kmkraft

OK, I think the majority of bad reviews don't take into account that THE VIGILANTE is a low-budget indie film. Were these the best actors, not in some cases, but they weren't awful, either. I didn't expect them to be. But I thought most, at least, were committed to their roles. Given that, I thought it stood out from a lot of indies. Were the actors the best? Not, but they weren't horrible. The lead actress was capable and believable. It would have been easy for the filmmakers to push her too far into the "bad-ass female avenger." But they pulled back just enough to make her sympathetic and accessible. The other performers were fine. The youngest performers did surprisingly well. I was moved by the story and the ending. Did it strain credibility at time, sure, but what movie of this kind doesn't. In some ways, the limited budget probably kept this movie from becoming just another movie of its kind. I was actually pleasantly surprised by the fight scenes, which seemed to improve as the movie progressed. (Although, my biggest contention is that the protagonist's 13-year-old sister was played by an actress who looks twice as old as that. I was baffled that they were able to find really young girls for the supporting roles, but they could find an actual 13-year-old actress to play the sister???) Considering the limitations, this wasn't an awful movie.

I so wanted to enjoy this film. The concept seemed interesting, and I really enjoyed Tiffany Smith. She's an actress with a lot of charisma and beauty. I can almost guarantee that the script of this project seemed much better than the eventual result, and I don't begrudge anyone who had a part in making this film. It was a gallant effort. But after the first twenty minutes, I realized that the delivery didn't measure up to the idea. The protagonist, Claire, made increasingly illogical decisions meant to advance the story, but ended up betraying her supposed intelligence and therefore undermining the rationale of the ending. The direction was weird. Objects--notes, for example, meant to give us clues, were out of focus. In fact, focus seemed to be the director's (or the cinematographer's) challenge throughout. I can only assume that shooting out of focus was a stylistic choice meant to communicate the mystery of the situation. But it didn't work. In the hands of another director, this movie might have worked. In this instance, unfortunately, this was a missed opportunity.

I just finished watching G20 and was so appalled by it that I had to review it here. That's bad! It's bad! Surprisingly bad. I've decided that the script must have been A. I. AI-generated, because the film (and I use that term loosely) takes every action movie cliche, and recycles them as a cheap Chinese knock-off, and wants everyone to take it seriously, when it would have played better as a send-up. As for the actors, well...they got paid. On the one hand, with Hollywood falling into utter decline, I don't blame the talent for taking the job for the money. On the other hand...I can't help but wonder if they're at least a little embarrassed by their involvement. Surely, they knew this was a stinker when they read the script, right? The writing was horrible. I feel compelled to look up the woman who directed this, see what else she has done, and make a list of all the titles she directed--to avoid them! This was an unforgivably atrocious. The best thing about it was, arguably, the score. Not that it was outstanding, just that everything else about G20 was so hilariously awful. Do yourself a favor, avoid G20 at all costs!