An underwhelming effort from a company that seems to have fallen behind the curve. Creatively it’s pulling too much from Zootopia and Inside Out while not adding much of its own flavour, almost every choice in this movie is predictable. Sure, the racism/prejudice commentary is more aggressive now that we’ve entered the post-Trump era (seriously, you should go back and look at how Zootopia handled that same topic, it feels quaint now), but besides that it doesn’t bring much to the table. The worldbuilding lacks the clever intricacies of Zootopia, the pretty animation style has some unique textures but it’s no Across the Spider-verse, and emotionally it feels more like Illumination than Pixar. It’s a very straightforward, cheesy romcom with a formulaic set-up for the main characters (think Notting Hill, Crazy Rich Asians, and countless other movies your mom loves), some ok comedy (bad puns notwithstanding) and a boring adventure (fixing pipelines, how exciting). The score’s pretty interesting because it seems to pull a lot from Indian folk music, on the other hand the songs sound generic and overproduced. Overall, I’d easily recommend this over some other animated films from this year, as this does genuinely try as a movie. However, that doesn’t change that I expect both children and adults to be mostly bored by this.
4.5/10
Competently made, but it gives you nothing interesting to set your teeth in. The storyline has zero complexity, and all of the characters are highly uninteresting, because none of them are properly developed. Cutting to a cute muppet every now and then doesn’t really distract from that. Just do something interesting for the next season, because this isn’t the way.
For something that tries to be as dumb and meatheaded as possible, this is quite boring. There’s an art to making a good bad movie and filmmakers seem so clueless whenever these are attempted nowadays. Most of the people involved probably weren’t coked-up enough to make the end result entertaining, unlike when these were made in the 80s. Take Jake Gyllenhaal, he’s obviously a great actor but someone who’s way too introverted for this type of material. By comparison, Conor McGregor fits this movie like a glove and he’s easily the most entertaining part by playing the same persona we’ve become accustomed to over the years (even if the performance is obviously quite terrible). As far as I’m concerned, his introduction scene is the only memorable thing about the movie, it’s this moment where the movie very briefly finds the right tone. The rest of the film is surprisingly bland and tame. Sure, the throwaway characters, simple story and terrible dialogue were all a given, but even the set pieces aren’t memorable as they’re often poorly staged and lacking in viscera. Someone gets eaten by a crocodile and we don’t even get to see it, the background extras during the big bar fights look amateurish and the choreography/stuntwork (besides a decent final fight) is often way too dull. The 80s, GTA Vice City aesthetic that’s promised by the poster doesn’t show up, most of this film has no visual personality. Then there’s the music, which might just be the worst thing about all of this. Right from the opening scene we’re met with auditory vomit courtesy of a cameoing Post Malone, following that there are occasional musical interludes that don’t complement the vibe of the film and on top of that score is filled with the type of ‘badass’ guitar riffing found in car commercials. None of it works in harmony, and I don’t get who it’s targeting. Much like the rest of the film I needed more wild energy for it to work, as the overall experience feels too much like camp by committee.
2/10
This is fascinating, I loved every second of it. Such a brilliantly written script and Cate Blanchett’s performance deserves every possible accolade, Lydia Tár is one of the best characters I’ve seen in a long time. The way the film tackles pretension, artistic ego and achievement as a veil for perceived integrity, and the abuse of power that results from it really spoke to me. Should artists be held accountable or not? Should we seperate art and artist? What is the effect of cancel culture on art? These are questions I’m currently asking myself, as one of my own favorite artists made anti semetic remarks and alligned himself with highly questionable social movements just a few weeks ago, tanking his own career. I used to be firmly in the camp of seperating the two, but this movie made me reconsider that, which is quite an achievement. An achievement made all the more impressive by the fact that there’s no spoonfeeding going on here. The main character isn’t judged in an obvious way and Todd Field clearly wants you to draw your own conclusions.
Now, the script is super intricate, there’s a lot of technical mumbo jumbo in it. Having a background in music (and music theory) myself, I can honestly say that a lot of that stuff went over my head. I got the impression that parts of it were meant to be satirical, but still: you don’t need to feel stupid if you don’t have a perfect grasp on what all of that means, because it’s not the crux of the story. Your focus should be drawn to the journey of our main character, which is intriguing by itself. It starts out as a drama, but then incorporates elements of psychological thrillers as the film progresses. After the movie finished, I immediately wanted to go back and dissect how we’d gotten to the point where we end up.
The filmmaking is very Fincher-y: it’s cold, impersonal, distant, and it has some of the best one takes you’re going to see this year. It’s confidently slow paced, subtle and the director likes to linger on certain shots for a long time, which will inevitably lead to some of the general audience calling it '''''boring''''', even though it obviously isn’t. In fact, I can even see it winning Oscars in a few technical categories, it’s that exceptional.
9/10
It’s hard to rate, because there are a lot of entertaining scenes in it, but the movie at its core doesn’t really work.
I can’t shed this feeling that Edgar Wright had a visual cue in his head of a girl experiencing visions of the 1960’s first, and tried to build a movie around that second.
The characters, drama, camerawork, music selection and social commentary are all very good, but the whole set up is kinda nonsense once you know the answers to the mystery.
I kept waiting for the twist that’d explain why our protagonist has these accurate visions of things that happened 50 years earlier , but it’s never answered, despite it being the crux of the whole film.
Also, showing CGI ghosts in a horror movie using well lit close ups is never the best idea, it kinda killed a lot of the horror and suspense.
I kinda liked that I thought that I was ahead of the film at one point, only to find out that it was a big misdirect to make you think you were ahead.
5.5/10
It’s a lot like the first one.
It’s kinda trashy and childish, and it’ll probably make you cringe at least a few times, but it can’t help to be fun occasionally.
Tom Hardy clearly enjoyed himself making it, Woody Harrelson is fine.
The action is alright, but the production value is awful, the whole visual look is dated and cheap.
Like, this was shot by Quentin Tarantino’s DP, but you’ll never be able to tell that because of the production choices made by Sony.
The plot itself is very thin, uninspired and mostly forgettable.
Everything about it is extremely disposable, and the whole thing just screams ‘streaming movie’ to me.
You really don’t need to waste your money on this by watching it on a premium format.
4/10
I’ve seen two episodes now and I’ve got to ask: what’s the point of watching this?
There’s nothing inherently satisfying about the show itself.
Just putting a twist on existing lore and calling it a day isn’t enough to hold my attention for 30 mimutes, nor any sane person, I imagine.
Are people only watching this because it sets up future stuff?
Why would anyone watch something that’s just set-up?
Projects are always supposed to function as an isolated piece of art, and not just as a piece of a larger machine.
This show is so empty, it’s the kind of format that lends itself for short 4 minute videos on Youtube.
But a feature series? Come on.
Edit: alright so there is an attempt to tie the loose ends together in the final episode, but still, it kinda fails to justify its existence.
Hobbs & Shaw: A Car Wars Story.
6/10
A fantastic short film that’s bound to become the major highlight of this season for most, while also likely to trigger some mentally deficient adults.
One of its best qualities is that you could in theory tell this story with a straight couple , and it wouldn’t lessen any of its emotional impact.
It’s such an original, creative angle for a zombie apocalypse show, and Nick Offerman/Murray Bartlett both deliver career best performances here. If their section was a bit more fleshed out, I genuinely think you could make a great indie/arthouse film out of it.
I also love how it portrays a hardcore Republican character without making him some incapable buffoon, we don’t get enough of that in movies and tv.
Ps: I’m pretty sure they used an existing piece of music during the marriage montage , I’ve heard it before but can’t quite place where it’s from
It starts of pretty well, but then it gets better and better. There are a few places where the logic is a bit thin (not saying it doesn’t make sense, but you have to give it some leeway), and there are a few too many comedic touches for my taste, but other than that, this is a terrific film, powered by an Oscar worthy Elizabeth Moss (who won’t get nominated of course, because it’s not that type of film) and a talented director who will have Hollywood producers begging at his door after making this for a mere 7 million.
8/10
It's more Solo: A Star Wars Story than it is Better Call Saul. This is an unnecessary, drawn-out prequel that's more story driven compared to Fury Road. From my perspective, this emphasis is a mistake for a franchise which has never used story as its major selling point. I have to ask: what does this really add to Furiosa as a character, the feminist themes of Fury Road or the revenge genre? The answer: not a whole lot. You probably already pieced most of this backstory together in the abstract if you paid attention during Fury Road. Because of that, Furiosa quickly becomes predictable and stale, especially with the new characters not being terribly interesting. I loved Hemsworth's zany performance (great voice work), but on the page there's not much there. Tom Burke turns in a really flat performance as the underdeveloped love interest this story didn't need. Anya Taylor-Joy is fine in this role, but she isn't given a lot to do. For the first two chapters, Miller makes a conscious effort to hold back with the more operatic set pieces, instead focussing on Furiosa's childhood with a younger actress. It's not the worst thing ever, but I never felt like the film came off the ground. The film picks up considerably during the war rig attack early on during the third chapter. It's an impressive scene, although it does look considerably more plastic than all the action in Fury Road. Sure, it's still way more artistically accomplished than everything else you're going to see this summer, but visually it's a noticeable downgrade. Still, from that point on, the film becomes more entertaining and set piece driven until the credits. None of it feels particularly innovative or original, but George Miller's vision for these movies remains unmatched. The camerawork, worldbuilding and atmosphere are great, although as mentioned before the lighting and CGI could use improvement. Combined with the weak story and character work it never quite manages to turn itself into something I'd recommend, but as the only action tentpole made for adults this summer, maybe consider supporting it.
5/10
Another F&F movie that’s stupidly entertaining if you can meet it on its wavelength. You don’t need to turn your brain off, but you absolutely need to be able to embrace the madness with this franchise. These are science fiction/anime, they have been for a while now and that tone is once again clearly communicated by the filmmakers. That doesn’t mean there aren’t some small changes compared to previous installments, however. They toned down some of the dramatic undertones and over the top antics from the last ones, which I think was drastically needed. Momoa is a blast to watch, his mannerisms do feel inspired by Ledger’s Joker. In fact, I liked most of the new additions, even someone like Brie Larson is a lot more fun here than anything else I’ve seen her in. However, it’s having a hard time balancing all of its characters and storylines (did we need this convoluted mini sidequest/Infinity War-esque structure?). Sometimes you really feel that any breathing room has been taken out of the edit to make it as tight as possible. It’s not incomprehensible, but I really hope they make something more focussed for the next part. It’s F&F, this should thrive on simplicity. Everything else is the same old recipe. It’s a string of set pieces (loved the bit in Rome) and other entertaining scenes filled with bad acting, boring trap rap, great sound design, soap opera dialogue, lots of production value, fun comedy, plot twists to roll your eyes at and a whole lot of Vin Diesel mumbling about family inbetween. The weaknesses are all very obvious, but it makes up for a lot of them by being shamelessly entertaining.
5/10
This show feels very much like an ensemble piece now.
The amount of characters is huge, it’s almost like an HBO flagship (The Wire, Game of Thrones).
As for the quality of the show, it’s still reliably entertaining and very well produced. It’s still shoving its 80s setting in your face at just about every turn, and the music, visuals and tone are all on point. The writing is also still pretty decent; you’re usually pretty engaged and there’s some great dialogue, but at the same time it can get messy, unimaginative and very predictable.
It’s entertaining and the characters are all great, but the show kinda lacks narrative ambition in order to be more than just pulpy fun. Simple stories tend to work for movies, but not as much for the extended format of a tv show. However, when compared to the recent Star Wars and Marvel output on Disney+, it’s kind of a miracle that this show remains as good as it is.
So, is this show still quite overrated? Yes.
But is it probably more fun and better made than most of the big stuff that’s going to come out in cinemas this summer? Also yes.
This is too tropey for an A24 horror film.
I don’t think it really succeeds in its mission of trying to be substantive and artsy, it’s too much in love with the established horror movie cliches in order to be that (e.g. bad jump scares, main characters with below average intelligence, an element of schlock and gore).
In its current form, I think it might benefit from a more fast paced studio treatment, thereby making it an efficient horror film that knows what it is.
However, then you’d also have to strip away most of the sex angle, which is what gives this film its own identity.
So I’m not exactly sure how you can improve this, though it’s also far from an awful film as is.
The characters are all pretty well developed, the acting is pretty solid, some good scares.
I wish the filmmaking was more interesting, though. There are some good shots in it, but overall most of it looks a bit uninspired and bland.
5/10
This is bound to be divisive, and I can see it getting a cult following in the future.
It plays out a lot like an Edgar Wright movie, starting as one movie and slowly morphing into another.
I personally liked it a lot, I found it very inspired and creative from a story perspective.
It has a great character at the center, some really unpredictable twists, it delivers the scares and gore you want, terrific visuals (Wan’s trademark camerawork is here) and good music (there is a subtle song reference that’s actually kinda brilliant).
It’s not perfect though: the acting can sometimes be a little wonky, there’s too much unneeded exposition, and the tone can occasionally get a little campy, which doesn’t always work.
Still, you have to respect James Wan for bringing creative and fresh ideas into a genre that has continued to give us the same shit over and over again.
6/10
This movie, right off the bat, makes some smart creative decisions: it doesn’t try to imitate the original too much, and it’s not a musical.
They even steer away from the usual Disney formula by taking away the funny sidekick.
And while the film is technically quite impressive (cinematography and score are top notch), I found it to be ultimately unengaging.
Also, there seems to be a correlation between big, feminist action movies and poor lead performances.
I mean, just do the math: Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, and now Mulan.
Yes, I also find it important that more of these movies get made (not corporate, tame Disney films, but female driven action movies in general), but they deserve to be a lot better than this.
Problem is, if nobody sees it, chances are execs will take the wrong lesson from it, and think people don’t want to see female/Asian representation, or feminist themes.
So, we’re kinda fucked regardless, but I still don’t find that an excuse to give a heavy push to this mediocre movie, as I see some journalists doing.
5/10
An exceedingly dumb piece of shit filled with unlikeable characters, laughable acting, tv level cinematography and amateurish directing. The third act denouement had me rolling in stitches, it’s remarkably idiotic. This franchise is so watered down at this point that it has become the exact thing it was once an antidote to. Just fuck off already.
2.5/10
At this point, Damien Chazelle’s career trajectory is one of upping the amount of Oscar bait with every new project.
And I get it, what happened with La La Land at the Academy Awards was most unfortunate, but this film should even be lucky to get nominated, because it's not going to be remembered beyond that.
It’s essentially an exhausting, empty, 3 hour mess that thinks it’s a lot deeper than it is. Lots of fancy camerawork, lots of showy acting, lots of coke and nudity, lots of scenes where it’s clearly trying to be Boogie Nights, but it does not stick the landing at all. Showing excess can be fun and interesting, but combined with the cocaine fueled, Michael Bay-esque editing style it ends up feeling more like Scorsese for the inattentive Tiktok generation. It also leaves you on a note that I thought was incredibly indulgent and pretentious, which soured me even more on the whole experience.
It’s not even one of those films where you need to have a critical eye or a good understanding of cinema in order to get why it’s bad, it’s pretty upfront right from the start. It fails with a lot of the basics, such as plotting (which is incoherent), pacing (which is all over the place) and music (which is incredibly annoying). I wish I could at least praise the acting or characters, but it’s all so over the top in the most annoying, unfunny way. I like the cinematography and some individual moments, but that’s kinda it. The whole film starts with an elephant taking a shit into the camera, so at the very least Chazelle seems to self-aware about what he has delivered here; a massive turd that doesn’t play to his strengths as a filmmaker.
4/10
I have three main take aways from this episode:
I’m starting to think that Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese, the writers of this film, are one trick ponies.
They really struggle with keeping subsequent films in their franchises fresh.
Between this and Deadpool 2, I see a lot of what I call ‘Hangover 2’ writing, meaning you change as little as you can from the first movie without making it a straight up remake.
I was annoyed by the amount of jokes from the first film that were repeated in Deadpool 2, and once again, Zombieland: Double Tap is just way too similar to the first film.
It feels lazy, but it’s still entertaining.
5.5/10
Nice, a really solid flick. It’s normie horror done right; formulaic and familiar enough while also smartly avoiding some of the genre’s dumbest clichés. The characters are still stupid as hell, but because this is a story about addiction and peer pressure, the movie gets away with that. It’s truly an exciting start for the careers of the actors and directors. In fact, I see so much potential here that I don’t think either will look back on this project as their best work. Nevertheless, the editing, sound choices and cinematography are already good enough where the movie got a visceral reaction out of me on multiple occasions, which means it did its job.
7/10
There’s 30-35 minutes of a stylish, cartoonish, low stakes action reel in here. As soon as people open their mouths, it becomes laughable to me. It really says something about how much people are starving for practical action movies when they’re willing to excuse E-tier level acting, pacing, characters, dialogue, worldbuilding and storytelling. 70% of this is not an engaging experience, it’s boring and not well executed. It’s pretty to look at (easily one of the best looking films of the year), but inexcusably long. Sure, only Tom Cruise can match the action at the moment, but he doesn’t forget to fill the other parts of the movie with clever writing, intrigue, tension, drama and humour. I’ll never understand what people see in this. These would be so much better if they explicitly acknowledged their own camp and had a little more fun with themselves, instead of trying to play it straight and cool.
4/10
This is in many ways the exact movie that The Lego Batman Movie made fun of.
So, I can totally understand if this film reads like self-parody to some (I'll admit, the gravely film noir detective voice over was a bit much, it's been parodied to death at this point), but I'd argue that it's overall a refreshing take on the character in a well thought out story that includes some excellent performances. Paul Dano, Robert Pattinson and Zoe Kravitz all nail their roles.
It's a typical Matt Reeves blockbuster in every sense. It's grounded, serious, and there's a strong emphasis on drama/tension, and less on action. The production and style of this thing are phenomenal. Excellent cinematography, which should be Oscar nominated (but probably won't), music, production value, costumes, directing, etcetera. It's grim, it's dark, it's gritty, but it doesn't feel like it's directed by a 16 year old edgelord either. I love how the colour palette of this film is restricted to black, grey, orange and red. It's perfect, taking clear influences from David Fincher films, neo noir detectives and '70s paranoia thrillers (maybe a hint of Marvel Netflix as well). I hope it reinvents the wheel for many blockbusters to come.
Its biggest problem are the pacing and the characters. I'm fine with defending longer films, but this isn't a smooth 3 hour ride. It holds its cards very close to the chest during the first half, to the point where it's hard to engage with and can get kinda boring. It's a lot of set-up, mood and atmosphere, and not much else. It doesn't really hook you with its characters or the dramatic intrigue of the story, as I didn't find this slow moving mystery compelling enough by itself (partially because it doesn't really engage the audience; you can't solve it by yourself). There's not even that much action to compensate, besides a few quick beats here and there.
It also relies too much on the cultural iconography of Batman and Catwoman that already exists in our current zeitgeist, and while I might know those characters as cultural icons, I don't know this Batman, or this Catwoman. It eventually gets there though, as The Riddler and Catwoman get a lot more interesting in their own right as the film goes along, but it takes a long time. I love that this Riddler is essentially re-imagined to be a radicalized 4 Chan incel , which feels very relevant for today. Still, we know very little about Batman by the end of it (besides his brooding indie rockstar behavior), which is mostly due to the general lack of Bruce Wayne in the film. Batman cannot be interesting without a good Bruce Wayne accompanying him. That's nothing against Robert Pattinson, he's very good in it, but the writing for his character is very one note. As a film, it would've benefitted a lot from a deeper dive into his psyche, because the emotional arc of his character doesn't feel earned by the end.
Still, these issues could easily be fixed in a sequel, it's a good enough foundation for a series of great Batman films.
7/10
Recently, I read this interview with Kevin Feige where he said that the Academy Awards have a bias against Marvel movies.
If you ever wonder why that is, look no further than the first 20 minutes of this episode.
You get this long 10 minute scene between Pugh and Steinfeld which hits a lot of important emotional beats for the plot, and the writing is actually not too bad.
Sure you have Pugh doing that awful Russian accent again, and Hailee Steinfeld’s making weird faces as if she’s Kate McKinnon in an SNL skit, but that’s besides the point.
Look specifically at how they shoot it.
Besides the bland looking apartment, you cannot shoot such an important and lengthy scene doing nothing besides shots and reverse shots and then expect to get an Oscar (or in this case Emmy) for it.
It is literally the laziest and most uninspired way to approach a scene like that.
So, what do they do to mask the poor filmmaking and weak story choices (because let’s face it, Marvel has once again put out something with a messy and unfocussed plot)?
Just take a quick look at some of the other comments, and you’ll get the idea.
It’s like they’re dangling a ball in front of a cat, and it’s kinda embarrassing to see how effective that is.
Kind of a mixed bag, I wanted to like this more.
I love how non judgemental it is, they could’ve easily taken the route to criticize the system and make a point about how these people need financial support from the state (like Sorry to Bother You, for example).
Instead, it presents a balanced perspective of both the struggles and charm of this lifestyle.
Also, the characters are interesting, the acting is great and it’s shot extremely well.
However, I find it quite baffling how nobody seems to want to point out the obvious flaw of this film: it lacks drama and .... well, a story.
There is no progression to the characters or the events in this film.
In other words, you could rearrange a lot of bits and it wouldn’t make a single difference.
As a result, the pacing kinda drags, and I started to check out halfway through.
This probably should’ve been a documentary instead.
5/10
Dolores.
First we root for her in the first season.
Then we hate her in the second season.
Now we’re kinda starting to like her again.
Or better said: the way we feel about her flips during scenes.
Westworld truly has its own Carrie Mathison.
The definition of a movie that’s competent but devoid of anything interesting.
3.5/10
I don’t get the appeal of these.
Yeah, the stuntwork’s great, but I see no redeeming qualities besides that. The acting sucks, the dialogue’s corny, the story is schlock that’s presented way too seriously, the characters are uninteresting, there’s little to no tension because the main character is an invincible cartoon, the music’s unmemorable and generic, and most of the film is just plain damn boring.
All the good stuff that this has to offer is also offered by franchises like Mission Impossible and Fast and Furious, and more on top of that.
You’re not getting the clever intrigue or fun gimmicks of the MI franchise here, nor the tongue in cheek comedy or creative, over the top insanity of the F&F franchise.
This is so boring by comparison to me.
4/10
Look you don’t have a lot to work with here, so this is probably as good as it could be. I like it more than the live action adaptations from the 2010s, that’s for sure. The plot and characters are nothing special, it’s really the stylistic animation and score that carry the entire movie. I also quite liked the voice acting, the turtles all feel distinct and I’m not surprised that Ice Cube’s expressive voice (given his background) works really well for animation. The problems start to reveal themselves as soon as you start to pay attention to the material that the actors are working with. The comedy mostly sucks and tries way too hard, as expected for mainstream American movies now. Some of the banter and dialogue felt like it got a pass by Marvel’s staff, it’s that embarrassing. It also has some of the weirdest, out of place pop culture references I’ve seen in a long time (you’ll know when you see them), as well as 90s needle drops that serve no purpose besides serving up empty nostalgia (seriously, even Transformers: Rise of the Beasts had the decency to at least set their film during the 90s). Its moments of action can be fun, but unfortunately it zips through a lot of them by montage during the first half, which was the wrong choice. The second half is definitely more entertaining in that regard. Overall, I don’t recommend this if you’re past the age of its target audience, but the beautiful visuals definitely made it more palatable compared to other movies like it.
5/10
I haven’t been a fan of anything Marvel’s done since Wandavision, but this was truly an excellent pilot. Pretty sure the visuals and editing are going to be a big talking point of this show, as it’s really well done and inventive. It’s not just the use of animation and colour, but the camerawork is actually exciting and fun without ever looking tacky or cheap. Great characters and acting as well, it’s all surprisingly fun. Maybe I liked it so much because it was light on action and story, which happen to be the two aspects where the MCU has been faltering lately. And yes, the brief action scene that’s in here might be a little too slapstick, but still. Great start.
