a significant others condition. However, this movie makes those films look flat in comparison. What makes this movie so different and yet more effective is that it’s told from the perspective of the sufferer. So, his confusion becomes ours. Simple things like switching Olivia Colman with a different actor can have a huge and scary impact, because when this first happened I was stunned, but I quickly realise this is the devastating reality of the disease where people you once knew start to look alienating to you.
Director Florian Zeller dose an excellent job of placing you in the shoes of someone going through dementia and have a better understanding of how the disease can affect you. Any other film marker would’ve done the predictable approach, which is to go over the top with the possibilities of presenting a surreal nightmare with flashy visuals, as a way to show off crazy camera work and digital effects, but Zeller instead keeps things grounded enough while in the imaginary world inside the characters head. It’s true what they say, less is more.
The movie is purposely structured and edited in a disorganised lucid dream-like manner, where certain elements such as the mention of names and the appearance of faces are a mystery to us just like the main character. Who are these people? Why is everything so mysterious? When you try to piece things together with the collection of scattered memories of events, it then gets shuffled around. Although, the movie isn’t as complicated as it may sound, it's just not straight forward narrative wise.
It was like watching a horror movie at times with the horrific effects of dementia. Your brain, metaphorically, is like a tree branch filled with leaves, but eventually with the slow effect of the disease, you will lose your leaves.
Overall rating: A magnificent movie that helps us understand the struggle and experience of dementia that was executed with extra care. It also goes beyond that in many different ways that I have yet to unlock in my first viewing. It’s a movie that I will never forget.
OMFG THIS MOVIE IS AMAZING. Sorry but I adored this film! Be aware: It is a biopic, do not go into this expecting something different. So yes, it has pacing issues and is a little long but that can't really be helped. But those issues are nothing compared to how slamming this movie is.
I've seen it twice already, it's been out in Australia for 2 weeks. In saying that I recommend a second viewing lets you pick up lots of little elements you may have missed the first time, subtle foreshadowing and commentary.
Now onto the important stuff! Tom Hardy is genius, actually genius. He said in an interview recently that he preferred playing Ronnie (the twin with glasses) and I am so happy he did because Ronnie was played spectacularly. He was by far the most interesting and complex character . Reggie was brilliant too however Ron's depth of character and surprising humor was flat out amazing. Emily Browning surprised me, I didn't hate her as much as I thought I would. In saying that I didn't really enjoy her character either. I believe her acting was a little to subtle as her character has a little flat. This is probably just me but Taron Egerton was great, I love the kid and he is going onto to do amazing work but in this film Mad Teddy was to die for. Hilarious and well-rounded. On the topic of Teddy he story line with Ronnie was very well handled. I was scared they would brush over it as is quite common and just stick to alluding. Whilst nothing was show I felt it received the same treatment as other story lines. That's my slightly confusing way of avoiding spoilers.
Had a great soundtrack and a beautiful screenplay. Seriously, just the construction of sentences and dialogue was perfection. As always for my favorite films I'll leave you a quote of this film, hopefully to entice you to watch it.
"It took a lot of love for me to hate him the way I do"
Technically, IT was a good movie. The effects, the cinematography, actors, pretty much everything was objectively good. But as a horror film, it doesn't have an impact on me.
The film was definitely designed for the kind of people that go into horror movies WANTING to be afraid. It is filled with clichés and typical stupid behaviour from characters, such as choosing to slowly walk into a trap just so the audience can say "DON'T GO IN THERE!". And most of the "scary" things that happen in this movie, aren't really scary because they aren't REAL. Which is what bugged me most about the movie.
Most of the horror scenes are nothing more than a figment of the character's imagination. Why should i be afraid when a zombie spawns out of nowhere in the middle of the street in broad daylight when i know that it isn't actually happening and no one other than the kids can see it. Pennywise does prove to be a physical monster when we see him kill people, but it isn't clear what the writers of the movie were thinking when they created him. How am i supposed to believe that he can casually teleport around public spaces without anyone noticing, or that he can somehow make himself appear in old photographs and pre-recorded television shows. His capabilities aren't consistent and it just feels like a compilation of cheap scares. Like the writers used a slot machine of horror tropes to create his character.
Still, i am looking forward to the sequel just so i can see how adults would deal with Pennywise. Maybe they will be a lot smarter and spend less time running from things that aren't real. But who knows, IT is a pretty basic horror flick.
Half genius and half infuriating, I guess that means it must meet in the middle somewhere? But that doesn't work, because there's nothing about Legion that's average. The visuals and aesthetic are unquestionably the draw here, and numerous moments have been burned into my memory. It's a show that's trying to reach for something further away, combining styles, music and moods to take you on a trip - and unfortunately it sometimes falters.
It may be enough for some people, but I watch shows for the story and the characters, and Legion almost never delivers in those aspects, to the point where I wanted to scream. David does carry the show quite well and is a very sympathetic character, but the focus on his broken mind means that we don't get to know much of him at all. All we see is the torture that the Shadow King has brought upon him. The other characters are a very mixed bag, some of whom caused me to almost hit the fast-forward button whenever they came of screen.
Legion would rather have a character perform an interpretive dance than deliver a compelling narrative. It would rather insert a slow motion sequence than give us exciting action. It's chosen style over substance, and while I have to admit that it's a choice that was made with a hell of a lot of statement and reason behind it, it's always going to make something a difficult watch (for me, at least).
To be very clear, I am quite in awe of the way the show looks. There were moments in episode 7 where everything came together in an incredibly effective manner. It's just such a double-edged sword. There were two-and-a-half episodes that were spent trapped in the same moment, and that is just ridiculous. The show is in no hurry to move, and by doing that it's not holding my attention. I don't care about most of these characters, in fact I actively dislike a number of them. I don't want beat poetry, I want a reason to come back each episode. I don't know anything about these people, there was no growth across the season. Everyone is so concerned with David that they have no motivations of their own.
So, let's finish up where the show absolutely shines: Aubrey Plaza. Wow. THERE is the reason to keep coming back. She's always been an entertaining actress, but here she's mesmerising and terrifying and fun and sexy and horrific. All the best moments of the show involved her.
I like Legion but I don't love it. The show is obviously not going to change its style as it goes on and I do want to keep watching, so I can see a struggle ahead. Season 1's end sets things up for a new direction but I can't say it was all that compelling. Most of the season is spent thinking, "what the hell is going on?" and when answers come it feels like the show just wants to try and do something to confuse you more. Season 2 would do best to avoid repeating that.
“Thing is, you ain’t that thing no more. What you used to was.”
True Detective season 2 ended up being so bad that it makes me doubt whether or not the first season was actually as amazing as it was or if it was just carried on the backs of Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey. That isn't to say that the only problem is the casting choices - it might be a step down from those two in a way, but Rachel McAdams is always great, Taylor Kitsch fills his role fine, and Colin Farrell pulls a good performance almost entirely out of his ass. Farrell's Velcoro is a nothing, some terrible approximation of cop character tropes that would have sunk horribly without a skilled actor there to keep it afloat, which is pretty interesting considering he is acting across from Vince Vaughn so often. I say it is interesting not because they have chemistry - they don't - but because Vince Vaughn is also given a terrible character that has to say idiotic things every ten minutes, except the difference is that his performance faceplants like a drunk gymnast. Nic Pizzolatto writes dialog like he has never heard a single human being speak.
None of this is helped by the story either. True Detective season 2 is eight episodes of television with maybe three episodes of actual plot spread between them. Plot elements that feel like they should have taken longer are rushed into an episode or two while parts that should have been developed quickly end up lasting the entire season. Nobody involved in putting this season together seems to have any concept of how pacing should work. Almost nothing of import or interest is verified or revealed until the last three episodes, and in those three episodes those reveals come entirely in clinical spurts of expository dialog. The main characters end up feeling so removed from the story - and from each other - that they sound like robots reciting Wikipedia plot synopses when this happens. When it does all come together and all the characters finally end up intersecting, it is so unfulfilling that you feel like maybe you took a wrong turn on the remote and ended up in a different show. That is almost a compliment in a way though, as the times when season 2 least resembles True Detective and everybody just shuts up - the meth lab shoot out, the penultimate episode, the sudden change of focus in the finale - it almost works. Too bad those moments, few and far between as they are, continually become weighed down under the shambling misshapen beast that is the main narrative. Somehow, and I really have a hard time wrapping my head around this, this show has figured out a way to have very little plot and also be comically overcomplicated.
All of this could have been fine with the right choices in the tone of the show, but those choices were not made. It seems like Pizzolatto has completely and utterly misjudged what it was people enjoyed about the first season, and I don't just mean that because he jettisoned 99.9% of the interesting vague occult stuff. All of the great scenes of interpersonal character development have been replaced by shots of Los Angeles freeways. He saw everybody go wild about Rust Cohle and went "hey why not have an entire cast of fatalist mumblers this time, people will love it!" No Nic, nobody loves it. You wrote the television serial equivalent of a 40 year old dude in a Tapout shirt reading Camus and sniffing a jar of his own farts. The only positive of this season is now we have yet another creator who can be added to the ever growing list of "People Who Should Never Have Complete Creative Control Over Anything." Good job buddy, you will be super happy talking narrative development with George Lucas and Vince Russo at the next meeting.
WATCH if you, for some reason, think there aren't enough overly complicated and paper thin cop dramas about people with dark pasts. DON'T WATCH if you want the first season to remain unsullied.
Not as bad as I thought it'd be, as someone who came in after having already done quite a bit of reading on the topic (via books/articles often written by the folks in this documentary, I might add).
Yes, it's pretty introductory when it comes to all the behavioral/cognitive aspects of the argument against social media and goes only slightly more in depth on political polarization, with some chilling practical examples from Southeast Asia that help the doc not get too (US-centrically) political. Also there's these cringe-y narrative interludes, something that anglo documentarists seem to love, which has to straddle the line between depicting a young white man radicalizing through online conspiracies and not explicitly identifying this ideology as the, huh, alt right movement it clearly is. I tend to find Vincent Kartheiser reliably hilarious in everything, though, which also happened here, where he plays a personification of The AlgorithmTM straight out of the garbage bin of a Black Mirror writer's room.
Yet overall I think it's a pretty solid starting point, particularly given how it emphasizes that the criticism is coming from inside the house, from the very people who invented this tech. "Love that you're recommending something to undo what you made." the interviewer tells one of the guys behind the Youtube recommendation algorithm as the credits roll. After the credits are done rolling, obviously, Netflix's algorithm will recommend you something else (in my case it was Nimona) and do its countdown thingie. Which was just brilliant.
The Office is one of the most popular shows on the internet. It still remains as Netflix's most popular TV show after all these years, and is generally loved by most people. I watched all of it in the last month.
I have to say that I think it is kind of overrated, many of the jokes felt very forced, sometimes the quality of the humour was really childish and unfunny, and too cringey too many times for my taste. I found myself jumping 10 seconds ahead when I felt like I just couldn't deal with some scenes anymore. But why didn't I stop watching it?? The truth is there is some unidentifiable quality that kept me coming back, something special that I can't explain. I wanted to see more, see what would happen to the characters, what stupid things they would do next, how it was going to end. Some episodes were weak, some characters took turns and developed in a way that made no sense to me, but overall, the show remained strong and the last few episodes were great, specially the finale. The show ended on a high note, which is difficult to say about many shows nowadays. I really enjoyed it despite all my criticism, it was not as good as I expected it to be (you can see that the writers struggled after Steve Carrel left the show), but it's lighthearted and fun, and it really has some incredibly funny moments.
Does it get good again? (Season 1 was great; season 2 was crap. Does it get better again?)
(BTW: There are no spoiler stuff here. Not unless you consider show quality changes to be spoilers.)
I finally committed time to trying the show. After having watched the first season, boy was I glad I did. I'd give that season an 8/10.
Then comes the second season.. where, amid some intermittent enjoyable elements (like some of the scenes with the lady Grail agent playing incognito roles, even those before we know of Grail; or, IIRC, the recruitment trials for Grail might have been amusing), it was very plainly a sludge (forced watching) forward to presumably-- hopefully-- get back to a part of the show that's worth watching. I figured that with a good first season under its belt, the runners of the show must have let some less included writers have a chance to guide a real TV show (resulting in a mish-mash of alternatively colored cow dung; not necessarily because the writers were objectively bad, but because they weren't melding their influences with what was already strong & expected from the show by way of its existing season)... But does whatever it is that went wrong with season 2 get undone in the seasons after?
I finally made it to the end of this bad season (2). There are two more available, meaning the show managed to stay on the air. Are they any better? Is it worth watching more, or did this show really only have one good season (1)?
4 years of filming in the outskirts of Venice, to then assemble a film written ex-post, inspired by their observation.
Neorealism or documentary, "cinema of reality" say the good ones, to tell a false story in a true reality, through characters created starting from the real life of the actors who interpret them and that inhabit this world made of fragmented islets and sandbanks also out of the movie.
A world that recalls typical western settings: large spaces of water and reeds instead of earth and dust, where the eye wanders in search of a small boat instead of the classic diligence and where you can measure the distance from Venice by observing how quickly the urban areas give way to unspoiled nature, like a frontier not of woods and Appalachian Mountains, but of limonium and calm waters, and in which the pioneers seem to have given up or passed on.
A world whose characters reflect the bare landscape they inhabit: lonely, taciturn individuals, without guides, parents or mentors, people who are aware of the conditions they live but who accept them as they are, without any attempt to change them. In fact, the dominant theme of the film is resignation, the total renunciation of aspiring dreams and the future, getting used to apathy in relationships with others, be they of friendship or love... Existences among which it is not necessary to speak because there is neither someone nor something to talk about.
The only thing that matters and seems to exist in this reality are the specifications of engines, propellers and keels, the 'barchino' as the only reason to live for, satisfied by a new speed record or a more powerful stereo system that does not disfigure enough to allow you to enter Venice, at the same time a place where those who count go around and yet as desolate as a ghost town, where there seems to be no one but the barchinos' guys themselves, yet another example of lives built around empty and senseless aspirations leading to nothing.
An inhumanity that stuns and disarms all attempts to empathize with the characters and to understand something of their motivations, whose frustrating absence is the only thing that transpires from their faces as they wander around the lagoon surrendered to the prospect of looking for at least one that would give them any meaning to their existence, during days that are always the same where even time seems to have got tired of flowing. An inhumanity that is even more disorienting when it is accompanied by the soundtrack of Sick Luke and the Dark Polo Gang, which with its post-gangsta rap tones always remains halfway between taking seriously the nihilism represented on the screen, glorifying it as the ultimate true sense of existence, and ironically distancing itself from it, charging him with rhetoric to the point of making it a parody of itself. Consistently, direction and editing follow this ambiguity in the tones of the story, avoiding camera movements and limiting shots' connections to a minimum. The shot is usually fixed, it does not follow the movement of what is on the screen, as if what is being filmed has value in itself and it is enough just to frame it to convey its meaning, like in a photograph, and most of the time the dynamism of the camera is diegetic, with the swinging shots from the bow of the boats while they reach the different locations of the film at full speed with a background of blaring house music. In the same way the scenes are connected to each other loosely, disorienting the viewer in the temporal ellipses between one event and another, during which it seems plausible that both months, days and a few hours pass, hence scattering the events in an apparent eternal present where time seems to have stopped. This aseptic approach in recording reality without a context or a time frame forms a collection of "animated photos" which, taken individually, pretend to give a complete meaning, but in reality they are not interested in really deepening it and when seen all together they highlight its absence. Exactly, form and substance, seriousness and irony.
Ultimately a movie dominated by an imperturbable stillness of places, rhythms and characters, at least until a particular event traumatizes it at the very end. The tragicity of the unhappy end of the protagonist, victim of this reality that slowly but inexorably overwhelms you like a salt marsh when high tide arrives, is coldly defused with a mere news on TV, to underline the insignificance of the events seen so far to the eyes of the rest of the world and marking the apex of the detachment between the narrative and its characters. But in the following 15 final minutes everything changes: in a nocturnal Venice whose narrow canals are patrolled by the guys' gangs, electronic music becomes a piece of classical music, 'acqua alta' arrives, and slowly docks, sidewalks and houses' entrances are submerged. The shot from the bow of a 'barchino' is finally stable and seems to touch the water surface as it explores the city, until suddenly it overturns 90° shooting the canals lying on its side: the time of decadent indolence is over, this modern Atlantis too has suffered its punishment or perhaps it was so apathetic and empty that it might as well be submerged, and as it disappears into the depths waiting for the dawn we begin to visit its underwater ruins, now that there is no longer a difference between up and down.
You know what? Maybe I'm not a feminist if it means I have to enjoy messaging that trashes men or only focuses on the worst of them to boost women up. I don't believe that men are only weak, whiny, stupid, incompetent, power-hungry, controlling, and empty. So, when they're portrayed that way to set up women as superior, I don't like it.
This movie had all the elements to open a conversation about how it shouldn't be about men ruling over women or women ruling over men, it should be about working together to break down toxic constructs that affect both men and women, supporting each other, and being better for one another to make real change. But instead of opening that conversation, it just tells you what you should think. You should think that if women ruled the world and told men what to do, everything would be great. That's just so... disappointing.
There's a lot I enjoyed about this film; the style, the actors, the direction, the soundtrack, the humor and satire, the way it explored what it means to be a woman, what it means to be human, gender roles, consumerism, and more. So many great things to love, but the feminist message is not one I can get behind.
Like John Holmes' underwear: warm but it tries to hold too much.
The story about an adolescent assigned female at birth who identifies as a male was wonderful. The subject was handled with compassion and subtilty and the actress who played the child (Luana Giuliani) hit all of her marks.
Yet, it was fairly clear from the vibe at the outset that the film was a memoir (last September, the director Emanuele Crialese confirmed that he was AFAB). The problem here was that he diluted this emotional story of his sexuality with more mundane aspects of his childhood (parents who fight, a domineering father, an eccentric mother who accepts her child's confusion).
The other hurdle the film faces is Penelope Cruz. The problem here is that she's so famous, such a huge and talented actress, that you can't put her in a film without making her the central character (she's even the only person on the poster).
So what should've been a sensitive look at a girl who knows in her heart of hearts that she's a boy falling in love for the first time with a girl, turns out to be a Penelope Cruz vehicle about a flighty mother.
The movie is still good enough to recommend, but it could've been so much more.
PS. Shout-out to the inclusion of the brilliant Italian song Prisencolinensinainciusol (Adriano Celentano, 1972), a song written and performed in gibberish meant to resemble an American accent because the singer/songwriter believed Italians would buy anything sung in American. YouTube it now or be sad the rest of your life.
Despite the passing of time "Boris" is still a pleasant, yet not exhilarating, sitcom. Despite the lighthearted tone, it even manages to make some sharp satire of the rotten Italian showbusiness, where purposely making shitty TV shows truly became a specialized job. The writing could be sharper, but we are still above the level of similar shows. A little like "The Office" did in the US, "Boris" generated countless quotes and memes all over the internet, most of which are untranslatable to other languages.
The first season is a little rough on the edges but still the most genuine. Each episode has its own self-contained plot and things don't drag on for too long. The only problem is, horrible music aside, the protagonist. Alessandro's mediocrity is a perfect counterpoint to the madness of the other characters, but it's almost as if he is just witnessing the events without being involved too much.
The same old jokes and dynamics already started to grow thin by the second season, which was a big upgrade technically but at the same time tended to play too easy and rely on the same old stuff. The side stories that span over multiple episodes like Alessandro’s love interests, the nonsense Machiavelli quest, and in particular, Biascica’s panic attacks, dragged the pacing down a little.
The third season tried to shake things up a little, but felt a little tired in its humor. The cynical ending seems to be unpopular, but it is actually the only really good idea they had here. The rest was pretty old jokes and uninspired situations. It also felt like the crew wasn't actually able to make a "good" show. Their mastery of garbage TV is what made "Boris" sharp and enjoyable, but every time they try to flirt with quality, it was hard to spot the difference.
Showbusiness has drastically changed since the end of "Boris" in 2011, and this revival makes it even more noticeable. The fourth season of "Boris" is undoubtedly crafted with passion and with the fans in mind, but I doubt it will be able to appeal to new generations. For better or worse, nothing has changed since 2011. The commentary on streaming services and the new standards for television feels unfocused and shallow, and most of the jokes that land are allusions to the old seasons or guest appearances from fan-favorite characters. Moreover, the eight episodes are barely enough to move the plot forward and expand on the characters. Many arcs get closed all of a sudden and some even fade out throughout the series. Nevertheless, it was still an extremely pleasant viewing from a fan's perspective. The ending was unexpected, but at the same time quite satisfying.
(Nonostante gli anni rimane una sitcom piacevole ma non esilarante, che tra un sorriso e l’altro riesce pure a introdurre un po’ di satira e problematiche vere dello showbiz. Quanto a quantità di tormentoni introdotti nel web, possiamo definirla la "The Office" italiana. La scrittura scricchiola di tanto in tanto, ma ci possiamo accontentare. Del resto, da amante del trash televisivo sarebbe impossibile non amare una serie consacrata a chi fa la merda di professione. Tra le tre la prima stagione è la più scorrevole, con episodi generalmente autoconclusivi e che non fanno ancora troppa insistenza sui vari tormentoni. L’unica vera pecca è, oltre alle musiche orrende, il personaggio di Alessandro: perfetto a bilanciare la follia del resto della troupe ma un po’ troppo anonimo come protagonista.
La seconda stagione è decisamente migliore tecnicamente, ma in certe cose sa un po’ più di stantio. Inizia ad esserci la sensazione che stessero campando un po’ troppo sui vari tormentoni e sulla gente che strilla in romanaccio. I drammi di Biascica e in particolare l’insipida storia d’amore tra Arianna e Alessandro ammazzano un po’ il ritmo generale, per non parlare del Machiavelli di cui onestamente non ho esattamente colto il senso. Tra le new entry abbiamo un Guzzanti un po’ sprecato e due cagnacce niente male.
Nella terza stagione ho apprezzato il tentativo di variare un minimo la formula, ma purtroppo ho percepito una spossatezza acuta nell'umorismo. Il finale cinico e rassegnato mi sta benissimo, anche perché si riconnette alle premesse fatte all’inizio della serie, ma le situazioni divertenti o vagamente intelligenti sono veramente poche. Tra l’altro non è che Medical Dimension fosse tutta sta qualità, eh. Anche quando avevano provato con il corto della formica, rimane l'impressione che la troupe dietro a "Boris" abbia poca dimestichezza con la qualità, trovandosi a suo agio solo quando si beffa di ciò che conosce a menadito, ovvero la monnezza.
La serialità è cambiata radicalmente dagli anni di "Boris", e questo ritorno fuori tempi massimi ne è la prova lampante. La quarta stagione di "Boris" è indubbiamente fatta con il cuore e con un'attenzione particolare ai fans di vecchia data, ma dubito sarà in grado di accaparrarsi nuovi spettatori. Nel bene e nel male, tutto è congelato al 2011, e rimarrà tutto congelato anche dopo questi otto episodi personaggi inclusi. I riferimenti allo streaming e al nuovo modo di fare televisione sono fuori fuoco e superficiali, tant'è che i momenti che strappano un sorriso sono quasi tutti riferimenti ai tormentoni dei bei tempi o comparsate del cast storico (in un modo o nell'altro torneranno praticamente tutti). Le otto puntate sono inoltre insufficienti a sviluppare la trama orizzontale, con personaggi e situazioni spesso perse per strada o chiuse alla bell’e meglio. Il tutto resta comunque molto piacevole e di facile fruizione. Il finale è stato inaspettato quanto soddisfacente.
Wow! I first started this show back in 2019 but didn’t get past the second episode cause I was using an hbo free trial, so I got another free trial and I got to finally finishing it, and back then it was like a warning and today it’s like a mirror, and how poetic it is that this last episode was about the monkey flu, so I guess they got it the other way around, we are starting the chaos with the pandemic and probably in 10-15 years the dirty bombs will be coming. I feel like they got everything accurately! And maybe at first glance some will say “oh it was about the Lyons family saving the world” but like they said, there were other protestors, other activists, other whistle blowers, they are just telling us the story of one family. Also I think they did a great a job with technology, the advances were subtle and gradual which I think is like real life, like an iphone doesn’t change much from one year to the other, but obviously if you compare it to the models from 10 years ago it’s shocking, and the perfect example is how the whole family was together in their very old home while Edith was in a very new facility, so I don’t think this new technology is gonna overpower us a become the norm (yet). The one thing I feel wasn’t as accurate was the fashion, cause as we’ve seen this year, people are inclining for comfort clothes, minimalistic silhouettes, monochromatic/pastel tones, our going full vintage and thrifted.
And I just wanna know who has behind Vivian... and who is behind all of this?
Honestly I leave this show feeling shocked (I will never forget that first atomic bomb, daniel’s death, edith and viktor in the concentration camp) sad of how much we can relate to this, heartbroken and scared of what’s to come next, sometimes I feel 2019 was the last “normal” year and I’m fearful of what’s gonna come and feel guilty of how much of it was our fault and not exactly for what we did but for what we didn’t do. 2020 is gonna end with my city in lockdown, but still I’m hopeful for a better next year for the world!
Oh boy, where do I start? This has got to be one of the most powerful, chilling, life-altering series I have ever seen.
Being an American History major, I've studied the case in class and when I heard about When They See Us coming out I was very happy that their stories were being told on a mainstream platform but anxious as to whether it would be well-executed. I have to say every single person involved has done an incredible job. Ava DuVernay (creator, director & co-writer) deserves numerous awards, I can't fault this show at all. If you watch the aftershow with Oprah Winfrey (also on Netflix), you'll see how committed DuVernay was to this series and how much it meant to her that the exonerated five had their stories told well. As far as the acting goes, every person on screen is unreal - the kids, especially, were so good that I'll probably watch everything else they will ever star in. Asante Blackk as young Kevin blew my mind as did Caleel Harris as young Antron. Jharrel Jerome as both young and old Korey deserves dozens of awards for this role. Family members played by Michael K. Williams, Niecy Nash and Marsha Blake give chilling performances also and deserve recognition.
I enjoyed watching how the stories played out and found myself intrigued how it would all unfold despite knowing the end outcome. I really liked that they dedicated the whole of the last episode to Korey's story since his experience was so different. The series should also be commended for its accuracy. For instance, the recreation of the tapes: from what the boys were wearing to the pepsi can on the table next to Korey. Also, I am really happy that they covered Trump's involvement in the case - I thought this might be removed or disregarded in the narrative with him being in the WH. I can imagine if some are unaware of the case prior to this series, they would see this as purely political. Whereas, in reality Trump's involvement was huge - his $85,000 ad calling for the death penalty for the 5 really set off and intensified society's belief that they deserved severe punishment for the crime as well as stirring up the fear of savage, "wilding" black boys.
Without a doubt, this series is an extremely hard watch. I watched it alongside my girlfriend (a black American who's all too aware of these situations) and she wanted to stop watching after the first ep because it angered her so much. The situation that these boys were in was so heartbreaking and watching it unfold makes you angry, sad, frustrated - and for me, want to prevent any injustice ever happening again in America - but you need to watch it even if it makes you uncomfortable. After this series, you will want to fight the justice system yourself because these boys were subjected to extreme cruelty from the police and will never get those years back. The five men appear on the aftershow and it is clearly visible how broken some of them still are - Kevin talks about refusing therapy and simply keeping busy - it is evident the way he talks about life just how broken he is + the whole cast breaks down.
I haven't seen a huge amount of promo from Netflix on this so PLEASE watch this show immediately; it is a hard watch but it is ESSENTIAL viewing for every American.
I'm honestly not sure how people are enjoying this show. From the creators of a few CW DC shows as well as a tenured CW writer/showrunner of a few seasons of Supernatural comes 'You', a show that had me asking myself why I was still watching nearly every minute and a half I had to pause the first episode.
'You', at least in the first episode, takes the 'Tell not Show' approach, rather than using the visual medium properly. Stilted performance after stilted performance on top of poorly written dialogue permeates every orifice of this boring incoherent mess of an hour. It really is obvious that the show was written for the Lifetime network originally, because it's about on par of what I'd expect from their offerings.
The visuals are primarily shot on anamorphic lenses, with untalented camera assistants missing focus left and right because the Director of Photography decided that being wide open with ND on every shot was a great idea for every situation. Bad visuals on top of an awkward score that has no purpose other than to accentuate the overbearing internal monologue of this show's 'Dennis Reynolds' of Always Sunny in Philadelphia.
Do yourself a favor and go watch the pilot episode of Dexter after this and tell me which you found more entertaining. I know which one I'll pick every time.
Not for the faint hearted even though this show will leave you feeling Euphoria in some moments
This show straight from the word Euphoria literally brings lots of really important matters faced by teenagers today into light. This show is not for the faint hearted as it deals with drugs, violence, romance, sex and much more, therefore showing an all round representation of what teenagers are faced with nowadays. The main character RUE deals with her own demons from having a drug habit where she overdosed and her sister found her on the floor practically dead. RUE faking being clean to her Mom and then after meeting this girl called Jules who has her own demons and interests that is set on this man who is just a character cat fishing her into a false sense of security. RUE falls for her hard where the Euphoria grows and you watch their relationship go as RUE stays clean and keep going to rehab as Jules is literally her rock and the main reason why she is trying to stay clean. I am so happy and practically Euphoric right now that this amazing show has got renewed for a second season ten out of ten amazing acting especially from Hunter And Zendaya. Lets keep this new amazing HBO show going for lots more seasons too go and the soundtracks will leave you feeling so euphoric. #Rules #Euphoria #EuphoriaHBO #Zendaya
This slice-of-life movie follows friends Jai and Sahil on a trip, where old feelings surface once again. Things are complicated by conflicting personalities, Jai's apparent fear of coming out as gay, and the fact that Sahil has a boyfriend back at home — one that he's been having some problems with.
There isn't much more to the plot than that. It's a snapshot of two men's lives, and much more important than the events themselves are the characters. For the most part, it's a great movie, but then, comes an event that shifts everything.
While I'm still unsure of how the aftermath was handled, I feel like it was handwaved because Sahil didn't really register the whole thing as a big deal. The ending seems to corroborate that idea. Still, it did feel off-putting to have the whole thing shown as 'not a big deal'.
The characters and their reactions to each other feel natural and real. Depending on your cultural background, there are some behaviours and thought processes that can seem a bit strange, but it all flows naturally in the narrative.
All in all, it's an alright movie to watch. However, I'm still unsure if I'd recommend it, precisely because I don't think sensitive issues had the attention and were treated with the seriousness they deserve. But if you're at all triggered by rape, I'd recommend against watching this. I went in blind and took me some time to recover from the ending.
Hirokazu Koreeda's work has been recommended to me by a few people, and I'm ashamed to say this is the first of his movies I have seen. Based on 'Like Father, Like Son' I am now in a rush to see a few more. It is an excellent film that deals with raw human emotion. But the genius is the way Koreeda shows us that emotion. There are beautiful looking films and then there are just beautiful films. This falls into the latter category.
This story centres around receiving the inexplicable news that your child was swapped at birth and your real child lives a few miles away ion the next town. That's a horrific thing for anybody to deal with but Koreeda doesn't show us the hysterical scream fits that both mothers would have no doubt had, he instead deals with the inner turmoil and pain that anyone in this position would no doubt feel. Questioning yourself to understand if you could have done something different. Examining your morals and your judgments on others.
The main protagonist is Ryota, expertly played by Masaharu Fukuyama. Through his journey we see that he has to learn alot about his role in the family even though he thinks he has made it as the main breadwinner with a high powered job. The use of pianos, kites and robots are all fantastic mechanisms to enable us to see how he views his "son", and the level of expectation placed upon him. In one scene towards the end in particular (you could very loosely call it a reveal scene) the emotions become too much for Ryota and we finally see him learning and accepting what his role in the family should ultimately be. How Koreeda manages to weave this into the plot is just masterful film-making.
It's such a simple concept - child swapped at birth = tragedy. But not many people could write a screenplay and direct a 2 hour feature on the turmoil and upheaval of family life based around it. Koreeda manages it, and also enables every single actor in this movie to nail their roles. Great film
