Change Your Image
amoore-4
Reviews
Gladiator II (2024)
It's not an enjoyable, believable watch. Here's why...
Gladiator 2 is, at the core, a last gasp by an aging director to capitalize on a highly successful blockbuster, to seal his legacy as one of the greatest directors. It didn't work. Gladiator 2 feels like the 'other version' of Gladiator 1 filmed at the same time but deemed inferior and shelved. This version taking place two decades later with different actors and an alternate script feels just like that. Gone are the triumphant moments you root for. Gone are the characters you felt deeply for. Gone is the epic love interest that so much of the film hinged upon. Gone is the gladiator who engenders strength, on screen charisma, good oratory skills and sex appeal. What we have is an attempt to recreate these important elements of fine film making. There were so many better choices for the role of Lucius. This unimposing man is far from what you would expect to see fighting and winning against large strong opponents and dangerous animals. The director would have you believe his cunning, his intelligence, his love of poetry and his 'rage' is all it takes to win against insurmountable odds stacked against him. Additionally Denzil Washington was a distraction. He was simply added to bring diversity and star power to a film Ridley Scott knew was going to struggle in the footsteps of a classic. And he was right. But the choice of Washington means he'll take away attention from the Roman character and make himself the center of attention, particularly distracting with his demonstrated inability to look, act or do different accents or dialects. He's the same in all roles, that's his calling card. He's there as 'insurance' to boost ticket sales, particularly for those who will watch him no matter what he's in. For those of us who were looking for a sinister, cunning, ladder climber his usual good guy roles are already working against him. There were dozens of lesser known actors of either color who could have carried this off so much better. Samuel L Jackson (yes, he's even more famous but he can wear any hat given to him), Ving Rhames, Jeffrey Wright. Idris Elba or Morgen Freeman all of whom can play convincing bad guys.
Bottom line Gladiator 2 did not suspend this contributor's disbelief and if you keep an open mind and judge it fairly even as you weather the blizzard of hype coming from the production house PR dept and critics paid to review big budget films, wink wink, I believe you'll agree. If you saw the first film, but more importantly if you enjoy well written film and TV series of which there are some good ones at the moment, you will see this sequel as, not necessarily a failed attempt, but a disappointing redition of what has become a classic Roman epic: Gladiator.
Ridley Scott for all his creative and screenwriting success simply couldn't repeat Alien where Aliens was as good or better. If you are thirsting for good Roman fighting scenes, strong acting and story telling with lustful interludes without the weird sexual innuendo, idiot Caesars, giant man eating monkeys, sharks, yes sharks, (don't ask), then pass on this sad attempt and watch the adult oriented series Spartacus (2010).
I'm a firm believer in paying only for entertainment that makes me laugh, cry, jump up, freaks me out, keeps me rivited or let's me fall in love..., but not when it insults my intelligence. And if we all follow this straightforward principle by doing our due diligence before running off to the theatre we'll get less of these stinkers in the future as movie moguls react to our elevated state of accepted excellence in movie making. It's all about the money for them and if we hurt them at the box office change will happen... if not, like Alien 5, we'll get Gladiator 7 in the 2030s. Is that what you want?
Ray Donovan (2013)
Very good series, here's what could have been done better...
This series could have had a 9+ rating because it has so much going for it. Great A-listers, well written scenes, good action, but here's where they went wrong.
Some of the time it moves too slowly; pacing is important but not without riviting dialogue or believable action. The action meets the standard but Ray's conversational retisence often makes the quiet times drag.
Doe-eyed Bridget: her character goes from the small role, mannered proper girl to the arrogent profane-laced drug taking, parent bashing miscreant. She's been directed to act like the female can-do-anything sterotype. Been done so many times before.
Phony intimacy. They make Ray appear to be 'ready' when everyone knows it takes longer to both get prepared and how long it takes to 'finish'. You know what I mean. They should watch some European films to learn how long it really takes.
Bunchy was made to look too stupid and easily manipulated. No grown man is that screwed up and goes on for that long without dying, ending up in jail or institutionalized. And his family wouldn't spend so much time trying to get along with him.
Terry would never have been involved with nice looking intelligent women who saw his condition. A successful policewoman would not have become romantically involved with a man with clear signs of Parkinsons. Involved maybe, but not professional career women. Let's be real.
Ray does nothing but drink... whiskey... at every opportunity. You never see him eat, just drink. It appears he survives on alcohol alone. I like whiskey too, but if I drank like him I'd be dead of sclorosis of the liver by season 4.
Cobra Kai (2018)
Entertaining but don't expect a believable drama
This is a feel good, lighthearted drama filled with the ups and downs of teen relationships. Over six seasons some of the characters from the 80s flick The Karate Kid reprise their role and deal with the same competitive issues 30 years later. Of course it's exciting to see them back again as older versions of themselves dealing with the same problems and new challenges in a different time. The feeling and mood of the film carries over into the series but the tight, action oriented film tempered by the ever peaceful Mr Miyagi made the movie special. The high rating of the series comes mostly from the sentimental value the series. Camera angles and baggy clothes mask the overweight Tori and Samantha's karate moves. If diversity wasn't interfering with character choices, they wouldn't be here. In summary, if it were stand alone without the successful history of The Karate Kid this series would likely be 7 to 7.5 on the IMDB scale.
In other words it's worth watching for its nostalgic retro view of The Karate Kid. The soundtrack is hard to take at times and the karate action starts with party fights but as the point of the series is to show truth and honor triumph over anger and brute force, in the end it's family friendly karate fun, mostly tongue in cheek.
The Walking Dead: The Ones Who Live (2024)
Directed by Frank Darabont it isn't.
I only watched Season 1 of TWD for the novelty of seeing dead people eating live people and because Darabont (The Shawshank Redemption) directed Season 1 until he had a falling out and departed the series. Season 1 was actually pretty good due entirely to the script and direction. Season 2 fell off a cliff and the rest of the seasons never recovered the 'glory' of S1.
So a decade later I gave both TWD: Daryl Dixon and TWD TOWL a shot but alas the undead soap opera continues. The dead play a small part and I suppose it's necessary as dialogue between them is pretty scarce ;-)
The series writing and directing died 10 years ago but fascination addiction had set in and the studio saw dollars to be made from the ratings. Actually the relatively high rating of TWD is a reflection of the first season's rating. People saw the high ratings and though it was worthwhile. It wasn't but the ratings did their work and it became a self fulfilling prophecy. The rest is history. This series is no different. Even the spin off series are boringly uncreative in their titles; depending on TWD to bring in the bucks. Don't waste your time when there are so many good series available.
Fargo (2014)
Fact is sometimes more riviting than fiction
If a story is well told, a real life story can be more exciting than a writers imagination. Fargo in its latest iteration is just one of these real life events that force you to keep asking yourself "Is this actually what happened? It's just so extreme what these people are doing to each other!". According to the credits such gruesome and frightening events did take place. The producers have taken great pains to make it as realistic as possible and yet follow the true events closely. Sure the actors and actresses (yes, you read correctly) can only do their best to imitate the real characters, but I'm sure the director made sure the actors were as authentic as possible in their portrayal.
The story told here has been described by other reviewers so I won't repeat it but suffice it to say Fargo continues to be a tour de force bringing solid screenwriting, great cinematography and spot on acting to viewers of discretion.
Constellation (2024)
Nope. Another Sci-fi ruined by filler relationships
I just cannot understand why series or movies of this genre cannot give us a true sci-fi drama that focuses on the mysteries of space and man's need to explore the cosmos. Personally I have no interest in Sci-fi that makes family struggles and tormented souls the 'interesting' attraction at the cost of the unravelling mysteries of living or travelling through the great unknown. Of course the characters are central. BUT they must be interesting as they relate to the central premise and secondly to each other, not become the point of the scene. So, for example, detailing their private intimate lives, bring in family members or delving into their personalities that do not relate directly to the unravelling of the mystery is just padding... It's a common problem and the difference between a 7 and an 8 or 9 rating on IMDB. Take Villeneuve's Dune, Kubrick's Space Odyssey, Scott's Alien(s), Nolan and Johnson's Logan's Run, Lucas' THX1138 and especially Spielberg's Close Encounters of the Third Kind and you will see great performances that further the narrative, that enhance the tension or illustrate the conflict. Performances that stitch together the fabric of a bold and inspiring sci-fi idea, concept or simply a great adventure, like Star Trek or if that's too old for you, The Three Body Problem. Which brings us back to Constellation. After the first few episodes the writing has not peaked my interest. I know more about what I don't need to know, than what would keep me on the edge of my seat and leave me thirsting for more pieces of a puzzle. Too much personal distraction, laughable application of the physics of a gravity-free environment, ridiculous phoney re-entry scene and Jonathon Bank's poorly written role. Only the CGI comes off without an aftertaste. Watch any of the above mentioned films instead of this. Waiting for Dune Part 2...
The Walking Dead: Daryl Dixon (2023)
This is not going anywhere different...
Update after 2nd episode:
Frank Darabont directed season one of TWD. After that the following seasons became a snoozefest that lurched from smashing heads to boring conversations and back. The IMDB ratings for TWD reflect very high ratings for season one. It was too late to bring the rating down to reality so with a plus 8 rating showing year after year it drew in the uninformed viewer and the series became a self fulfilling prophecy. It never again lived up to it's first seasons ratings; not even close. So why the history lesson? Because this series, although only two episodes in, follows the same pattern as seasons two onwards of TWD. The brilliance of top writers (they're on strike) and directatorial stewardship is clearly lacking here.
This series is nothing more than a TWD reboot cash cow with all its weaknesses taking place in Europe. Just like TWD Darryl stumbles through France picking up a ragtag group of followers on a quest for survival and ultimately a return to the US. The usual scenes of religious followers under threat of being overrun but saved by Darryl are on display here, as is the malevolent male counterpart put to murder him and his followers. Sound familiar? This series is a continuance of a zombie apocalypse with little redeeming value. You've seen it all before.
A Spy Among Friends (2022)
Tight intelligent witty slow burn British American cold war spy story
I cannot understand how this superbly acted drama based on real life counterintelligence operatives receives only 7.3 at time of writing on IMDB. Damien Lewis )Homeland, Billions) is superb as is Guy Pierce. Accents are spot on and they slip convincingly into their roles primarily in early sixties London. Of course political correctness which has permeated the film industry requiring the production to write a black and a woman into into fictitious roles clouds authenticity slightly, but overall the production is authentic in all other ways. This is an intelligent, smart story that unfolds slowly that doesn't insult your intelligence. I found the weaving of the time line and character interplay riviting and I had no problem remaining focused, necessary to grasp the inferences and subtleties that unfolds over the six episodes. Highly recommended.
De slag om de Schelde (2020)
Another must see...
Yet another excellent portrayal of the horrors of war and sacrifice me and women can ,ake for their country. This is a balanced and historically accurate dramatisation of a battle we know little about. One that Canadians, the British and other colonies should see. We are exposed to far too many American fact and fiction war epics with big names and budgets, but there are many important battles by other nations during WW2 that never reach a wider audience. Like this little gem it's not a Universal or Warner Bros production; it's minor, small, lower budget film companies who cobble together the funds to make a historical record of heretofore undramatised but important turns of events of the war. I was touched by the time and care the director took to show how civilians and soldiers lived and died under such terrible circumstances. The scenes where a German soldier questions why he is there killing others and the scenes where a Canadian soldier encounters him are so palpable I cried at the end. May we NEVER allow humanity to enter again into such a tragic and avoidable sacrifice of men and civilians. I dedicate this to my father who fought for my freedom and liberty...
Foundation (2021)
Bears little resemblance to the Foundation books
Remember when they cast Will Smith in the role of Spooner in I, Robot? The movie was dark and totally unlike the world Issac Asimov wrote about. Worst of all the interplay between robots and humans was portrayed in a menacing way; missing the point Asimov so poignantly described and not at all what he was trying to convey. It was an abomination. In my 60 years of watching sci-fi both original and 'adapted' screenplays casting Will Smith in the role of Spooner was the worst. One of the best loved sci-fi books of all time was ruined by this casting choice and the decision to portray robots as a menacing force at the expense of the central tenet of Asimov 's book which is the fundamental question: 'Are robots alive and how do they fit into society?' In other words the sensitive and thoughtful nature of Asimov's thesis, that robots could co-exist with humans was written out in favour of the 'alien menace'. The original The Day the Earth Stood Still was vastly superior to this Will Smith abomination.
Then comes Foundation. In the hands of those that believe authenticity to the writings of Sci-fi masters is paramount, it could have been be a triumphant screenplay, accurately portraying the time, place, people and purpose of the author; a joy to behold. But it is not.
When I buy a ticket to a rock concert or the opera, would I be satisfied if the promoters decided to substitute the Stones for Billy Eilish? Or Mozart for Beethoven even though the poster says the Stones? After all, what gives the people who turn books into screenplays the right to REWRITE the author's story into what they want and pass it off on screen as the author's work?! In academia those that rewrite texts in their entirety and pass them off as their own with or without a citation commit plagiarism. But in the entertainment medium those with the money and desire to bring sci-fi masterpieces to the screen can buy the rights and then use literary license to produce a movie or series that bears little resemblance to the author's original ideas, characters, or vision; simply using Smith and Asimov as a money making tool to pull in large audiences. Such is what happened to I, Robot ... and now Foundation. I will not go into detail here how they have 'mortally wounded' this classic book. Just read the reviews. Suffice to say three key characters have been substituted for politically correct gender/race choices. To hell with the truth. This is how investors/producers/directors are rewriting classics to fit how the world sees the characters in 2024, not when the book was written in the 1950s or whenever. And the result is the slow but insidious rewriting of history where viewers, particularly a younger less knowledgeable audience thinks that what they see under the guise of entertainment is the truth...that the Foundation series on TV in 2023 is a portrayal of what the author was trying to say in tens of thousands of written words. But it is not! Read the wonderful book(s) because unlike Dune Part 1 and 2 which was a decently accurate portrayal of Frank Herbert's classic, this one most certainly is not.
The next time you turn to the classic movies channel and see how women's roles, cultural sensitivity, sexual orientation, family manners, or race relations are naturally portrayed in that era, thank your lucky stars we have a record in celluloid of how things used to be to inform us of how things have changed. To deny who we were is to censure our past. Thank you for reading and enjoy the books.
UPDATE
I must also add (as many others have) that once a screen adaptation of a book betrays the underlying philosophy that connects the book to the author, the adaptation can no longer be called by its original title. The Foundation books by Issac Asimov have a clear philosophical underpinning; a thread that starts and finishes the work and leaves the reader with deep feeling of fulfillment: story-telling at its best.
This TV series lies to its audience when it purports to honor the author's original literary work. Call the series "Peyton Place in Space" "Foundation Soap Opera" anything, but you cannot call a movie or series after it's author/title when the underlying philosophy and fundamental meaning of the book is changed, not to mention changing gender and making it PC. As I wrote earlier, in academia, and as it should be in movie making, this is plagiarism.
Money and contracts underlie the truths of business in screen productions. Names, Titles and Stories are shamelessly used by production companies as marketing vehicles with truth being the first casualty when not honoring the author's philosophy, characters and story.
Silo (2023)
It's still too early in season 2...
We're only one episode in but not a particularly good start. Our protagonist is just making her way through a silo trying to put a makeshift bridge across a broken walkway keeping her from ascending the silo This episode starts with a mass suicide when everyone from a silo races out the door and appears to die in large numbers. We see her entering this silo and struggling to open doors and make her way towards a rhythmic metallic noise on the other side of the broken walkway. She being flashbacked to a child where she fixes things. Clearly this episode is doing its best to prove she's strong and technically smart when actually Common should have got her character and she, his. That would have been much more interesting, but we're living in a girl power era. So we'll see if this season can match last season, but the story will need to pick up, the suspense needs to rebuild and more characters need to flesh out the episodes. It's still a bleak landscape outside the silo(s) and it appears inhospitable as a space suit is needed. But magically the air is good inside the deserted silo with its doors open and the lights are on, so there's still much to explain. There has been so many excellent series this year that Silo has slipped well down my list of must-sees. It's going to be a long climb up to a level to where my disbelief will be suspended...
Echo of Diana (1963)
Not a bad little story
Kind of surprised at the 5.5 rating. It's definitely not. It's a simple story but with some interesting twists and turns. The acting is very good and at no time did I disbelieve what was going on. At the time of writing (2023) the lead actor is still alive, about to turn 100 this December. The others have all long since passed. As a Canadian I get to see many British movies here in Austria by watching a British channel on my TV courtesy of my giant satellite dish capable of capturing faint signals from abroad. This film was above the average of the ones I've seen over the years and enjoyed the way it ended.
The Night Agent (2023)
Writing and acting weak but engaging action
I rate the first three or four episodes 3 out 10 due to poor character development, unconvincing delivery and terribly written dialogue. In addition almost all the strong roles are women and the men, especially the lead, are emasculated. The young female lead, the neice, goes from being a cyber security expert civilian to playing a key role in all Secret Service and FBI activities in one episode. It was not able to suspent my disbelief past 30 minutes. If you're looking for examples of Hollywood desperately trying to advance womens' roles at the cost of forced acting bordering on laughable, this is it. There are some believable female roles, but the director/production decided to promote as many female roles as possible. Even if the acting is weak and the roles are not well cast. The most interesting characters are the assassins, especially the male who is killed off in the 8th episode. The overall story has good potential and shows complexity, and it's fairly well developed throughout the 10 episodes ending in a predictable conclusion. But there are so many instances of weak line delivery and poor writing you'll start yelling at the TV or grasping your head in disbelief. In the final 6 episodes the action increases and characters are knocked off raising the stakes and increasing tension, allowing you to take the focus off the weak points I mentioned and get into the developing story. I would rate the last three or four episodes 7.5, but the major weaknesses are still present. The series gets off to a very shaky unbelievable start and ends predictably. In the hands of an experienced director and screenwritten by a Breaking Bad writer this series could have easily been a 8.5+. Disappointing...
Star Trek: Picard: No Win Scenario (2023)
We're getting close to Star Trek
The first two seasons of Picard are throw away. This season's storytelling may save it from the fate of Discovery: a directionless mish-mash of time and space. The first four episodes, which are really an almost two hours movie, have now shown that Star Trek may not be dead after all. Breathing life into the series using established Star Trek characters, familiar aliens, an omnipotent adversary and smart script writing may just save this aging franchise. Jean-Luc Picard is frail and lacks the energy and personal power he once had but shows promise when pushed to take command. Riker is still 'the man'. He has good on screen presence and other than a greying beard brings familiarity and reassuring self confidence to any scene he's in. Seven-of-nine has never been a great actress, just a great body, but in Picard she's starting to show her acting chops, likely because a tight fitting one piece jumpsuit and menacing half Borg attitude has been replaced with a more challenging role as an unofficial member of the crew trying to find her footing amongst the established crew members and the new younger officers. But the actors aside, the story told in the first four episodes of the third season, climaxing in yesterday's finale is refreshingly reminiscent of the dangers TNG crew and starship encountered in so many of their better episodes throughout their long run. I had given up on Picard, like Discovery, but I may now just sit back in my chair and say "engage".
The Last of Us (2023)
Solid first episode but suffers from TWD syndrome
End of Episode 8 review:
TWD syndrome is when a great director like Frank Darabont leaves a series and far less talented directors/ writers run the series for years more on its name as nothing more than a zombie soap opera. The Last of Us regardless of its computer game beginnings went from a promising 'zombie' horror to just silly and insulting very quickly. The mountains in an early episode were the Canadian Rockies not the hills to the west of Boston. The Tetons as seen from Jackson, Wyoming were substituted by, you guessed it, the Canadian Rockies again. A whole episode to placate the LGBQT lobby had nothing to do with surviving the infected zombies storyline and was a complete distraction. The episode where Ellie and her budding lesbian love interest spend the day in the mall playing games insults everyone with its pointless narrative; again fulfilling an agenda all to common these days. Ellie is not a born leader or intelligent as the writers keep telling us. She starts off in episode one as an annoying girl brat that you just want to send to bed without her dinner; or like me you just keep wishing she'd get eaten by a crowd of zombies. She's Joel's nightmare and his trumped up loyalty to the woman who foisted Ellie on him drives him to accompany her to some clinic where her blood can be made into a magic serum to save mankind wears thin very quickly, especially as he's quick to dispatch those around him but keep saving her from all the stupid situations she gets herself into. Instead of listening and learning from Joel she spends all her time doing the opposite, which of course gets her and him into trouble. The examples of this are too many to get into here. As the episodes progress her character becomes less annoying but no less absurd as she takes on men twice her size and dispatches them... Sure... In episode 8 her miraculous escape from the holding cell by tricking and killing her captives is laughable and insulting in its unbelievability. Joel's sudden recovery like the calvary coming over the hill in the nick of time is a total stretch, especially based on the serious life threatening wound and the few hours he has to recover after Ellie (incorrectly) administers the antibiotic.
The studio PR machine is milking this series for all its worth spinning it into the highest rated series at the moment, undeservedly. Don't be fooled by all the starry-eyed reviews. If you step back and view it objectively without all the hype it utterly fails in suspending your disbelief and will erode your interest as it panders to select groups in society and wastes potential storyline on side shows. I gave it 8/10 after episode 1, then 5/10 after episode 6 and 2/10 after the disastrous episode 7. Episode 8 does not improve the score because it further focuses on Ellie's character at the expense of Joel's. He is wounded in episode 6 only to let the writers try to put Ellie in the limelight and hope she shines by forcing her to act like an adult and save Joel. I think most of us are tired of her 'deer in the headlights' blank look and childish attitude masquerading as some sort of new girlie talent. She's just riding the coattails of the inflated series ratings as long as it lasts. Like Walter White's co-star in Breaking Bad, she'll fade into oblivian soon enough.
The Capture (2019)
Taut, exciting, techno-political drama
This review concerns the complete two seasons. You don't need to be a nerd to appreciate the weight of the issues dramatised in this series. The story revolves around the use of facial identification technology and what it can mean to society. This is yet another intelligent British production that is well acted and believable. There'll be no spoilers here but suffice it to say the successful portrayal of this controversial topic is exceeded only by the frightening reality that it is either currently being used or will be soon, possibly for reasons shown in this series. Personally I enjoyed season 1 more than season 2 but both are very good and well above the average fare presented these days. Season 1 introduces us to the technology through the eyes of a British soldier and the troubles it causes him. It's really well done; Riviting at times. Season 2 continues and expands the theme with a new protagonist and delves much deeper into the frightening possibilities this technology can wreak on the population. Season 1 largely side steps the woke stereotypes found commonly these days in movies and series and finds its mark without drawing your attention to the choice of actors or the dialogue. Season 2 - even though I kept an open mind - starts to grate a little on my sensibilities as strong male leads give way to more female leads. The 'bitchiness' that tends to be seen with competing female leads is largely avoided with well written dialogue focusing on interesting content and developing trains of thought. Fortunately it does not fall into the trap so commonly seen these days of 50kg females physically overpowering 90kg males for the sake of promoting women in the media arts. But the producers, whether because of their own choices or pressed upon them by others, tick many of the boxes. Ethnic diversity across the board is on full display with mixed marriages, which, as portrayed here, for me stretches believability. It seems it's just too scary for productions to put ethic characters together in a relationship prefering to push the boundaries of believability by mixing but not matching. So in spite of what I've said above you may be able to suspend your disbelief and just enjoy it as I did, but it was borderline for me.
I suspect this little gem may not get the credit it deserves in spite of wide release, partially because technology crime is not to everyone's taste. But it's too well acted, brutally believable, and prescient to be overlooked. It may be one of the best 'docu'-dramas as a predictor of how this technology will someday be implemented, assuming we believe it to be true and not 'corrected'... 😉
Top Gun: Maverick (2022)
Just backseat cockpit footage... and superhero wannabe
This is the kind of cockpit footage you can get in real training and the theatre of war shown in many documentaries. Top Gun Maverick like Mission Impossible is strictly a money making venture; it has little entertainment or informational value and bears little resemblance to actual military activities.
Fact: non-military personnel are NOT permitted to fly military assets. Tom Cruise was NOT sitting in the cockpit flying these aircraft as it appears in the movie! He sat in the back mugging the camera. You're better off watching the TV series Seal Team which at least includes some actual Seal members and a well informed and accurately written script.
So, it's a Tom Cruise vehicle, people, little more. Set aside your TC idol worship and this is at best a movie about an unreal military operation with zero chances of success, until of course, the hero of the day comes out of retirement (unbelievably) and sucks up camera time. Kelly McGillis avoided this stinker, but Jennifer Connelly took the big money. Even the cameo from Val Kilner is dubbed as he is unable to speak. Did you wonder why Cruise, sitting thoughtfully speaking to the camera introduces the movie? Why is he out of character? This never happens at the beginning of a movie, right? He knew this was not a great movie and wanted, disengenuously, to thank you for donating to his production company and ingratiates himself to win you over. Did you think he really gives a s*** about your loyalty to sit through his movie? There are fine films out there that sometimes go wanting, that tell great stories and can be truly entertaining without insulting history, science, facts, or you, and it is a shame that their production companies cannot afford multi-million dollar advertising campaigns to promote quality film-making... and that truly is a shame. You as a viewer have to seek out hidden gems (and there are plenty) and support them. And every time you pay to see mega dollars being spent on TC closeups and totally unrealistic action scenes, you contribute to the making of further productions of this kind of chest-beating, Ra Ra, bomb-the-bad-guy-in-some-rogue-state mentality.
Don't spend your post COVID money on this nonsense. And remember the ratings for this movie come from two main sources: young minds who are yet unable to see how transparent this movie is, and two, millions of dollars spent on promotion saturating TV, and print media extolling the virtues of the next fantastic TC movie (read: hundreds of millions spent, must be good, need to recoup investment).
Update: I continue to see advertising and reviews (from paid experts) saying this picture is Cruise piloting a jet. HE DID NOT! Whatever camera trick they used, he's sitting in back of the pilot. Civilians are never permitted in the pilot seat of a military aircraft. You are being lied to to squeeze yet more revenue from this phony movie. In addition to him not piloting the aircraft (which he never comes clean on) he's a lousy actor. How many academy awards or awards of any kind does he have for acting? None. He just makes a ton of money promoting himself and his production company - he laughs all the way to the bank. Sorta like casino operators watching hordes of addicted gamblers throwing their money away in their establishments. Additionally the premise it absurd. Many REAL pilots have gone on record stating the stunts shown in the movie are impossible to carry out; they are just testosterone on steroids with no physical reality for the pilot (who would black out) and the aircraft (which would likely self-destruct); just eye candy. Expensive movies have massive advertising budgets to bring in an audience that will believe anything they're shown. Don't give in to Tom Cruise superhero worship. Like Trump who has gotten rich grifting the American public by saying the election was stolen, Cruise has a powerful economic machine behind him that inflates reality and plasters the airwaves with advertising to recoop the millions spent on the movie. Cruise wants to conquer the cinematic world with help from money grabbing Hollywood execs. Keep this in mind when scrutinizing the next Cruise "blockbuster".
Gaslit (2022)
Again, ratings are being unfairly influenced.
I should be talking about what an interesting and we'll acted series this is with a stellar cast, but instead I must inform readers to ignore the ~7 rating; it's better than that! Whenever a tv series or movie depicts right wing political operatives engaged in shady or illegal activities, even if it is based on an historically accurate story they skew the overall rating by entering low scores as a reflection of their bias. To confirm take a moment and read a few to see what I mean. Enjoy the well acted story.
That Dirty Black Bag (2022)
Can't understand the 6 and 7 ratings for this...
That Dirty Black Bag is a dark, sometimes violent but we'll written and acted western that pays homage to the classic spagetti westerns of the 60s with Clint Eastwood, Lee van Cleef and a host of well known actors of the time. Not only is it filmed in the province of Almeria, Spain (near Tabernas) with its stark, dry, desolate landscape, but it has overtones of Quentin Tarantino's dramatic, violent, oversized red credits style similar to what we saw in The Hateful 8. But more importantly it's a nod to the great director Sergio Leone who pioneered the good vs evil western with closeups of the cool, calculating and terror-filled faces with rousing academy award winning music by Ennio Moricone. We see hints of Sergio's directing style throughout the series but especially in episode 8 "The Great Duel" which is so reminiscent of the final scenes of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly replete with a cemetery, wide angle POV followed by angst-ridden closeups of the gunslingers as they prepare to shoot em' up. To make it even more interesting the evil protagonist is of Italian descent and of course the crew is 95% Spanish. As I write this there are few ratings for the last few episodes but I expect this series to be a sleeper, and fan reviews will come out soon with headlines like "the best western you missed" or that you should see... Definitely in the 8 area of IMDB...
Outer Range (2022)
The mystery unfolds
For people who write reviews that extoll virtues or condemn after one or two episodes, please learn how to review TV series. You can review objectively with or without spoilers an episode or two but you cannot definitively write that the series is terrible or fantastic until it has run its course. There is no rush. Learn patience. Seasoned and usually older more experienced viewers see the big picture better than newbies or younger audiences expecting instant gratification. Improve your writing skills by giving the audience the benefit of your episode analysis. And later as the series unfolds tie the parts together but refrain from summarizing the series until it's over. The reason for this that not all series meet your idea of quality and some series start off slow but take time to build. Jumping to conclusions in your review early may result in people deciding not to watch when in a few episodes it starts to really show its true colors and can even become a classic. Breaking Bad, Peaky Blinders, Dark, The Sinner, Gloria, and Mind Hunter (all on Netflix) are only a few series that were not immediately hits. To put it another way, many of the 'best' series start slowly and unfold unrushed to reveal complex and deep stories while less interesting series grab your attention from the get go but ultimately disappoint or fizzle. The top 10 series by viewers rarely include examples from the first group above; usually the 'flavours of the week' are new under-reviewed attention grabbing often controversial series that social media and advertisers recommend or 'push'. The morbid flash-in-the-pan novelty of a Squid Game will rarely if ever stand the test of time while slow burning Ozark or Outlander, for example, are riviting character driven layered dramas that deserve your attention. IMDB ratings of new releases must be thoroughly vetted to sort out the diamonds from the glass. Keep watching glass and studios will keep producing glass.
From (2022)
Starts out with promise...
...but devolves into yet another exploration of how the characters get along with each other. Emotional scenes are clearly overdone and often soapy. People being allowed to wield power over others or taking it by force and then dispensing frontier justice becomes the rule. 'Horror' scenes are just dark scenes of shadowy figures moving around at night with the appropriate half eaten corpse left somewhere in the morning.
The horror and suspense is replaced by the human condition devolving into tribalism, and is what happened to TWD after Darabont left after season 1. The series, written from season 2 onwards by various less visionary writers, became merely an exploration of humanity's will to survive and the lengths to which they would go to accomplish this; imagine a modern version of a Shakespearean play about love, betrayal and murder with zombies thrown in. TWD went off the rails when Darabont's vision was turned into an exploration of man's (in)ability to get along with each other and devolved into an animalistic tribal feeding frenzy masquerading as a character driven emotional drama.
The Zombies became background actors instead of developing a more equally matched adversarial playing field that would have kept us interested; shades of Squid Game would have been so much better. Keep in mind TWD's rating is only as high as it is because the first season's stellar start hooked viewers and Darabont's direction garnered fantastic reviews. After that the high rating dropped but the now hooked audience kept people coming back to what ultimately became an examination of the human condition under stress and lost the true center of the story: zombies taking over and threatening the very existence of human life.
I write this comparison with TWD to show that FROM is suffering the same fate. Episode 3 was written to show people adapting or not to their new reality, but taking the new family to the house where they will now live and where the mother and daughter were slaughtered without cleaning it up and removing blood and guts from the walls makes no sense. The Chinese woman speaking Cantonese to other members of town is also a stretch. Filmed in Nova Scotia Canada (but taking place in the US wink wink), immigrants 99% of the time have at least passable English. Episode 4 was written to develop the characters background and highlight one character's spooky nature. No scary scenes; no horror. The dialogue in Episode 5 is painful to listen to at times; it can be so simple it's infuriating. It amounts to pulling at your heart strings or rasing expectations when there is none. There is a lot of girly talk between the largely post pubescent female cast that goes nowhere. Nutcase Sara kills Nathan by accident while trying to kill Ethan. All written to inject excitement into a lagging storyline. Music plays a role in setting the mood and perhaps gives a sign about something not yet clarified...
Conceptually it has great potential. Rod Sterling produced an episode along the similar lines of never being able to leave the town no matter what you did, without the horror aspect. John Griffin who wrote this series has little pedigree although he may develop depth with time. Crater, his most recent movie is for some reason unreleased; it also has no rating and with go straight to the Internet making me think it may not be worthy of viewing.
It's pretty clear the producers are bowing to pressure to make this series as inclusive as possible, but this is unrealistic. Of course it has odd ball types wandering around, a priest, religious undertones, a sheriff, kids, a drunk, family breakups, arrogant demanding teenagers, a possessed young woman, unnecessary deep reflective moments, nosy neighbours, the list goes on... If scares are what you want; a well written original horror... then look elsewhere. If Peyton Place meets the Walking Dead is more to your liking, then stay tuned for more daytime blah blah blah and nightine teasing scares.
1883 (2021)
Cinema photography and music are highlight...
...but seeing the challenges of pioneering the west through the eyes of a starry-eyed city girl turned cow poke weakens the plot substantially, especially when she can't seem to figure out until three episodes in that a pair of jeans are more appropriate for horseback riding than a school marm's dress. Additionally casting a couple of well known country singers (not actors) as leads further weakens the believability of the story. Tim McGraw's acting is wooden and his character is two dimensional whereas in contrast Faith Hill's character as the protective mother is done quite well. Moreover, the adolescent musings of Isabel May aim this series directly at young women, one of the most sought after and, until the last 10 years, ignored demographics by producers. Lastly, the choice of sheparding a group of seemingly incompetent German settlers across half of America is just not believable. The writers have made these potential common-clay-of-the-new-west immigrants into a bunch of bumbling idiots incapable of swimming, riding, shooting a rifle and even getting along with each other. German immigrants were not like this. Language and culture problems, yes. Basic life skills, no.
So if you're in the largest segment of the Western-watching viewers (adult male) or fan of tales of the west regardless of your age or gender then beautiful landscapes, soulful southern music and the western charm and rugged good looks of Sam Elliot will not be enough to keep you engrossed. It's plodding and the acting at times can be off putting, but the scenes with Sam Elliot and LaMonica Garrett (Thomas) are well directed. With better casting and tighter direction this series could really have hit the mark. Too bad, really...
No Time to Die (2021)
No time to die... not until the production costs are covered...
Reviewing the demise of Craig's latest Bond is easy: watch the YouTube clip where in an interview he says, to the effect "Another Bond movie? Over my dead body. Well, maybe... if they pay me an insane amount of money, maybe"
He got two things right in this revealing interview: over his dead body and an insane amount of money.
When an actor is bored with/ finished being truthful to a beloved character, the actor should step aside or be replaced. And when an actor turns to the camera and says 'I'll do this movie only if the producers pay me tons of money' he should never have the chance to play the role again. His heart is not in it. For just under three hours he's humming Pink Floyd's "Money" to himself.
This movie is insulting on all levels but most of all to millions of fans who have loved Ian Fleming's novels and the on screen actors who personified James Bond 007.
Update:
It has to be said in addition to all the reviews of the movie itself that when we step back and look at the clear downward trend in ratings over the last few months as opposed to the flood of positive reviews in the first few weeks, it comes as no surprise. Why? Simple. Film companies spending millions in pre-release media hype is par for the course, especially when they know the film to be so bad that there's a risk of losing money. Remember Batwoman? And just about anything recent from Bruce Willis or Sylvester Stallone? Here's the equation that saavy moviegoers know: large production budgets + poor pre-release ratings = large pre-release advertising budget. Works everytime. Influencing the tastes and interests of moviegoers by developing excitement around an impending release is what they do best, particularly when their bottom line is at risk. If a broker calls and says there's an IPO you should consider investing in because the ROI will be attractive, how many of us would ignore the advice? Only the more experienced long term investor, that's who.
My point is there's no reason to spend millions on advertising on, for example, Parasite, American Hustle, Jojo Rabbit, Knives Out or anything from Quentin Tarantino or Martin Scorcese. Investors/production houses know, even on big budget releases that these movies will stand on their reputation and credibility (95% of the time) without having to mislead the public through pre-release media blitzes about how great this film is, but, as they know, isn't.
ABC, NBC, CNN, BBC, ORF, ZDF ad nauseam jump on the pre-release hype to improve viewship and take the money without a thought to the possibility the film could be junk. And why should they? They are in business to bring news and entertainment to the public and not to second guess the hand that feeds them.
It is up to us, the moviegoer to not 'invest' in movies that don't meet our standards. Everytime we rush to the box office and fork over hard earned cash for a substandard movie we perpetuate the continued production of low grade entertainment... a self perpetuating cycle.
To break this cycle we must become less reactive to media hype and peer pressure and apply greater scrutiny to spending our money on films that, like any get rich quick scheme will likely be a disappointment in the end. If it's being promoted 'as great' beyond reasonability or common sense then it probably isn't.
The Forsaken Westerns: King of the Dakotas (2019)
Classic B&W with Alan Hale Jr (Gilligan's Island) and Raymond Bailey (Beverley Hillbillies)
In the late 19th century a French aristocrat buys land in the Dakotas to raise cattle and ship them by refrigerated rail cars to market. A study of conflicted cultures as the Frenchman exercises his values leading to conflict and murder. A court case ensues a with a surprising result.
Godzilla vs. Kong (2021)
Special effects only; story uninteresting
Short, truthful summary: There is no viewing value in this film. It lacks a coherent, novel or engaging narrative. You'll wonder why people rush out to see it because other than 2021 technical CGI wizardry there's little here. And it's insulting. The premise lurches from one unbelievable scene to another. Honestly folks, it's a desperate attempt to milk King Kong/Godzilla for every last penny at the box office. Nothing more. Think of how citizen Trump is currently getting rich... same approach: promote as supporting quality but in the end it's grab and run...