One of the most entertaining films I’ve seen in a long time.
It’s a really basic plot that gets elevated by the dialogue, violence, acting and stylish presentation.
Does it feel like a Tarantino movie?
Maybe, but this is much tighter and less indulgent than anything he’s made in years.
8/10
One of the few Marvel movies where you can notice the artistry that went into it.
This feels like someone’s vision, the story is layered and the conflict is relevant and interesting. The way it’s resolved doesn’t feel safe to me, it makes a pretty nuanced statement about protectionism that might seem agreeable to some, but I can assure you that it isn’t.
The camerawork also really stands out (one of the few Marvel movies with proper colour grading), costumes are terrific, the characters are very well drawn and the acting is great.
It does have some pacing issues in the middle, some of the action is poorly handled (the climax is kinda lackluster in a sense) and looks too artificial, and the main character kinda feels overpowered when he has the suit on, but it’s still easily one of Marvel’s best just because of what it gets right.
7.5/10
It’s the best one.
There are only two real contenders when it comes to the best Bond movie: this and Skyfall.
Skyfall stands out because of its artistry, whereas this one has the tightest script and the most memorable moments.
Moreover, it's a complete reinvention of the character (and franchise as a whole) with a more stripped back and raw approach in the same vein as Batman Begins and The Bourne Identity.
It's gritty, but they throw some clever jokes in there in order to make sure that it doesn't become a slog.
Daniel Craig kills it, and so do Mads Mikkelsen and Eva Green.
The script is tightly structured, unpredictable (two amazing twists in this), and the dialogue in particular stands out (the train scene is perfection, highly quotable stuff).
I can appreciate any script that makes me follow along with poker scenes, even if I’d never played poker when I first saw it.
From a technical standpoint, you can tell that the filmmakers took their time to put more effort into the visual style of the film compared to the previous ones, and it paid off, the camerawork is sleek and the colour pops a lot more.
It’s paced very well, the action is visceral and David Arnold nails it with the score (so does Chris Cornell with the song).
No complaints, it's a perfect popcorn movie all around.
9/10
Most Bond movies are kinda uninspired and interchangeable.
They’re good at giving the audience what they want, but because most installments aren’t interested in challenging the formula in any way, they don’t make for very visionary pieces of art.
That is not the case for Skyfall, you can feel the inspiration and vision that the filmmakers had for this one.
It stands out primarily as a result of it being driven by a concept and theme, rather than just action and tropes.
Sam Mendes directs the hell out of this movie, combining the gritty Daniel Craig era of Bond with some more traditional elements in a way that works very well (something he would subsequently fail at with Spectre).
There are some campy ideas in this (the whole hacking plot is complete nonsense if you know the slightest bit about hacking, Javier Bardem’s performance is over the top), but because they’re presented in a dark/sinister way, rather than a silly way, it doesn’t mess with the tone (kinda like Nolan did in his Batman movies).
The acting is great, the action is very well handled and memorable, it’s shot extremely well (Deakins should’ve easily won the Oscar for this), good music, and most importantly: all the new characters leave an impression.
Naomi Harris is very likeable, Berenice Marlohe gives an excellent performance for the little time she’s on screen, Ralph Fiennes has a nice little arc, and Javier Bardem is a terrific bad guy.
I only have one small nitpick, and it has to do with the whole ‘I wanted to get captured’ trope, which makes the plot a little less tight than it should be.
It worked for The Joker given how psychotic that character is, but here it just seems like forced nonsense.
I love that chase scene through the London underground that comes out of it, but there are quite a few conveniences in it because they lean into the ‘I planned all of this’ trope so hard.
8.5/10
Given what this franchise is, this is pretty much the perfect version of a Fast and Furious movie.
It isn’t some cinematic masterpiece, it’s still riddled with poor acting, laughable dialogue and underdeveloped characters, but it’s entertaining as hell.
The Rock is the perfect addition to this franchise, and I like that they got Ludacris and Tyrese back, as they help with elevating the tone as well.
The action is a lot less grounded than before, which works because it allows for more creativity and unpredictability.
It’s just great schlock, a perfect guilty pleasure.
6.5/10
The reason why this one sucks compared to the ones following it is simple: it takes itself seriously.
The filmmakers were still treating the franchise with dignity at this point, which is a bad idea, as these films are inherently shlocky and written like soap operas.
It looks quite nice, and there are some decent set pieces, but it’s all too grounded to be entertaining.
You can just tell that these movies work better when they’re heightened.
3.5/10
Very intriguing subject, executed with precision by Denis Villeneuve and his crew.
The man truly is an astounding filmmaker; there’s not a single shot with weak framing or bad lighting.
Cool art design, good performances, intelligent and interesting; we need more sci-fi like this to balance out the usual blockbuster schlock.
Its biggest problem is that none of the characters besides Louise are all that interesting.
Also, there’s a final twist with Jeremy Renner’s character that I found fairly predictable.
But still, a very inspired film with plenty of food for thought.
8/10
Good, but it’s kinda uninspired at the same time.
The main problem is the script: it doesn’t really drop the ball or anything, but you can tell that they didn’t have a good idea of what else to do with this character, and the stuff with Riz Ahmed feels tacked on.
Still, just like with the bad Bond movies, it has such an interesting main character that it’ll keep you engaged, even if the movie surrounding him could be better.
It has solid acting for the most part (Julia Stiles was quite bad though) and a few memorable action sequences (the whole riot scene in Greece is amazing from a directorial, cinematographic and editing perspective).
The music is great, it knows how to build tension and thrills, and this series hasn’t lost its visceral sensibilities.
I get why people call it a disappointment, but you also have to look at it from a broader perspective.
If you look at this as an isolated piece, judging the movie on its own merits (and not just in comparison to the original trilogy), you can only conclude that this is still above average for an action thriller - that standard being your annual Liam Neeson taken rip off.
6.5
It’s funny how people think of these movies as ‘realistic’.
Do people actually think an American intelligence agency is capable of pulling live footage out of a camera in a train station in London? Within like 5 minutes? Not to forget that this takes place in a pre smartphone era.
I know that paranoia and anxiety were a big part of culture post 9/11, and these movies play into that, but they’re far from being realistic.
I’d say they’re grounded, and it’s got a director at the helm who’s really good at selling the heightened stuff.
Having said that, this is one of the most thrilling and tense films I’ve seen.
Paul Greengrass is a master of building tension through visceral camerawork.
Sure, there’s a lot of handheld and shaky cam, but that style actually works in this film’s favour, because Greengrass knows how to use it without loosing a sense of clarity.
The story is again very solid, it’s got a surprising amount of memorable dialogue, the acting is solid, interesting characters, John Powell’s score is iconic, and there just isn’t a single dull moment.
High octane action filmmaking at its finest.
9/10
This is more of a traditional Tarantino film compared to volume 1.
It’s more dialogue driven and slow paced (in my opinion to a fault, it really drags at points).
Daryl Hannah and David Carradine are great.
The acting, action, visuals and music choices are once again very well done.
7/10
It’s basically a really simple genre film, but it’s stuffed with so many memorable action scenes, great characters, terrific music, dialogue, visuals and gore that it gets elevated to incredible heights.
It doesn’t suffer from the pacing issues that his film usually do, but Tarantino’s voice as a director can still be overly present and indulgent here and there.
To this day, I still find the bleeping of the bride’s name pretentious and unnecessary.
Other than that, it’s an absolute must watch.
8.5/10
This show is genius.
It’s brilliantly acted and scripted, though challenging at times.
I’ve known a few friends who gave up during season 2, and I understand why, but if you stick with it, the puzzle pieces will eventually all fall into place.
What’s even more rare (given that it’s a tv show) is that it is filled with truly great filmmaking, and it has its own artistic style, often amplified by perfect editing. The silent episode and one take episode are both high marks of television in my book.
Whenever people are framed in the bottom of the corner for their close up, you instantly know you’re watching Mr Robot.
The music is also instantly recognizable. It’s almost where the show gets a little too David Fincher-y, but it still hits regardless. Just the whole vibe of this show is a thing to behold.
Is it perfect? No, it’s hours of television, so that’s impossible.
If you pick up on what the influences of the show are, you’ll probably find some of the twists in season 1 predictable.
Season 2 can get really abstract and weird, and isn’t as satisfying by itself (though it works perfectly in the overall narrative).
And finally, a few characters don’t really get a satisfying conclusion in season 4.
But overall, it’s incredible, probably my favourite tv show of all time.
So much subtext about the 1%, mental health, our relationship with technology, capitalism and it brilliantly challenges the way you perceive hackers. You’ll think twice about whether they’re a good thing or not.
It clearly owes a lot to Booksmart, and while Booksmart makes bolder creative and visual choices, this is still very entertaining in its own right.
The comedy has a lot of bite to it, which is becoming increasingly rare nowadays.
7.5/10
I’m very much against judging something in comparison to the source material.
It often leads to very shallow criticisms, and giving an artist some leeway to put their own creative twist on the material isn’t a bad thing.
However, this movie strips away everything that makes the anime interesting, so even when judged as just a movie, it’s still a fail.
All it really has going for it are some gory death scenes.
3/10
It’s a really generic script, you’ve seen this type of conflict time and time again. But it moves along, and the visuals and action will keep you engaged. I don’t quite get why the action is receiving so much criticism. Sure, there’s some handheld camera, but I didn’t notice any incomprehensible shaky cam. It’s a perfectly fine film.
It’s stylish and fun, easily recommended if you want to have a good time with friends.
It does have that sense of emotion and heart you expect from Gunn, though some of his comedy is a bit hit or miss for me.
6.5/10
This movie is everything that Bohemian Rhapsody wasn’t
Lame.
It wants to be Lethal Weapon, and it just isn’t.
The story sucks (that’s almost a given with these movies), the action is below average, and the jokes, which are mostly terrible, can’t save it either.
And for a movie with a budget like this, it’s surprisingly ugly looking (way too fucking bright).
This feels like someone trying to do a impression of a ‘90s action movie, and it’s a really uninspired and overlong attempt.
Pretentious nonsense that becomes a complete tonal mess by bouncing between a surrealist and realistic tone in a very jarring way. Also, it can get unintentionally funny and the character choices that are made after the scene where she visits the producer do not add up with how this character has been established. I’ll give it some credit for the acting and cinematography, but this is overall a terrible art film that feels like a lesser version of Enemy.
3/10
The story is solid, the characters we know from the first one have new arcs, and the action kicks it up a notch.
I especially like how cinematic it feels, it feels big and like an actual event film.
The choices that are made in regards to editing and camerawork really stand out compared to most blockbusters nowadays.
It kinda falters a bit with its pacing, and the plot relies too much on convenience, but it’s still a solid film.
7/10
A funny satire of contemporary mainstream music and the shallowness of it.
Still, for as good as it is, I think they could’ve pushed it a little further.
The main character of this film and his music almost appear to be highly intellectual, especially for an industry that gave us Lil Pump and the song Gucci Gang.
7/10
It’s entertaining, but also a big mess.
And not just in terms of writing & the poorly structured plot, but also in the ugly way it was filmed.
4/10
Messes up the basics of filmmaking (story, characters & acting).
The direction is actually not that bad, considering the budget.
3.5/10
A cool mix of an entertaining 90’s script and modern style & direction.
Logan Marshall Green shines, but there are no interesting characters besides him.
Also, the overarching plot is kinda predictable and something we’ve seen many times before.
Normally, I’d give it a 7.5, but because the action is so inventive and creative, it deserves a little higher that.
8/10
The themes are unfortunately becoming increasingly more relevant in 2020.
As for the film itself, it’s pretty good, though there are Disney films with better characters and more interesting stories.
7/10
You really have to stick with it, because most of the weird stuff only starts to make sense in the final few episodes.
I love how this show took its time to fully delve into all the characters in the first half of the season, with some episodes highlighting one or two of the main characters.
The plot is rich and thematically interesting, and asks questions about meaning making and purpose in a world where no one seems to have answers for the things that happen.
Who do we believe? Scientists? Religious figures? Cult leaders?
Most of the characters have interesting arcs, but some of the B-storylines feel haphazard and unnecessary for the main plot (Tom/Wayne/Christine & Dean the dog killer), making the show less focussed than it should be.
Also, for as great as most of the acting is (Justin Theroux & Carrie Coon in particular), some of the younger actors aren’t all that great.
7.5/10
Feels more like a student film in terms of acting, directing, and writing.
It could’ve been really fun, if the writing wasn’t so extremely on the nose.
But then again, subtlety isn’t exactly America’s strongest suit, especially in terms of politics.
This effectively shows how the culture of stigmatized neighbourhoods in the UK promotes small, banal things blowing up and turning into hostile, unpredictable situations.
The core of it is solid, but the rest of the film leaves a lot to be desired.
It’s overacted, unfocussed and a tad too melodramatic.
The rapping would have been a nice addition, if it didn’t get on my nerves so quickly.
Most of it recaps what happened during the previous 15 minutes, which wouldn’t be necessary if you’d pay attention.
4/10
Yes, the design of the character is much better than what it was in the trailer.
This design change, however, came with a big trade off: less detail and more cartoony features.
With the new design, it looks as if a Pixar character was inserted into a live action film, which I find highly distracting.
It’s the exact same problem that I had with some of the Pokemon in the Detective Pikachu film from last year.
Look, if you want to make the creatures look cartoony, that’s fine, but then why don’t you make an animated film instead?
This feels like a weird blend of both worlds.
Also, let’s not forget that we’ve seen a realistic incorporation of fantasy creatures in the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings universes years ago, so it’s not like we can’t do it.
As for the film itself, let’s face it, it’s not very good.
The dialogue is very hit and miss, the plotting is as paint by numbers as you’d expect, the CGI already looks dated, and the acting often misses the mark.
I’ll give it a few points for its character development and cinematography, but those are the only positives I can find.
3.5/10
