Change Your Image
alex_with_a_P
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Joker: Folie à Deux (2024)
Are you not entertained?
Joker Folie à Deux is refusing to give the audience what they crave almost on every corner. A good thing, in my opinion, in these times of instant gratification. The audience has to face the music on this one. Phillips didn't take the easy way like the trailers suggested. I was worried about fanservice and a rehash of the previous film. Although the movie does use small glimpses of flashbacks/glimpses from the previous movie, which wasn't really necessary in my opinion.
Cinematography, acting performances and music score is again top level. And it feels tonally a little bit different from the first one, more introspective. It's stripping off all the flashy parts; with the exception of two musical numbers this is a very subdued experience. It focuses more on the psychology and duality of our titular character. Arthur Fleck is both a victim and a perpetrator and therefore creates division not only among the people in Gotham but also in himself. Which undoubtedly strikes similarities to our current celebrity obsessed society. Arthur is battling for his soul and I commend such ambition in film making. The movie strays even further from the roots of the comic version which will further alienate most comic book fans. Right after the end credits rolled, I knew this isn't a movie that will be accepted by general audiences. It's one of those movies that rewards a second viewing. There is a lot of thought put into it, to the extent that even the musical concept isn't a gimmick. Without it, it would be too grim and depressing. The levity it brings is needed for it's a hard pill to swallow. Besides the first movie had it's fair share of music an dance scenes in retrospect. The music also stands for the siren's call personified in Lee Quinn who is trying to lure out the Joker. The movie has a lot more clarity what it wants to say than it's predecessor.
The movie shines with lots of little details like the judge bearing a striking similarity to a famous director who inspired the first Joker movie. Arthur has to dream up realities because he is trapped in a recurring nightmare, notice how the three guards who torment him bear a striking similarity to the bullies he encountered in the subway. Details like these are what make movies enjoyable even on re-watch.
Which isn't to say that the movie is flawless. It certainly drags a bit in the middle and could have been a bit tighter in terms of running time. And it is unfortunately not as radical as a Michael Haneke film, although it has undertones of Funny Games in it. Similar like the first movie it shies away to lean into the complicity of news & entertainment media even though it seemingly takes place during a time when smart phones and other social media driven gadgets didn't exist. But it has definitely guts right till the very end and is overall more thought-provoking than The Joker. It even fixes certain problems I had with the muddled themes of it's predecessor. The downside is that it definitely won't be everyone's cup of tea, and that was very clear from the audience reactions in the cinema. For example when a recurring character is asked to come to the stand during a trial. The audience was mostly giggling and laughing at this one although it wasn't intended to, but it exposed the people in the audience who thought this would be a spectacular roller-coaster ride. It is a great tragedy. The biggest irony here is that the most vocal critics are the ones who want more of the same-old comic book Joker, not knowing that almost all superhero comic books & it's characters are derivedfrom greek tragedies. And this movie does more justice to those ancient tales than the version the audience craves for. It is sad how the reaction of the audience in real life resembles the citizens of Gotham at the last act, probably unintended by the filmmakers but still very meta. Folie À Deux leaves a more lasting impression than The Joker, since audiences have to engage in the themes in order to get enjoyment out of it. And that is a quality we don't see very often in high budgeted films anymore. I enjoyed it till the very end and unlike most people it absolutely elevated the previous film.
8/10.
Sien lui yau wan II: Yan gaan dou (1990)
Loads of ideas but unfocused story
It has been more than 20 years since I watched this movie, so it was about time to dust off the old DVD Player and re-watch this old classic. While the first movie still holds up pretty well, I wish I could say the same about part two. But this one suffers from common 'sequlitis'. Or in other words, trying to ape the first movie but with bigger battles and special FX budget. I give the movie props for one thing, it doesn't run out of visual ideas and interesting characters. Unfortunately it all gets squandered in a meandering plot that struggles to engage viewers. There are lot of parallels to the first movie like the protagonist befriending a magician swordsman, encountering a hidden threat in form of monsters lurking in the dark, or a character hiding a loved one from being seen by others and hi-jinx ensues. Some shots were even completely re-used from it's predecessor like the chase scenes with the dogs in the forest (that are supposed to be wolves). The movie throws lots of dialogue at the viewer, most of it non-sensical mildly amusing comedy. Where the movie dropped the major ball though, is the romance in it's core. It is lifeless and not much time gets invested in making it believable. Is the t's probably the biggest gripe I have with the movie. Unfortunately the re-watch wasn't as satisfying as I hoped it would be (like part one). I hope part three is a step up from here.
MaXXXine (2024)
Needed more flesh in the story
If you like the genre that I will call 'period murder mistery in Hollywood' like Tarantino's Once Upon a Time in Hollwood, you will probably like this too. Just in terms of ambiance and the attention to details. Unfortunately, both those movies fail to show the seedy underbelly of the industry. Not only are they too tame, they full-on glamorize it and prefer making outliers the major threat. Add some ultra violence for the flavor and call it a day. Both those movies are missing something, be it satire or some surrealism. That's why Under The Silver Lake is still the best out of this obscure genre.
To get back to Maxxxine, it has visual flair and good directing, but the script feels like a first draft. All the side characters are pointless filler. Kevin Bacon gets a pass because he knows how to chew the scenery but his character still remains a missed opportunity. Cut any of them out of the movie and nothing would change storywise. Especially the two cops (with a whole missing police force that is supposedly on a huge manhunt) are wasted here when you look at how little police work they do and the actors they casted for the roles. Ti West should study Wes Craven's Scream movies, which masterfully play with suspense and suspicion at every corner and with every character. Mia Goth has to carry the movie all by herself, unfortunately the movie does not provide truly iconic or emotional moments for her, like Pearl did. Her character is often unlikeable on purpose and it does work in context of where the character is coming from.
So it all comes down to the ending, which again feels undercooked/underwritten however you want to call it. The cinematogrpahy is pretty good, so is the production design for a movie that probably had only a tenth of a Hollywood budget.
For a horror movie it has very little horror in it. It has one and a half graphic scenes, the rest is kind of tame compared to the previous two movies of the trilogy. The movie isn't a failure, it still feels mostly solid, but coming from the heels of the previous two films it does feel slightly disappointing .
Civil War (2024)
States the obvious
Garland was never a director known for subtlety, with the exception of Ex Machina. In a nutshell this is how his movies played out for me: "this is an Interesting premise, unfortunately it's approach is very dry and stereotypic, then at the end you almost feel the movie is about to catch wind and win you over, until it doesn't".
In many ways it is very similar to his earlier movie Annihilation, where a group ventures into an anarchistic alien world. The world is interesting but the characters we follow are bland and the conclusion feels nothing short of underwhelming. Civil War unfortunately is in the same wheelhouse. The title alone, opens up so many possibilities, so many storytelling roads. None taken.
I don't mind that the movie isn't political, but it's funny that there are hardly any movies from the US that are these days, given the current climate - how refreshing it would be to see a contemporary equivalent to Apocalypse Now these days. Garland's movie had the ingredients but it is not satire, not a character study, it is hardly a war movie, nor is it a journalistic tale. Like so many viewers noted it feels very devoid of anything to say. Again, it's fine if a director doesn't want to make a political statement, but this movie is devoid of anything meaningful. The approach the movie takes towards war, atrocities and frontline journalism, is very, very simplistic, to put it mildly. I doubt there will be a viewer coming out of this movie with a new way of looking at things. Which is a shame because the movie raises valid issues. Where does the polarization come from that divides a whole country? What has embedded journalism (Reuters) done to real investigative journalism in the information age?
The only thing that surprised me was how a seasoned writer like Garland (who proved in the past that he could do better) can write such corny, clichéd dialogie, or an introduction of a protagonist that bordered on fanfiction. You have a greenhorn character come in and say "oh my god you're a legend, you did this and that". In case the audience still doesn't get it, we get flashbacks which show war atrocities shot like a commercial for military services. The tone is distracting. There were a couple of times where I had to roll my eyes because the movie tries too hard to lean on the contradictions just for posturing. For example, there isxa moment in the film showing beauty amidst war, but tonally it is presented like a music clip of an early 2000 indie band (forest fire). That is due to the terrible musical choices. They are supposed ro be jarring but then again, this technique has become another overused cliché. The minute the rookie takes a picture of Kirsten Dunst coldly photograhing the bodies of a terrorist attack, we all know the ending to this. Same when a character tells another character not to expect too much from a larger than life figure.
A lot of moments feel borrowed from better dystopic movies like Children of Men. It's a shame because on a technical level the movie is well-shot and the action is engaging, in fact it's better staged and directed than most action films these days. If only this movie wouldn't shy away from some thought provoking ideas.
4 out of 10.
Tulsa King (2022)
Just basic
I was looking forward for the Stallone/Sheridan collaboration. But after three episodes it was clear that this is one of those series, which has an interesting premise but doesn't really know what to do with it. It is a mix of The Ozarks and Sopranos, leaning more towards the former with it's plot-driven approach. But could have been easily told with half the episodes. A lot of stuff feels meandering rather than engaging, precisely because nothing feels fresh here idea-wise. None of the mob guys are interesting. The police is mostly played off as clueless for plot convenience. A lot of characters are strangely gung-ho with entering or re-entering a world of crime. A world, that you can't get out of easily. Again, lots of it felt too convenient.
I finished the whole season, and a couple of sub-plots seem almost lifted from The Sopranos but without the subtlety. Which is a shame since Sheridan proved with Sicario, Hell or High Water and even Wind River that he's capable of creating nuanced characters. So this season was underwhelming, not bad, but not very interesting either. If they wrap it up in season 2 I might watch, but it's definitely not a premise that you can stretch out too much, judging by it's first season.
Trust No One: The Hunt for the Crypto King (2022)
Why bother...
Most likely the last Netflix documentary I have watched. Their docu-series are at best serviceable, but never do they really delve deeper into the respective topic and yet they still feel overlong. The last good one I remember is 'Making a Murderer' which has aired nearly a decade ago. Since this wasn't a series but only a movie I decided to give it another try. And unfortunately, it still follows the mold of every other doc from any streaming service. Here a slight twist, a misdirection there, no tension and then it ends unceremoniously. Spoilers ahead:
We don't get to have an interview with the wife or even a statement from her. Zero. The mystery surrounding the death of Cotten and the Skype account used one day after his death? Never mentioned again. No follow-ups (as usual from Netflix). The people making this doc should have waited a couple of years or at least until there's a little more movement regarding the case. It's prematurely telling a half-baked story to which we know very little but it seems good enough for the content farm from Netflix. It's simply not enough and I wish they had better standards for documentaries, since they muddling the waters with their mediocre output. Better sit this one out.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024)
Does it's own thing
Having heard all the mixed or negative reviews almost made me skip this movie in cinema. It didnt help that I didnt like George Miller's last movie (One Thousand Years of Longing). But I'm glad that I gave him the benefit of the doubt and watched it on IMAX. Great sound design, great action and awesome chase scenes being delivered by Miller and company. The approach to the story is different, the structure is different, the topic is different, so comparing it to Fury Road is futile because both movies feel very different at it's core. The questions I ask myself are: Was it unpredictable? Was it an exciting journey? Did I care about the characters? And if the answer to all those questions is a resounding Yes! Well, then the movie delivered. Like I said I liked both films although Fury Road will always have an edge just for the simple fact that it blew so many minds with it's relentless high adrenaline tone. Also Fury Road was a little bit better paced and I like that it's an ensemble film. Furiosa has a lot more ground to cover story wise, it's understandable that it runs a bit longer. But I have to admit that there is something slightly off about the last act which felt unnecessarliy rushed. Certain scenes were too indulgent, took too much screen time while others wrapped up too fast, or not at all. Like the character of Scrotus for example. I was hoping he had a bigger role to play. Immortan Joe had the right amount of screen time, especially since he will be more prominent in the next movie. Scrotus on the other hand is not present in Fury Road, so it seems like his fate in the 2015 video-game is canon, which I found a little bit disappointing.
Yet still there is a lot to like in this movie. For one, there's more variety in the car chases. More 1-on-1 battles which I personally find more exciting. Sure there has to be a War Rig sequence and that one's great in it's own right. The CG didn't bother me as much as I feared. The trailer really did a huge disservice to the movie. The music didn't go for melody like In Fury Road but instead went for atmospheric tones and vibes. This also felt more reminiscent to the older Mad Max movies and therefore perfectly bridges the tone of the older films with the style of the newer MM movies. Probably the only prequel that I know of, that isn't just a shameless money grab.
Blonde (2022)
Not the story of one woman
I understand why this gets so many negative reviews. Given that this is depicting one of the most if not THE most iconic actress of 50's Hollywood. People were not happy about the creative liberty that was taken here. But then again most people in the US probably knew that this is based on a famous novel that stressed out it's fictional roots.
I wasn't aware that this was loosely based on said fictionalized novel but it didn't bother me that much, since this isn't a historic movie nor is it trying to be a documentary. This borders on the realm of surreal cinema à la Lynch or Fellini. There are many visual signifiers that we are watching a dream/nightmare come true. Especially the transitions show the meaningless of time and space. The story of Norma Jean in this movie is sadly the story of many. Many who never made it into stardom and were chewed out by the system. But it's almost a horror movie in regard how the big institutions, the movie industry, the media or government are fundamentally corroded and only know how to feed their endless hunger. I think especially when it comes to cinematography Andrew Dominik has a good eye, and for the first time I have finally seen a good-looking Netflix movie that doesn't look like digital garbage. Of course there are things that I didn't like, namely the loose structure can be a curse as well. Especially when it comes to the end of of certain events or relationships, the film sometimes doesn't even care to wrap up certain threads. This can admittedly become tedious after a while. There is also a great amount of unnecessary nudity towards the end, and a sexual encounter with a president which is horrific but the way it is depicted borders almost on comedy. It's moments like this where the movie just tries too hard to hit you over the head. It is still an interesting film, I never felt the long running time and Ana de Armas does a really good performance. And for a digital shot film (with Netflix' visual stipulations and guidelines), it looks pretty good. Not for everyone, but people with an open mind or an open eye should take a look.
John Wick: Chapter 4 (2023)
One hour too long but the best sequel
I went into the sequel without any expectations but was mostly pleasantly surprised. The main reason for that is thanks to Donnie Yen's character, who displays more depth and charisma than all of John's story in all movies combined. I hate to say it, since I like Keanu Reeves. But on every sequel of his respectable films he sleepwalks through his movies - very obvious in Bill & Ted 3, where he played the confused John Wick.
Like I said, John's storyline is the weakest overall, it felt repetitive, but I have to admit, I liked how they handled the closure. What drags this move's rating down is the unjustified running time. A lot of the action scenes feel unnecessary bloated, why exactly was John in Japan to endanger his last good friend? Why he offed that guy in the desert if it didn't change a thing? The Wick sequels have been particular lazy in expanding their world building or inciting incidents for action scenes. And all of the action scenes overstay their welcome. There's a whole character sub-plot with the character of Tracker which should have been left on the cutting room floor in my opinion. If that movie was edited tighter into a 90 minutes film it easily would have elevated the whole thing. As it is now, it's still the best sequel, since it is less forgettable than part two & three.
Kkeutkkaji ganda (2014)
A very entertaining ride
One of the best attributes about A Hard Day is it's break-neck pacing. Say what you want, but there wasn't a minute I was bored with this film. Right away from the first few minutes it plunges the viewer into an inciting incident. Relentlessly moving from one fallout to the next. That alone is quite an accomplishment in my opinion. One downside to this fast-paced storytelling is that certain important moments feel glossed over in the middle of the action. Especially that the protagonist doesn't share a strong bond with anybody, seemingly not even his own daughter. I don't know if it was by design, but it created a certain distance for me. To get back to the story, it has a good hook and a mid-point twist that keeps things moving forward at all time. Spoilers ahead:
With the reveal of the villain at mid-point we get introduced to one of the craziest whacko characters I have ever seen in a Korean film. Cho Jin-woong is really firing on all cylinders: he is impulsive, almost suicidal. He is an extreme version of our hero, superior in most areas too in terms of job status, intelligence and physical prowess. Every time he appears on screen he is a force to behold, he keeps our detective on his toes. He's a great villain, the kind that is a real threat. You don't see that kind of character very often anymore. The movie balances things out with some dark comedic moments throughout. It is unapologetic in that regard, which is another strong point.
It is a highly entertaining film. The only thing it falls short from is that it misses out on depth or profound characters. I know it's a nitpick but since most Korean films always go that little extra mile to make a movie special, it feels something is missing here. In any case I would recommend watching it, especially people who like suspense and a movie that keeps the audience engaged at all times. You can't go wrong
.
7 out of 10.
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Pointless exercises in suspense
One of those Tarantino movies that are entertaining on first watch but never really grab you in a way that you want to watch them again. Took me 15 years to give this another go, and to be honest it didn't do much for me. It highlights Tarantino's worst tendencies: where over-indulgent monologuing, unfitting movie references and pointless jabs at film criticism take precedent over storytelling. The only things that I appreciated on re-watch, were the good build-ups to suspenseful scenes, but it's mostly technical fluff. Christoph Waltz performance is still a highlight, so is August Diehl's as Major Hellstrom. But the rest of the ensemble cast delivers a shockingly bad to mid-tier performance spear-headed by Brad Pitt, Diane Kruger, Eli Roth, Fassbender and Melanie Laurent.
There isn't much of an interesting story here, everything is surprisingly convenient. All the characters are right where the writer wants them to be without much resistance or obstacles. In general this movie felt kind of episodic. As if Tarantino wrote three or four set pieces but had to string them together in a half-hearted plot about revenge and an allied assassination plot. The twenty year old French resistance fighter who conveniently owns a cinema? Fine I'll take it, but what's the point of her being in the story when the Basterds are there to do basically the same job? They don't even get to meet each other or are forced to collaborate for the plan to work. A lot of stuff felt superfluous when one stops to think about it. There are two scenes where Tarantino tries to showcase the Hitchcock's famous concept of suspense with the ticking bomb device. Namely, the opening interrogation sequence and the basement meeting . The former has the most meat since it is a very good way to introduce us to the main villain. Again the scene is a bit too stretched out, but the latter one has less of an impact. My main problem is that Tarantino is trying too hard to make the Basterds out to be the good guys. Which is a) completely unnecessary if you pit them against Nazis and b) they should have been morally corrupt characters like in Peckinpah or Sergio Leone's movies. It would have at least made for a more interesting or nuanced experience. As it is now, coupled with mediocre cinematography, this film has more in common with watching a TV series than great cinema.
Sien lui yau wan (1987)
Imaginative and touching tale
One of those unique movies that hold up really well like China Swordsman or Green Snake. There is not much fighting in this, but the little that it has to offer is very imaginative. There are so many cool visuals and ideas here that it put a smile on my face. Not only that, the movie offers a perfect blend of dark comedy with a lovely romantic plot. Rewatching this after more than twenty years I'm glad how well it held up. Similar like Green Snake, it is a simple tale with only three main characters. But is a testament how well-written characters are, that every encounter, every interaction changes their perspective and their relationships to each other. It's truly good dramatic writing at play. There is no big journey here, it mostly takes place in an empty house and a forest, and yet the world never feels empty. For everyone who are into Hong Kong films this is a must-see, for everyone-else this a must-see as well.
Perdita Durango (1997)
Residue of the bygone era when everyone tried to be Tarantino
The 90's were a strange time, with a wide array of genre films. Looking back now, it almost seems as if exploitation movies had a second renaissance during that time. Thanks to the success of Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs, it let loose an avalanche of hyper stylized violent movies like Natural Born Killers, Killing Zoe, Doberman etc.. To be honest I like the risks that were taken back in the day, even if the majority of those films turned out to be serviceable. Having heard so many times about this movie in the past from many people I didn't expect this to be a dud, but unfortunately it was.
Perdita Durango is a sleazy exploitation flick with zero substance. Which would be fine if it was at least interesting. It's as if the studio got the picture greenlighted and they had to come up with a story in one week, there's a little bit of symbolism sprinkled here and there but overall there is no point to it. And that starts with the title, you'd think a movie called Perdita Durango would be mainly about the titular character. Instead it focuses on Javier Bardem's Romeo character the minute he walks into the picture. You can't blame the director, Bardem has an eclectic presence compared to the pale performance of Perez. But honestly nothing much happens with his character either: the couple kidnaps two teenagers, do questionable things with them and share their criminal wisdom, things go sideways as always in those kind of scenarios and that's pretty much it. Underwhelming was the feeling I had when the credit rolled. What soured me though is when I found out that this movie was 'inspired' by real events about a religious psychopath who tortured, sacrificed and buried dozens of people but once they snatched a white guy from the US border the authorities finally decided to maybe do something about those shenanigans. As you can tell, there is an interesting story here which could even work as a satire. But it's baffling that the producers of this film decided to go a total different route: namely in making the religious mass murderer likeable and do a fun road movie. This fits perfectly with other misguided Hollywood productions that took an appalling true crime and turn it into fast food entertainment like Michael Bay's 'Pain &Gain' or '30 Minutes or Less'. For an exploitation film it is too tame and for a drama it offers no one to care about. In short: not worth your time.
3 out of 10.
The Fall Guy (2024)
Death by a thousand paper cuts
I like Gosling. I like Aaron-Taylor-Johnson. I like real stunts. And unlike many reviewers I even enjoyed the director's previous film (Bullet Train) in parts. So this movie was a no-brainer for me. Unfortunately what I got was the most meandering love story I had to endure. I can not stress out enough how abysmal the love story is treated. You will appreciate Star Wars Episode 2, because that one was at least unintentionally funny. Here it kills the movie dead in it's tracks, whenever the movie starts gaining some traction. So don't expect fireworks coming from Blunt, Gosling or the action scenes.
I appreciate the sort of behind-the-scenes tone the movie is going for, I can not tell if it's parodying or documenting the chaos surrounding modern blockbusters nowadays. On paper, this should be light-hearted fun, but in reality, every minute of it felt tedious. You can guess all the story beats from a mile away, the big twist included. Every stunt set piece feels like it's five minutes too long. And the constant cross-cutting between two locations (and tones) during an action scene never works. Specifically the stunts are underwhelming, because they made them look like they were heavily green-screened even though they weren't. But Gosling is basically dealing with a few henchmen here and again it feels underwhelming how the story and action unfolds here. The director shoots for being Shane Black and Michael Mann at the same time but lands somewhere on Tommy Wiseau/Michael Bay territory. The film itself can not decide if the protagonist is a coward, a real human, a caricature or a superhero, so it rolls the dice every five minutes. Everything is so in-your-face and tries hard to amount to something: be it the obvious music choices, the movie references & especially the tired humour.
Gosling, Aaron-Taylor Johnson and Hannah Waddingham are the only actors chewing the scenery, and who barely keep this corpse of a movie afloat. Emily Blunt is terrible in this, I want to blame the writing, but Gosling is punished with the heavy lifting here and he mostly makes it tolerable, but even he can't turn a turd into a cupcake. There's tons and tons of dialogue which is supposed to be clever, meta or just quirky but it's trying too hard. It's one of those movies where you already checked out when the final act comes along and arguably the best action scenes are thrown at you, but all you want is for the movie to end already with it's tacky happy ending. This isn't a homage to the 80's and it's respective stunt work, this looks and feels like any other mid-movie from Marvel or Netflix.
3 out of 10.
American Manhunt: The Boston Marathon Bombing (2023)
Solid but lacking depth
One trouble this documentary has (although not it's fault), is that it has to work with really bad interviewees who are often grandstanding, almost performing when being interviewed. It feels like they are clearly enjoying being interviewed and it rubs me the wrong way, given the topic. I'm surprised so little actual victims get a voice here. Apart from that the documentary does a well enough job to show the chronological nature of the events. Sadly there are certain moments where I wished it would focus a little more and others a little less (Obama). For example the family of the bombers acted very peculiar and although it is only hinted at, I think the father played a bigger role why the sons felt so unhappy that they not only embraced an extremist movement but acted on it.
Some reviewers stated that the investigative journalist Phillip Martin had an agenda and went too hard on the police. But I think the documentary understated how many crucial mistakes the police force did. And how they came off as cowboys who finally had their John Wayne moment. The documentary doesn't show them having level-headed responses to certain situations, especially the mexican standoff part gets brushed off. The worst in that regard is the FBI, represented by Rick Deslauriers, who talks and acts like a clueless buffoon in a Peter Sellers film. At least they interviewed guys like David Filipov who has probably one of the most interesting and thoughtful takes on this complicated matter. Like so many documentaries on Netflix, it's the aftermath part where it falls apart in rushing through the events like it's an ending coda. There's nothing about the impact on the police force this attack had. Were there repercussions? Did new laws get passed? Was anything learned from this chain of failures? A country that prides itself on spending billions on 'security' and depriving the whole nation of it's democratic rights, and in the end two teenagers can turn the whole country upside down. That would've been interesting question to cover and put some of the people here on the spot.
Road House (2024)
A shot of blandness on the Rocks
I have no nostalgic attachments to the original movie, since I literally saw it a week before this one. But fact is, the original is a cult classic and this will never be. I was curious about how they would tackle a movie which has a ridiculous plot and over-the-top characters and the result is underwhelming as is every streaming-produced film. This remake has nothing going for it. They wanted to make more realistic fight scenes and try to appeal to the MMA audience, but why is everything shot on green screen, badly edited, and every car stunt is a CG car that moves and behaves in unrealistic ways? This is another one of those fun 80's movies that got DarkKnighted: make everything realistic, use a brooding protagonist, film mostly at nights but use yellow lights, up the kill count and throw more money on it. Just a reminder that this movie had six times the budget of a Godzilla Minus One.
All the characters on the island are cookie-cutter unlikeable Starbucks costumers with zero acting abilities. And Gyllenhall has no chemistry with any of them because the script doesn't allow for real human moments or connections, especially for his love interest. Don't get me started on all the meta-humour concerning the name of the bar, can screenwriters please stop doing this. Gylenhaal's character is so shallow and everyone likes him immediately especially after he beats up people. Swayze had class, was reserved, reading books and trying to teach the employees how to diffuse situations. The Dalton in this movie is too cool for all that nonsense. He just trains alone, let's others do the work, while he's busy allowing people to use his abdomen as a knife guard, because he's emo and mad inside. The director and the scriptwriter completely missed the point of what that character was about. Then we have the bad guys which also fail to leave a memorable impression. They try to make them at least over-the-top, I'll give 'em that, but they don't do much with it overall. Connor McGregor is okay for a minute of screen time, but he's always grinning like that was the only thing he was allowed to do. A croc is getting introduced just to conveniently get rid of a problem and is never seen again. And of course we get the obligatory back door for a future sequel. It's insane to me that the studio seriously thought they would have some kind of John Wick franchise in their hands. I doubt anyone is craving for more of this mediocrity.
Dune: Part Two (2024)
Cinema worthy
The first Dune movie I had mixed feelings, since it felt too much like setting up pieces rather than a satisfactory story. Even if you're building a trilogy every movie should stand on it's own feet. Without ever having read the books I understand now why it is so difficult to capture them on film. Although we get a lot of story to chew here, certain characters feel still underdeveloped. To be fair I liked Part Two much more since we finally get some pay-offs from the first part. But then in the last act we get the same clunky set-ups we got in part one unfortunately. I must stress out that I enjoyed the movie quite a bit and I urge anybody to see it in cinema because it is an achievement and a sight to behold. Dennis Villeneuve and his team are masters at their craft: cinematography, editing, production design, sound & music are performing on the highest level here. It's truly rare to see this kind of united quality on a big screen, and it deserves to be up in the ranks of the biggest blockbusters. Everybody who loves going to the cinema to be immersed in another time and space should check it out. I might watch it again, just because I enjoyed it purely on a visceral level. The movie is almost three hours long but it passes by much quicker due to the great narrative flow. What I had problems with, although sounding nitpicky, is that there are so many players, that we don't get to know them very well and some important ones are dispatched of too quickly, sort of anti-climatic. Especially the ending felt kind of rushed to me. In general, but especially in the final battle I expected more losses or opposition in the fight. It almost felt too easy, no struggle. Again, this would have been great as a mini series, especially when it comes to fleshing out the antagonists. But on the other hand Vileneuve would have not gotten the budget for the location shoots, cinematography, sfx and everything else that made this so impressive if he had to operate on a streaming budget. I wished Villeneuve would release all the deleted scenes (of there are any) of this and turn it retroactively into a mini series, but since we all know his stance towards deleted scenes we know this is not going to happen. As it stands, I still enjoyed the hell out of this movie. It should be seen not only because of the immersive world and ambitious storytelling. But also to signal the big studios that audiences are tired of spectacle movies. And that they need to get their story departments in check, try to win audiences back with compelling stories rather than dangling shiny things in front of kittens.
Poor Things (2023)
The Empress with no clothes
I have watched this movie twice now in cinema, in two different languages, but I wanted to at least watch the original version to see if something got lost in translation. On the first watch I had mixed feelings, because there's honestly a lot to process with the neat visuals, bizarre otherworld and the absurdist tone/conversations. On second watch I liked it a bit less, because the film feels like it drops the ball somewhere at the midpoint of the movie. The only thing that kept things fresh was honestly the buffoonery of one of the villains played by Ruffalo. The protagonist wanders around and states very obvious things throughout the film and it becomes quite simplistic, like the story getting the reverse evolution treatment of Bella. The nudity and sexual scenes didn't bother me too much, although it definitely feels like overkill on second re-watch, and I spoken to other people who watched it and claim that it's intentionally being dull or repetitive because of 'patriarchy'. I have no problem with a movie being disturbing, just boring and repetitive are qualities that are hard to be enthusiastic about. Like I said the movie loses a lot of steam halfway through the boat trip. Especially whenever the movie is getting interesting like introducing the class system (rich vs poor) it does literally nothing with it, seeing that it is intrinsically linked with the exploitation of women, children, humans in general. It never goes more into the complexities, complications or Tha accomplice of our society. There's also no struggle in Bella's journey to attain certain knowledge, she feels sorry for the poor slum people but throws money at the problem and then completely forgets about it. She's not very smart in one scene but psychoanalyzes the cynical traveler to a T during their farewell. She's poor but immediately gets a job as a prostitute. And the depiction of the whorehouse being a jolly fun place I found especially problematic. For example, there is not one instance of violence, the worst costumer she gets, is a guy who smells funny. If you watch interviews with prostitutes and they talk about the environment, it is without a question a very harsh one. The movie always shies away from the real nasty stuff of life, and violence is definitely a prominent tool for exploitation. We get a brief glimpse of it during the appearance of her real husband, but again this issue gets solved fairly easy, it's such a mild inconvenience, I wonder why it was included at all.
Another problem I had, is the fiancé/medical assistant who has no backbone, no agency, he is such a fluff character willing to read every wish to Bella's demands, that I wonder what it is she likes about him. If one would reverse the gender of this dynamic you'd get a very different picture. It's not a bad movie, I quite enjoyed it although it's meandering to get through the finish line. I liked the saturated colorful cinematography, Ruffalo's sleazebag performance, the intrinsic set design and especially the music. I wish the movie had a little bit more to say or we would get a more interesting and challenging encounters towards the end.
The Iron Claw (2023)
Predictable but solid
The Iron Claw isn't a great movie as the trailer made it look like. It had potential, you can tell that there is something simmering underneath there, that never gets to shine. It is a well made movie with great cinematography, great ambiance and a very good cast of actors. Unlike others, I didn't find Efron's portrayal stiff, he was pretty good. The problem was that his character was under-written, so was anyone else unfortunately. The movie doesn't dig deep into the psychology of our protagonist or the Dad really, which is a shame. It would have been great to get to know the other brothers more as well, but the movie settles for simple archetypes which made the story predictable, especially concerning the fate of certain characters. Be that as it may, it is a movie that has heart. And that, you don't see often anymore from the big movies, so there are a few emotional moments which really hit home. It sure resonates with a lot of people, judging by the reviews, especially people who are not familiar with wrestling or the family (me included). I would say it is not as haunting as Sofia Coppola's The Virgin Suicides, which deals with a similar topic and is set in the same era. But everyone else who wants to see a solid drama with good production value should definitely give it a go. I didn't regret seeing it.
6 out of 10.
Argylle (2024)
Nothing is real anymore
Oof, I was looking forward seeing the new film by Matthew Vaughn and didn't want to get spoiled by watching trailers or any promotion for this. Big mistake. I honestly don't know where to start. So I start with the question that came up at least fifteen times while watching this movie. "What happened to action movies?"
I have never been so bored by an action movie in my life. If you like real explosions, real stunts, real car chases and real locations, this movie is not for you. Not only is everything CGI like any of the action films Netflix churns out by the week. The badly integrated green screens took me out of the movie. Every time. Now you might say we are talking about one or two sequences. But this is the whole movie. I could not immerse myself in the story that is wrapped in obvious fake sets the whole time. Even regular apartments look like they took stock photos and plastered the actors on top of them. And I'm not at the edge of my seat when I see a badly rendered car swerve weightless around the corner. Hell, even the cat is CG ninety-nine percent of the time. I saw this on regular IMAX but judging by the sheer amount of 'in your face shots' I got strong vibes that this is one of those movies that will get post-converted into 3D to make an extra buck. The schtick with cross-cutting Henry Cavill was wearing thin after a minute into the train sequence, but they kept doing it.
I must say at least the story is rather ambitious: what starts off with the premise of a French comedy film (La Chèvre-1981) turns slowly into a weak 'The Long Kiss Goodnight' (1996) rip-off. But the constant misdirections where sometimes obvious and too much. And they tried too many times to go emotional and failed which brings us to the other elephant in the room: The actors.
I don't want to talk too much about Bryce Dallas Howard, she is as wooden as in every movie role, no surprise here. She is a obviously corpulent, which I thought was a nice touch for the role of the book author in the beginning. It makes sense if she spent most of her days at home writing. But the minute we involve her into gravity-defying action acrobatics, it becomes laughable. Here was an opportunity to create conflict even comedy to show how rusty she is in the field, but I guess the makers weren't brave enough for that. Instead we get served more unbelievable action shenanigans, Bradley James Allan's choreography and creativity is sorely missed in Vaug's films. More unforgiving, is that a reliable actor like Sam Rockwell totally misses the mark with his smarmy and dry delivery. I don't know what he's going for, but likeable or interesting it isn't. He is worse here than in Seven Psychopaths (2012). Bryan Cranston is okay in this, he tries at least to chew the scenery, but even he is giving up by the end. Most of it is the fault of the writing, to be fair. Some of dialogues, especially the ones in the book club are so cringe worthy written, I really want to blame AI for this. Scenes meandering for far too long, everything is spelled out and hits the viewer with a jack hammer. We have an exciting scene with Sam Jackson watching a basketball game immediately followed by an upload bar (ripped off from his own Kingman film). I leave it at that. And want to end with another question. Can we please get old school movies back?
Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
Giving up at the finish line
I have watched this in cinema, but apart from one or two image I completely forgotten what it was about or how it ended. I just rewatched it, and it makes sense why I have blocked it out of my memory, although I mostly enjoyed the set pieces up to a point. This movie starts very intriguing with lots of questions and shady characters. I also liked the lighting and camera work of the first half of the movie, the only downside is that the set looks a bit artificial in it's pristine state, since everything looks brand-new. We don't feel like the characters are stranded in the middle of nowhere since we only see the hotel and it's parking area, but nothing outside of that perimeter, it would helped to see a little bit more of the area. If it was surrounded by a huge desert area. I would have accepted more why characters don't leave this forsaken place when their life is in danger, regardless if their car doesn't start.
But those are just nitpicks to be honest. The real problem with the movie is that it has nothing really interesting to tell halfway through the film. Especially the inclusion of the cult hippie family deflates the movie from anything remotely interesting. You can tell Chris Hemsworth had fun playing that character, but it is also very, very one-dimensional on page, which culminates in him being shut down by the protagonist in the most preachy way possible. I don't buy it for a second that this self-delusional lunatic would just sit there speechless, it felt very written. A lot of it does on the last stretch. The war veteran reveal felt like this whole thing is a convenient joke. It is simply astounding how hard the movie dropped the ball after such a promising beginning. Don't get me wrong, I was rooting for the two characters to survive but it had to be earned. This move gets compared to Tarantino a lot, and although I'm not his biggest fan, at least in his movies the characters have to go through the wringer in the last act. The other reason this gets compared to Tarantino is probably it's structure. Although he certainly didn't invent the out of order storytelling, he helped popularize it, bringing it into mainstream cinema. The flashback segments on this film are interesting armt first. But the more Goddard uses it the more they overstay their welcome. I remember even in the cinema that the constant breaks in the main narrative got really tedious. And the difference between the segments in Pulp Fiction versus this movie is that they have a clear beginning, turning point and a resolution. Most segments here end with a cliffhanger or a question mark and that is what makes it more frustrating than rewarding.
Overall this movie played it too safe, and was too on the nose with the male toxicity. All the talk about religion is nothing more than lip service. I get that every character in this movie believes in their own god like christianity, government (FBI), money, Manson and music. But at the end the characters still take the blood money, so I guess that is good. Bad Times is unfortunately an empty movie since there is nothing deeply profound about any of the observations and as an entertainment flick this movie just gets lost in it's long-winded narrative. At least Cabin in the Woods was fun towards the end.
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (2023)
Across the Bloatedverse
I found the first film to be a solid movie. A bit over-indulgent and over-praised but solid. This on the other hand, takes all the bad aspects of the first movie and cranks it up to eleven. First off, this doesn't feel like a story about Miles Morales. Sadly we are still doing the multi-verse gimmick that has worn off three years ago. To top it off the 150 minutes runtime is in no way justified for offering such a thin story. Most action scenes are far too long, especially the one with the Vulture and the mid-escape chase scene. That one in particular felt like a redo of the lab chase from the first film. A lot of times the movie was trying to recreate moments from the previous installement without the heart.
And what's with the mediocre voice acting this time? Especially the opening monologue of Gwen Stacy felt like it was read from last-minute cue cards. To be fair, I liked the Gwen Stacy story arc in the beginning, but then they used an unbelievable character moment to make her force her hand to join the Spiderverse. And this is where the movie lost me. This whole world and the explanation of it's existence reeks of desperate attempts of an industry that is trying to sell the same doll with a different dress. I just don't watch superheroes to see them having existential crisis, it plagues the comic movies since The Dark Knight. They even implemented this narrative hook on characters like Superman (Man of Steel) who are the antithesis of this outlook and we saw how that went down.
It's no coincidence that the story got very thin after we get to the Spiderverse. From then on the writers can only throw action set pieces after the audience to fill up the two and a half hours runtime (!). Seriously it was really boring, sometimes laughable (that shot of the hologram that reveals the serious face of Spiderman 2099) and the scenes that were supposed to make you laugh were tired. Especially the quips during the action were otherworldly bad. And once the dust settled, they filmmakers could not even manage to end it in a mildly satisfying conclusion. There are ways to end a story with certain degree of closure while some story strands aren't resolved. It's an art for a reason. But this is just plain lazy. What they dish out as a cliffhanger should have been the mid-turning-point of the movie. If they had any talented writers at all they would have made this movie with Miles and Gwen in their respectable world without crossing over into the other person's universe. Seemingly having a different story but with the same theme connecting them. That would of course require more work in the writing department to pull off, but you can tell that right after the success of the first movie they wanted to keep the machine running to churn out another one of these as fast as possible. And although four years seems like a long time for a movie, I can assure it's not for an animated movie. Especially one with this magnitude of animation quality, runtime and post production requirements. Unfortunately it didn't deliver, I was honestly rooting for this film but at least I don't regret anymore that I missed it in cinema.
4 out of 10.
God Is a Bullet (2023)
Different kind of beast
God is a Bullet is a movie that is trying to be many things but falls short of being truly powerful. In fact, the first ten minutes start promising, it doesn't waste time to get into gear. But soon after that it starts to meander a bit aimlessly. I was especially disappointed that the story didn't commit to the black magic angle they teased in the beginning. There were vibes of True Detective season one where we go on a dark journey down the abyss. Unfortunately the movie gets more predictable and trivial the closer we reach the end. Again, the overall pace is very meandering and the story is handled more like a checklist unfortunately.
What deflated a lot of tension were the dumb decisions the characters made at every corner. All the time they keep talking about how dangerous it is to go against this cult and most of the time they just barge into a place unprepared and are surprised that they get caught with their pants off. All the while the movie is trying to be dark, gritty and authentic but treats the viewer with completely over-the-top moments or a character out of an 80's film. It created a weird disconnect. Maika Monroe's character "Case" seems intriguing at first but there's not much substance in her portrayal. Her divine change of heart moment is explained away as a random encounter in a grocery store. Truly underwhelming. And then there are the exchanges about faith and religion which come off very superficial and smarmy. I realized that this is basically the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo without the intriguing murder mystery (they even lift the epilogue). Instead of a good thriller we get lots of gore but it is so obvious CG that it takes all the enjoyment out of it.
The movie has some nice imagery and colors here and there but it is mostly filmed in drab colors. Nikolai Coster Waldau is a reliable actor but he already did the grieving father who's out for revenge in 'The Silencing' which was undoubtly a better and much shorter flick. Here they push it to the extreme by making him play a desk clerk who turns into Charles Bronson. Not in an interesting manner, and way too stretched out with it's two and a half hours runtime. The movie is severely lacking in the action and thriller department. Cassevettes neither commits to an authentic tone or goes completely off the rails like an Craig S Zahler with "Brawl in Cell Block 99". For more dark and authentic revenge thrillers I would rather recommend Blue Ruin or Destroyer(2018). This one was disappointing.
5 out of 10.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (2023)
Nice visuals but derivative story
Tried to like this film, but I it was a little bit too messy. The overall story felt a bit too cliché. There were also a couple of things that I found deeply problematic, but more on that later. First the good things, visually this movie is very impressive, I liked the art style: be it the 'concept art' look of the backgrounds or the 2d effects. I also believe it's a fresh angle to have the Turtles actually be teenagers. Unfortunately they don't do much with that concept, because if you're honest you could have told the same story of acceptance with grown up characters. Splinter being the over-protective Dad is such a tired trope in animation, I rather preferred him to be a wise man with faults. At least that would have saved us some lame rat jokes. And here comes the big reason, why this didn't work for me: the jokes. They are so wannabe hip with the dated pop references, and by the way I seriously doubt that a male teenager is gonna fawn over Adele. There were too many of those cringe moments where they are trying too hard to be meta or in on the joke. I wish this kind of humor would end, it's the lowest form of writing. Coupled with a pace that is too brazen (because of joke overload), there is barely any room for contemplation. Similar like the Lego movie (and to an extent the Spiderverse) the fast cuts during action scenes left me more often wondering what just happened rather than being wowed by intrinsic choreography. Ironically they showed clips of old Wuxia films on TV, they maybe should have studied those films on how to stage action properly with fluidity.
It also doesn't help that the movie has nothing interesting to tell - the coming of age themes in particular feel half-baked. Leonardo is in love, that's about it. As a matter of fact I always felt like seeing a hodge podge of other animated movies and films. Whole beats like the citizens helping the Turtles with cranes is lifted straight out of the Amazing Spiderman (2012) movie. Others like the end fight reminded me of The Incredibles, (especially the themes about acceptance and hiding your true self). But whereas the Incredibles has clear goals and doesn't pepper in jokes at every corner, this showdown felt very convoluted. Not nearly half as much engaging, especially when the Turtles even joke while they're about to get crushed by the villain, it's just dumb.
Problematic is the message of the movie: the Turtles get accepted only AFTER they save the world. Would have been nice to see that beat play out in the middle of the story and they aren't welcomed at school like now where they arrive as pop stars. The overall message seems so shallow, but it makes sense with the way the movie reminded me of an overlong TikTok clip. I also found it problematic introducing our young 'heroes' in a theft montage without any remorse or questioning those acts. It's really weird how tone deaf some moments feel. Almost like a supervillain who wants kill all humans to avenge his Dad, who was a Human, mind you. I respect the attempt to try something new with this franchise, but they could have used better writers before they plunge hundreds of artists to give their sweat and blood for a half-baked movie.
Gojira -1.0 (2023)
Beast of a movie
It's a great movie that reminded me of the Golden era of Blockbuster movies with great action, suspense and heart. It's almost a rarity to see likeable characters in blockbuster movies nowadays that this movie feels like a breath of fresh air. Motivations are clear, ramifications have impact a'd Godzilla really feels more a force of nature rather than a movie monster. I can not express how important that simple notion is for the success of this film. The movie has a very immersive quality to it. Some scenes reminded me of other movies like Jaws (2nd Godzilla encounter) but in a good way. Another reason this movie is ahead of mindless popcorn flicks is that it genuinely has something to say. Not only is the protagonist a tortured character, nearly all the characters are reeling in from trauma, thanks to the post war setting. It's a smart choice to make the story take place in this era. Not only does it double down on the struggles of our characters. There is also a sense of desperation and vulnerability, since Japan is in shambles and doesn't have the resources or manpower to defend itself, especially not for this unstoppable force. I liked Shin Godzilla (2016) equally as well as this one, but both movies set out to do different things. This is definitely more character drive and is more appealing to general audiences. It wouldn't surprise me of this becomes a sleeper hit in the west (once it gets proper distribution). There are of course a few minor flaws, like sometimes the cgi is a bit too obvious, and I don't mean on Godzilla but on certain vehicles, trains etc. Also without getting into any spoilers there are two things happening that are considered cop-outs in lesser movies. The first one isn't really a cop out since it really resonates with the themes of survival VS sacrifice. The second one though, feels almost like they bowed down to negative test screenings or something. But again, those a minor nitpicks. I watched this on an IMAX and while the size of the screen is impressive the main attraction is the sound. So I would rather recommend a cinema with Dolby Sound or something else equally fancy. This movie is worth the cinema ticket and if more movies like this would have been made, a lot less cinemas would struggle to survive. So go watch it on the big screen if you have the chance.