Change Your Image
siderite
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
His Three Daughters (2023)
More of a filmed play, but I liked it
The entire film is about three estranged sisters getting together to care for their father in his final days. Sisters being sisters, they bi*ch and judge and cry and talk all the time. It all happens in one room, basically, with a few other characters having insignificant roles. But it's well acted and really insightful psychologically.
Now, this is more of a play, one can easily imagine it happening on a stage in a cardboard room. If you don't have the disposition, life experience or interest in this kind of film, probably you should not try it. I got it for the wife, but I enjoyed it as well. It's not an entertaining film, though, more of a life drama thing.
Personally I thought it was well crafted, saying exactly what it wanted to say and doing it well, with good acting, direction, screenplay and dialogue.
The Last Redemption (2024)
DNF
I watched like 20 minutes of it, enough to find everything: budget, story, characters, dialogue, fighting, acting, direction to be terrible. I mean, the starting scene is a woman carrying a child in slow motion and monologuing using words like "math". She's supposed to be a medieval outlaw.
I actually wanted to see this because Kevin Sorbo and orcs, I thought it was another Arrowstorm Entertainment production, but it's another entertainment's and it's not good at all.
What really spooked me is that really good veteran actors were doing so poorly: James Cosmo, Angus MacFayden, even Kevin Sorbo, even if he mostly plays himself at all times. The moment they introduced a small girl that couldn't act if her life depended on it, I turned it off.
My Old Ass (2024)
Slow, but delightful movie
The premise of the film is interesting, but to be honest, it's superfluous. It's all about a young 18 year old girl who is preparing to leave her small town to "live her life". The actress is delightful and bright and the whole movie is brimming with that nice Canadian vibe. Everybody is kind and settled and mature, in a nonjudgmental way.
If you wanted to see the film because of Aubrey Plaza, you're going to be disappointed, because she literally has only a few scenes in. Come for Aubrey and stay for Maisy.
Also, there isn't anything that actually... happens. It's all about being young and happy and full of hope and dreams and that's about it. A heartwarming movie, really, a nice disconnect from the everyday artificial drama.
The Wild Robot (2024)
Robot fairytale
This film was great from many points of view: the animation was top notch, the acting, the sound, the heart strings it pulled on, the classic hero arc and the fairytale elements of the story. It's a fantastic film for children and their parents. But it's also completely fake. Let me explain.
The plot of the film is that a robot with artificial general intelligence wakes up on a wild island populated only by animals. Following its programming to require tasks and provide assistance, it learns to communicate with animals and raises a duckling to maturity, while also finding its own heart. Beautiful story, right? However it leans heavily into those fairytale aspects I was telling you about: the technological utopia, the heavily anthropomorphized intelligent social animals that speak the same language, the animal utopia, the way everything can be solved with kindness, the benevolent and pristinely beautiful nature, and so on. It teaches children nothing of what animals are like or what artificial intelligence is or can ever be or even how corporations act when their property goes missing. It says nothing real about the world of humans, machines or the natural world.
In the end it's just another film about how feeling something strongly and wishing things would happen makes them true, which is how we got into this mess to begin with.
Bottom line: once you realize that technology in the story is a representation of magic and that the plot is not based on anything real and it's all a classic animated fairytale, you can enjoy this beautiful film made for children. But it never reaches one's brain.
Kill the Irishman (2011)
Decent mob film, with some gross exaggerations to make it palatable
Coincidence has it that this is the second Ray Stevenson movie I've seen today. He was actually a great actor and I am sorry he died.
This is a two hour classic mob movie, with the underdog doing all kinds of violent deeds while lively Irish is sung in the background to set the mood, getting into the big leagues and fighting to survive. He is portrayed as a good man doing bad things, more of an antihero than a criminal. Indeed, that's what the media made him at the time, mainly because he was bragging on TV about how no one can kill him. The film exaggerated these even more, to make the runtime acceptable.
The problem is that the first hour is just setting the story. You get to know Danny Greene growing in level from poor dock worker to mob boss. The second part is the one that people probably want to see the movie for, how people are trying to kill Greene and can't seem to succeed. Only that part is also underwhelming, because the film is based on real events, so they can't do too much with it.
Bottom line: an absolutely stellar cast, a very good performance from Ray Stevenson, but a rather boring story, only elevated by the quality of the acting. Mobsters be mobbing.
Canary Black (2024)
What a shameless movie
Luckily, I've watched Classified so this is not the worst movie ever, but it's bloody close. Imagine the most generic espionage thriller, fronted by a diminutive 50 year old female agent that uses her brawn and speed to get out of situations, with the sappiest most predictable plot ever and on the budget of a house renovation and you get this piece of crap. Why did they release it now? No idea. Ray Stevenson is in it and he died in May 2023. Did they wait until it was less offensive to the actor's legacy? Doubt it.
The funny thing in all of this is that after they use a title that may trick some people to believe it has to do with the comic book hero, they put Beckinsale and Stevenson on the cast for no other reason than taking advantage on nostalgic hope, after they use the most ridiculous and yet completely predictable story ever with no mystery or art in any of its components, after all of this, they end the film with a hint to a possible continuation. Someone believed that this could go on.
But wait, just saw the result of the election. Hell, probably this will become a franchise.
Joker: Folie à Deux (2024)
I think people not liking this film validates it
I absolutely HATE musicals: with their fancy pointless sets and the famous people singing songs that don't need to be there to tell the same tale. However, I loved this film. That's because the music makes sense within the confines of the story. It's the soundtrack people imagine is there behind their ordinary lives. Perhaps I was in the best mood to get it, but I really felt the emotion conveyed by the singing here. And no one is going to give Oscars to these songs, because they were part of the experience, not some musical performance.
Joker was great not because it rehashed the same old artificial drama in Batman comic books, but because it was real while everybody, including the protagonist, wanted it to be a fantasy. The sequel delves even deeper into this and gives you not what you want, but what you deserve. And there lies the rub: no one wants that. People raging against the film are validating every aspect of it. Hell, they were portrayed in it, leaving the courtroom in disgust. And that's the greatest joke.
Was the sequel as good as the first movie? No. But it was close. I also felt that it was deeper in meaning, too. It was impactful and artsy, but also entertaining. It was clearly well thought and I appreciate that they did that while also caring about the audience. I loved it.
Die Alone (2024)
A combination of good acting, fresh writing, some baiting, but a pretty simple predictable story done on a budget
One thing that bothered me about this movie was putting Frank Grillo on the poster, like he is a major character. He is not. He has what is basically a cameo at the very end. The only two characters other than other very secondary ones are Carrie-Anne Moss' and Douglas Smith's.
The story happens in a post-apocalyptic world in which some plant based virus infects people and make them attack and eat each other while slowly turning them into plants. Couchpotatosis, basically. The main character has amnesia and tries to find the girlfriend he lost after a car accident, while this old lady Mae helps him find her. And various things happen until he finds her. That's it.
However, the acting is really good, the sound, the sets, the atmosphere. I switched from "why does Carrie-Anne Moss play in all these stupid movies lately?" to "I got why she chose to play in this one". Douglas Smith did well, too, although I would say I can imagine the guy being like that in real life, so maybe he played himself :) A bit mean to say that.
Basically, an arthouse zombie flick, of which there are a lot for some reason, low budget, but well done.
Transformers One (2024)
Again animation with free creative control humiliates live action movies
Wow! I didn't expect this to be more than popcorn action, ridiculous plot, over the top acting and bad jokes. Indeed it was nothing like that! Another animation film that just blows the latest hundreds of millions of dollars live action crap out of the water. Why? I don't know. Maybe because studio interference for animated movies is weaker than for flagship projects. Or maybe because you have to draw everything and so you have multiple opportunities to realize what parts just don't work. But I like it!
The only problem that I probably have is that it is a prequel, so it has to tie in with the narrative in the existing movies and probably the comics and the toy lines or whatever. This was a perfect story just before the last 15 minutes of the film, where things just had to go crazy to enable the transition to what we know already.
What was beautiful about this film, except the animation which could do everything a lot better than expensive special effects trying their hardest to belong in a filmed environment, was the story. The characters were just the right amount of fleshed out, the plot made sense, the voice acting was very good, the message was inspiring, and so on. Being a franchise film it made sense to hire some amazing cast for this, but frankly, I don't think it was necessary. Interesting enough, this can be fun for old timers like me and children alike. There is a classical hero arc against an oppressive authority that lies to you and forces you to do soul sucking pointless work that can't fail if done decently.
And while this plot archetype has been a classic for thousands of years for a reason, I find it concerning that so many of our successful modern stories take place in a faux corporate environment, which shows both the way this cancer has spread in society, but also the bubble in which we put ourselves in by exaggerating with these stories. Of course, one might say that it's about a feudal authority system and not corporations, but I would be hard pressed to tell you what the difference is.
Bottom line: I think this may be one of the best, if not the best, Transformers movie. Not a masterpiece of literature, mind you, but just exactly the right ingredients in the right recipe to feel both familiar and fresh, inspirational and entertaining. Good job!
Seven Cemeteries (2024)
Mostly for Danny Trejo fans
Cheap Mexican modern western that makes little sense, but it's kind of fun. Imagine Danny Trejo coming out of prison, where he spent 28 years with 5 minutes off for good behavior, in order to be the hero a Mexican woman needs to save her farm from the local gang barons and corrupt cops. And he does it with a bunch of ineffectual undead former associates. At 80. How is that not fun?
If you want actual action, special effects that are more expensive than 15$, a meaningful story or acting of any sort, this is not the film for you. But if you want to see a very low budget Mexican The Magnificent Seven with a few lines that make you chuckle, you may enjoy this.
Classified (2024)
Hilariously bad
What the hell happened to these people? I used to like Aaron Eckhart, Tim Roth and even Abigail Breslin. How did they get into this movie? I can only assume this one was some sort of covert body positivity campaign gone bad. And no, I am not talking about Breslin letting herself go and then suing everybody who noticed, because she's a sweetheart, but of the "mercenaries" in the film who were out of breath after moving too fast up a few stairs. (And if you don't believe me, try to google Abigail Breslin fat and you will see no page displays anything about this except isolated trolls making unsubstantiated claims and adverts against fat shaming).
Really, this film looked like someone filmed a corporate retreat at the paintball farm. It looked homemade! Worse, apparently Breslin filed a complaint against Eckhart for being "aggressive and demeaning" after the production of this film, and so the filmmakers sued her! So it wasn't even fun to make!
And even worse, this is an absolutely terrible film! I mean... I am looking at amateur films on YouTube and it's hard to find one so bad as this. The individual scenes make no sense! Tim Roth acted like he just didn't give a damn the entire film. At least Eckhart channeled all of his anger of this production in his acting: he really felt upset. Not fit or in any way prepared for physical combat, but he did feel enraged. He absolutely got that right. Everything from acting, costumes, sets, cars, direction, filming, editing - oh, God, the editing!, plot, script, story, characters, locations was awful. I am pretty sure this was one of those scripts that was not generated by ChatGPT, because those are way better. The haircuts were bad!
Using my patented movie rating system (kidding, it's free), anything under 3 or 4 could actually be fun, in that Mystery Theater 3000 way. You get really drunk or high and suddenly it is hilarious, watchable with like-minded people. And I used to rate many movies like that when I was young, but I've grown as a person - my wife says I'm fat, but I know what she means - and lately I found something to respect in every film I watched. Not Classified. No, siree. This is an honest to God piece of excrement I am still not entire sure I've actually watched or just hallucinated. It wasn't my brain giving up after pleading with me to stop watching all kinds of stupid stuff, was it?
Anyway, this is one of those films that I can't event tell you to avoid, because it would have to be a film first. It is not.
Yôjû toshi (1987)
Neo Noir demon romance horror action film, in the style of Ninja Scroll
This is not a great story and the animation is, while very well done, pretty classic, similar to Akira or Ninja Scroll. Yet the combination of the themes, the artistic freedom, even the animation style still makes you feel something. Instead of being one run-of-the-mill anime, set in a particular rigid category, it goes into detective noir, romance, explicit sex, body horror, mysticism, action and so on. I liked it.
The story revolves around a "Black Guard" which is the name of the book it is based on, written by Hideyuki Kikuchi. Yes, book, not comic. Weird, right? :) Anyway, these Black Guards are an agency of enforcers between "our world" and the demon world. A treaty has been in effect between the two worlds for some time and it's about to expire. Our hero is tasked to protect a very important ambassador of the other side until the new peace treaty gets signed. He also is assigned a new partner, a beautiful woman from the demon world. You know the trope, it makes a lot of sense to assign a new partner for a very important mission, but I digress.
The plot meanders quite a lot, to varying effect. I feel like, ironically, an anime made today from the same material could actually be better, but only if enough creative freedom is given to the writer and animation team. While a bit dated, it's a beautiful film and one that could be considered a classic. It is worth a watch.
Twisters (2024)
Popcorn all the way
The cast did a great job, although some of the choices there were a bit odd (talking of chilling adventures, right?) and the effects and overall production values were very good. Unfortunately, this film is just a perfect popcorn flick and nothing else. The science makes no sense, the action happens just because the characters are there, there is a romance thing that does nothing to the plot and there are never consequences for the dumb thing people are doing. (I guess we're not going to talk about the guy they left in the path of the tornado, nor the other two trucks, right?). And then there is that "we gotta help people by going where the danger is and telling them, the denizens of Tornado Alley, what to do in case there is a tornado" which is just bonkers! The local yokel soundtrack and settings are not helping in giving this any semblance of intelligence or meaning.
I barely remember Twister, but I believe it was way better than this. To be fair, other than the name there is nothing to indicate this is a sequel or set in the same universe. It's a standalone fire on all cylinders money in, money out thing.
Bottom line: this is a by the numbers film, a country song of movies. Well done, but completely artificial. Amazing underused cast used for a mindless story that makes little sense. Ironic, considering the entire idea of the film is that people should follow their passion and not money.
Alien: Romulus (2024)
Actually, really good!
I dreaded watching this film. Not because of the terrifying xenos, but because it was an Alien movie featuring teens in a post AvP and Prometheus world. And it had that terrible name, too. Happy to report that it's actually a pretty good Alien entry!
In a way, this is an alternate version of a third entry in the original Alien series. It ignores Alien 3 and it incorporates some ideas that were introduced in Alien: Resurrection.
The teens are actual young adults, people who work towards a goal in a corporate lead environment like a Weyland-Yutani mining colony. You can imagine that in that place people grow up fast. There are still the usual Western emotional shenanigans, but they are few and far between. The main character is a strong young woman who has to juggle many things at once to survive, as is tradition, but the actress did a very good job with the role. I liked that they showed a bit more of the corporate world with more of the Blade Runner crossover idea underneath, but without committing to it.
The story makes actual sense: simple survival run on a deadline with aliens with some idiots thrown in the mix to spice things up.
An Ash model android makes an appearance as well as a mining model, with a design that is confusing to understand, but well played by the actor. The special effects are good, but not over the top. I loved the disintegration of the station and the way aliens and their hive looked. I liked the hybrid being - as usual, I rooted for the guy :-)
All in all, there weren't many cringe moments in the movie. I enjoyed watching it from start to end. The various plot holes or random events that just had to happen to make something work were not big and happened rarely. It is not on par with Aliens, but makes a very decent entry in the franchise.
Deadpool & Wolverine (2024)
A delightful parody, but that's basically it
In a world where everybody is tired of superheroes taking themselves dead seriously while wearing fancy pajamas and stories that seem to be made by ChatGPT, here comes Marvel Jesus to save it all. But he really doesn't, because while the movie is lighthearted, well acted, lovingly written, it is essentially a parody of everything Marvel without actually having a story or a world itself. Case in point, my wife, who has seen most of the referenced Marvel movies and series, but is not into the lore, did not like the movie and didn't laugh at most of the jokes. The end credit scenes even show a lot of old footage and behind the screen of the films that this movie is making fun of, which really feels like a good bye. "We can't believe we pooled it off (pardon the pun), but it's probably the last one you'll see". It felt like those scenes where old friends laugh together about the past while one of them is dying.
In fact I think I got exactly why a lot of people liked the film, but felt something was off. It's not a Deadpool movie, but a Ryan Reynolds movie, in the sense that it wasn't the Deadpool character breaking the fourth wall, it was Reynolds playing himself dressed as Deadpool with a lot of actor friends. It if practically impossible to get invested in the world building because there is none. It's just bits and pieces of others. There is no fourth wall to be broken, it's all an in-joke. I guess the multiverse strikes again.
Bottom line: I had a lot of fun and laughed my ass off a few times, but this film shows both the incredible power comic stories have and their greatest weakness: you mix them up long and hard enough and you can't find anything to relate to. In the end, it's the new stories that will matter, the new characters that you fall in love with.
Hell Ride (2008)
Tarantino what?
Some overly optimistic guy recommended this as similar to Grindhouse. Which I've seen long enough ago to not remember it mostly sucked. He also mentioned the writer/director (Larry Bishop) did Underworld. Which was not very good, I thought, but I kind of dug it. And so I checked out the film: amazing cast, Tarantino's name attached to it, however flimsily, motorcycle gangs, sounds good - let's go.
First, it's not THAT Underworld, but one of the many films named thus. A lot of hot girls in it, which seems to be at least partially the reason why someone made this movie, but no Kate Beckinsale in black body leather.
Second, most of the amazing cast is cameoing. You have Dennis Hopper jumping around the movie on his own motorcycle when the plot needs to move somewhere, and you have David Carradine doing one scene. Even Vinnie Jones, who is one of the main characters of the story, just appears a few times looking tough as nails and mean as hell, but not doing much. Michael Beach? Few scenes. Eric Balfour? He is actually a lot in the film and he is looking good and hot. Why he didn't make it on the big screen I have no idea. He had the charisma, maybe he lacked the flexibility. And Michael Madsen who just plays himself as usual. I don't like him.
Which leaves the lead actor, with most of the screen time and playing the most influential character. Larry Bishop!? Hell no.
Now the story is one of a war between motorcycle gangs. Yet the motorcycles are only shown as transportation vehicles. I can imagine the same film with people riding buses. If you put the story together, you get something relatively simple, but they tried to make it meaningful by cutting it to pieces and mixing it up in a blender before editing it back together. And that was really weird because the editors were professionals and not, as I had expected, Larry Bishop.
Bottom line: this is a surprisingly bad film considering what went inside to make it. The hot girls alone could have made a more interesting movie just by walking around a park or something. Many of the actors in the cast could have carried large parts of the film like Angus Young would carry half an AC/DC concert in winter in his underpants when Brian Johnson lost his voice (true story). Yet this was just... not entertaining, informative, artistic or interesting in any way or shape.
You like motorcycle gang movies, just watch The Bikeriders (2024) or Combichrist music videos.
Hellboy: The Crooked Man (2024)
Pathetic money grab
A red cosplay suit does not a Hellboy make.
The movie starts with Hellboy and his colleague transporting a demonic spider to their headquarters. Up until the end we never see that spider again. It's this level of stupidity that accompanies the entire film. Each step of the plot makes little to no sense, not only logically, but even in the literary sense. There is nothing entertaining, exciting or even scary in the story.
Then there are the actors. All spewing some fake Appalachian accent and behaving like crazy for no apparent reason. Leah McNamara was the only thing there that seemed like trying to act. She had a minor role.
Finally, the direction. Or rather lack of it. Or it going all over the place. I understand low budget, but this was alternating between really cheap shots and some unreasonably high level effects that brought nothing to the story. The snake effect was cool as were some other minor things in the film. The SFX team did good.
Bottom line: I am not really a fan of the Hellboy movies and I've never read the comics, but this was bad for so many reasons... someone will go to hell for it.
Avec amour et acharnement (2022)
A good film based on a bad story
I haven't read the book this is based on, but after seeing the film and getting that WTF feeling, I had to see what other people thought and yes, the book was not well received. Which is in sharp contrast with the directing and acting in the film, which was really good.
In short, this film is more of a play than a film, just a few characters, a lot of talking, a lot of emoting, strong emotions that overwhelm reason. I don't like theater plays much and this film is a perfect representation of why not: a lot of noise and a story that brings little entertainment, even if - perhaps particularly when - it's well executed.
You have three major characters, two guys and a woman. The woman is with one of the guys, but has been thoroughly in love with the other one a decade prior. And suddenly he pops back up into their lives. And they can't just say "this is awkward and I will take no part in it", so they dance this ridiculous dance that has a relatively predictable poor ending. Oh, and then there is this 15 year old idiot son of one of the guys who pretty much has no bearing on the story, but wastes a lot of screen time.
You can't fault Juliette Binoche, of course, she can act better than most when she's sleepwalking, and Vincent Lindon was great, too. The direction of this story was good, too, in the sense that such a nebulous plot was made bearable. But in the end the story felt biographical, because it made little sense narratively, and all of the characters were really annoying most of the time.
Dragged Across Concrete (2018)
Tarantino with no humor or long speeches
The acting is very good and the story is solid, safe perhaps for the ending, but it's a very slow burn that doesn't really get anywhere special. Imagine a cross between a Tarantino film, with all the random characters all having their own motivations and maybe not related to the story per se and ready to be killed off at any time, combined with something like Heat and you get this film.
The fact that it's a good movie doesn't make it entertaining, though. This is a 2.66 hours film with very good characterization, but very little action until close to the end, no jokes, no flamboyant characters that entertain through their personality alone, no famous actors playing long time rivals. It's a pretty straightforward plot about people entering something without knowing how they're going to come out.
Personally I enjoyed it, but it felt at least half an hour too long and, as I said above, the ending was kind of forced. Nice to see Mel Gibson in a good role, though.
Slingshot (2024)
Well acted I guess, but so useless!
This has to be like the fourth or fifth movie featuring astronauts on a distant mission, but being about the psychological state of the lead character, in the last few years. This things are usually giving themselves away immediately: artificial gravity, LED light everywhere, big screens, big spaces, lectures for children about the Solar System given to trained astronauts, things unravelling or not making sense, but always, always someone obsessively thinking about people in their past: lovers, children, parents. Because it makes perfect sense for a person to go through years of rigorous training to perform a specific mission and then, when they get the job, out of a lot of hard working and highly motivated candidates, they spend it regretting things and thinking about the past. And they were the best candidate out of them all!
What's the point?! Who watched these and then said "yes, that's exactly what I needed! A psychological drama, but set in space, although nothing spacy really happens!"? Science fiction folk don't care about the drama of it, they want the action and the science and the gadgets and maybe to feel that there is more to life than just the daily whining of people. And drama people want some sort of highly emotional story involving multiple people, but somehow resembling their life, not some person in a small space having a fit. What a completely useless film!
So, yeah, let's call this small-space-fiction. And the writer is Nathan Parker, of Moon fame! He did one good film about a guy alone on a space station 15 years ago and thought to remake it, but without a story?
Bottom line: the story is so flimsy that I can't talk about it without spoiling it. All I can say is that this is not science fiction, because there is no science, and one can hardly call it fiction, because it doesn't have the coherence of fiction. It's like a nightmare that makes no sense and you barely remember when you wake up from it. The only positive thing is that it was decently acted.
Trap (2024)
Can be interpreted in many ways
I saw interpretations like "A love letter to his daughter" (talking about M. Night) or "pointless" or "why make me root for a psycho?" or "a straight white male defeated by women" or even "Never trust Alison Pill". They are all valid.
The story, which is not really spoiling anything, is that Josh Hartnett is a serially killing psycho who goes with his daughter at a concert for teens. There he learns that the whole thing is a trap to catch him. Right there you lose a lot of people, because that's the dumbest premise I've heard in a while. But if you accept that part, the rest is full of tension, good acting and some smart ideas. It feels like an escape room thriller.
The interesting part of Hartnett's acting is that he really manages to convey psychopathy. He acts the whole time as a loving father and a caring person, but there are the little things that make you understand he doesn't feel any of it, he just plays a game. I like the guy and I loved what he did with the role. With that in mind, I was pretty happy with the film until it got to about half - that's like 50 minutes of solid film. And then there is the rest...
The second half is dragging along some lines that are very difficult to believe, but I guess anything to give Night's daughter more screen time. Probably the idea was to show us some of the reasons and internal mechanisms that made the character who he is, but it was in such a roundabout way that loses yet another lot of people. Which leads us to the ending...
Which is bad. It kind of tries to set up a Hannibal/Clarice situation, without any of the sexual tension, but it just... fizzles out. And the last reveals are just silly.
Bottom line: we are introduced to a charismatic and very intelligent psychopath. Josh Hartnett does a brilliant job portraying him. But the film is also a vehicle for putting the director/writer's daughter on the big screen, which leads to tens of minutes of unnecessary scenes. And the story is (expectedly so from old Night) overly contrived and sometimes very dumb.
Dialogue avec mon jardinier (2007)
A painting in film form
This is the story of two men who form a bond, even if they are vastly different. Nothing happens in the film, really, and also everything happens. Life. The film is beautifully shot, the sun and beauty of the French countryside, the colors, the shadows, with a very carefully chosen soundtrack that doesn't make itself heard over a level that would subtract from the plot.
I thought Daniel Auteuil was great, but Jean-Pierre Darroussin steals the show with a shy, honest performance. There are no other real characters in the film besides these two, although we meet their wives and their daughters and their mistresses. It's all about the friendship they have, simple, direct, with no expectations, just like the garden one makes for the other.
Bottom line: beautiful film, calm, artistic in a way that doesn't shout "look at me how artful I am!". You probably have to be in the mood to see it. It's short, but slow moving.
Watchmen: Chapter I (2024)
As good as the film
In fact, although I don't remember the details of the film, to me it seemed that this film was following the exact same story and plot and scenes as the Watchmen movie. I understand that there is a comic from which the material is derived, but other than a rather ridiculous attempt to make it less violent, I didn't see anything different. What is the point of getting someone brilliant to make this film if all he does is follow existing content?
The first chapter stops when Rorschach is framed and sent to jail. I liked the animation, I already liked the story and I feel like the voice actors did a very good job. Michael Cerveris does a great Dr. Manhattan and Titus Welliver can always be depended upon to voice a character like Rorschach.
Bottom line: so far I fail to see why anyone would choose the film or the animation other than that they like one medium more than the other. The story, as brilliant as it is, is the same.
The Crow (2024)
I understand why people hate it, but one can enjoy it
I think most people hating on this film are people who watched the original The Crow (probably a long time ago so they don't remember it well anyway) and expected better or people who look at the cast first and saw that the love interest actress has the name FKA twigs. But if you get over that, you might watch this and say "meh!".
Because Bill Skarsgård is a decent actor and while he had almost nothing to work with, he performed well. The story itself is not much different than the original, only with some stupid additions that didn't bring anything valuable. The sets and effects are good.
The problem is the story and plot. Things were added for no reason and things were removed or changed equally unreasonably. For example you have no idea why this film would be called The Crow. There is no reason for the deep connection between people. Nothing happens really until 45 minutes into the film. Danny Houston's character starts as powerful and ominous to then get a pathetic finale. And so on. It It's like the writers and director had no idea what they were supposed to be doing. This was supposed to make you FEEL something. Even if it didn't make sense, it had to be emotionally jarring and impactful. Instead, it's just bland.
Bottom line: I don't think it deserves all the hate, but this is not a good movie, despite the efforts of the actors.
The Twisters (2024)
Ridiculous
Writing a good solid is hard, that is why writers spend years on a single book. There are a lot of people that go to Hollywood hoping to become actors, but the vast majority of them get rejected immediately, mostly because they won't put out, but also because acting is difficult, with all the emoting and expressioning and stuff. Also, making special effects is a craft that is being honed in decades, an eternal area of innovation and struggle. So surely with terrible writing, bad acting and cheap soulless special effects you can't make a movie, right?
Wrong! I present you: The Twisters, a film so hilariously bad that I had to watch through it all. The bittersweet pain caused by watching completely talentless people trying their best was excruciating. I truly believe this film should be taught at school films, together with The Room, which is itself orders of magnitude more captivating and well done than this.
Must watch while stoned, drunk or otherwise mentally challenged, but it will be worth it.