Tornado

Loved it. A simple story set in 1790 that could have easily been ser in the 20th century because the bulk of the film takes place in a forest or the area surrounding a small lake. Other than the "1790" indicator, only the costumes made the time clear. This struck me as universally applicable. Many scenes throughout were emotionally strong and superbly acted. "Tornado", the main character's name, was compelling and intriguing. I was surprised by the way she talked, as something about it felt too modern to me. The cinematography was beautiful and the soundtrack fit perfectly. A small budget film showing a period of transformation in Tornado's life. In order to move my 8 rating to a 9 or 10, I'd have wanted to know more about the characters lives before the events of the film started and to have had deeper, more specific emotions shared between some characters. I'd see it again.

Overall it's very mediocre.

I see the influences, but it feels like a cheap knock off.

The story is pretty basic, with a weird and slow pace. But it gets faster towards the end.

In general the production value screams old Samurai movies, but it feels like a cheap knock off.

The characters were okay. Tim Roth was a great antagonist, but I want crazy about the protagonist Tornado. The other characters were host mindless thugs or helpless civilians. The character arc of Tornado was decent, but other than that unimpressive.

In general the film was very underwhelming. I'm not sure if it's worth your time.

I was low-key looking forward to this movie when I first saw the trailer. An original samurai drama in European lands? Hell yeah! But in reality, this movie feels skeletal. The story is simple and promising, and it has its moments. But it lacks compelling characterization and the storytelling is kind of just boring. Certain plot beats just don't feel developed enough to be interesting, and things kind of just happen without much build up or clarity. It doesn't help that some scenes feel a bit illogical, making the characters seem either stupid or nonsensical.

Visually, this movie is fine. I love Tornado's costume design and the cinematography is decent. But I feel like the coloration is a bit dull and not all that interesting. The soundtrack overall is fine, but the more mellow songs are really good.

Tornado is such a missed opportunity, man. An original action-flick with an interesting backdrop and premise, let down by a story that feels unfinished and uninspired.

One Rewatch Later:

Despite being very disappointed on my first watch, I was kind of looking forward to a rewatch. I realized that this movie takes more of a minimalist approach to all of its storytelling, while I was expecting a simple plot with slightly complex characters or even deeper themes. I like a simple story, granted there's something that can interest me for the duration of the journey.

But after a rewatch and going into this with a minimalist lens, I've come to the conclusion that this story is either not clicking with me or there really isn't anything to gain from this. I knew the illogical script and dumb characters were still going to be a problem, but I was hoping that I could get more from Tornado's arc than I originally did. I was even hoping to like Little's arc a bit more, too. But rewatching this made me realize that this movie is nothing more than a cat & mouse chase around an interesting rural setting. There's so much running up and down that pads out an already short and boring story.

The thing is, I don't really find the characters interesting in the slightest. The story starts off fairly interesting, but then throws in a non-linear structure that doesn't do much to enhance the story. All of this is even more frustrating when I find the ending and Tornado's send off to be quite beautiful. But then I reflect and remember how much of a slog the journey actually was. It's like there was a deeper story that got cut for whatever reason.

Again, it's unfortunate because I like the premise. I've even warmed up to the overall art direction and visual style of the movie, and I am starting to appreciate Jed Kurzel's soundtrack a bit more (though it still doesn't hold a candle to his Assassin's Creed and Macbeth soundtrack).

Being a fan of Slow West, I was really looking forward to this movie. You can tell right away it is the same director as Slow West, John Maclean. His style is a very subtle, cool, relaxing form. Unfortunately, it means not really a good fit for a thriller.

The movie is almost same as Slow West in the element, a slow burn with a big finish. Unfortunately unlike Slow West, the ending was somewhat anti-climatic. This is very disappointing as the rest of the film, the story, was actually quite intriguing and keeps you engaged but the ending didn't quite satisfy.

Overall, I thought this is an average film, watch it once, you probably won't think about it again. The ending leaves many questions, but then you realize it is a western, it's not suppose to have a realistic ending.

5/10.

This is experimental cinema... a hodgepodge of various genres and styles based entirely on the imagination of the creator ... nothing wrong with that. In the 1960s, for example, the brilliant Sergio Leone accidentally created an entirely new class of film which HAD NEVER EXISTED BEFORE -- the "Italian western." Not merely a financial success -- it turned a failed, out-of-work, actor named Clint Eastwood into a Hollywood icon. Does lightening strike twice? Not here, it doesn't. Sorry. The rating is for technical merit only. The film itself will put you to sleep. ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))