SquigglyCrunch
Joined Jun 2014
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings1.4K
SquigglyCrunch's rating
Reviews336
SquigglyCrunch's rating
A Quiet Place is a movie I've been looking forward to for quite some time. Not just because of the cast and director, but because the concept was so good and the first trailer really sold me on the movie. For the entire length of that trailer it's completely silent (save for the end) and I really loved that. Unfortunately, the movie is more like it's second trailer.
First of all there were good things about this movie. Emily Blunt really shines, and in a way carries the movie. She's the most competent talent in this entire movie, and honestly I don't know if I would've been able to watch the whole thing had she not been there.
I liked the way the movie was paced, how it takes place in real time for the most part. There weren't any cuts where an entire hour or more will go by, the movie just keeps going and doesn't stop. I liked that, it felt more personal. And with the tone of the movie it really did work.
The first scene was good as well, it served to introduce the conflict and the world well and really establish what this movie was going to be tonally. I also really liked the ending. Sure it was totally out of place but it was kind of campy and I liked that.
Despite liking the first scene it also completely ruined the movie. It introduces the fact that there is going to be a lot of music. The movie is full of stock horror movie ambient or otherwise music that completely ruins the tone. If the movie had been dead quiet and all we as the audience could hear was the world and actual characters I might have been closer to the edge of my seat. Every sound would actually mean something and have impact, but the constant soundtrack butting into that silence made sound much less impactful. If the movie had been from the perspective of the deaf daughter entirely that would've made for a pretty dang cool movie too.
Save for Emily Blunt, there is barely a competent actor in this movie. Krasinski clearly tries, but as the movie wears on he slowly starts to give less and less to his portrayal of a character he wrote. It's like his passion for the film was just ebbing away as he realized what he had done. The daughter is usually fine, but she never says anything and her facial expression remains the same from start to finish. The son is just awful. His facial expressions are over-exaggerated and silly looking, and serve only the pull the audience out and remind them that this is just a movie.
The movie tries to establish characters for the first third-ish, but the problem is is that there are no characters. They're just a bunch of flat, one-dimensional beings existing in an empty world. They have no personalities, save for barely visible character tropes. Krasinski is a concerned father, the daughter is a rebellious teenager, the son is a coward but only when the movie calls for it. I understand that the movie was trying to get the audience invested before the non-stop climax that takes up two-thirds of the movie, but the characters need to be people for an audience to care, and I didn't.
In fact, this whole first character bit is incredibly boring. I was constantly fighting off the urge to nod off, and I almost walked out just to wake myself up. Heck, this is probably the only movie I've genuinely considered walking out of the theater for, and it's not even the worst movie I've sat through in theaters. It's just so boring, and the biggest thing it had going for it is quashed in the first scene. Sure the climax is mostly fun, but it takes a while to really get going because of how sleepy I was.
As a whole it's pretty generic too. The directing is nothing to write home about, the scares are often cliches that anyone who's seen a horror movie before will recognize. There's a scene where the characters hear something that sounds like steel plates hitting their roof, and it turns out to be raccoons. Really? A fake-out scare? Don't we have enough of those? And the fact that it sounded like something really heavy hit the roof just shows how amateurish this movie is. It's like the director was about the introduce the monster, then halfway through the scene decided not to but just didn't fix the editing. Way to go.
The monsters bend to the will of plot convenience. They are drawn to sound and have no eyes. It's established in the movie that they are drawn to the loudest sound in a given area. So how do these monster somehow listen through loud rushing water and hear gentle breathing an entire floor below them and be drawn to that. They serve only to drive the plot, and when Krasinski wants to bend the rules he simply does. Unfortunately that's not how to set up an engaging universe, sorry.
Another thing that could easily be a nitpick was Blunt's character being pregnant. It's established early on that this whole apocalypse thing has been happening for well over a year. So what we're expected to believe is that this couple decided to attempt silent unprotected sex and succeeded? First of all, how stupid can you be, and second, how and why? Sure it was supposed to built tension for the plot, but in the grand scheme of things it just doesn't make sense.
The second trailer gives away the entire movie. Part of the reason why I think the first bit was so boring was because we'd seen it all before. The constant dialogue in my head was "and then there'll be a shot of him and then he'll do that and this'll happen and yep, I was right." Honestly you could just watch the second trailer and that's basically the whole movie. I typically try to avoid movie trailers, but when you go to see movies in theaters they're kind of hard to avoid, and I hate to use the marketing as a flaw because oftentimes that's not even something the director actually puts together, but come on. The trailers had to have been approved by someone.
Overall A Quiet Place was terrible. It was probably the most respectful theater I've ever been in (everyone was dead quiet for its entirety), but that really only made it easier to doze off. It's not that I hate John Krasinski, in fact I'm quite happy at how hard he's been trying to establish himself as an actual Hollywood presence outside of 'The Office', and it's great that he got an actual budget to work with for this movie. But he really screwed the pooch with this one. Under a more competent director, this could've been a pretty incredible movie, and who knows? Maybe one day someone else will take this concept and make something of it, but for now, we're left with this total disappointment of a film. In the end I definitely wouldn't recommend it.
First of all there were good things about this movie. Emily Blunt really shines, and in a way carries the movie. She's the most competent talent in this entire movie, and honestly I don't know if I would've been able to watch the whole thing had she not been there.
I liked the way the movie was paced, how it takes place in real time for the most part. There weren't any cuts where an entire hour or more will go by, the movie just keeps going and doesn't stop. I liked that, it felt more personal. And with the tone of the movie it really did work.
The first scene was good as well, it served to introduce the conflict and the world well and really establish what this movie was going to be tonally. I also really liked the ending. Sure it was totally out of place but it was kind of campy and I liked that.
Despite liking the first scene it also completely ruined the movie. It introduces the fact that there is going to be a lot of music. The movie is full of stock horror movie ambient or otherwise music that completely ruins the tone. If the movie had been dead quiet and all we as the audience could hear was the world and actual characters I might have been closer to the edge of my seat. Every sound would actually mean something and have impact, but the constant soundtrack butting into that silence made sound much less impactful. If the movie had been from the perspective of the deaf daughter entirely that would've made for a pretty dang cool movie too.
Save for Emily Blunt, there is barely a competent actor in this movie. Krasinski clearly tries, but as the movie wears on he slowly starts to give less and less to his portrayal of a character he wrote. It's like his passion for the film was just ebbing away as he realized what he had done. The daughter is usually fine, but she never says anything and her facial expression remains the same from start to finish. The son is just awful. His facial expressions are over-exaggerated and silly looking, and serve only the pull the audience out and remind them that this is just a movie.
The movie tries to establish characters for the first third-ish, but the problem is is that there are no characters. They're just a bunch of flat, one-dimensional beings existing in an empty world. They have no personalities, save for barely visible character tropes. Krasinski is a concerned father, the daughter is a rebellious teenager, the son is a coward but only when the movie calls for it. I understand that the movie was trying to get the audience invested before the non-stop climax that takes up two-thirds of the movie, but the characters need to be people for an audience to care, and I didn't.
In fact, this whole first character bit is incredibly boring. I was constantly fighting off the urge to nod off, and I almost walked out just to wake myself up. Heck, this is probably the only movie I've genuinely considered walking out of the theater for, and it's not even the worst movie I've sat through in theaters. It's just so boring, and the biggest thing it had going for it is quashed in the first scene. Sure the climax is mostly fun, but it takes a while to really get going because of how sleepy I was.
As a whole it's pretty generic too. The directing is nothing to write home about, the scares are often cliches that anyone who's seen a horror movie before will recognize. There's a scene where the characters hear something that sounds like steel plates hitting their roof, and it turns out to be raccoons. Really? A fake-out scare? Don't we have enough of those? And the fact that it sounded like something really heavy hit the roof just shows how amateurish this movie is. It's like the director was about the introduce the monster, then halfway through the scene decided not to but just didn't fix the editing. Way to go.
The monsters bend to the will of plot convenience. They are drawn to sound and have no eyes. It's established in the movie that they are drawn to the loudest sound in a given area. So how do these monster somehow listen through loud rushing water and hear gentle breathing an entire floor below them and be drawn to that. They serve only to drive the plot, and when Krasinski wants to bend the rules he simply does. Unfortunately that's not how to set up an engaging universe, sorry.
Another thing that could easily be a nitpick was Blunt's character being pregnant. It's established early on that this whole apocalypse thing has been happening for well over a year. So what we're expected to believe is that this couple decided to attempt silent unprotected sex and succeeded? First of all, how stupid can you be, and second, how and why? Sure it was supposed to built tension for the plot, but in the grand scheme of things it just doesn't make sense.
The second trailer gives away the entire movie. Part of the reason why I think the first bit was so boring was because we'd seen it all before. The constant dialogue in my head was "and then there'll be a shot of him and then he'll do that and this'll happen and yep, I was right." Honestly you could just watch the second trailer and that's basically the whole movie. I typically try to avoid movie trailers, but when you go to see movies in theaters they're kind of hard to avoid, and I hate to use the marketing as a flaw because oftentimes that's not even something the director actually puts together, but come on. The trailers had to have been approved by someone.
Overall A Quiet Place was terrible. It was probably the most respectful theater I've ever been in (everyone was dead quiet for its entirety), but that really only made it easier to doze off. It's not that I hate John Krasinski, in fact I'm quite happy at how hard he's been trying to establish himself as an actual Hollywood presence outside of 'The Office', and it's great that he got an actual budget to work with for this movie. But he really screwed the pooch with this one. Under a more competent director, this could've been a pretty incredible movie, and who knows? Maybe one day someone else will take this concept and make something of it, but for now, we're left with this total disappointment of a film. In the end I definitely wouldn't recommend it.
L.A. Confidential follows three cops in L.A. as they attempt to crack a murder case that is more than it seems.
The three main characters, excellently played by Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, and Guy Pearce, are also well written. Yes, their characters are generally built around one major character trait, but they still manage to branch out from just that. The characters all have motivations that are laid out in expository fashion, but said exposition isn't so drawn out that it derails the film's momentum. It's quick, and it works to flesh out the characters. Not only that, but the characters go through arcs. They get over things, move on from ideas they once indulged, act out rashly like people do. They're flawed in more ways that just being dirty cops, and I think that's one of the best selling points about them and the movie as a whole.
I'm a sucker for a good crime story, no matter whose side it takes. Here, L.A. Confidential manages to forge a complex, yet largely easy to follow story. Sure, I got confused with some of the names and such, but the dirty cop formula is one that is often easier to follow than police politics. The movie mixes both, and it actually works. The crime itself is engaging to see as the detectives find more clues and discover more along with the audience. It's a lot of fun, and often creates some stellar tension.
If I have but one real issue with the movie, it's how forgettable it is. With poster art as bad as it has, it's no wonder I never paid attention to it until I saw the ratings. It's not a movie that would jump to my mind when someone brings up great movies, or even crime movies for that matter. Maybe later into the conversation I'd start raving about how good it was, but it'd take a bit to get there.
Overall L.A. Confidential is a really solid crime drama with great characters and writing. Sure it's pretty forgettable, and I probably won't see it again for quite some time, but it's a solid watch for sure, and in the end I'd definitely recommend it.
The three main characters, excellently played by Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, and Guy Pearce, are also well written. Yes, their characters are generally built around one major character trait, but they still manage to branch out from just that. The characters all have motivations that are laid out in expository fashion, but said exposition isn't so drawn out that it derails the film's momentum. It's quick, and it works to flesh out the characters. Not only that, but the characters go through arcs. They get over things, move on from ideas they once indulged, act out rashly like people do. They're flawed in more ways that just being dirty cops, and I think that's one of the best selling points about them and the movie as a whole.
I'm a sucker for a good crime story, no matter whose side it takes. Here, L.A. Confidential manages to forge a complex, yet largely easy to follow story. Sure, I got confused with some of the names and such, but the dirty cop formula is one that is often easier to follow than police politics. The movie mixes both, and it actually works. The crime itself is engaging to see as the detectives find more clues and discover more along with the audience. It's a lot of fun, and often creates some stellar tension.
If I have but one real issue with the movie, it's how forgettable it is. With poster art as bad as it has, it's no wonder I never paid attention to it until I saw the ratings. It's not a movie that would jump to my mind when someone brings up great movies, or even crime movies for that matter. Maybe later into the conversation I'd start raving about how good it was, but it'd take a bit to get there.
Overall L.A. Confidential is a really solid crime drama with great characters and writing. Sure it's pretty forgettable, and I probably won't see it again for quite some time, but it's a solid watch for sure, and in the end I'd definitely recommend it.
Spider-Man: Homecoming follows Peter Parker as he attempts to take down an organization in his city to prove to the Avengers that he can be one of them.
Unlike in the previous Captain America movie where I found Spider- Man immensely annoying, in his solo movie he actually proved to be quite good. It's clear that he's putting a lot of energy into his role and having a lot of fun with it. His character is pretty eccentric, and seeing him being able to pull off this character in a solo movie is really refreshing. Plus the writing for his character is a lot of fun too. He's a nice, younger break from the other movies.
The movie as a whole is a lot of fun. The other actors are good and again, clearly having fun, the action sequences are fast and entertaining, it's all a good time. The only problem with this fact is the lack of stakes. It never seems like Spider-Man is actually in danger, there's always some convenient thing there to make sure nothing bad happens. The amount of problems Spider-Man actually fixes himself are incredibly small next to the amount of plot conveniences. Something bad will happen and immediately be fixed by some convenient, semi-connected to barely connected thing. It was too convenient to believe on multiple occasions, and I just didn't dig that.
There was one scene in the movie, closer to the end that involved a major villain and the love interest that I knew was supposed to be super intense and serious, but I just couldn't help laughing the entire way through. It felt like the movie suddenly became a sitcom for those ten minutes. The scene was totally out of place and so clichéd to the point where the audience can't actually predict it. It's a cliché that's been done to death, so most filmmakers know not to include it in a movie anymore. I'm not saying it was a bad twist, but it sure was a funny one. Where my problem with this scene really lies is towards the end when a character comes to a realization about something. It's as if the writers didn't know how to start wrapping up in the generic Spider-Man way and just went with some half-developed way that really doesn't make a lot of sense.
Overall I had a lot of fun with Spider-Man: Homecoming, but that doesn't make it a great movie. It's immensely convenient, lacking tension or stakes, at one point becoming too silly when it's supposed to be serious and at times sacrificing realism for rushed plot progression. Other than that this is a perfectly disposable, turn-your-brain-off action comedy to watch with a group of friends on a rainy day. In the end I would recommend it.
Unlike in the previous Captain America movie where I found Spider- Man immensely annoying, in his solo movie he actually proved to be quite good. It's clear that he's putting a lot of energy into his role and having a lot of fun with it. His character is pretty eccentric, and seeing him being able to pull off this character in a solo movie is really refreshing. Plus the writing for his character is a lot of fun too. He's a nice, younger break from the other movies.
The movie as a whole is a lot of fun. The other actors are good and again, clearly having fun, the action sequences are fast and entertaining, it's all a good time. The only problem with this fact is the lack of stakes. It never seems like Spider-Man is actually in danger, there's always some convenient thing there to make sure nothing bad happens. The amount of problems Spider-Man actually fixes himself are incredibly small next to the amount of plot conveniences. Something bad will happen and immediately be fixed by some convenient, semi-connected to barely connected thing. It was too convenient to believe on multiple occasions, and I just didn't dig that.
There was one scene in the movie, closer to the end that involved a major villain and the love interest that I knew was supposed to be super intense and serious, but I just couldn't help laughing the entire way through. It felt like the movie suddenly became a sitcom for those ten minutes. The scene was totally out of place and so clichéd to the point where the audience can't actually predict it. It's a cliché that's been done to death, so most filmmakers know not to include it in a movie anymore. I'm not saying it was a bad twist, but it sure was a funny one. Where my problem with this scene really lies is towards the end when a character comes to a realization about something. It's as if the writers didn't know how to start wrapping up in the generic Spider-Man way and just went with some half-developed way that really doesn't make a lot of sense.
Overall I had a lot of fun with Spider-Man: Homecoming, but that doesn't make it a great movie. It's immensely convenient, lacking tension or stakes, at one point becoming too silly when it's supposed to be serious and at times sacrificing realism for rushed plot progression. Other than that this is a perfectly disposable, turn-your-brain-off action comedy to watch with a group of friends on a rainy day. In the end I would recommend it.