Change Your Image
bj-bijaya
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Avatar: The Last Airbender (2024)
Shyamalan was Po-tay-To, this is Po-tah-To.
Even before I watched the first episode, I had been saying it during the teasers and trailers that it should not mess up the humor because the original animation was so "lively" because of just that. Now after watching the disappointing first season, I can rightly say - most cookie points are lost just because of the humor.
The storyline wiggles at most places. Even when you try to shut the original and watch this Live Action as a new piece, characters come and go as if they are "placed" in the show just to give them a tribute or an honorable mention. Zhao, Bumi, The Mechanist, Jet & the Freedom Fighters, Mai, Tai Lee, Suki, Avatar Kyoshi, and other secondary characters are just there serving no purpose, sometimes making no sense also. Revealing Fire Lord Ozai was a huge risk, since he was seen in the teaser too, and now having Azula and Ozai not just seen, but also serving no purpose has made Zuko's storyline blotched.
The White Lotus society carries a big part in the original, and here, Iroh and Bumi (ironically, together) yet don't even acknowledge each other is just plain bad writing. Story of Oma and Shu, the lack of urgency of Winter Solstice, the lack of built up for up Avatar Roku, Aapa's connection with Aang, everything feels haywire. Even if you close the animated chapter, and try to watch this as a separate entity, it falls flat on its face.
Maybe Dallas Liu as Zuko fares well since he is the most driven, and even sounds like Dante Basco from the original. Ian Ousley as Sokka is watchable, bearable but his character is just plain boring. Worst are the leads, Gordon Cormier as Aang, and Kiawentiio as Katara - they lack the zeal, their character arcs look confusing, and they don't behave like children but robotic adults.
I could find little or no saving grace for this. Fight sequences are sporadic and forced, and the "Avatar Culture" that all of us Arrowheads are so acquainted with, is tainted. I have had enough of these Live Action, NO SEASON 2 PLEASE!
Heart of Stone (2023)
One word: Stale!
Hollywood is suffering from a severe illness, and Netflix is the wrong prescription given.
Let me tell you why:
1. A movie does NOT need to have an international (read: inclusive) set of stars just to tell an action story.
2. Just in case you DO have an international array of actors, it DOES NOT mean that you have to diversify the location all across the world to tell a compelling story.
3. And if you DO go across the world just to showcase a threat, it has to be a PROVOKING story to make it "feel" like an international threat.
Heart of Stone fails from all fronts. This James Bond-wannabe is an overall slugfest from the very beginning. Even the twists we could expect are badly clichéd. The screenplay, thus, takes away most points of this movie, rendering it lousy.
Gal Gadot is now a painful typecast. She cannot carry the Wonder Woman image forever. Audience know it, but makers don't seem to get this. She is losing her touch with every other movie.
Alia Bhatt, even though a nepo-child, has worked hard and wide to get rid of her family's shadow and stand as a solid actor on her own right in movies like "Udta Punjab", "Highway", "Raazi" and the others. Her acting skills are beyond her Bollywood counterparts. But this movie austerely impedes her prowess; this is a black mark in her acting portfolio. 1/10 for her acting.
Jamie Dornan is probably the only saving grace in this movie. Dornan as an antagonist is fresh to experience; he has dropped his "pretty boy" charms that were stamped in our minds with the "50 Shades" series. I expect he would continue doing so in future.
Direction and editing are to two technical aspects of this movie that follow its bad writing. The director does not seem sure where to take the movie's plot.
Most of the action sequences seem repeated, almost like a patchwork seen in other action films making it a stale work. Editing does not help either - it is sloppy and choppy at some instances.
Overall, I would suggest against this film: unless you are a passionate Gadot fan, or wish to spend time watching a mindless action movie.
Guillermo del Toro's Cabinet of Curiosities (2022)
You get exactly what you expect from del Toro
Based on the first two episodes (which del Toro also co-wrote), you get exactly what you expect out of Guillermo del Toro. The eery-themed colors, cold and bland environment, some ancient folklore looming in the background and horror that is not your regular jump scare but laid out with a backstory that engages you in every frame. Classic Guillermo del Toro.
The Cabinet of Curiosities, as every episode seems to likely have an enclosed space somewhere, the 'claustrophobic' settings were there in both episodes. Hope they will be the same in future also. But the payoff for both episodes were just okay. They could have been much better. Maybe the future episodes will have endings with better woven endings.
Werewolf by Night (2022)
Something 'differently' good from Marvel Ph:4
Judging "Werewolf by Night" as a standalone movie would not suffice, since it already carries the tag of "Marvel" with it. It's a Phase Four presentation, and that too would come into play. So far, Phase Four has not been able to deliver anything substantial - but at least, this TV movie (in itself) is a different, innocent-yet-packed presentation, which is enjoyable, had its moments, and has worked like a charm for Marvel.
The styling of the film (black-and-white), combined with an excellent cinematography (with the proper usage of light versus shadow, and flicker used in the right places) helps truly tell the story of a werewolf. The acting is gripping, especially the two leads - who have neither overdone their part, nor underdone it. The screenplay feels smooth, and acts like a short film that does not desperately try to stick either to the comicbook-source or to other MCU presentations. The music and background score (of course, since the director is a musician) is excellent - nostalgic and modern at the same time, which should be the best part of this film.
Like DC's animated universe, Marvel could actually choose to do these short TV movie offerings as standalone presentations. This one was quite appealing.
Aftershock: Everest and the Nepal Earthquake (2022)
Well-documented, well-made
As a Nepali denizen who lived through the earthquake and its massive aftershocks, this documentary made me relive the entire event from seven years ago. Everything weaved together in form of individual stories are personally crafted - from Everest to valley to the capital city, hence they make you feel the chaos and fear once again.
Some of the things mentioned in the documentary are true. Like the day of the earthquake and the day before were sureally ominous. It was dark and cloudy, and eerily silent. But the documentary takes liberty to make it a bit 'fiction-like'; that's where one might take it with a pinch of a salt.
This is Nepal's history and Olly Lambert has given his all to make this documentary personally connected.
Plan A Plan B (2022)
Something was happening... happening... and... nothing!
This movie had a good premise. So much could have been done with this even though the end was painfully obvious. But there was a hope that at least some salvaging elements could be there in the plot, but no, there isn't. Tammanah disappointed with two movies this season: Bubly Bouncer and now this.
Deshmukh was bad. I was completely uninterested with his role and was almost reluctant to play his part. Any other actor could have shown better conviction. He looks and acts outdated. All other supporting cast are cold, frigid - with no verticals.
The worst is the screenplay. The dialogues are corny, something painfully cringy and the set-up of the scenes are either childish or outlandish. This movie was a big waste of time.
The only decent thing about the movie was the music. Even though a better mixing could have served the movie better, it is the only commendable part of the movie. The costumes and choice for mise-en-scene deserve a little applause. But that's it! Nothing else is even worth a mention.
Babli Bouncer (2022)
So many right things... all done WRONG!
The plot for Babli Bouncer was on point. A village of male bodybuilders all working in the city, and now the village supplies a local female bully as the bouncer as well. It could have elements of comedy, antagonist too big for the protagonist to go against, societal no-nos to overcome, and yet have a social message at the very end.
But even with so much right elements to play, the director lost track of where the movie should head. The writing is really poor, dialogues almost cringe-worthy, and Tammanh's acting potential all gone to waste. I could rate the movie lower, but the enjoyed the premise during the first-half. But the half-baked romance, instable friendship, weak protagonist motivation, and the lack of any imminent threat left during the second half was not enough to leave a mark.
Justice League vs. the Fatal Five (2019)
It was good, till it became bad
DC Animated Features are fun to watch, but this one does not make the cut. Characters that were already featured in the past DC Animated movies are poorly written, and the newly introduced characters are not given a backstory that is "worth it". While the writers are busy plotting the story, the characters are lost somewhere in between - so neither the villains are threatening, nor the heroes seem to have an "eminent doom" handle.
While trying to bring to incorporate stories from various DC anthologies, the writers seem to have forgotten that they have specific fans rooting for specific arcs. This movie arises a lot of questions rather than answering what's next for DC Animated Features. The DCEU Live Action is doomed, but so seems the Animated World too. Highly disappointed with this one.
Incredibles 2 (2018)
Did I watch The Incredibles AGAIN?
Let's get straight to the point. I don't need to write SPOILERS here, simply because Incredibles 2 is exactly like its predecessor - The Incredibles.
The Incredibles is still my favorite film. But with so much of anticipation and expectation, watching the second edition made me feel just that, "I was watching The Incredibles again!"
The Incredibles starts off after Mr. Incredible wrecks the city. Same thing in II. The family has to go under hinding. Same thing in II. Someone has to take up being a superhero again. Same thing in II. One parent is caught up with parenting. Same thing in II. The fan becomes the superhero. Same thing in II. Parents get into trouble. Same thing in II. Children save the day. Same thing in II. Bigger eminent threats arrive and everyone joins hand to become the Incredibles. Same thing in II. The villain is destroyed by his own stupidity. Same thing in II. The daughter finally gets the guy. Same thing in II.
Director / Writer Brad Bird took a genius step over a span of more than a decade to come up with a story that could well become the second part. He Xerox'ed the first film, hoping that young minds would not realize. But what he did not expect is that there are REAL Incredibles fans out there, and they do remember every scene, every dialogue of the film. Wrong move, Mr. Bird.
And yes, the action sequences are way less in this IInd version. One more star taken away just for considering the fans dumb.
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
Best Thor movie till date, but not the best from MCU
Thor: Ragnarok is beautifully made. The comic timing is great, the action sequences fill you with energy, and of course the acting is good. The director deserves a round of applause.
What I like the most about this film is - it is "Asgardian" film. The setting makes you feel like you are watching a Thor film, completely detached from influences from Earth (even though Dr. Strange is there for some few minutes).
But with all this said, Ragnarok is still missing that 'conflict' and 'resolution' balance that otherwise all MCU films had (except perhaps Spiderman: Homecoming. That film was bad).
The conflict between Thor and Hela is more of who-threatens-who more rather than who is fighting whom. She is a menacing villain, I agree, but her intentions aren't clear. She is freed from her prison and hopes to win over Asgard. Why does she, then, wait for such a long time to do so? Was Heimdall her worthy adversary then? Or, was she simply waiting Thor's return? What was stopping her from causing havoc/Ragnarok of her own?
Also, (SPOILERS AHEAD) when Thor realizes Ragnarok is bound to happen, why does Hela try to save Asgard? Did she not realize that "Asgard is its people?" Seems like she was closer to Odin than Thor ever was (she was his 'executioner' for crying out loud!)
Technically and via its story, Thor is the best in its own series. Seeing the funnier side of Hulk, and the eye-candy Mr. Goldblum was just too satisfying. But the end battle and sequences, the justification of the film's ending, motif of Hela, and obviously motif of Loki is somewhat misleading and/or not defined properly.
I rate this film 7/10. Best Thor movie, but not the best from MCU.
Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017)
Good action sequences, bad plot line
If you admired Kingsman: The Secret Service, then this film will disappoint you; not just from a single front but from multiple angles.
With that said *SPOILERS AHEAD*
First of all, the antagonists and their ploy isn't as threatening as it was in the first movie. While Julianne Moore as the villain was a good casting choice, her character Poppy does not even have the 'looks' of a villain, let alone her intentions to 'destroy the world'.
Also, Colin Firth's Henry feels like a liability instead of the 'super agent' he was portrayed earlier. It is understandable as to why his character needed to be sloppy, but why would he not justify his actions ? Why does he keep quiet about his action to Eggsy? It is rather amusing that the screenwriter thought audience would never ask such questions.
Kingsman: Golden Circle also does not justify the reason for having Golden Circle tattoos. Who gets them? Why do they get it? Also, why does Charlie's girlfriend have the tattoo if she is not actively involved in the ploy?
How did so many cages appear at once? Why did people still enter the square after seeing so many people affected? Why did no one have a cell phone to inform the authorities that they were being captivated?
Why are people kept like mannequins after they are paralyzed and not reclined? Why did no one think of going to a doctor immediately after developing the 'blue rash'? If Henry had such an affinity with butterflies, why was a dog his 'jump start' memory cue?
Small nagging questions like these do not let you enjoy the action that so beautifully adorns the film. Wasting actors like Michael Gambon, Channing Tatum and Halle Berry in insignificant roles don't help either.
I was prepared to enjoy the film thoroughly. But all the 'glitches' mentioned above plus seeing Elton John in such a horrendous character that does not even suit a hobo averted my hopes.
Give it a try for action sequences, but make sure your 'logic' department in the head is shut down!
Seto Surya (2016)
Treading a fine line between art and entertainment
During the People's War in Nepal, art and entertainment field took quite a toll. Nepali films from the past decade were marred by ripped off story-lines from B grade Indian films, dialogues were corny, and filmmakers made films just to make their hands and mouth meet.
The country is still torn apart by the war, but with films like "White Sun", attempts to heal the country with art and entertainment has been evidently apparent. The film shows a post-war scenario and tells the story of an ex-combatant trying to make his ends meet as the country is declared Republic.
Per se, actor Daya Hang Rai has portrayed that ex-combatant's character to an optimum best. From his personal dilemma to his familial and societal convulsions, each personification has been aptly enacted. Actor Rabindra Singh Baniya has aided Rai as a counter-hero, offering the role of an antagonist without obviously doing so. The children from this film deserve a bow - without them, this film would have been a linear story. Their story and dynamism has angled the film into two dimensions.
Director Deepak Rauniyar has been able to connect the three eras of Nepali political scene: the pre-war Monarchy, the war-torn people, and the country getting prepared for a Republic State. Bringing these three elements together was already a challenge, but Rauniyar has excelled to justify 'artistic' style of film making, all the while, making it entertaining to watch also.
Birth of the Dragon (2016)
Don't talk about Kung-fu, if you don't know Kung-fu
The trailer for this film had already bugged me. First of all, Bruce Lee isn't all about Kung-fu. He was the founder of Jeet-Kun-Do, which came out as an offspring of Taekwondo mixed with many other forms of martial arts including Karate (which is shoved off in the trailer itself!)
When a film is said to be inspired by true events, at least the basic true events have to be correct. The life and times of Bruce Lee was largely covered by his passion to "showcase" his martial arts and bring forth new students who could popularize Jeet-kun-Do in future. The reason he chose to do films is also because of that very reason.
The film has tried to portray one of the finest commercial martial artists in a bad picture. It's for the filmmakers' intent alone that this film deserves a cold shoulder from the fans of Bruce Lee.
The makers could have at least watched a few documentaries about Master Lee before making this film. Or at least browse the basic Wiki page before writing the script!
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Wrong things at wrong times
Film makers should understand that every viewer that enters the theater to watch a film comes with a clean slate. They don't have back stories to support a back-story of a character, nor all the viewers read all comics with enthusiasm.
That's what Batman V Superman exactly does not do. It just 'puts it out there', as though we hold a PhD degree in DC comics. That's where everything started to get messed up. The reason why Batman is so adamant to go against Superman itself does not hold a strong ground. Rest of the movie is just a Krypnonian (if you understand the metaphor) error of it all.
George Clooney can now finally breathe his sigh of relief. He isn't the only one who has messed up Batman's personification in live action. Kudos, Ben Affleck, you have surpassed Mr. Clooney. Gal Gadot is a miscast, I put a rest to that.
Jesse Eisenberg, however, showed some promise in the character. But comic book fans will have a bad taste. Lex Luthor is supposed to be menacing, calculative, and manipulative. Here in BVS, Eisenberg is trying to rip off Heath Ledger (acting all crazy all the time does not win you an Academy Award Mr. Eisenberg).
And for an action film, the film lacks the concept of it genre too. It's an 'action' film with all the right actions missing! Did not expect that from the man who made 300 and Watchmen. All the wrong things done at wrong times! Eat and chew Mr. Snyder, don't try to swallow it a whole. This is DEC, not MCU.