Trakt for iOS
Works on iPhone and iPad.
I can say straight up this will not be a movie for everyone, but it really clicked for me. I would also say a blind watch is preferable in movies like this, I went in knowing almost nothing and if possible I think that's the way to watch the movie if possible.
For me it was incredibly immersive once established, with incredible sound design and score. The slow build of tension, unease and dread as things unfold. I'll admit, I've always been a fan of mediums that give the viewer the same amount of knowledge of whats going on as the characters have, and this nails that.
The premise has a whole has been done many times before, including this years Knock at the Cabin, but I've not seen that or read the book it was based on. But in relation to the other similar films, this takes the top spot for me.
While the ending itself is probably the weakest part of the movie for me personally because it answers just slightly too many questions a little bit too easily, the journey to get there was still worth the time and I think the ending might still work for others.
John Wick dressed in a Santa suit! Violent Night is an action thriller dark comedy. It lives up to it's name with lots of brutal violence, creative kills and lots of blood. The action sequences are well-made, inventive and over the top. The goofy dumb humor might not be funny for some but I thought it was hilarious.
The setup and introduction to all the characters was really well-done and it felt flawless. David Harbour is perfectly entertaining in the role of a killer Santa and Leah Brady as Trudy brings some heartfelt moments to an otherwise violent and bleak story - It was the perfect balance. The villains were mainly one-dimensional but very entertaining nonetheless. Their deaths were all well-thought and hilarious. I would of prefered less family stuff and a lot more of Santa's backstory... although it's fine if they're keeping that for a sequel.
My favorite part was the Home Alone for adults scene it's what elevated the movie to great for me. The movie did reference a lot of movies which i'm not too sure if it's a positive or not. I do think it should of been more of it's own.
Definitely one of the better experiences at the theater this year people were laughing a lot. Without a doubt a new Christmas classic I can see myself watching this yearly along with Krampus, they would make a great double feature together. If you're in the mood for an action packed silly holiday fun this is a real candy cane treat!
"It means your future hasn't been written yet. No one's has. Your future is whatever you make it. So make it a good one, both of you."
Great end for a fantastic trilogy!
With Back To The Future we had an amazing first film, a sequel could have been a problem. Is very difficult to make a sequel as good as the first film. That didn't happened with Back To The Future Part II, it continued to be amazing. Thinking about another sequel after two successful films is even more difficult and in my opinion Back To The Future Part III is indeed the weakest of all three but that doesn't mean that is bad because it was a very fun ride once again!
This time we travel back in time to the Old West that is portrayed beautifully. That atmosphere makes it different from the other two films, so it kinda looses a little bit of the 80's charm of the previous films.
In one hand, I really like the fact that we don't know anything more about what will happen to the characters in the future but on the other hand it makes me a little sad to see that the amazing Marty and Doc team will never cross each other again. Because we know that this is the last instalment of the francise, it's very interesting to feel the nostalgy that is very present throughout the film.
Back To The Future films are one of the most fun and amazing adventures that cinema ever saw and they will always be great classics. Robert Zemeckis deserves all the credits by what he accomplished with this trilogy.
A well-intentioned project by a stuntman himself spreading his passion for stunts and giving us a look into this undervalued job. The meta and behind the scenes aspect of the movie is interesting and it has a few impressive stunts that looked pretty hard to accomplish but not nearly enough and nothing that beats any records or anything. I expected an action movie based on the trailers and it's not really an action movie until the third act. It's more about "getting back with her" and if you're not on board with that being the only narrative, it's one hell of a boring watch. Not much of a story really, although it felt good when we finally introduce a villain in the second half.
My biggest criticism is the comedy, it's straight out flat! Ryan Gosling's charm drives every second of this movie (without him this movie is nothing), he's great with the slapstick humor and his timing is excellent but any dialogue that's meant as a joke is so flat. Emily Blunt was ordinary, any actress could have done the role. Great chemistry with Gosling though. The needle drops are all songs everybody loves so it deserves an applaude I guess, a real crowd pleaser. Also, never interrupt Emily Blunt singing again, the woman can sing! The third act redeems it a little with the action but I found it underwhelming overall. Definitely too long.
Everyone keeps suggesting there is a paradox concerning the 5D future humans and their ability to save humanity in the past. It's really not a paradox at all. Everyone assumes humanity survived to ascend to the 5th dimension but how could humanity exist in the future if not for the actions of Cooper.. who was guided by future humans (begin endless loop).
Did anyone ever consider the other important character in the movie? Amelia Brand carried on with the rest of her mission (thanks to Cooper). I postulate that Brand used the human seeds as intended and set up a colony. A colony that would thrive and eventually evolve beyond human. Thus Earth is of little importance, and may have indeed died. These colonists, and the generations that followed, would have been told the story of a great man (Cooper) who saved them from extinction. With the ability to manipulate space-time, they would pay homage to their hero "God" by helping him in the past so he may fulfill the mission most important to him, to once again see his daughter. Plan B worked beautifully. But the 5d humans, having the power to bend space-time, decided there's no reason why Plan A had to fail.
what i find truly beautiful about this movie is the way every single character shares the same exact view of themselves.
all of them believe that they are broken people, and there is no way of fixing themselves, that they are "past redemption"
yet, each and everyone of them expresses it in a different way through their actions and emotions
the protagonist is the most obvious, he feels that he is a monster, he doesn't want to go the hospital because he did all of this on purpose. he doesn't want redemption because he is trying to literally self destruct.
the daughter has no friends, and growing up in a broken family made her think that she is not good enough to even care.
the missionary believes that his stealing and smoking has put him past redemption, so he runs away from home desperately trying to find something that will excuse his actions.
the nurse was labeled as "the black sheep of the family", and eventually accepted this label as a true part of her persona
the mother never recovered from a broken marriage and ended up mistreating her daughter, being ashamed of how she grew up to be.
all this people really are the same, they just chose different way to cope with this ideology.
some chose to eat, some drank, some started looking outward for another person to "save", and so on.
But in end the message is all the same, you shouldn't give up on yourself because you are wrong, you do matter and it's not too late.
yes, you abandoned your child when she was just a child, and yet she still loves you deep down and wants you to be part of her family.
yes you have no friends and your family wasn't the best but that doesn't mean that you will never be worth anything, someone will love you.
yes, you stole and disappointed your father, but stealing a couple grand doesn't matter. Your family cares about you more that they care about a mistake.
I could go on but i think i got the point across. this is just a beautiful beautiful movie, it's really sad and honestly tough to watch at times because it hits hard, but it's definitely an experience that we should all have.
Rian Johnson is starting to turn into the white Jordan Peele. He's another one of those filmmakers that loves to work in this niche of subversive genre films that include a heavy dose of social commentary, and I'm all here for it. Specifically, with this franchise we’ve gone from satirizing old money with Knives Out to satirizing new money with this new film (chances are Knives Out 3 will center around a group of homeless suspects). Now, a lot of films in that same vein have been released recently (Triangle of Sadness, The Menu), but I think none of them do the satire as well as this film. To me it’s too easy at this point to simply aim your commentary at these people by making a statement about how stupid and incompetent they are. It seems like low hanging fruit to me, because everyone with a brain knows that these types are vapid and contribute nothing to society. Luckily, Rian Johnson understands this too and goes one step beyond that, filtering all of his commentary through this idea of the glass onion. These people aren’t just stupid and incompetent, but they’re using a veil of eccentricity and ‘complexity’ to hide that. This is a brilliant deconstruction that rings very true for today’s society, and of course you can’t quite escape the obvious parallel with Twitter’s manchild CEO firing himself this week. This subtext is woven into a lot of elements of the film (character, location, plot, even some props), which means that some things are a lot dumber and simpler than they appear to be. I think that will annoy some people, but I think it's quite clever. Like the first film, you get a great cast of colourful characters. Some of them are given depth, some of them are just playing funny caricatures. Daniel Craig owns the whole movie again, but Janelle Monáe comes pretty close to outperforming him. Even people like Dave Bautista do a great job, and it’s because Rian Johnson knows how to use these actors despite their limited range. There are plenty of twists you won’t see coming and the filmmaking is again terrific. It looks very cinematic with the blocking, lighting and compositions, and the score feels very 60s (lots of strings, some minor baroque orchestration), which reminded me of The White Lotus and a certain Beatles song. In the end, what puts it over the first film for me is the fact that the tone feels more consistent here. The more tense and dramatic moments of Knives Out didn’t really hit home for me when you have Daniel Craig doing a really campy accent, and this one just fully embraces that it’s a silly comedy. And it’s a great one at that, nearly all the jokes landed for me. Maybe could’ve done with a little less shouting from Kate Hudson, but ok, it makes sense for the character. Probably the most fun movie of the year next to Top Gun: Maverick, and definitely one of the most well constructed.
8/10
Pixar returns after a 1 year gap with this literal look inside the mind of a child, Riley. We see her emotions personified into Joy, Anger, Fear, Disgust and Sadness.
The initial few minutes of Inside Out set the scene out in a simple, easy to digest manner. We see Riley at her birth and the simultaneous birth of her simplest emotions, which take control of her. Memories are created and assigned an emotion, represented by a colour, then stored. It’s almost heavy-handed by Pixar standards but this approach quickly starts to make sense as the film goes on.
Everything goes swimmingly until Riley gets knocked for six with a move to San Francisco; a far cry from her native Minnesota. Her friends and interests all get up-rooted and she considers running away. Meanwhile inside, her emotions are equally out of whack as Joy gets knocked off the controls by a traumatic event.
What a beautiful, original, heartfelt piece of work this is. Docter delves deep into the human condition while somehow pulling off an entertaining family adventure. It’s best not to think too much about the logic of what’s going on; just like the real brain, the actual processes that create memories and personality are fuzzy and chaotic.
Inside Out isn’t afraid to make choices that will make people cry out ‘that doesn’t make sense!’. That’s because it has instead chosen to operate on a higher plane, exploring the reasons behind our actions and reactions to certain events, our motivations in life and dealing with trauma. If you’re worrying that they only picked five emotions to deal with, you’re missing the point.
The film runs mostly on metaphor, and with that it visits previously unexplored territory in children’s cinema. For instance the suggestion that sadness can often be what helps us through difficult times is not something that sells Minion toys in happy meals; but the film makers don’t seem to care. It’s OK to be sad. Sometimes it’s the only way we can feel anything at all.
There’s also a running commentary on how memories affect every part of our lives, from our current mood, our personality, to how we interact with other people. Docter manages to explain the importance of memories, and equally the importance of loading them with emotion. Simply by changing the ‘colour’ of a memory he’s saying that what one remembers is always defined by how one remembers.
The real stroke of genius is that these relatively complex themes are set to the bright, colourful backdrop of Riley’s mind. The set design and art direction are gorgeous and tie the whole thing together nicely. Pixar seems to be the only major animation studio that genuinely cares about how every frame looks, and here that attention to detail only adds to the film.
One other more ‘technical’ aspect that stands out is the inspired choices for the voice performances. These people haven’t been picked because they are big names, it’s because they fit the bill perfectly. Amy Poehler and Phyllis Smith play Joy and Sadness respectively and their work is a large part of what makes the film so memorable.
On a personal level, I found this to be one of the most fascinating, profound experiences I’ve had from a film. There is so much more to talk about, so much more to be uncovered, that I feel like I cannot do it justice in words.
Another smart, entertaining, emotional masterpiece from the studio.
A small-scale imposter / con man, making the rounds in 1950s New York, gets caught up in something much greater than his usual scam and decides to let it ride, if just to see where he winds up. In this case the answer is Italy, gorgeous vestige of the old world with just a few hints of the modern one, where he's tasked with convincing a flippant trust funder to return from a perpetual, fortune-draining holiday. That mission quickly goes by the wayside, just as soon as he realizes how much easier life is in the lap of luxury, and he merely exacerbates said money-letting as the wealthy playboy's new wingman. When things take a turn for the messy, though, his welcome worn thin and nothing to show for it but bittersweet memories, a panicked string of responses sends the entire comfortable lifestyle into a tailspin.
At its root, Ripley is an example of how fear and rejection can press a normally smart, affable person over the brink into monstrosity, a surprise considering the playful tone of the first act. Matt Damon, still fresh from his breakout in 1997's Good Will Hunting, shows great versatility in the leading role (essential for such a complicated character), smoothly masking that twitch in his eye from all but the viewing audience. It's one of those films where you'll feel wrong about your rooting interest, knowing all along that the guy absolutely does not deserve a happy ending, with the final moments serving as your comeuppance.
Denis Villeneuve is the man!
There’s only one word that came into my mind after watching it: finally.
Finally, a blockbuster that isn’t afraid to be primarily driven by drama and tension, and doesn’t undercut its own tone by throwing in a joke every 30 seconds.
Finally, a blockbuster that puts actual effort in its cinematography, and doesn’t have a bland or calculated colour palette.
Finally, a blockbuster with a story that has actual substance and themes, and doesn’t rely on intertextual references or nostalgia to create a fake sheen of depth.
Finally, a blockbuster that doesn’t pander to China by having big, loud and overblown action sequences, but relies on practical and grounded spectacle instead (it has big sand worms, you really don’t need to throw anything at the screen besides that).
Finally, a blockbuster that actually feels big, because it isn’t primarily shot in close ups, or on a sound stage.
And of course: finally, a blockbuster that isn’t a fucking prequel, sequel, or connected to an already established IP somehow.
(Yeah, I know Tenet did those things as well, but I couldn’t get into that because the characters were so flat and uninteresting).
This just checks all the boxes. An engaging story with subtext, very well set up characters, great acting (like James Gunn, Villeneuve's great at accentuating the strengths of limited actors like Dave Bautista and Jason Momoa), spectecular visuals and art design (desaturated but not in an ugly washed out way), pacing (slow but it never drags), directing, one of Hans Zimmer’s best scores: it’s all here.
I only have one real criticism: there’s too much exposition, especially in the first half.
It can occasionally hold your hand by referencing things that have already been established previously, and some scenes of characters explaining stuff to each other could’ve been conveyed more visually.
Other than that, it’s easily one of the best films of the year.
I’ve seen some people critiquing it for being incomplete, which is true, but this isn’t just a set up for a future film.
It feels like a whole meal, there are pay offs in this, and the characters progress (even if, yes, their arcs are still incomplete).
8.5/10
Barbenheimer: Part 1 of 2
This is the kind of film I really don’t want to criticize, because we don’t get nearly enough other stuff like it. However, mr. Nolan has been in need of an intervention for a while now, and unfortunately all of the issues that have been plaguing his films since The Dark Knight Rises show up to some degree here. Visually it might just be his best film, and there’s some tremendous acting in here, particularly by Murphy and RDJ. However, it makes the common biopic mistake of treating its subject matter like a Wikipedia entry, thereby not focussing enough on character and perspective. As a whole, the film feels more like a long extended montage, I don’t think there are many scenes that go on for longer than 60 seconds. There’s a strong ‘and then this happened, and then this happened’ feel to it, which definitely keeps up the pace, but it refuses to stop and let an emotion or idea simmer for a while. There are moments where you get a look into Oppenheimer’s mind, but because the film wants to cover too much ground, it’s (like everything else) reduced to quick snippets. It’s the kind of approach that’d work for a 6 hour long miniseries where you can spend more time with the characters, not for a 3 hour film. I can already tell that I won’t retain much from this, in fact a lot of it is starting to blur together in my mind. There are also issues with some of the dialogue and exposition, such as moments where characters who are experts in their field talk in a way that feels dumbed down for the audience, or just straight up inauthentic. Einstein is given a couple of cheesy lines, college professors and students interact in a way that would never happen, Oppenheimer gives a lecture in what’s (according to the movie) supposed to be Dutch when it’s really German; you have to be way more careful with that when you’re making a serious drama. Finally, there are once again major issues with the sound mixing. I actually really loved the score, but occasionally it’s blaring at such a volume where it drowns out important dialogue in the mix. I’m lucky enough to have subtitles, but Nolan desperately needs to get his ears checked, or maybe he should’ve asked some advice from Benny Safdie since he’s pretty great with experimental sound mixing. My overall feelings are almost identical to the ones I had regarding Tenet; Nolan needs to rethink his approach to writing, editing and mixing. This film as a whole doesn’t work, but there are still more than a few admirable qualities to it.
Edit: I rewatched this at home to see whether my feeling would change. I still stand by what I wrote in July, though the sound mix seems to have been improved for the home media release. It sounds more balanced and I didn’t miss one line of dialogue this time around. I’m slightly raising my score because of that, but besides that I still think it’s unfocused, overedited, awkwardly staged and scripted etc.
5.5/10
Bloodsport: “Nobody likes a showoff.”
Peacemaker: “Unless what they showing off is dope as fuck.”
James Gunn recently said in an interview that he finds superhero movies “mostly boring” right now. Anything ranging from safe and boring or technically well-made but disposable, at best. Gunn received at bit of heat from fans for those remarks, but in some sense, he’s not wrong. Because sometimes following the same formula will eventually wear fin and more risk taking needs to happen.
And here we have ‘The Suicide Squad’, the soft reboot to the 2016 film, but this time directed by Gunn himself, where he delivers a highly entertaining movie that is bursting with creativity and ultra-violence. James Gunn once again shakes up the superhero formula with a slick style. I’m just glad DC is finally letting directors have a voice and a vision, and I hope it stays like that.
The first 10-15 minutes tells you exactly what the movie is going to be.
I just can't believe we got something like this. It's 2 hours and 12 minutes long, but it's always on the move. It’s bonkers from start till finish, and I enjoyed every minute of it. This is probably one of the best shot movies in the DCU. The soundtrack is great as well and used effectively. The action scenes were insane and made the overall experience one of the most fun I had at the cinema in a long time.
A massive improvement over the 2016 film, AKA ‘the studio cut’, is that the movie doesn’t look ugly and isn’t chopped together by trailer editors. The movie is vibrant in colours that made it look pleasing to the eye. The structure at times is messy, and yet strangely well-paced, as there’s a lot going on.
Did I mention the movie is very gory? It’s cartoonish violence, or what people call "adult superhero movie", so it's not for kiddies or for the faint of heart. You would probably guess that not everybody on the team is going to make it to the end credits, so deaths are to be expected, but how certain characters “bite the dust” are so unexpectedly gruesome and brutal, it took me by surprise each time. The marketing for the movie was right, don’t get too attached. As I said before, James Gunn had complete creative control over the movie, and he doesn’t hold back on what he wrote and show on screen. But then again, it's a movie, it's not real, the actors who die on screen are fine in real life...I think.
All the cast members have equal amount of time to shine, and you like these super villains this time around, as each character had wonderful chemistry with each other. John Cena plays Peacemaker, who can be best described as a “douchebag version of Captain America”. An extreme patriot who will do the most horrific things for liberty. John Cena excels in the deadpan line delivery for comedic effect, but surprisingly enough, worked well in the serious moments. Looking forward to the spin-off show ‘Peacemaker’.
Margot Robbie once again nails the role of the chaotic but gleeful Harley Quinn. While the character isn’t front and centre this time around, more of a side character, but whenever the character is on screen, it’s instantly memorable.
Idris Elba plays Bloodsport, a contract killer who’s doing time in prison after failing to kill Superman with a kryptonite bullet, while also dealing with family issues, especially with his daughter. While the character may sound like Will Smith’s Deadshot from the 2016 film, but trust me, the execution here is much stronger. This is by far Elba’s best work in a while. Charismatic and a strong leading presence.
Polka Dot Man, played by character actor David Dastmalchian, a socially awkward, weird, and lame sounding character that has some serious mummy issues, which has a funny running visual gag throughout. However, because of Gunn’s writing and Dastmalchian's performance, the character is more than a joke, but a unique character to watch.
Ratcatcher 2, played wonderfully by Daniela Melchior, who brought so much warmth and heart to the film. I loved how they tied in her tragic backstory into the finale, as it honestly made me cry. And let’s not forget the king himself, King Shark, voiced by Sylvester Stallone. He stole every scene he’s in, because he’s so adorable and has such kind eyes, but when he’s hungry, he can be a killing machine.
The rest of the supporting cast, even in the smaller roles, still manage to stand out amidst all the chaos. I liked Joel Kinnaman as Rick Flag a lot more this time around, because the actor was given more to work with in terms of good material. Viola Davis is brilliant as the cold and ruthless Amanda Waller. And Peter Capaldi is always a pleasure to see. Also, I like the character of Weasel, who I can describe as a unholy offspring of Shin Godzilla and Rocket Racoon. He may not be beautiful to look at, but he's beautiful to me.
Like ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’, the movie has a lot of heart and I like how they took certain characters, who on page sound stupid and ridiculous but are handled with such love and depth, while also being self-aware of its own characterization.
You can literally watch this as a standalone movie and you won’t be lost or confused, as you don’t need to watch 22 other movies to understand it. This is by far the strongest entry in this jumbled mess of a cinematic universe.
Overall rating: Nom-nom!
Before explaining why I liked this movie, I'd like to point out that the main idea of the movie is NOT that you need find your purpose to have a happy life. It's the exact opposite! I'm not saying this just to be a professor, but because it's really important and that's why I loved the film so much. You don't need to be fixated about something to find a meaning in your life. You need to savour it and learn to enjoy the little moments instead of waiting for something big to happen to reach happiness. It's so profound and refreshing. A movie just about a guy waiting for his big moment and feeling fulfilled after having reached it would have been dull, boring, trite and most of all wrong, like pretty much all "self-help" advices.
Instead the opposite idea is presented and if you just pay attention to the dialogues -and the story, really- you'll understand what I mean and most importantly what you might apply to make your everyday life better.
But back to the movie I've got to say I almost cried as the end was approaching as much as I was going to turn off the tv when the movie started. The whole initial setting reminded me too much of Inside Out, a film I quite disliked, so I was worried it was a copy of it (it kind of is in the beginning). But luckily the second half steered away from it and developed in one of the most moving film I've seen in a long time. Undoubtedly one of Pixar's best.
Midsommar is a complicated beast. Those going for something as linear as Hereditary will be immediately disappointed by Midsommars somewhat convoluted plot elements and meandering pace. I sat in the cinema as the credits rolled by, deep in thought about what I just watched, and if it was any good. Nothing really sat well with me, and the film didn't really connect upon immediate completion, but I gave it time to digest.
Ari Asters two movies are very much at odds with each other. Hereditary slaps you with it's excellent presentation, pace, sense of dread and quality of acting on display. Then, upon further inspection, it's woven plot elements and symbolism shine through on subsequent viewing.
Midsommar is very much the opposite. The film almost dawdles in it's presentation and doesn't fully attack you with it's acting chops or narrative (although Florence is simply stunning in her portrayal of Dani). Midsommar more presents it's parts in a very matter-of-fact fashion, and then leaves it up to you to connect the dots of both the plot and what's on display. While there is far too much to unpack in this small comment section, I'd just like to detail some of my favourite themes on display in Midsommar, and why it went from a 6/10 during my cinema viewing, to a solid 8 - 8.5/10 upon reflection.
--- LONG DISCUSSION OF SPOILERS BELOW THIS POINT ---
One of Midsommars central parallels is the individualism/selfishness of Western life and it's stark comparison to the commune we are introduced to. Examples of this are: During the intro, Dani is going through the trauma of a suicidal family member and her boyfriend, Christian, is encouraged by his friends to abandon her in her time of need telling her to see her therapist as it's not his problem. Christian echos these sentiments directly to Dani about her sister, telling her to leave her alone as she is just doing this for attention. Upon arriving at the commune in Sweden, Mark is unwilling to wait for Dani to be ready to take shrooms. Josh, knowing of Dani's recent trauma involving death, subjects her to the suicide of the elders for his own thesis and research. Christian uses the situation to further his own academic efforts, much to the annoyance of Josh. Everyone is acting in their own self interest regardless of the emotional toll this takes on their friendships. This is a stark contrast to how we see the commune deal with distress, emotion and personal issues. When Dani sees Christian cheating on her, the female members of the commune bawl, weep, scream and cry along with Dani, literally experiencing her burden with her to lessen the load. As described by Pelle, the commune "hold" you during your distress, helping you cope and living through those emotions with you. This is further cemented by the scene earlier in the movie, shortly after Dani's sister commits suicide. We see Dani hunched over Christian's lap overcome with emotion, screaming out the pain of the loss of her sister. Christian is anything but present however, his eyes vacant as if he weren't there with her at all. This is possibly my favourite theme of the movie, as it really paints how alone we are in modern society regardless of how many people we surround ourselves with. How many people are actually there for us in our time of need? Sure, they might be physically present, but are they actually there, sharing our pain? It's truly terrifying to think about.
My other favourite theme is who is and isn't a bad person. I've seen many people online say they think Christian is a horrible boyfriend for how he treats Dani. While I can understand their position, I struggle to see how Christian is the bad guy for his actions. Christian finds himself in a dying relationship which he is mentally checked out from but decides to stay to help her through the grief of losing her parents and sister. Christian even goes as far as to bring her on vacation with him to help her through her trauma, even though he wants to split up with her. Would the audience have prefered Christian leave Dani right after she lost her family? That would have been MUCH worse. Do these actions warrant what happens to Christian? I don't think so at all. Christian is so misunderstood in this movie, I can't wait to see it again to draw more conclusions on his character. Is Josh a bad person for wanting to fully envelope himself in a foreign culture? Although we know it is largely for academic gain, Josh does seem to love learning about the culture of these people, wanting to see how they operate and know every intricacy of their faith. Does this warrant his murder for trying to document their sacred texts? Should an outsider be murdered for enjoying and absorbing someone elses culture and customs, or should they be thanked for their interest and passion? (Sidenote, I see Josh's character as a direct reflection of the usual racial stereotypes we see in movies of this ilk. Usually we see the white academic researching the savage native/minority tribe, but Josh is the exactly flip of this, which is a nice touch). Were Connie and Simon wrong for coming into another culture and expressing disgust at their customs? Should they have been so outwardly disgusted and vocal about their disapproval while being welcomed in by the commune? Sure it didn't warrant their ultimate fate, but this small subplot asks an interesting question about outsiders attempting to shape and alter other cultures and customs as it doesn't sit with their ideals.
Other small details:
While it's directly conveyed to the viewer that the red haired girl is attempting to cast a love incantation on Christian via pubes in his pie and runes under his bed, very little attention is given to the fact that Christians drink is a slight shade darker than everyone elses. From the tapestry we see at the start of the festival, we know exactly what the red haired girl has slipped into his drink :face_vomiting: Fantastic subtle horror/grossness.
Pelle talks about how his parents died in a fire and the commune helped him through the trauma of that loss. After the ending, it's pretty clear the fire wasn't an accident, and they evidently died for some kind of ritual.
Artwork above Dani's bed at the beginning shows a girl with crown kissing a bear. While direct foreshadowing to latter events, it also asks the question if this was all fate. Dani's sister's final message reads "I see black now" (potentially a reference to The Black One) before killing herself and her parents. Were Dani's parents 72 and this was the end of their cycle? Was Dani's sister already a distant member of the commune?
Runes are scattered all throughout the film to foreshadow certain character arcs or add more meaning. My favourite hidden rune is the doors to the temple, which when open, make the rune for "Opening" or "Portal". Amazing attention to detail.
Yeah, this movie is much MUCH better on reflection and I absolutely cannot wait to see it again. I really hope Ari's 3 hour 40 minute directors cut is released so there is more to dissect. While not as immediately impressive has Hereditary, Midsommar definitely has the layers and complexity to be a slowburn horror classic.
EDIT: I am now 4 days out from my first viewing and I've not stopped thinking about this movie. I've become a frequent visitor of the films subreddit and have even purchased/listened to the films dread-inducing yet somehow joyous soundtrack a number of times throughout the days. I've been reading up on runes and their meanings, reading up set analysis for hidden meanings and any other small details others can find. A movie hasn't vibed with me like this for a long long time so to reflect this, I think it's only right I bump my score from an 8/10 to a 9/10. When I can get my hands on the digital download/Blu-Ray, I'm sure this might even go higher.
So this movie premiered in Poland today and I just got home from the theater. I have two things to say: this is hands down the best installment in the Thor trilogy and it also definitely ranks somewhere in the top 5 MCU movies for me.
This movie was a wild ride from start to finish. The story was a ton of fun and so many things happened along the way, keeping you engaged at all times. While I do love slow movies that allow their scenes to breathe, the crazy pace of this one worked in its favor. There wasn't as much action as I had expected, but we did get some cool fights and general destruction. In the typical Marvel fashion, there were a lot of jokes and most of them were really, really hilarious. Some of the MCU movies try way too hard to be funny and I end up feeling annoyed at how many quips they cram in there, but in Ragnarok, the humor definitely worked. My personal favorites were the "Get help" scene, Thor's story about Loki turning into a snake and Bruce falling onto the Rainbow Bridge (especially Fenrir's reaction). Those had me laughing uncontrollably. And on the other end of the spectrum, there was quite a lot of emotional weight to both Odin's demise and the fall of Asgard. The movie struck a good balance between the two, keeping things exciting and light-hearted most of the time, but not being afraid to go a little deeper when the situation called for it.
As for the acting, Chris Hemsworth seemed to be really enjoying himself and while I'd often found Thor to be the blandest Avenger in the past, he had a lot more personality and charisma to him here. He was extremely likable and funny, but he was also the hero you rooted for throughout the movie. Cate Blanchett didn't get to do much as Hela, to my disappointment. She looked incredible and she did the best she could with what she was given, but in the end, the Goddess of Death didn't do much in terms of breaking the tradition of one-dimensional, evil-for-the-sake-of-it MCU villains. But she did at least seem to relish and enjoy her evilness. Tessa Thompson stole the movie for me. She was amazing as Valkyrie. She had wonderful chemistry with Thor and I like the idea of the two of them together, she's a much better love interest for him than Jane, but she was by no means reduced to that role here (thankfully!). She was a fully-fledged character with her own arc and personality. She was brash, badass and absolutely deadly in a fight while still having a more vulnerable, softer side and dealing with horrible trauma. She reminded me of Jessica Jones in that way. Watching her go from a drunken scavenger back to a mighty warrior ready to fight for her home and her king was a pleasure. I absolutely loved her and I hope to see more of her in the future MCU movies. Tom Hiddleston delivered as always, Mark Ruffalo was a great addition and Bruce's partnership with Thor was fantastic, and the supporting cast was also very good.
The soundtrack. Man, the soundtrack. 11/10, totally buying it. One of the best I've heard in a while.
The cinematography was gorgeous. So many colors, so many beautiful shots (the one with the Valkyries bathed in light riding towards Hela who was surrounded by darker colors? Holy shit, that looked like a baroque painting. Absolutely stunning). It was a pleasure to watch. The special effects were simply outstanding as well. Fenris/Fenrir was magnificent and let's just say I want ten angry, giant wolves immediately.
I had high hopes for this movie. The first Thor was pretty good, the second was meh (perfectly adequate, but painfully forgettable), but there was a lot of hype around this one and I really wanted it to be great. And it was! I had a blast watching it and I'd definitely see it again. Every standalone hero trilogy in the MCU so far has had at least one fantastic installment. Iron Man had the first one. Captain America had The Winter Soldier. Now, Ragnarok joins the circle. I'm very happy that it turned out as well as it did.
LIFF31 2017 #2
"Nature has cunning ways of finding our weakest spot."
There is no doubt how incredibly beautiful "Call Me By Your Name" is. Putting aside your age and sexuality, the film offers more than romance. It's not sad or tragic, but a peaceful one. It's all about falling in love. What's been said by many will be repeated here, so none of this is gonna be new to you, because it's all true.
Armie Hammer, Michael Stuhlbarg, and newcomer Timothée Chalamet all deliver terrific performances. Not a weak or unconvincing actor in sight. All of them were perfectly cast in the roles and there was no shred of doubt during the emotional parts. Especially Stuhlbarg monologue towards the end is as moving as anything I have ever seen.
The way Luca Guadagnino manages to play on your emotions and present gay romances is really mesmerizing. The warm and summer spectacle of Italy makes you want to be there. With the scenery, sunny waters, and the food which look so good, all through Sayombhu Mukdeeprom brilliant cinematography. It's paradise.
Even the sexual tension never once came across pornographic. I don't mind sex or nudity in movies and people seriously just need to stop being so sensitive about it. Ever thought that making little things a huge deal only makes it a huger deal. Or your sloppy description.
The sexuality in this film is more of an emotional connection you personally experience through the characters. And you don't have to be gay to enjoy those scenes. It avoids the typical tropes you find in movies that isn't as perfectly presented as this.
This is a truly special movie that I easily got lost in.
"I do worry sometimes I might just be entertaining myself while staving off the inevitable."
The Banshees of Inisherin is one of the saddest breakup movies since Marriage Story. Well...in the film, they are not a romantic couple, but Padraic (Colin Farrell) and Colm (Brendan Gleeson) were good friends, until one day their friendship ends abruptly, just because Colm decides that despite there being no bad blood between them, he does not like him anymore. The reason is: you are dull. In some ways, friendships are like relationships; it starts with the strong bonds you form with each other until that feeling towards them is not the same, and you no longer like/love them anymore.
I mean, everything was fine yesterday.
A strange occurrence that is not explainable but does happen. I believe it starts when one person changes while the other doesn’t. In the movie, Colm is a wise and articulated older man with an artistic ambition that he never acted on and never stopped to think about getting older. Living on a small remote island off the west coast of Ireland, where everybody is freaking boring and gossiping little bitches who love to stick their noses in other people's business and drama, because there is nothing else to do on the island. The movie does a fantastic job of giving you the impression that living on this rock slowly kills you on the inside. While being a supporting character, this is the dilemma with Colm. He does the same thing every day with his ex-friend, going to the pub at two pm and talking endlessly about meaningless crap and nonsense, and who knows what else happens the rest of the day, which is not that interesting, I assume.
The end of their friendship is hard to watch because it leaves the audience with everlasting pain. Brendan Gleeson is remarkable as the desperate and often cold Colm.
Despite what film Twitter tries to tell you, Martin McDonagh has yet to make a bad movie. In the same vein as Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino, whenever McDonagh makes a new movie, I am 100% there. Every movie this guy has made has been brilliant, and Banshees is no different. A dark comedy at its finest cause you know when things go so wrong to the point it gets funny. Well, Martin McDonagh's movies are like that.
The writing is superb and has plenty of dry humour. The film-making is not anything grand or flashy; some comment on how stagy it is, but I do not feel it needs to be a technical marvel. With that said, there are some beautiful shots of the landscape of Ireland.
Comparing his work in The Batman early this year and this movie proves that Colin Farrell is one of the finest working actors. His character Pádraic Súilleabháin is a dim-minded, polite man who, unlike Colm, has found peace and happiness in his daily life. Farrell brings a child-like vulnerability to the character, where everything he does or says can be funny and depressing. His character arc is incredibly heart-rending.
Pádraic sister, played by Kerry Cordon, another standout performance, and some of her line delivery has implanted itself in my head. Her character Siobhan is trying to find the ultimate purpose in her life, echoing the problems that Colm is facing, which the two get along like a house on fire.
Barry Keoghan plays Dominic, and out of all the characters in the story, he lives the worst life under his abusive father. Keoghan continues to be an excellent actor who is on a winning streak. The character of Dominic is a playful and childish man, but the tragedy of the character is that he is lost in this life and has nowhere to call home, often appearing at the most random of places during odd times.
The score from Carter Burwell immerses you in this story and contributes to the stunning visuals.
Overall rating: On paper, a simple concept of a friendship breaking up, but its approach to mental illness, kindness, art, masculinity, and our inevitable death was strikingly profound. At times, it felt like Shakespeare mixed with the Brothers Grim tale.
It is one of the best movies of 2022.
This is so bland and inessential, they might’ve as well put it directly on Disney Plus. Why are we investing 300 million dollars in an action/adventure flick starring an 80 year old grandpa? Look I have a lot of respect for Harrison Ford, but everything that’s wrong with this movie is connected to the larger issue of him and the franchise being way past their expiration date, so this never should’ve been greenlit in the first place. Nothing is offensively bad here, but it’s more a case of wrong decisions piling onto each other.
I understand Lucasfilm’s decision to hire a director who just delivered two crowdpleasers in a row, both of which were acclaimed by normies and snobs alike. Mangold understands what makes the world and character work, but he doesn’t get the soul. Right from the opening scene, the movie looks drab, underlit and generic. There’s almost no imagination to the set pieces, and some of the more impressive stuntwork is undone by poor effects work. Take the Tuctuc chase. Ford’s stunt double puts in the work for the wide shots, but when you cut to a close-up of characters in front of a green screen, you’re not exactly selling the sequence. It’s not going to stick on my brain, it’s too unremarkable. Again, what’s the point of making an Indiana Jones movie if there’s no viscera or imagination to the action?
Then there’s the story, which is also very by the numbers and low on risk. It feels like wheel spinning, which in theory could be fine (the Bond franchise got away with that for decades) but there’s nothing to hold my interest. Some of the new mechanics introduced during the third act I found to be underwhelming, and this is coming from someone who didn’t mind the inclusion of aliens in the last film. All of the new characters are boring and underdeveloped (especially the villain), despite the actors putting in decent performances. It’s quite funny how this suffers from the same problem as Furious 7, where villains will show up on the same location as our heroes despite there being no story reason for it. Occasionally there’s a brief fun interaction, or a fun set, or a good visual idea (like the final shot, for example), but that’s not enough to fill its bloated runtime.
4/10
As much as I wanted to like this movie, and ESPECIALLY not wanting to throw shade on Dave Bautista, I'm afraid the words of none other than Macbeth are the most fitting as far as a review of this enterprise goes:
A.O.D. is but a walking shadow, some poor players
That strut and fret their two and a half hours upon the stage
And then are heard no more: It is a tale
Told by idiots, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
That having been said, the REAL shame here is, that, with just a little bit of re jiggering, and a little less stupidity on the part of any one of the panopoly of characters, and, this could have not only been an epic movie, but, possibly a even a (2 or 3 movie) franchise!
Any movie that starts from the jump with nekkid zombie stripper ta ta's is a go for me, just on the "Hmmm, I ain't seen THAT before factor alone. Now, throw in Siegfried and Roy's zombified Manticore' , and, you're going to hold my interest. Add super quick and agile "rage zombies, and a mix of your usual suspect "shufflin' and bitin' " zombies, as well as a full auto Drax the Destroyer, and a crew of mangey former tier one operators, who served their country honorably, but per current SOP, were promptly shat upon by the country that they so dutifully served, then, give them a chance to for once not just even the score but come out ahead, and, you HAD the basis for a pretty decent horror adventure flick.
But then SOMBODY had to go and try to grow a brain, perhaps thinking they could be "edgy", and, instead of delivering a fun, intelligent live action "Walking Dead" (first few seasons only), they decided to suck all the common sense from EVERY characters brain, and then have each one of them suddenly go mute at the most inopportune times, when a word, a note, or even a cryptic whisper, could keep someone from becoming zombie snackos'. Now add to that mix, a teenaged girl with one of the most full blown cases of narcissistic personality disorder ever witnessed on film, and have her played by an actor who every time she opens her mouth you just want to backhand her and send her to her room with no dinner. But, she's also a master of either guilting her father (team leader Scott Ward) for doing something she later admits "he had to do", or, forcing him to let her accompany the squad, (to "rescue the aforementioned STUPID friend) by threatening to run off and do it alone anyway, which is a certain one way trip. So, welcome to mercenary baby sitting, Z/A style.
All is not lost though as there are some nice bonding moments between Zen "man some of the shizz I've done" Vanderohe, and newbie merc / safecracker Ludwig Dieter, especially when it is discovered he doesn't even know Zombie 101 basics. Raul Castillos' "Mickey" who at first seems to be either a You Tube poser, or just a bit crazy, then actually turns out to be an honorable guy. Samantha Joe's "Chambers" is a formidable street fighter, but, sadly , her heroic last stand is wasted when in the end, she got a case of the mutes, when she could have saved the entire crew with a shouted warning.
Nora Arnezeder is believable as Lilly, The Coyote, even if she does let little miss prissy teen smack her around a bit, for helping another of Kates IDIOT friends do something stupid, that, in the end, does not bode well for the entire team. Tig Notaro I guess is OK, especially since she was a last minute "digital" substitute for Chris D'Elia, who was unceremoniously cancelled and erased from the movie due to misconduct of the sexual kind. It's not seamless, but, it's not distracting either. But, she too, got hit with the idiot stick at the last minute, and, her indecision literally was catastrophic. In BOTH their story arcs, Snyder chose to plagiarize, er, uh, be "inspired" by ENTIRE SCENES from "Aliens", then "edgily" flip the script, by declaring opposite day at their individual conclusions.
The longest walk of shame, IMO, goes to Bautista's character Scott Ward, for being either too blind of just plain dumb, to not see through the machinations of neither his Japanese Benefactor, nor his henchman sent along to fulfill the ACTUAL goal of the "heist". But, in his defense, a couple hundred million dollars tax free, can buy a mighty dark pair of rose colored glasses, and, even though he can't see the forest for the trees, nor, apparently when the passion fires of his former flame have burst into a bonfire. Her end was so telegraphed, that even as it occurred, you weren't really shocked, just saddened. Just as his end, and the way it came about, had one waiting for the sound track to cue up Alanis Morrissette, but, perhaps they couldn't get a music clearance..
ONE final chance at redemption comes in the form of the epilogue with Vanderohe, and, it could have played out the epic revenge scenario, but, alas it was not to be, and he, along with any chance at a sequel, was D.O.A.
So, in conclusion, I don't dislike this movie for it's short comings, but, because of it's unfulfilled potential. It didn't necessarily have to be all happily ever after, but, as you watch it, and the idiocy starts leaking out of the characters, see if you can glimpse the great movie that COULD have been.
This was a great take on a dark past, bringing comedy and satire to the forefront, and I absolutely loved it! While being comedic, there are many emotional parts to the film, which I was rather surprised to see. One moment you're laughing hard, the next you're on the edge of balling your eyes out. I never would have expected to see a film quite like this done on Nazi Germany, it was very well made.
With this being Roman's first-ever professional acting job, I was incredibly impressed - he is awesome, and I certainly look forward to his next project(s). He was able to capture the rollercoaster of emotions, thoughts and feelings that may be going through a child growing up in Nazi Germany—who is being told who is okay and who is not—with ease. Taika never fails to please me with his work, and Stephen is a very funny actor. The way that Hitler was mocked through Taika really adds into the thought that not everyone is as strong as they are said to be. Thomasin brings in lots of emotion, and Roman just blows the film out of the park.
Seeing it for my 7th time, I think I'd probably upgrade this from one of the best films of 2019 to one of the best films of the decade.
I shall certainly be seeing this several more times, and I definitely recommend it.
Well, so I just saw this movie for the first time yesterday. Almost 40 years after it was released. A bit late yeah, but it never really seemed interesting enough to check out. And what can i say? To be honest, I expected the movie to be pretty bad considering how much praise it gets (usually in horror that's a sure sign it's only trendy to like it somehow). But I never expected it to be this bad.
The characters are just a big mess. The acting is atrocious and the casting choices are very weird. Everybody looks way to old for the role they play, and the dialogues are just some of the worst I've ever heard. My favorite being Laurie saying "was that the boogeyman?" which had me burst out in laughter. Great stuff. Anyway, none of the characters ever sound realistic in any way. And there is NO chemistry with any character and I mean zero. Michael Myers himself is just nothing special at all. The opening scene with him is pretty great tbh (when he's a little kid), but after that, it's all downhill, and we don't get to know anything about him at all whatsoever. He's truly lacking any character whatsoever. He doesn't speak or even have motives. He just goes around strangling people. Yeah very creative.
The story is among the worst I've ever seen. Almost not a single thing makes sense, and it becomes very slapstick at times. It is the perfect example of all the archetypes everybody hates in horror movies like "go randomly into the closet" and "stab the killer and toss the knife away afterwards and sit and wait for him to get up" or my personal favorite "just give him the car". The main storyline itself is extremely narrow and it truly feels random. For like 70% of the movie there are no real interactions of any kind between anyone and some overgrown babysitters just sees spooky things and gets killed in (extremely) predictable and stupid ways. There is a doctor too, but that part is so ludicrous that it almost seems to be for comedic relief. He's sure funny when he breaks out his doomy and gloomy speeches, I'll give him that. Especially when he's peeking on the kids from behind the bush. That was hilarious. The ending is atrocious too. Worst end sequence I've seen in a while. And that brings us to...
The directing is simply awful. Some shots drag out for a laughable long time, so much that it gets really awkward. And there is so much repetition too, and some parts that (I guess) is supposed to be scary just looks very funny. Like the times when Michael collapses. Or when they are being tailed by a car accompanying the "creepy music" for like the 5th time in like 10 minutes. The editing is poor also, like when Michael cracks the car window. And the movie is shot in such a way that not many scares are unexpected. It's a very predictable movie. Like the music will always let you know well before hand when something creepy is about to happen. Which brings us to...
The score is very amateurish and very often plain bad. Yes the main theme is kinda good, but not after you've heard it slapped on like 50 scenes. It starts to get funny after a while to always hear that tune. Not very scary.
Overall, the movie felt like a very bad low budget horror of it's time. But would it have been better back in the days? Hell no. It's a bad movie, no matter what time period it's from. It's just a very trendy movie, and now that I've finally seen it, I can safely say that I wasn't missing out on anything. Phew.
After seeing several people on SM recommend that it be seen in Spanish if possible, I waited until I could find a theater nearby that was showing it. I am estatic that I saw it in Spanish. It was an amazing treat to see it in the language that the characters would have spoken. The spanish language voice actors are all Mexican, giving the film it's final seal of authenticity that the english language is missing (though this is not a negative critique of the english language cast, but rather an extra treat of the spanish language version).
The film is a heartfelt tribute to the tradition of The Day of the Dead, part of the cultural heritage of Mexico and it's indigenous roots. The film shows the time and care the producers, writers and director took in staying true to and understanding this celebration as observed in Mexico, from the offerings to the dead, the significance of the vibrant marigolds, and the love and gathering with our ancestors and family.
Yes, Coco follows the tradition of all Pixar movies, with a focus on love, family and friendship. The difference this time is that it places Mexico, its culture and its people, at the center of the story.
Disney’s 2019 version of Aladdin provides us with pleasant surprises and a few hiccups along the ride on the magic carpet. Agrabah looks amazing, you totally feel the Arabian vibe and still is a city with more depth then in the original animated movie with more cultures mixed into one. Jasmine has a well written storyline which is not only fitting for the time we live in now, it’s also very in depth and gives her even more of an edge. She truly outshines the animated Jasmine. Mena’s performance is almost identical to the original. Great acting and good looks. Although I was more anticipated for the Genie’s performance, it was Jafar who surprised me, but not always in a good way. I liked this style and Jafar being younger and more appealing. Marwan showed us great acting by letting us feel Jafar truly is dangerous. What I missed though are iconic moments the animated movie showed us like turning into a snake, make genie lift up the castle and being the old poor man who tricks Aladdin into the cave of wonders, which wasn’t all that wonderous to me at all. The feeling of the cave popping up from the sand was something I really missed, the interior though is flawless and well put together. Aladdin started of stronger then it ended but overall, this new adaptation left me ‘Speechless’ thanks to its wonderful cast, set design and refreshing plots.
In 2008, i saw "Cloverfield" for the first time, i had no idea about what the movie was and a i didn't know i would love it, the simple script and the found footage style made as an imersive and amazing experience, i really enjoyed.
8 years later and the same producers come back with a semi-sequel, i guess that's how i can call this film, in january i didn't even know this movie was coming out, i tought it was weird cause they were using Cloverfield in the name, so i saw a small teaser and i was surprised that this film was totally different from the previous one. The filming style, the atmosphere, everything from the predecessor was gone.
New filming style (which by the way is a beautiful cinematography), new atmosphere, new characters, new story. Dan Trachtenberg's first feature film is just amazing, very competitive and stylish direction, everything works on this film, the simple script works along with the cast of three. Mary Elizabeth Winstead outstanding as usual, John Goodman on one of the best works of his career and John Gallagher Jr. i never saw acting but he surprised me.
The atmosphere created in the film is just great, caught my attention in every second, the shadowed cinematography and a very imersive soundtrack by Bear McCreary makes it almost perfect.
The third act rushes a little bit, and the ending may have some mixed receptions, i liked it. (Obs: don't watch the trailers, it may have too many information and ruin your experience).
10 Cloverfield Lane is one of the best psychological thriller movies of the decade, terrific and almost perfect. Go see it.
I've been a fan of Taylor's music for a long time but for a while I refrained myself from being too vocal about my support for her as a person, because it wasn't cool and we were all supposed to think this and that about her and if you didn't you were labelled all sorts of things, so instead of defending her i just didn't say anything, and enjoyed her music outside of that sphere of drama and controversy. But with Taylor it's really hard to fall in love with her music and not instinctively fall in love with her too, because everything that she is she puts into those songs, those lyrics, those melodies, so if you love her music then that means you love her, and i soon figured that out. The way she's grown and become more vocal about everything we all already thought she had in her is really inspiring and, in my opinion, what she needed to fully become an icon, because icons have to stand for something and help change history with their platform, which is music, which happens to be the wider reaching form of art there is in this world. I'm so so happy she's finally showing the world what she stands for, cus it's not hard to see that privately the values have been there from day one. I really never wanted this docu to end, i wanted it to have 3 hours. Fuck The Irishman, give me 3 and a half hours of Miss Americana instead.
First off, the technicals. I have no trepidation in saying this is the technically most impressive movie of 2023. The visuals are sumptuous, some stills are painting worthy. The fisheye lens, the discordant score, the absurdist and beautifully detailed environments...everything is operating at an extremely high level. Special shoutout to the title cards that split up each section of the movie. In particular, that last one will live rent free in my head. The settings are just perfection. From the very first shot of the movie, you know you are in for an audiovisual feast. Secondly, the performances. Really, this movie starts and ends with Emma Stone. In the most competitive year for Best Actress that I can remember, she is the winner. She puts everything into this character, not just from a physicality point of view but also the way that her facial expressions and speech patterns transform throughout Bella's journey. It's definitely centered around her, but the supporting cast does an admirable job (Mark Ruffalo specifically) in tandem with her. Third, the plot. I think, if I were to criticize the movie, this might be the one area. The movie is 2.5 hours long, and it does drag a bit in a few sections. I thought one or two of them could have been slightly tighter to keep the pacing brisk. I am doing this just to nitpick though because the other sections were brilliant, and I absolutely loved them. Finally, themes. This is a movie about liberation, and it tackles it across a variety of different avenues. Seeing Bella's journey of self-discovery was fascinating, and it was equally fascinating to see how often certain elements tried to contain it. Utilizing this madcap version of the world to really accentuate those competing forces worked. This is the best movie of 2023. Just FYI, this is not a movie you see with family. At all. It is explicit. Extremely explicit. And weird. And absurd. And so good.
Way better than it needs to be, or is expected from films like these nowadays.
It’s pretty much perfectly produced, and you can tell they really went the extra mile with these action scenes and their presentation, which paid off in dividends (great sound design in particular!)
They also wisely toned down the amount of cheese and propaganda compared to the first one, though it’s still there to some extent.
For example, you still get a scene of the main characters playing sports games in the Californian sunset, while a terrible One Republic song plays in the background.
The writing in general is a little basic. They found a good way to deepen Maverick as a character emotionally, and the new additions to the cast are all fine, but everything sort of falls into place in the way you’re expecting during the first 2 acts. Take the scenes with Jennifer Connely. She’s clearly trying very hard with what she’s given to do, but she’s ultimately just the obligatory love interest, making her scenes feel like filler. There are also a few too many times the exposition repeats itself, too many deus ex machinas moments, and there’s an arc that’s set up with Ed Harris’ character that’s never paid off.
It seemed like a scene got cut from the end that was meant to complete that arc, because instead you just get a quick montage to wrap up the other loose ends, while a terrible Lady Gaga song plays in the background.
The writing got a little more interesting in the third act, which is where the movie basically turns into Mission Impossible. Our main characters are given an ‘impossible’ mission, things don’t go according to plan, and Tom Cruise has to figure a way out of this. It’s a great formula that just works, with tension that’s constantly rising and a good sense of physicality.
Ultimately, the extremely well shot and edited action scenes are the selling point and most memorable part of this film. The movie around that is acceptable, but could’ve been more creative and tighter.
8/10
Watched it last night and his coolness is still fresh in my mind. John is just Wicked sick... LOL i had to say that. Storyline was pretty good, action packed all the way. It can get a little exaggerated cause he killed most of them with headshots but i guess that's what assassin's are trained to do, ruthless and deadly. There's just no room for them to f*** up their kills unless he wants to. The lady assassin looked pretty tough but sadly, it wasn't a long fight before he could end her. Of course i wasn't THAT surprised since the only one who was on par with John was Cassian and even he lost the fight.. I feel sad for John tbh, he left that kinda life, was forced to re-join it cause of the mark and now he gets f***ed over, and has to live a life in exile being targetted with a huge bounty on his head T-T. All in all, a really good show, has it's little funny moments on and off, serious moments, sad moments and of course the action part. I am looking forward to a part 3 cause i can't imagine how his life is gonna be after that ending. Love John Wick! :D
Once again, the actors doing impressions/playing against type is the best thing the film has going for it.
Jack Black stole the last movie, this time that award goes to Kevin Hart (first two acts) and Awkwafina (final third).
Having said that, the movie that's build around the impression comedy isn't as good, nor fun, as last time.
The story takes the T2 approach of making a sequel, i.e. switch the roles that everyone plays, and keep the story the same.
Unfortunately, the approach can't save the film from its own poor choices regarding the filmmaking.
The action in this is quite poor, to which some people will undoubtedly respond: well, it's supposed to be cheesy.
To be fair, I probably would've given a pass for it if there was an analog charm to it, but I just refuse to do that for lazy, digitized ugliness.
Moreover, the comedy isn't as sharp and witty as it was before.
Surprisingly, there's a lot of reliance on slapstick, which almost makes it feel like this was made for a younger demographic than the last one.
There's not a single scene that matches Karen Gillan's outstanding seduction scene from the previous film.
Also, there's a lot of expository dialogue that shouldn't be there.
Finally, the ending begs for comparisons to Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom , which makes me go: out of anything you could've done, why on earth would you willingly choose to go there?
4.5/10
Tarantino’s debut is still one of his best films. The opening sequence has been often imitated and referenced, but it does showcase Tarantino’s use of banter, natural dialogue and pop culture to bring his characters to life. Here it works well, immediately giving the audience a sense of all the important personalities within the film and the relationships between them. By dropping us into the aftermath of the heist, the film’s strength is in the use of flashback to build intrigue over what happened, but equally important is the hook that there might be an insider. This allows Tarantino to gradually develop his characters in the flashbacks beyond simply focusing on how the dilemma they find themselves in will be solved. Buscemi and Keitel in particular stand out and whilst Madsen has repeated himself ad nauseam in other films, he is still effective here. The soundtrack and costume design all serve to emphasise how hip and cool the characters are, but this is punctuated with the violence that remind us they are brutal too. Its this juxtaposition of coolness and violence that marked the film out as something different, no more so than in the still shocking scene of Madsen torturing someone. Some of the flashback scenes do occasionally outstay their welcome, though there is a lot of humour drawn out from them and the authenticity in his dialogue that Tarantino appears to strive for is sometimes stretched as characters vie to show who is top dog. But these minor quibbles don’t stop this from being a tightly edited and well paced crime thriller.
