More pieces of the puzzle but still no full picture developing.
It actually wasn't too bad. We see more of Q, which is a good thing given deLancies great performance. Concerning Q: Why would he rip himself of his own power in a scenario he himself created ? Doesn't make sense and suggest that someone else is involved ?
So, Laris isn't Laris but a supervisor like Gary Seven. That's an interesting angle that I hope get's further developed than just this short mentioning. I'm also getting some Edith Keeler vibes with Renee Picard in the sense that she was essential for the timeline. Interestingly Keeler's survival would have let probably to the same future as Renee not making the flight. Coincidence ?
The ICE storyline is hopefully done with and it was obviously just there to make a point. Let's leave it at that.
I don't like the Jurati plot because I don't like Jurati. And I'm dissapointed in how they used the Borg Queen so far. But that's just me personally.
Bringing in Brent Spiner as another Soong ancestor is a nice angle that, in a way, gives more depth. Althought I fear he's just a tool here. And Isa Briones finally got to make her appearance in this timeline, too.
One thing that pains me to say a bit is that it feels that Patrick Stewart seems exhausted in almost every scene he's in. It could be intentional in how he plays Picard as a fragile old man. I hope it is because otherwise it would mean it's too much for him. Which could be normal given his age but makes me wonder about his involvement in season 3.
I don't think I have ever been in love with a movie, like I'm in love with La La Land. From the first few seconds, till the very end. This movie had me and didn't let go. My english vocabulary is not good enough to express my love, heck, my dutch vocabulary is not good enough to express it. This movie is everything.
It is beautiful, happy, magical, romantic and I could go on for a little while longer but I won't. I wasn't expecting it to be this musical-y, but I mean, I love musicals so I'm not complaining. I think this is a great "musical" because there isn't non stop singing, so people who don't like musicals might like this one because it's more "subtle". I can only imagine how much practice went into all those dance routines and don't get me started on the impressive piano skills Ryan Gosling showed us.
Something that really impressed me as well was the way they filmed everything. It's a very creative and different way, which I really enjoyed and think makes this movie a great inspiration for those who love film and camerawork themselves. The build up and flashbacks and stuff were really cool as well. Yea I really enjoyed that. Also, the storyline, which does so much for a movie, was so great.
This is normally the part were I talk about the actors, but seeing that there were mainly only two actors and they were both amazing (I do think tho, that Ryan Gosling his character wasn't a very challenging one for him because we have seen him in roles like these before. Mixing it up with all the dancing, singing en piano playing though, you got something quite different and I loved it), I'm going to skip this part and say that you should watch this movie, do nothing more, just watch it, enjoyed it and love it.
Before I started watching this movie, I had high expectations. Reviews and friends told me to expect a real science fiction movie. I've been longing for a real sci-fi flick since "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Contact" and "Sunshine". I know people nowadays are calling fiction and fantasy movies sci-fi, but I rather tend to draw a dinstinctive line and emphasize on the word "science".
That being said, the plot is simple, but at the same time realistic. The movie tells the story of humans trying to survive in an utterly inhabitable place - space. It's a movie that will remind kids (and adults alike), spoiled by the strange education they receive through contemporary media, that not everything can be achieved by wishful thinking. Humans are not made for living in space. Every step off earth is a step defying nature. Is that bad or good? That's a decision everyone has to make for himself.
The visuals are stunning. I watched it in 2D and I plan on watching it again in 3D. The spectator has the feeling to actually be there.
At least as important though is the sound. Many filmmakers make the mistake of having sound in space. Of course that's totally ridiculous. The only sound there is, is the sound that's created inside of your space-suit or space-station by the shockwaves that hit it. Throughout the movie I had the feeling they got it right. And actually it didn't make the movie "empty", but quite the opposite, more tense. It intensified the feeling of "this is not a place where I belong".
There was one scene though, I thought wasn't right. When Bullock holds on to Clooney, Clooney should already have the same trajectory as Bullock or the station or he should bounce back. I just don't get what's still pulling him. I think it is a mistake in the movie and a serious one at that.
Anyway, I can overlook that, since the rest of the movie is very good. On IMDB it has a rating of 8.2 right now. I'd give it more like a 7.8. Maybe even less. I guess the rating is a bit high, because for young viewers it is a new experience to see something realistic on the screen.
Should you watch it? Yes, definitely. Should you rewatch it? Maybe, for the CGI and if you haven't seen it in 3D. Certainly not for the story.
“Can you guess what every woman's worst nightmare is?”
You know, I find it genuinely concerning that some people are angry and upset over this movie. I mean, just look on IMDB. Film is subjective and it’s OK not to like this movie, but the thing I don’t understand is why certain people are upset with the themes this movie appropriately presents. Even through deep inside I know why. If it scares them, good, because they deserve to be scared.
‘Promising Young Woman’ is a rare revenge movie that crosses several genres with one sharp sweep. Some parts are funny, other times it’s romantic, but it can get DARK really quick. I thought the way it was executed was creative and interesting. It shocked me at times with its twist and turns, even though it shouldn’t be surprising. The world can be so dark and treacherous that being surprised by its twisted ways is a bit foolish. Certain elements felt realistic, while other elements of the movie felt...well, like a movie.
It’s nice to see that Carey Mulligan’s career is getting better and better. In this movie Mulligan delivers an amazing performance that was captivating to watch. It’s difficult to imagine an actor playing a character who is dealing with so much emotional baggage and vulnerability from past events in her life, but tries her best to conceal it, but Mulligan manages to find the right balance. She can be extremely funny, emotional, and really intimidating. Her drunk acting deserves some praise as well, because within the movie her character pretends to be drunk in bars or nightclubs, to trick “nice guys” who want take advantage on her intoxicated vulnerability, before she drops the act to scare them enough to teach them a lesson. The transformation from drunk to sober was nothing short of impressive.
I was surprised to see Bo Burnham here and it’s great seeing him getting acting roles. He is a man of many talents; comedy is one of them and in this movie he never fails to make me smile. Alison Brie and Alfred Molina are also in this movie and both did a great job in their small roles.
I give this movie major credit for being unpredictable. I would sometimes try to guess where the story might be heading, to only have the rug pulled right under me.
It was an interesting choice to cast likeable actors in the roles of predators and despicable people. The movie smartly suggests that people like these can easily hide their sinister side through a fake smile and popularity.
Now I’m being vague about certain things because I’m hoping what I’ve said so far might boost your interest in checking this one. I’m starting to do that now, going in blind and leaving impressed (hopefully).
Director and writer Emerald Fennell did a solid job on delivering a fresh and unique take on a brutal topic with extreme care on the subject matter. This is also her direct debut and everything I’ve seen on screen shows great potential for her as a filmmaker in the future. The look of the movie has that candy-like colour to it, which made the movie look visually appealing to the eye. Revenge has never looked so colourful.
Without spoiling the ending for the movie, but the way it concludes is very strange and rare. I was both sad and happy at the same time. However, it can also make or break the movie for some, while I was kind of mixed on it. Some parts of the ending were realistic, as it was a cold reminder for us that sometimes justice isn’t always severed.
Unfortunately, this is where my issues start to come in. When I said some parts of the ending was dark and realistic, well to me it didn’t quite commit to that with the last few minutes of the movie. I just wished they took more of a real approach to conclude the conflict that could be plausible. I also thought the movie was a little on the nose with its social message at times.
And that’s really it for issues. What, you expected more? Surprise!
Overall rating: Revenge is best severed in confetti and rainbow colours.
[6.8/10] I’m in no position to say how accurate Homeland is when it comes to the life of a spy. But I have to imagine it’s a hard profession to make friends in. You are in the business of deception, of misdirection, of fooling people to further your own ends, so how could you then turn around trust the people in the same business. How do you know that when your interests aren’t aligned, they’ll use those same abilities on you?
“AltTruth” seems to be playing on the recent Trumpian notion that facts are slippery and malleable. It features plenty of the major players thinking they have a hold of the truth, and having the rug pulled out from under them. It has them doubting who their allies are, questioning whose side everyone is on, with real serious consequences. It raises the question of whether, in a world of spies, you can trust anyone else, or even your own paranoid instincts.
The turns come fast and furious here, the most notable of them being Javadi flipping on Saul when he realizes that his erstwhile partner is on the outside looking in of the intelligence apparatus. When Saul gets him in front of the President Elect, Javadi is suddenly spouting Dar Adal’s party line, telling Keane that there is, in fact, a parallel program, confirming the line of B.S. that Dar has been pitching to her for a long time now.
It is a twist, and a mildly shocking one, but also unsurprising. Javadi was never a true believer, and as much as Saul wanted to believe that Javadi wanted to preserve what they’d built, that they were brothers in arms and not just strange bedfellows, Javadi was also first and foremost interested in saving his own ass over any larger cause or sense of loyalty, which is part of why he became an American agent in the first place.
Because Javadi sees that the winds have changed, and that his best ticket out of this situation is to hit his wagon to Dar Adal. It is a betrayal of Saul, after Saul stuck his neck out for Javadi several times, and it’s cravenly mercenary, but it’s also smart. Who knows if Saul could deliver what he promised. Who knows if Dar wouldn’t just take Javadi out using the same guys he’s been employing as of late. They’re in a business where friends cease to be allies and allies cease to be friends because the power has shifted, and Javadi recognizes that.
Hell, even Carrie recognizes that when she spills the beans about what she’s uncovered and admits that she didn’t know what side Saul was on. He’s certainly been Dar’s pal and running buddy before, and put pressure on her not to advise the President Elect, so it’s not crazy to think that Carrie’s own closest ally in the agency might have been working against her, whether he knew it or not.
But the biggest case of mistaken truths, false hunches, and terrible consequences is Quinn and Astrid. Quinn is paranoid, finding a gun, his papers, and various attendant facts about this wonderful lake house where he can somehow stay indefinitely and begins to realize it doesn’t all add up. He sees a familiar guy skulking around the grocery store; he knows Astrid’s been in contact with Dar Adal, and he thinks something’s fishy.
The neat thing about the story is that he’s not wrong, even though he’s completely wrong. When he stalks whom he thinks is the guy from the grocery store, he knocks out the wrong man. And before that, he thinks Astrid is there to take him out, that she’s untrustworthy. In a charged, skin-crawling scene, he interrogates her, berates her, and hits her. Brain-damaged Quinn has had a woman-beating problem, and it’s uncomfortable as a well the show goes back to. But still, given the history between these two characters, what’s most affecting in the scene is the way he tries to wound her emotionally, telling her they were never friends, just lonely people who had sex.
He doesn’t know who to trust anymore. He thinks Carrie betrayed him. He has reason to believe that Dar has betrayed him, even if he gets the methods wrong. And thanks to Dar’s little talk with him (plus, you know, a lifetime of trauma) the seed has been planted for him to think that nobody would help him just out of the kindness of their heart. He believes that they must have an angle, and tragically, it leads to him contributing to death of one of the few people who really did just love him.
Unfortunately, that’s also where the episode just gets silly. The show has always been a bit hit or miss about these big action thriller set pieces. (Lest we forget Carrie’s serial killer run-in with the terrorist mastermind in Season 2.) This is no exception. It’s a shocking, if cheesy moment when Quinn is shot by (presumably) Dar’s goon through the window of the house. Suddenly, the whole thing gets unrealistic, with people surviving bullet wounds easily and lumbering around to get into combat situations with the guy.
On top of that, the trick with Quinn taking the bullets out of the gun is a little too neat. Sure, it sells the main story and theme of the episode -- people mixing up who their enemies and their friends are in dramatic ways, but it just reeks of a lesser show, one more devoted to ironic twists than theme. It’s Homeland at its most pulpy, and that has always been a mixed bag for this series. Giving Quinn another miraculous near death experience, one where he can hold his breath and evade gunfire despite being grazed and suffering from mental and physical disabilities strains credulity. It brings down an episode that was already on shaky ground.
But it does work with the larger leitmotif of the episode, including the scene that opens the episode, where the Alex Jones analogue is doing a takedown of President Keane’s son. With creative editing and commentary and tinseltown gloss, somebody who was trying to save other can be painted to look like a coward. The line between a hero and “the opposite of a hero” can be incredibly hard to discern, even for the people who were on the ground. And when somebody is offering you envelopes full of cash, or guaranteeing your safety, or ensuring you’ll continue to get to do things your way, it can be very easy to throw the heroes under the bus, with innocent people suffering along the way.
Suddenly my new-favorite-drama (not anymore:sob:) became shit. The last 2 episodes ruined everything... was so unfair, so unnecessary and no sense. It hurts.
During the whole show Jiho was kinda sincere about how she felt (not always, sometimes were so immature...) but now she's so cruel... how can you leave somebody for so long and came back like nothing happen?
Was that cliché really necessary? Why Koreans think about love as something unconditional and everlasting? You can leave me for years and I still love you? You can hurt me and nothing happen? There is not consequences? Is okay to hurt somebody just because "you love him"? Just because you "wanna know what you want"? You cannot just talk as human beings? As adults?
Those chapters weren't a good idea. They don't work, not with the history we saw the first 13 episodes. So unfair... I'm so sad.
This show have an important message for korean society, at the beginning feminism was clearly present... and it also was so funny. WAS SO STRONG WITH IT PRINCIPLES. SO CRITICAL BUT FUNNY AT THE SAME TIME. WHY YOU HAD TO RUINED IT?????? WHYYY
...
and somebody doesn't know how to use properly shows' soundtrack. You cannot play lalalala song during the most sadness scene, you f*ck1ng 1di0t.
I think I’ve fallen in love with Korean Romantic Dramas! This is the third I’ve watched this month and I’m looking for a fourth when I’m finished writing this review. Fortunately, Netflix has a great deal of them.
This series started off slow for me, mainly because the two main characters have dramatic character arcs and they start off in a very different place than they end up. Where they end up is predictable but the journey is nuanced and well written. The leads were well cast and well performed, you kind of gradually fall in love with each of them through their journey, not just to one another, but to themselves. In many ways this is an ensemble story, about a community where each have wonderfully well written, unique character arcs. The acting is very good. There are moments of loss that break even the hardest heart and moments of joy that sweep you up in the moment. The setting is spectacularly beautiful, really almost a character in itself. I started off giving the episodes a cautious 6 or 7, but the last 3 episodes are solid 10s. I give the whole series a 9 (superb story telling) out of 10. [Romantic Drama]
As the many professional reviews I read afterwards suggest, Fatman is a movie that doesn't live up to it's promise.
Fatman has a great premise about a gruffy slightly gritty Santa, a boy-child that feels wronged with his lump of coal and a Santa-obsessed hitman hired to kill him. I even think for the most part that tonally it mostly works. It's not overly gritty and it's not overly serious for most of it's runtime. It strikes that nice balance of casual surrealism.
The problem is that the movie knows what it wants to tell you and doesn't have any patience or subtlety in getting there. All the dramatic tension you expected from the trailer when you hear Mel Gibson's Santa yelling to the hitman about "You think you were the first to come for the Fatman?" the movie doesn't actually have much Fatman hunting. There's no series of hide and seek where we see that Santa is capable of defending himself. Even the tension the movie decides to try to generate of the Hitman even trying to FIND Santa in the first place isn't really tension. It's just a road trip without all the fun aspects of a road-trip movie. No interesting stops, No interesting road people. The movie just walks a straight lines from Point A to Point B. Nothing you see even really matters. Santa goes by Chris in this movie. In this small down he knows everybody and everybody knows him. There is however no payoff for this. He saves a woman from going home with a married man by casually reminding him of his wife and kids but while we see her again and she's clearly a friend there's no payoff. It's like a failure of the Chekhov's Gun trope.
There's a semi interesting plot line about Santa being underfunded and having to take a military contract to be able to pay his workers. In retrospect this entire plot line fails to have any narrative purpose other than world building Santa as a factory owner. In spite of their presence all over the final fight scenes these military security personnel plan next to no role in the violence. There's an even smaller plot line about Chris/Santa being grumpy because of his commercialized depictions compared to this underpaid status and while I like the characterization there it serves so little point to the plot that it feels kinda wasted.
Wasted is unfortunately the only way to describe this whole movie. I went into this hoping for a darkly humorous film with a bit of violence and while a lot of the scenes sans context imply that, this is no Ladykillers (either one).
After watching Nomadland I could see how some people would just stop watching after the first third and never go back to the film, likewise I could see how what is played out in front of you gets under your skin like a favourite song.
For me Nomadland is a poem made into a visual feast. Casting Frances McDormand was obviously a coup for director Chloe Zhao who likes to point the camera at real people, film, and then edit down until it is something palatable. McDormand is just the actorly glue that holds the film together and the perfect actor to play a natural role. No showboating, she just looks and behaves exactly like the ‘real’ nomads featuring in the running time. Most of those on the screen with exception of David Strathairn and France McDormand are exactly as they are in real life. Swankie is still alive and well, and she does what you see during the runtime in her own non-filmed life.
If the film has a noticeable fault it appears to show that this tough life on the road in the USA seems to have been somewhat romanticised because it does not take a huge stretch of imagination to realise that even on a good day this is a tough, tough life, with a social security system that does not care, a private health care system and open hostility to people without homes one can imagine every day is hard work. This is not shown to any extent in Nomadland.
For me the film is not there to show these points but more about the ornery, tough character of Fern who is resilient, tough, and self-reliant. She certainly is not painted as an angel of compassion and understanding but as we all can be be – many points between kind and mean. Life has thrown some awful brickbats at her, ending up with her being on the road and needing no one, it has battered a lot of love and feeling out of her to the point where she is incapable of real love, having close friends or even relaxing to a full extent. When her husband died, then Empire the town, she did too but carried on living.
The vistas are both beautiful and sparse and certainly seem to say that travelling up and down the USA in a minivan is not so bad. I’m not convinced. For me the people throughout the film are hanging on to their broken pasts and not wanting to move on up the road but instead just travel the road, almost an easy way out that ironically is not easy.
Fern visits her empty house and town at the conclusion in the most emotionally strong scenes in the movie as the desolated town and her old home sit empty and dusty perhaps a metaphor for her soul and life, perhaps the soul and life of the USA?
It is both sad and beautiful and if you do not fret so much about the story, the apparently ‘whitewashing’ of the hardships what you see is a beautifully made, mournful poem.
That’s the way I see Nomadland and if you know me from my presence on t’Internet then you know I like this type of approach.
I recommend Nomadland, you will either love it or hate it – but it will make you feel something.
I should preface this review by saying that, based on the rave reviews of friends (and strangers), I looked forward to seeing this movie, so, it has a faithful fan base who were of the opinion that the movie full justice to the book. The story was interesting (I was forewarned that tissues might be required). I truly believe that there is not another actor that better portrays the complete, self-sacrificing devotion of a man for a woman than does Milo Ventimiglia (I've believed in him since Jessie in GILMORE GIRLS). Amanda Seyfried is a harder sell for me, though, so that prejudice may have soured the love story for me somewhat. I did, however, learn a lot about racing and driving. The author certainly knew his stuff and was expert in spinning it's metaphors. The love of a man and the devotion of a dog were winsome. The treachery and heartbreak were moving, so the magic was not totally lost on me. I give this film a 7 (good) out of 10, and if you need further encouragement to see it, my bookish friend has told me, “Nancy, I would give it 11/10! I went to see it again. For me, it was about Enzo, the dog who wanted to be "people" and the incredible bond between dogs and their families.” So, there you have it! [Drama]
When did you last go to a movie in which the audience applauded as the credits rolled? (It is not a typical Canadian response.) Behind me, a young female law student was weeping. As I sat there, I was deeply and intellectually moved by the power of this woman's life and the subsequent effect she has had on our lives, on my life, and I had been totally unaware of her. Let me put that in context. Although I am 20 years younger than RBG, her litigational years were my culturally maturing years (college, university and entering the work force). That was the culture of my years, her years, and I thought I knew the seminole personalities of my time but I had never heard of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Indeed, until these past two years (in which she has gained a rock-star like celebrity) I had no idea of her influence on my life. This movie (and the excellent documentary, RBG, which, on the recommendation of other movie goers last night, I watched as background for this review) have now convinced me that I would not have been allowed to be the person I have become had she not addressed the legal restrictions of gender in the law of the United States that undermined a global sense of personhood. I am Canadian, so these were not my laws she changed, but the culture of the civil rights struggle in America was not lost on us. My maturing personal ethic of the time, cradled by my faith in a just God and a loving, growing relationship with Jesus, was not of feminism but of the rights of every person to live under a judicially just system and in a compassionate and culturally rich society. I appreciate now that this was the justice for which RBG challenged her legal system. Thank you, Mimi Leader and Daniel Stiepleman for telling her story. Now, concerning the merits of the movie, itself: The cast is superb and the performances of Felicia Jones and Armie Hammer were deep and warm. I was also impressed by how the role of young Jane Ginsburg, adeptly performed by Cailee Spaeny, gathered in the emotional climate of the time. Wonderfull cameo performances. The cinematography and soundtrack brought a sense of grandeur and the costumes a sense of style and subtle class. I give this movie a 10 (important) out of 10. [BioPic]
The soap opera writers that have been put in charge of this ,once revered, franchise continue to distort and abuse the long and beloved history of Star Trek canon to subvert it to their own hand. In past seasons we've seen that Burnham was the reason Spock became who he was, we've lost beloved characters who have rejected everything they were before, Romulus was blown up and now we don't even have Vulcan anymore. Whatever reason these "writers" might have to do this is beyond me but it should be clear by now that it's malicious. Their ilk have destroyed 50 years of canon on Doctor Who, destroyed Star Wars and pretty much done the same to Trek. If rumors are to be believed they will soon include the Guardian of Forever and possibly deliver the final blow to Star Trek.
To the people defending this soap opera dribble... Well I don't know what to say to you. Character development, plot and the concept of coherent writing are cornerstones of anything that's good. These writers can't even keep track of events in the same episode let alone use a massive overarching storyline or how to benefit of over 50 years of worldbuilding.
It's disgraceful really what they have done and they should be ashamed of writing something that is below mediocre. But that appears to be modernday "entertainment" and by god... I hope it bites them back in their ass cause we'll all be worse off if it doesn't.
[7.8/10] In many ways, this is the kind of LWT episode I've missed. There's a good main story covering something I was faintly aware of but did not know was deeply in need of reform -- namely rehab facilities. The idea that these entities are not only scarcely licensed or otherwise regulated, not only that few offer evidence-based treatment, but that there's severe difficulty in getting independent info on whether they're good or bad is eye-opening. I'll admit, the humor was more hit or miss in this one, but it was a great mini-expose on the clear problems with the industry.
My only beef is that, unlike a lot of the best LWT segments, there was no suggestion as to the best or clearest path to reform, but at least the show did offer advice on what to do in case you or a loved one needs treatment for addiction, which is certainly important too.
The other segments were solid-to-okay. I appreciated the quick but piercing dive into why John Bolton putting the prospect of a Libya-style denuclearization out there is counterproductive to talks with North Korea. I continue to grow weary of the "aint local news anchors stupid" material. The stuff about the royal wedding was fine, but easy -- kind of like a video buzzfeed article.
Overall, the main segment shouldered most of the load on this one, but it was quite good and the type of story that I come to the show for.
Sigh This film could have been so good. And yet...
Let's start with the pros. Lily James shines as badass zombie-slaying Elizabeth Bennett in a version of the character that feels very fresh and contemporary. Uninterested in finding a husband, this incarnation of Lizzie is much more concerned with the more pressing matter of the recent zombie outbreak. With no patience for polite society, she openly expresses what she thinks and takes out her frustrations by hacking at bushes with a sword. A standout moment involves the iconic confrontation between Lizzie and Darcy after he proposes - but this time the fight involves literal hand-to-hand combat.
Some other standout characters include Matt Smith's hilariously bumbling Mr Collins and Lena Headey's intimidating one-eyed zombie-slayer Lady Catherine, though Sam Riley didn't feel quite right as a snarling, leather-clad Mr Darcy. However despite some interesting and original characterization, the script as a whole left a lot to be desired, full of awkward dialogue and poorly developed plot-lines.
Too ridiculous to be considered a drama but not funny enough to be considered a comedy, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies sits awkwardly between the two. It strikes an uneven balance between the zombie plot-line and the period romance, with neither feeling fully realized. Without sufficient development, events such as Wickham running away with Lydia feel very sudden and random and the romance between Elizabeth and Darcy never quite comes off - due partly to a lack of chemistry between the two lead actors and partly to poor writing.
The overall result is a confused mess of a story centered around an unconvincing romance and a lacklustre action plot. A great concept poorly executed; I'm sad to say this film is another title to add to the long list of mediocre Jane Austen adaptations.
[5.8/10] When watching Discovery, the easy route is to compare it to prior Star Trek series and films. Between the continuity nods, the classic characters popping up here and there, and some of the usual Trek rhythms, it’s natural to think of the latest show in the franchise in relation to its predecessors.
But “The Wolf Inside” is one of those episodes that reminds you that no matter how many familiar sound effects we here, no matter how neat it is to Mirror Sarek with a goatee like his son would eventually sport, Star Trek Discovery is a show that’s taking its cues from the most buzzworthy hits on cable television -- The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones -- more than it’s pulling from its space-bound forebears.
As I often say, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that necessarily. Despite rumblings about ousted creator Bryan Fuller’s ideas for the show, it was likely a pipe dream that CBS would revive Star Trek and keep it the same as it was when the franchise last left the airwaves. (Though perhaps the existence of The Orville suggests it wasn’t impossible.) Star Trek was very likely going to need to be updated for a new era of television, and it’s understandable, if not terribly original, that the powers that be, and the studio bankrolling it all, would want a show that emulated the biggest hits of its competitors.
Selecting Sonequa Martin-Green as the lead character is a canny choice, but also a clue where the show’s braintrust was at. One of the biggest issues with The Walking Dead is clunky, overwritten dialogue that spells out the theme for anyone not paying close enough attention to get the show’s otherwise flashing neon signs of theme.
In this instance, that’s “how do you hang onto who you are when the world around you is harsh,” a very Walking Dead theme. You have it in Burnham’s voiceover in the beginning of the episode, you have it in overdone exchanges between characters, and any number of other scenarios designed to let you know that this is what they’re getting at.
And hey, it’s not a bad theme for a Star Trek episode where you’re trying to infiltrate the Mirror Universe undetected. The notion of becoming the mask, of having to pretend to be someone for so long that who you’re pretending to be seeps into who you really are, is a good concept. It’s just dramatized in a blunt, tedious, and even dumb way.
For example, Burnham is ordered by the Terran Emperor to destroy a rebel colony. When told by Lorca that she needs to do it to maintain their cover, Burnham pushes back, and says that no matter who she’s pretending to be, she’s still a Starfleet officer, and she doesn’t want to kill people if she can avoid it. That’s admirable, and an interesting dilemma to play.
The problem is that her solution to this is to try to infiltrate the rebel camp, hoping she doesn’t get killed on sight, and bringing her friend who’s been acting erratically for a while now. It’s a stupid, stupid, stupid plan, one that only works because the plot needs it to work. Sure, it’s cool to see rebel leader Voq, and get our first look at Discovery’s Andorians and Tellerites, but mind meld or no mind meld, it’s a big dumb risk to take, especially when Burnham has the info on the U.S.S. Defiant she needs.
Her reason for taking that risk is even dumber -- she wants to ask Mirror Voq how he managed to unite different species, especially the Klingons. Sure, maybe that’s an interesting question, but it’s not like he’s going to have some magic formula that will tell her how to get the Klingons in the prime universe to accept the Federation. (Right now, my bet is that eventually they take Mirror Voq back to the Prime Universe, where he manages to start the movement of Klingon tolerance for the Federation.) True to that, when pressed, Voq basically says, “we united because we had to -- the Terrans were wiping us out.” It’s not especially complicated, and certainly not information worth risking your life for.
It doesn’t help that we’re only two episodes in and the show is already stretching the Mirror Universe concept a little thin. Let’s be honest, the Mirror Universe was always a kind of silly concept, and the problem is that Discovery wants to be a more serious show than the outsized Original Series was. That means it’s harder to write off convenient coincidences like that everyone Burnham knows is in some plot-relevant, position of significance.
Bits like the reveal that Georgou is the Emperor, or the convenience that Voq is the rebel leader, don’t really hold up to the scrutiny of the law of unintended consequences, where one significant change would beget others, rather than just leaving things mostly the same but with an evil flip here and there. That sort of tack is forgivable, even enjoyable, in the four-color tones of the original Star Trek, but feel goofy and convenient here.
That might be easier to swallow if the nuts and bolts writing were better. Again, the dialogue here is repetitive and often painful, full of banalities and pseudo-philosophical ramblings that fail the smell test. The episode is also aping Game of Thrones and its big twists and betrayals and reveals. There’s a fake out with Lt. Stamets’s death under Tilly’s care, with the hint that Stamets Prime being injected with spores just gave him an invitation to the Interdimensional Council of Reeds (or Ricks, if you prefer), which comes of cheesy rather than cool.
The most significant reveal is that Ash Tyler is really Voq prime, having been made human a la “The Trouble with Tribbles.” In principle, it’s a perfectly fine twist. The show set it up well enough; there’s past precedent for it in the franchise, and there’s juice in the notion of Burnham having to balance out someone she loves with someone she hates. But the show had just been hinting at this reveal for so long now that it comes off anticlimactic. The stilted Klingon Speech doesn’t come off well when Tyler has to speak regular english instead of denture-assisted roughian. And overall, it’s just underwhelming when all is said and done.
It’s not all bad. While a little predictable, the episode sets up “death by transporter” well enough to subvert it in a clever way with Tyler at the end of the episode, and transmit the Defiant info in the process. The interactions between Burnham and both versions of Saru are more revealing and emblematic of the show’s themes than all the hamfisted dialogue in this one. And Lorca admitting that his judgment may be impaired by his torture, and his sense of someone who’s putting on a steely facade but just barely holding things together.
But overall, “The Wolf Inside” is too on the nose with its themes, too skimpy on using those themes to craft a story that’s compelling and makes sense, too committed to clunky dialogue that drags the whole enterprise down (no pun intended), and too enamored with those wild twists that keep Game of Thrones in the news. I’ve enjoyed Discovery so far, but this episode was a reminded that it could use a scaling back of its efforts to ape its high-class genre show brethren, and more efforts to just be Star Trek.
3.5/10. This was, if you will pardon my french, a shitshow, especially afer how good the last episode was. The plotting was contrived, the acting was off, and the character motivations were haywire.
Let's start with the worst part. Robyn has been an unpleasant character from the moment she's been on our screens. Sure, to some extent that's the point, but it takes any story involving her down a notch from the getgo. She's a very broad character on a show that aims for something approaching naturalism even as it depicts super-strong heroes and mind-controlling villains. While I appreciated Malcom's dliemma (his character has quickly become one of my favorites for his quiet earnestness and strength despite what was done to him), giving Robyn such outsized characteristics and personality quirks just made it hard to have sympathy for her even in what should be a situation filled with pathos for the character.
And my god, how ridiculous was it that this crazy woman is able to not only rally the troops to go after Jessica, that it happens to coincide with Malcolm baring his soul, and that they just so happen to show up at Jessica's when she has Kilgrave on lockdown and things are otherwise fairly stable. The concept of the misguided outsider thinking the hero is the real villain, and that the villain is the victim, thereby freeing the bad guy and unraveling the hero's good work, is such a tired cliche in superhero stories especially. Channeling that story through Robyn was a poor choice especially, and it was all too convenient that it happened when it did. It seemed as though the writers said, "we need something to upset the applecart here, and this is just random enough to do it."
Speaking of convenient, I'm apparently one of the few people who's enjoyed the Hogarth-Wendy-Pam triangle this season, but Pam showing just at the right time to unintentionally kill Wendy was a bridge too far. There were tons of ways you could have had Pam realize that Hogarth is full of crap and realize that she was trying to use Kilgrave to get Wendy to sign the papers without ending up in this contrived, all-too-on-the-nose morality play where Pam ends up in jail. The scenes with just Hogarth and Wendy were actually pretty solid. The combination of Wendy's disgust and woundedness worked, and the "death of a thousand cuts" setup was tense. But the utter plot-convenience of how it ended up, especially with the hamfisted scene in the jail afteward, were facepalmingly bad.
And then what was with crazy Simpson? I mean, I get that he's taking some strange super solider pills, but his going all crazy Riley Finn seems unmotivated. His killing Detective Clemmons and torching the place felt out of character, and even if you can sell it as a Jekyll and Hyde situation with Dr. Koslov's pills, I just didn't buy the actor's performance. The insane incarnation of Simpson just seemed kind of goofy, rather than a deranged extension of the character we already knew. I don't know what to make of him.
Then the flashback with Jessica Jones in the dreamy past was so strange as well. Again, it was an extraordinarily blunt way to deal with the idea that she and Kilgrave look back at things differently. Plus I nearly died of ugh when Jessica said, "I'm all ears." And then we have some weird setup where Kilgrave's dad is trying to make a vaccine and has to use Trish? It's fine in principle, but it all goes so fast and strangely.
Then, of course, there's the end with Hope. I actually like the idea of Jessica allowing lots of collateral damage from Kilgrave's continued existence because Hope is a symbol for her -- of herself, of innocence, of a way she can make herself right with the world, and I like the idea of Hope rejecting that because she's much more pragmatic, her wounds are fresher, and she can't imagine what kind of life she can have now anyway.
But ye gads, did we really need this sort of complicated SAW-like set up from Kilgrave in the restaurant. There's a point in most seasons of Dexter where after the show has spent a great deal of time introducing characters and setting up cool conflicts, you get these more and more elaborate and convoluted setpieces as the cat and mouse game continues and the show keeps throwing more and more balls into the air. I think we reached that point here, and it's not a good look for this show, especially if, as Dexter did, it struggles to stick the landing after all the insanity it invokes.
It was surprisingly really good! At least as good as it can be while still keeping younger audiences in mind. When I saw the trailer for this movie I thought it looked kinda shitty, but then the reviews started coming out. So I saw it more out of an obligation than anything but I'm glad that I saw it because it was very enjoyable.
I did not expect to be barraged with such dystopian social commentary right off the bat, but it's those clever little statements about society that allows people other than children to enjoy the movie. And not only that, but it made so much sense how they orchestrated those statements about individualism, bringing back nostalgic images of Lego instruction manuals that the character carries around with him. Now I'm not the biggest fan of Lego as a franchise. I mean, to me the video games just seem like a really easy way to save money on animation, but the animation in this film was fan-fucking-tastic.
Objects and characters would mostly have a lower frame rate to imitate stop-motion style, and because all of it actually was computer-animated, they had a lot more freedom as to what they were able to do, particularly with the facts in camera placements and most noticeably during the action scenes. But not only did it just imitate stop motion as a style; a clever decision was made to keep certain depths out of focus at any given time, and by doing so it instantly reminds you of those old Lego camera sets. The movie didn't really leave too much room for emotional investment, but I don't really think that I tried to. It pretty much knew exactly what it was and it tried hard to avoid falling into clichés that you would normally expect, and the writing made it clear that they were aware of these clichés that they were intentionally avoiding.
It's funny, entertaining and it feels somewhat unique. And yes, I'm aware that it is basically just one giant ad for a toy company, but this movie is the best Lego commercial I have ever seen
Life of Pi is simply magnificent, a truly masterpiece and is now part of my all-time favorite movies.
From the technical point of view, it is astonishing, the colors dance with the forms to create landscapes to take your breath away, it is amazing to see how realistic a CGI can be nowadays, even if they have filmed 4 different tigers, Suraj Sharma (Pi) was never even near a real tiger.
Life of Pi is not just a survival story of a castaway in challenging conditions. While all this is present, it is a simple fixture for a table of allegorical representations of several life happenings, survival instinct, faith and affection. Interconnected, the film makes no judgments about the authority in relation to each other, leaving the choice to the viewer, who will decide according to his own disposition on life, faith and relationships.
The history is just perfect, it is full with symbolic meanings that you only realize at the end of the movie, both the introducing and the ending wrap the main history giving it even more meaning.
Ang Lee performs probably the most significant film of his career with the adaptation of the book bythe canadian Yann Martel. The reflection of Taiwanese filmmaker is noticeable in the way each image with meaning grabs and transforms simple scenarios as a boat on the water to subliminal images full of spiritualism.
Life of Pi is a technical marvel and a treasure film destined to become a modern classic. In my personal opinion, this is a movie you must see, and ofc among the best of the year.
This movie was a huge disappointment! The only positive thing I can say about it is that the special effects where not half bad. The movie itself was childish, unfunny, unintelligent and generally really bad.
Some reviews giving this movie 9 or 10 stars (which is just ludicrous) are saying that people cannot handle the feminism in the movie. What feminism? Replacing the original actors with women is not feminism as far as I am concerned and anyway, if you care about such things should it not have been two women and two men to be politically correct? Also, the supposedly intelligent women in this movie behave in a typical old-fashioned Hollywood stereotype of women way. They are mostly downright silly. If I were a feminist I would actually have been insulted by this movie.
Then we have the male clerk that is dummer than a piece of rock. If someone had stacked four supposedly intelligent men and a single blond bimbo that is totally devoid of any trace of intelligence together in a movie the social justice warriors would have cried foul so loud that you could hear it across the planet. But since it is four women and a stupid male it is okay (not really). It is even feminism according to some people. What a load of bollocks.
There is actually a story in the movie although it is well hidden under the silly jokes and silly behavior. It is paper thin and rather silly in itself but it could have worked if the rest of the movie was up to snuff but sadly it is not.
As I wrote above the only good thing about this movie is the special effects. The few scenes that I actually enjoyed was during the big shoot out at the end which had some cool moments. I especially liked when Jillian pulls a pair of pistols out of her Ghostbuster suit and goes on a ghost killing spray.
Apart from that this movie is best forgotten
I knew that quite a few people had complained about the realism in this movie even though it hold high ratings on most movie sites. I was hoping that the complaints were mostly nitpicking like wrong model of Sherman tank and such like. Well, I am afraid that it was a bit more than that. I would say that this movie is clearly written by some Hollywood writer sitting in his comfy chair and never ever having been close to any military activities, not to mention live action, in his life.
I can live with a movie being inaccurate or somewhat unrealistic if the rest of the movie is good but I have to say that I did not really like the movie even after trying to filter out the unrealistic nonsense.
The movie is very dark and gritty and there are really no likeable characters in it whatsoever. Well, the clerk that got thrown in as a tank machinegun gunner was perhaps somewhat likable but then him getting assigned as a tank machinegun gunner in the first place was one of those nonsensical bits. In this movie the “heroes” are not really any better than the Nazis. The scene where “Wardaddy” forces previously mentioned clerk to shoot an unarmed POW is just disgusting. I am sure this is not too far from reality in some cases during the war but I’ll be damned if I am watching a movie to be entertained by it.
Having said that I must also say that the movie was very well done in terms of acting and cinematography with one exception. The ridiculous overuse of tracer bullet effects. Tracer bullets do not look like you are in a Star Wars movie and yes I have been using tracer bullets during my military service, obviously unlike the producer and consultants (if they had any) of this movie.
The pacing of the movie was somewhat uneven. Some of it was fairly fast paced but then some parts, like the part in the apartment of the two German women was quite slow and somewhat dull.
The “last stand” at the end was just silly and nonsensical. It started pretty much right away when the poor clerk spots the arriving German infantry just using his eyes. Then it just takes forever until they actually arrive so our “heroes” have all the time in the world to prepare. There would of course be no way for a lone Sherman to hold off an assault like that and the Germans would of course not be charging around shooting useless fine caliber weaponry against said Sherman. Also when they had all this time to prepare why the f… did they leave some of the ammo outside the tank? Obviously because some dumb scriptwriter thought it would make for a good scene. And do not get me started on the fact that the Germans apparently just stops in their tracks every time the director thinks it is time for some slow scene inside the tank.
The ending? Well I do not like bad endings and this one certainly did not give me any feeling of reward for having suffered through over two hours of this movie. Needless to say I am a tad disappointed.
