[Disney+] Recycling of classic adventure stories that leans on Tolkien to use numerous literary references, from "Gulliver's Travels" to biblical chronicles. An adventure film directed by Ron Howard, who is directed by George Lucas, which has lost now some of its original strength but none of his charm, with a charismatic Warwick Davis, Val Kilmer carrying the clone of Han Solo to ground closer to Errol Flynn and a thrillingly beautiful score by James Horner that sounds closer to Prokofiev than ever before.
[Disney+] That the main guide of this documentary about the Camden scene is an artist who has lived in Camden but has never participated in the neighborhood's local scene says a lot about what the focus of the series is. The problem is not that Dua Lipa's life is not at all interesting to explain the cultural effervescence of the neighborhood, but that the story never explains what turned this area into a countercultural reference, that the relevance of punk in the eighties and the references to the darker aspects of nightlife are carefully avoided. In the end, we learn a lot of uninteresting things about Dua Lipa and few interesting things about Camden Town.
[Disney+] A group of current comedians tries to recover a sketch film and ends up showing how the sense of humor has changed in the worst way. "History of the world. Part I" (1981) deals with absurd humor with less success than "Life of Brian" (1979), but it is much more coherent than its television sequel. The new version is a mix of all kinds of styles that proves that a series is too long for a set of desert skits with some oasis of humor. And that the new American comedians (actually stars of the ABC/Hulu series) are repetitive and boring.
[SkyShowtime] Recalls Mrs. Maisel in the description of the character, but transferred to a London of cultural effervescence in the 60s. With her reference in Lucille Ball, the protagonist aims to become a recognized comic actress in the world of controlled television by men, and the optimistic spirit of the character is one of the successes of the series. Oliver Parker achieves one of his best works after his languid theatrical adaptations to the cinema, and Gemma Arterton builds a character that is not only fun and enjoyable but complex and profound, through which an era is reflected with its greatness and its weaknesses.
[Viaplay] A clumsy and dull adaptation that doesn't understand its characters, building them from a presentist perspective of false progressivism. There is little chemistry between Camille and Valmont, because the creators of the series insist on drawing a love story that seems adolescent, looking for unnecessary justifications for coldness and ambition. If the original work offers a rich representation of a rotten society, the series builds an environment that is only created to reinforce the youthful relationship of the protagonists.
A disappointing series about police investigations in a small town that seems destined for crime and tragedy. It tries hard to offer some parallel subplots that enrich the main story, and to give Armand Gamache's character some depth without succeeding, in one of those profiles that we are sure are more effective in the novels than what they manage to be in their adaptation. In the end, there is a production with a classic tone in which there is not much personality in the main detective or much depth in the cases that are investigated.
[tv+] Adaptation of the Belgian miniseries "Clan" (2012) that more or less faithfully follows the original story, a representation of all types of abuse and discrimination suffered by women, here specified in a particularly amoral male character. The problem with this new version, which works just as well on the chemistry between the sisters, is that the nastier it makes John Paul, the more sympathy he arouses.
[tv+] Sidney Poitier doesn't need such a bland platform to claim the importance of his work in Hollywood. The film forgets about Josephine Baker, who opened many doors to the black community before Poitier arrived, with the added difficulty of being a woman; despises Hattie McDaniel, who was not only the first African-American person to win an Oscar, but the first African-American to attend the Oscars as a guest, not a service employee; silences James Baldwin, who criticized the role of "domestic star" played by Sidney Poitier and dismisses Diahann Carroll, of whom he was a lover for nine years, although she is only mentioned for nine seconds in the documentary.
Everything to build an idealized and flat image that actually feels against the protagonist. Compared to other biopics like "The last movie stars" that are not afraid of the imperfections of their protagonists, getting a deeper dimension of the life and career of Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward, "Sidney" is an approach that is too superficial and one-dimensional. And lest we forget that this is an Oprah Winfrey production, the last word before Sidney Poitier is granted by herself.
It manages to create a disturbing and dark atmosphere, using the elements of the cinema of the seventies and reflecting on them. But although the concept is interesting, it gives the impression that it runs out quickly (by the third call) and its insistence on not explaining anything because it does not need to be explained makes it emptier than it seems at first.
[HBO Max] Arguably works better as a depiction of the problems of present-day Hungary than as a faithfully historical recreation. When a Soviet flag is burned, there is an implicit criticism of the good relations Orbán/Putin. And this feeds the interest of a story that, otherwise, works well as a political thriller that takes place in a time of death of the communist dream, a few years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the midst of a Cold War that in the streets it is a boiling battle.
[Movistar+] It knows how to build tension with a measured structure and an interesting use of the cliffhanger, although some secondary plots feel forced. The claustrophobia of the investigation inside the submarine is cleverly alleviated with a parallel investigation on land, enhancing a narrative that throws out some political ideas without hindering its thriller status.
Season 2 is clearly inferior, much more predictable and implausible than the previous one, with frankly bad episodes like the one that takes place during the kidnapping. The series has more difficulty this time in making the main couple empathetic, and the development of false culprits is boring and predictable. Outside of the submarine, the show sinks into mediocrity.
[Netflix] The final season closes the circle of the defense of the family unit and the power that wealth grants, whatever the cost: "Most people have the wrong idea about money." Perhaps S4 is far below S2 and S3, and shows the usual frustration caused by a series sometimes too focused on moving forward that forgets to go deeper. And the ending can be a bit disappointing, but it comes full circle in a consistent way.
[HBO Max] How a lovable comedy with standout characters can't find a way forward. Completely pointless, sometimes boring, the second season stalls in the development of the characters, not knowing what to do with them when they have already started a relationship. Tom stays in a secondary place, completely inconsequential. But there's also, surprisingly, not much evolution in Jessie's character arc.
Trying to build a story around some video games is an almost impossible mission. The director comes from advertising related to video games, and understands that the movie should offer fights wrapped in gore. But there is an evident lack of trust of the company in the film, turned into a series B in disguise. The fighting is surrounded by laziness, wanting to finish as soon as possible to move on to the next one.
[LasPalmasFF] The marriage of Elvira Lind and Oscar Isaac offers a story about human relationships that works well in the portrait of loneliness. Very well structured from the presentation of the characters to the development of a kind of emotional obsession through the private stories that are reflected in the letters of the prisoners. The story has suspicious similarities to the Turkish film "Passed by censor" (2019), which limits its interest.
A weak detective story that has few notable elements. It is assumed that the interest is in finding the evidence to convict a murderer who from the beginning we know that he is guilty. But research is of little interest, and the attempt to give the researcher a certain family background is clumsy and cliche.
Willie Nelson sings "Blue skies". But there is no blue sky. In continuous contrast, Craig Roberts creates a film that walks between comedy and drama, between illness and mental health, between reality and fantasy. Sally Hawkins and David Thewlis make up two profound characters, locked in their own state of mind. Depression can be terrifying. But there are moments of light, of blue skies, those to which to hold. Unbalanced at times it is, however, a constant challenge to normalcy.
[FICX] The unknown war, which pitted Paraguayans and Bolivians against bordering grounds, was actually an oil war. This chronicle of nonsense is carried out by a group of Quechua and Aymara soldiers, the spoils sent to their deaths. A war in which you don't die from gunshots, but from hunger and thirst. The desert as the scene of a hostile game, sometimes absurd, like asking some indigenous people if they are Paraguayans or Bolivians. The film is calm, perhaps too. But it contains images that remain.
[HBO] A messy script that's constantly running ahead of events, as if it's so eager to explain itself that it leaves constant narrative gaps. Episode six, a kind of short film anthology, is intended to be explanatory but leaves more questions than answers. The new showrunner Philippa Goslett has the mission to fix the mess (if it is possible) and, on the way, eliminate the sexist tone of the show.
[Netflix] Without knowing the book on which it's based, this doesn't seem the most successful portrait of white America that, like Amy Adams' character, falls over and over again in the same mistakes. Ron Howard builds a loud, histrionic movie based on a flimsy script, banal dialogue and messy construction. While Amy Adams is contagious of the histrionics of the film, Glenn Close manages to walk in the limit.
[Netflix] A sensationalist documentary about the riots in Maiden's Square that forgets about the important participation of the Azov Battalion, a group of neo-Nazi sympathizers that later became part of the National Guard of Ukraine. Despite its good technical quality, it is a manipulative film that offers a one-way point of view, very much in keeping with the official Western narrative about Ukraine.
A story about two men and a woman written by two men and a woman in which the feminine gaze prevails, the "truth" is assumed from the beginning, so the other "versions" seem somewhat unnecessary. But there is a perfection in the representation of a medieval society so masculinized that it's difficult to argue, and it has an extraordinary contribution in the very intelligent soundtrack by Harry Gregson-Williams.
Horror movie that seems to be related to demonic possession, the story unfolds in even darker and less conventional way. As a mixture of subgenres, between sects, sexual abuse and possessions, it ends up being fascinating thanks to the director's ability to create an unbreathable atmosphere. Some sequences feel implausible and the ending is not entirely convincing, but it is an outstanding terror/drama proposal.
It belongs to that type of production that adapts without adapting, that modernizes what doesn't need to be modernized and that sexualizes what has a subtle and enigmatic approach, as if translating a classic text would mean underestimating its value. In the middle of the season Knight gets tired of Dickens and readapts his "Taboo" show, building a new plot more conventional than the original. At least Olivia Colman gives Miss Havisham the right touch of tragic pathos, but Pip and Estella are bland characters. For Steven Knight, modernizing Charles Dickens consists in considering the audience idiots.
Why does everyone have visions and when someone says he had a vision, everyone thinks he's crazy?
[TV 2 Play] A story of street gangs in Oslo that feels dated and irrelevant. There are no characters that are complex enough, and everything happens with a drab and sleepy tone, as if it wanted to be "Top boy" (2011-2023), but couldn't create a solid narrative. There is a good production that highlights Oslo from a gray perspective that highlights the more industrial areas, but it is an atmosphere of darkness that is not reflected in the protagonists, even though an element of mental dissociation is introduced in Moaz, which is nonetheless an undeveloped note.
[SkyShowtime] The series contributes to the film adaptations of John Ajvide Lindqvist's novel by broadening the gaze with more characters, establishing not only the relationship between father and daughter, and between them and their neighbors, mother and son, but also another relationship of dependency/protection between a scientist trying to find a cure for her brother's vampiric condition. Thus, an emotional envelope is established that builds an interesting framework that reflects on predators and their prey, on the need to attack in order not to be attacked and on the obligation to defend the weakest members as a form of natural survival.
There's a subtle construction that is sustained in two long sequences during the first part: the interview and the class. They are the two springs that raise the main themes of the film, and for this reason the structure proposed by Todd Field is exquisite and intelligent. The secrets are the inner demons, the symbolic representation of a persecution that is more psychological. Supported by a superb Cate Blanchett, the film has that Kubrickian film planning that at times can be too obvious, but feels comfortable in the construction of spaces that suffocate and imprison, despite their breadth.
[Netflix] As with many stories featuring teens, the inability to give them a believable voice is disappointing. Once again, this short stories anthology series, that builds a main plot to stretch it out to exhaustion, offers implausible dialogues of fifteen-year-olds talking as if they were thirty years old. And it reflects on life and death through characters who don't have a solid life experience.
[Netflix] It's darker, more intriguing and more pessimistic than ever, somehow closer to "House of cards" than "The West Wing", and brings the protagonist closer to the "dark side" than ever. It is also more cynical, titling the first episode "The future is female" in a world where there is no sorority, but backstabbing and betrayal. It manages to return with the same complex reflection about the corruption of power.
