A twisted view of filial piety seems like it could be an interesting take — but the film doesn’t satisfy; it’s lacking humour, romance, a substantial plot, meaningful dialogue (excepting the ending speech), and especially… any character growth. Maybe you don’t mind the glorification of violence and misogyny, and only pressed play for gory fight scenes… sorry to say, they also suck. At the end, you’re left thinking all characters are stupid and instead of 3h21m they could’ve done better in just 21m.
The film drags on with insubstantial plot, but never gets around to the ‘why’ of Ranbir’s character. He isn’t presented as a sympathetic hero with deep flaws, just a violent obsessive killer who somehow happens to be the main character. He’ll jump at every chance to commit violence on ‘behalf’ of his family as the ‘man’ of the house… even when they beg him not to. He’s desperate for attention from his father, but dismissive of all others who try to connect, especially women. Decades pass but he seems unable and unwilling to form a relationship more meaningful than the father-son relationship he obsesses over, even after having children of his own. We seem one doctor’s visit or traumatic childhood flashback away from a severe mental diagnosis, but it never materializes. All his decisions make no sense — actually no one’s decisions make sense — why is violence the first and only option? It’s not like that’s what father taught him, they don’t actually spend time together! Why does the girl leave her fiancé to marry him, when he’s so unlikeable and makes her cry? Why did the director even bother filming the actresses’ faces, if he was going to spend the entire film treating them like bodies speaking into the void? Actually if he'd replaced the actresses with mannequins I would've found the film MORE interesting, I could have pretended it was the film’s attempt at clever social commentary. Instead of whatever point he was trying to make with the catheter speech.
It can be said that all actors did well in given roles, which by the script was limited for all but Ranbir. He showed great commitment and vigor to the deranged and emotionally immature character but even he can’t bring depth where there is none in the script.
But ok, let’s say we hit play for gory fight scenes only. I love a good revenge thriller, but this film was not John Wick or Liam Neeson in Taken. This was an unlikeable character who makes unequivocal decisions favoring gratuitous violence on behalf of people he claims to love but never listens to, basically throwing several temper tantrums with flashy artillery. The scenes feel abrupt, as if Vanga was paid to fill a quota of gunshots and blood sprays, the way other Bollywood films decide on the songs first and edit film to fit. Look at the way blood splashes on that face, look at the shiny masks and axes, look at the giant gun — just don’t look at the paper-thin plot or the lacklustre fight choreography. The culminating fight is the most bizarre of all: a slow dance where both opponents eschew guns and goons, slowly stripping for each other between punches, building a weirdly charged connection that ends in a climactic spurt of blood. Both had such a strong inclination to violence it would be impossible without context to tell which was supposed to be the ‘hero’… instead you almost pity them for the relationship they could have had as equals on the same side. The end is just as abrupt and uncomfortable, with a highly emotionally charged speech that once again includes violence but resolves nothing.
It’s not the characters flaws that are the problem, it’s that the script and director doesn’t give us anything else — ALL the characters become unlikeable, either through their actions or their impotent lack of action. The best bad boys are the ones that can be explained, that just the right touch could ‘fix’ — this film’s protagonist isn’t the bad boy, he’s not even the villain with a heart. He’s the abusive ex who might be the reason you wind up dead.
Overall, give this a miss. In fact, based on this I’m prepared to give all Vanga’s works a miss. You want a tense father-son relationship? Re-watch K3G. You want violence? Anurag Kashyap has you covered. Ranbir’s acting is on par with South Indian superstars, but as both action and drama, the film was a flop.
Kaala Paani (Black Water) is about the unraveling of a society under crisis. An epidemic strikes the island, and the show follows characters on disparate journeys as they all come to understand how civility is a thin veneer, and there are different rules for survival in a dystopia. Netflix bills this as their first Indian survival drama, and if that’s what you’re looking for, this delivers.
Kaala Paani remains rooted in Indian drama, with enough familiar Bollywood tropes and super dramatic acting to satisfy (or frustrate, depending on taste). The setting of a near-future Andaman and Nicobar adds a little freshness for seasoned viewers of both Indian dramas and english post-apocalyptic drama (why so many desert wastelands?). But if you like this show, credit is due to the writer’s clarity of idea — the human aspect of epidemic survival — and the director’s focus on execution. The team said yes to liberal use of fable & philosophy tropes, yes to time skips, yes and yes again to flashbacks (make it like Oprah’s giving them away), and no to in-depth explanations of science/procedure/things-that-aren’t-drama. The focus is entirely on the character journeys undertaken by a set of individuals from a distribution of roles across the island society. The actors all did very well, and most have juicy dramatic bits preceded by overlong childhood flashbacks (can you tell my biggest quibble? yet they are a classic Indian trope that can’t be escaped… get it?) to hammer in that character development. This is not a mystery series: there are no twists, no red herrings. But the 7 episodes are meaty with social drama, seasoned with the urgency of a thriller, and light on the boring gristle. Overall, Kaala Paani will hits the spot. And if my review hasn’t put you off it, I think you’ll enjoy it too.
A second season is possible but not required. The epidemic isn’t fully resolved (given the time frame it can’t be anyway), but most characters have reached a climax and denouement to complete their arc. If continued, here’s hoping the writing remains true to concept with new character journeys so that the energy stays high.
Based on an award-winning young adult webcomic, this animation has a simple child-friendly plot around themes of identity and belonging with a sprinkle of punk style for Nimona. It watches brief breezy and cute, devoting more time to comedy than melancholic drama, which leaves it feeling far fresher than anything Disney has put out lately.
What makes this film a decent watch isn't the time loop at all, but how each loop you get little hints about the couple experiencing a home invasion, and the fraught political situation of the world they live in.
Time travel is a common trope in science fiction, employed to change the past, but ARQ is nothing like 12 Monkeys or Looper. Science fiction lovers will remember "that time loop episode" of their favourite science fiction show. This film is not concerned with whys/hows, and doesn't preach about time manipulation; the machine is only a tool here.
This plays a lot like an extended short film, as each loop is a (slightly different) slice-of-life perspective. I agree with reviewers who say it feels like a pilot (the ending supports this), but disagree that it would make a good series. I think the current length is designed to make you tired of the loops but not quite tired of the actors. The team did a great job of doing something a little different, moving a little faster each time, so you can see them adapting emotionally to the looping.
I can only describe this show as 'perfectly awkward'. I adore how it skips across the balance beam of comedy and drama, depicting some incredibly realistic situations and life events that range from hilarious to depressing, without wallowing in either of them. This is not a tearjerker about depression, or a rofl-comedy, but that perfect sardonic middle where all characters are both likeable and flawed.
Showrunner, writer, and lead Josh Thomas has said it is based on his own life. Although his unique voice was a bit of a hurdle at first, I quickly warmed to his, and other characters. Give it a few episodes at least :)
The first two episodes set such a low bar that I genuinely wondered how the test audience let it fly under the radar... then I remembered the existence of Iron Fist. The premise of Inhumans is fine, but the plot and action is dull and slow, presumably to allow for character development... unfortunately the characters are unlikeable, as all the 'good guys' are simultaneously arrogant and naive, making them unsympathetic. Iwan Rheon's character is a rare exception, but I suspect my misplaced affection for Misfits may muddle my judgement there.
TL;DR If I didn't know better I'd think it was a second-rate mockbuster, but given The Defenders... maybe I need to resign myself to the new Marvel/Netflix reality.
I was excited about the premise, as a fan of both Star Trek as well as sci-fi comedy, but having seen 3 episodes it falls short of expectations.
I had hoped for either a clever parody, or a farce exaggerating Star Trek plots to comical extremes. Instead, it comes off as a weak-tea homage. Sure, numerous Star Trek references provide fanservice, but the characterization/acting is flat and the comic moments feel silly rather than punchy. I do appreciate the show's dedication to ethics as espoused by the original Star Trek, and will probably continue watching if only to see which ethical debates the writers think are most relevant in 2017.
Overall, I get the impression of a skit or community theatre, leaving me wishing for a stronger script.
The Hitman's Bodyguard has a forgettable plot that clearly comes in third, after to Reynolds' and Jackson's buddy-cop snark and their respective romantic troubles, but the action sequences stuffed with absent-minded kills are perfectly satisfying for a summer action flick. Admittedly, you might feel a little shock at seeing a rule-following 'Deadpool' and fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants 'Nick Fury' but that's rather the point, I think.
This is not a Disney fairytale, but is reminiscent of that mixture of innocence and horror from the Grimm's tales. This twisted short story collection is a feast for the eyes.
I found the stories themselves to be somewhat unsatisfying. The tales are fragmented and instead of a single climax, each has a 'point of no return', where a character makes a choice and everything goes horribly wrong. The cast, however, was excellent and clearly worked hard to not let their characters become the one-dimensional caricatures seen in story books.
The real stars, however, are the Italian castles and caves. This film might be tourism propaganda, and I'm not even mad. Seriously, even if you skip the film go check out the screenshots and film posters on Imdb, they're a treat.
The movie gives you just enough of an interesting concept of a feminist-artificial-life awakening in the first few minutes to genuinely deepen the disappointment throughout the rest of the film. I'd recommend skipping this in favour of the Westworld series, but if you're still curious, watch the trailer and then fill in the plot mad-libs-style. You'll undoubtedly turn out with something far more satisfying (yes, even action-scene-wise).
This dramedy is set in the premise of alien segregation, such as "V", "District 9", or the contemporary "Cleverman". It is rather heavy-handed with the metaphors and at times patently ridiculous. If you're looking for a more reflective social commentary, I suggest you check out one of the others (listed in order of release).
On the other hand, this wry, dry, and (very) British miniseries offers a relatable taste of a character that discovers something about himself, and proceeds to walk that fine line between f***ing his life up and figuring it out. There are no superheroes here, but Michael Socha is believable as the gobsmacked and impulsive Lewis, who makes me want to facepalm at least once per episode.
No interest in sci-fi required, but if you sneer at soft SF you may wish to skip this one.
This show made me feel somehow validated, confused, then betrayed, and more confused. It wasn't fast, and I still don't understand it, but it got steadily more complex and kept me interested in the ride.
If you liked the X-Files, and Stranger Things, give this a shot and be prepared to be patient through the slow start. If unexplained mysteries irritate you, or you will always pick the latest superhero movie over an arthouse feature, ymmv. Either way, watch with a friend so you can yell about it afterwards.
If you loved the books, you needn't fear disappointment! The tone stays very true to irreverent comedic melancholy of the books, and is supported technically by the sets and lighting (like a city immediately after a rainstorm, generally damp and gloomy but especially vivid at the same time).
Note that all characters are closer to two-dimensional caricatures than actual people. This is, however, in line with the book series, where the 'writer' reports facts and events with emotional distance. I believe this was designed to allows readers the room to marvel at the utter ridiculousness of all the adults, and at the inventive perseverance of the Baudelaire children, while still preserving the central overarching mystery. This strategy works great in print, but doesn't translate quite as well to the screen.
For myself, the dark humour and Neil Patrick Harris's portrayal of the frankly outrageous Count Olaf more than made up for flat characters, but if neither the author's dark humour nor NPH is your thing, then ymmv.