I'm 36, and while I'm too much of a weenie to have made it past night 3 in the first game, watching others (particularly Markiplier) play through the series is what got me into watching let's players on Youtube. I thought this movie was great! Was it a good movie? Nothing to write home about; the animatronics were fantastic, the sound design was good, Matthew Lillard is a gift, but otherwise it was sort of middle of the road. But I had a great time watching it. I laughed a lot, I pointed wildly at the screen so my cat could see the easter eggs, and near the end when Afton took off the mask I did a big Super Bowl touchdown reaction. I'm gonna make my mom watch it, because it's something connected to a thing I'm very much interested in, so I want to share it with her, and it's not anywhere near scary enough to get to her (she's very, very bad with being startled, and I didn't find that much of anything besides the three Balloon Boy jumps were actually startling).
First of all: damn, what an amazing cast! It’s a shame that this is a true story of course, but what an amazing way to translate one of the biggest scandals ever to the big screen. Amazing movie.
Pleasantly surprised by my first Aki Kaurismaki film. It's almost like a mashup of Kieslowski, Wenders, Fassbinder with a bit of Jean Pierre Jeunet and Jacques Demy chucked in. All of those influences are clear. The movie essentially explores compassion / morality, styled in 1970s but set in modern day. The currency is Euros, the conversation is immigration and Al Quaeda - but the set design is from a few decades ago. This is obviously deliberate - is it to play on Kaurismaki's exasperation on the lack of progress in recent times? Despite this, and the film having a few sombre subplots, it is very optimistic and explores the true value of community / love they neighbour ethic. Really impressed by Kaurismaki and can't wait to explore more of his movies to find out if they are as good as 'Le Havre'
Ambitious…. But messy.
There is some good stuff here but also some things that just didn’t work. At times the action looked phenomenal, at other times I couldn’t follow what was happening with the shakey cam and the way some of it was cut. I liked the story and exploring the past. The training break between 2nd and 3rd act was the weakest part of the movie. Also felt little unsatisfying with the way it wraps. I think Dev showed some good traits though and will definitely check out whatever he does next. Shout out to Shantel Copley, he’s great as always!
I’m not the biggest fan of the original, and I think Scott improves a little bit on that film’s inconsistency of tone. Besides that, everything is dumbed down for modern audiences. Tacky, overly flashy editing; shouting instead of subtlety; less intricacy in regard to the plotting; a score overselling how cool everything is; no atmosphere, etc.. Really hated Travolta incredibly annoying performance, Denzel and Turturro are collecting a paycheck.
3/10
I feel like I finally understand the people who are turned off by the Coen brothers for their quirks and eccentricities. This is a really annoying film, it's like Pulp Fiction if it was made by someone who doesn't know how to elevate that type of trashy/B-movie material. Technically still quite admirable (lots of good cinematography and editing), but overall just held back by insufferable dialogue, poor attempts at experimental/psychedelic imagery and a lack of memorable moments.
4/10
Season 1 wasn't exactly superb but was passable. Season 2 just sucks. Lame story dragged out over 10 episodes and nothing funny along the way.
Please... someone force Selena Gomez to take acting lessons!! She has the acting skills of a cardboard box. At the very least, teach her how to use a non monotone voice, its called inflection I believe.
Quite a frustrating watch. It has this great concept of showing mundane, everyday life juxtaposed with horrifying imagery and sound hanging in the background, many reviewers have referred to it as the banality of evil. It's an inventive way of doing a Holocaust movie, but there's not much else to this. Glazer spreads the concept really thin over the 105 minute runtime, and I started to check out around the halfway mark. It's lacking in structure (no character arcs or big plot developments), every time it threatens to go somewhere it turns out to be an excuse to use the same bag of tricks. The acting and stilted cinematography are both pretty decent, but because they're both meant to serve the understated tone and nothing else, it can't fall back on those aspects. Again, if the tone is enough to carry this experimental film for you, your experience might be different. However, I became increasingly numb towards the repetitive nature, eventually feeling rather indifferent towards the experience (which is the last thing I want with a movie like this).
4.5/10
Damn, we're already milking early 2000s culture to trigger the dopamine buttons? Sometimes I wonder how blockbusters in the future will try to evoke the current era. How do you copy an era that's almost nothing but nostalgia, an era that coasts almost entirely on recycling stale ideas, IP and music from 20 to 40 years ago? Madame Web finds itself at a similar creative dead end. Why does Sony keep persisting on reviving this wave of forgotten B-movies from the early 2000s? I had some fun with Venom because of Tom Hardy's ridiculous performance, but I see no artistic merit with this or Morbius. It feels like everyone involved is several degrees of incompetent, or they simply didn't care. In fact, I probably already put more effort into this review than these screenwriters did with their script, so I see no reason to analyze this any further. Avoid at all cost.
1/10
This will probably be among the most well liked Oscar contenders, it's a very accessible crowdpleaser with clever writing and comedy. The scenes satirizing the exploitation & commercialization of black art are easily among the film's most entertaining moments, but it loses steam whenever it cuts back to the stuff about Monk's personal life (despite some pretty great acting by Sterling K. Brown). I also found the filmmaking pretty average; the locations and cinematography are decent but lacking in vision or personality. The acting's generally pretty good, but it probably would've been better if some of the wackiness remained more understated. It all leads back to the same issue for me; this needed a more experienced director at the helm (e.g. I'd love to see Spike Lee's version of this). The writing carries it a long way but some of the watered down choices make it feel more like a disposable streaming film than it should.
5.5/10
Well deserved classic, a perfect film. Really fantastic, clever script about the nature of justice that functions within the confines of the noir genre. Masterful use of sound and visuals by Fritz Lang, technically it feels very ahead of its time but it’s also very pronounced stylistically. The acting styles and dialogue don’t just feel like they’re from this time period, they feel specific to this film. I’d love to write an in depth analysis about this one someday, but considering that so many papers have already been written about it, I don’t think I could bring much to the table in terms of original thoughts. Just take a chance on it if you’re unsure; don’t let it being a German black and white film scare you away from seeing it.
9.5/10
Pretty wild film that’s good at playing with your expectations. The characters and acting are solid, Rosamund Pike is so funny that she stole the entire movie for me. The technical aspects are also excellent; really appreciate the specific aspect ratio and gothic nods in the cinematography, as well as some great needle drops that authentically capture the college experience of ‘06. However, the story is kind of a mess because the film wants to seemingly do everything (wealth satire, gay love story, erotic thriller, con movie, murder mystery etc.) so that leads to a film that feels inconsistent. The tone of this film varies between absurdly comedic, grounded, romantic, thrilling, gross; it kept me intrigued while being very frustrating at the same time. The motivations of the characters can also get a bit thin, with the final twist not repairing that as Fennell probably thinks it does ( leave those kind of montages to mr. Fincher, please ). Overall, this one is recommendable for the singular experience it provides, but it should’ve been more refined.
5.5/10
Nicholas Cage keeps up his bizarre career streak of pinballing between high and low art. He works really well in this post-Ari Aster drama/comedy/sci-fi/fantasy/horror/....; basically it's this experimental, surrealist art piece that refuses to pigeonhole itself into a specific genre. It's surprisingly cohesive and comments on topics such as celebrity culture, image and how fame can make one lose perspective of the important things in life. Like Beau is Afraid, it's structured like an unpredictable rollercoaster ride that hits many different emotions along the way. I was really enjoying it, though it started to lose me a little bit towards the end because you could tell the filmmakers had a hard time wrapping up this story. The filmmaking also feels like it's coming from a director who's just starting out. The filmic look is quite nice (pay special attention towards the trees when Cage is walking outside), but too much of this is shot like basic coverage. There are also some questionable editing choices and the score that doesn't really fit the quirky, surrealist tone. Still, I'd recommend the end result to any A24 loyalist.
6.5/10
Competently made, but its discussion of gender politics feels disingenuous and unbalanced. The movie tries to get away with how it depicts male behavior by setting the movie in the Australian outback, but the major leaps it asks for still ring to me as false. There’s nothing wrong with the dialogue or acting, it’s entirely the fault of the direction and story. For what it’s trying to do, all of the characters are simply too one dimensional. That could work if you throw in a layer of artifice, like Barbie for example; however it stretches believability with this more realistic, grounded tone. As a result, a lot of of the (implied) tension didn’t really resonate with me either once it decides to go full thriller mode. Again, it’s not a terrible film, but it reeks of the wrong kind of feminism.
4.5/10
First week of January type of bad, the kind of film that could potentially become a cult classic due to moments of unintentional camp merit (though I kinda doubt that because of how excruciatingly boring the rest of it is). The writing is some of the dumbest, convoluted nonsense I've seen in a while. The horror elements are also very tame, it's just so afraid to push any button. I get that you can't go too hard with a baby movie, but there are individual sequences in non-horror properties like Indiana Jones and Harry Potter that are more likely to scare a kid (or man child g4m3rs for that matter, I'm not entirely sure who this was made for). The technical aspects, in particular the editing, feel mostly unprofessional. Even Josh Hutcherson, who by all accounts should be the main bright spot in this movie, stands no chance with the given direction and dialogue.
1/10
Best enjoyed as an elaborate hipster prank where everyone involved simply refuses to break character.
1/10
Pretty frustrating how Laurie puts down the knife right next to Michael and sits and waits next to him instead of … idk maybe getting the fuck out of that house already
This uses a lot of overexposed tropes from coming-of-age films and sex comedies, but its unapologetically campy dna gives it a fresh twist. I don’t mean that lightly: the characters are more heightened than your average Wes Anderson type and the dialogue is specifically written to maximize the amount of sass and queerness. If you thought Barbie was annoying, I don’t recommend watching this. I generally found it to be decently funny, entertaining and energetic in the moment but without leaving a deeper impression. In terms of story it checks every box, its creativity lies more in coming up with fun scenes than it does with unique character arcs. Visually it’s slightly above average for a comedy, however due to it being heavy on close-ups and centre framing, it still has that disposability factor to it that’s often found in direct to streaming films. The music also gets too excessive and annoying at points. All in all, it’s a decent film that I can see (hopefully) contributing to the resurgence of low/mid budget comedies in the mainstream.
6/10
Probably the best Branagh Poirot movie so far, mostly by virtue of not having the ugly, plastic sheen of the previous 2 movies. This one captures the old school filmmaking style Branagh is going for pretty authentically, and the visuals are easily the best thing about this movie. With that being said, the final result is still nothing to write home about. While the characters and acting are generally ok, the dialogue and mystery are once again unexciting and lack a distinct artistic flair. Add to that a sluggish pace and poorly executed touches of horror (really unnecessary if you’re not willing to lean into that influence in a creative way), and you have a movie that is overall pretty forgettable and dull.
4.5/10
I don't know if I went into this with high expectations because of the critical acclaim it has, but I was left a bit confused at the end as to why Vertigo is so lauded.
I love many movies from this era and indeed Hitchcock's work (I especially love Rear Window) but hadn't seen this one before. The first half of the film was enjoyable and felt like a slow burn, unfolding towards some thrilling conclusion. James Stewart is always watchable and the cast in general is good, but I felt the film's second half drastically let it down. There were abrupt developments, such as Stewart's character Scotty getting hospitalised then suddenly free again, and then there's how Scotty displays a manipulative stalker-like side when he finds Kim Novak's character again, and pretty much holds her captive for the remainder of the film - until her death marks the almost hilariously abrupt ending.
I certainly wanted to like this film, and perhaps a second viewing will unlock some of its charms, but as a first watch and impression, Vertigo was sadly lacking for such a lauded film by an acclaimed director.
And here it is: the end of the biggest television show of all time.
Seasons 1-4 are (close to) perfect.
Seasons 5-6 are where some of the cracks start to appear, with some filler episodes that don't build a lot of character. However, they're still great seasons nonetheless.
Seasons 7-8 are good, not great. They have certain pacing (rushed developments, teleportation of characters) and writing issues (plot armour, unsatisfying & unearned conclusions etc.). It is especially the level of production that elevates these seasons above average television.
Am I also unsatisfied with how they handled certain characters at the very end? Absolutely.
Do I think, however, that they mostly stuck the landing? Yes.
S1: 9.5/10; S2: 9/10; S3: 9.5/10; S4: 10/10; S5: 8/10; S6: 8/10; S7: 7/10; S8: 7/10
Overall rating: 8.4/10
Is this what Hollywood calls progress? Are this and Ghosted the type of movies out of touch executives refer to as genuine attempts for launching a female Bond/MI? This is so offensively soulless and generic, there’s not a single interesting call during the entire runtime. Why does it all need to be so shit, Netflix? This isn’t high art, it shouldn’t be this hard to get right. Just give me a real, female-led, fun action film, not this content crap that’s made for NPCs.
2/10
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
"Shit like this always happens to my girl Nancy Drew. Sis be coming across some weird, kinky shit that don't make no sense, but in the end, it always turns out to be some regular-degular, missionary-position vanilla shit."
The comedy and dialogue go hand in hand here, it really works. The comedic interactions between characters is what made it a good watch for me. The title reveals a big part of the mystery but there's still plenty to offer and a few twists and turns. The funk hip-hop synth score and songs were a pretty good fit. The SpongeBob and Nancy Drew callouts were funny. It's too long though, I was about ready for it to end and there was still 50 minutes left—which turned out to be worth it. A good third act. Overall, it had it's moments but I can't see myself remembering this for too long.
I want some fried chicken now
It kinda reminds me of Memento in the sense that its scale and ambition pale in comparison to some of the director’s later works; however, intellectually and artistically we meet a filmmaker who’s already really well formed and defined. Industrial sound design, surrealism, mystery and abstractions; it’s all here already. Probably not the easiest film to get into if you’re new to Lynch’ filmography, but also not his most challenging by any stretch (especially if you understand how to read movies like this).
8/10
It's Crazy Rich Asians meets The Hangover. I'm not really a fan of either of those, so I'm not entirely surprised that this didn't click with me. The movie is at its best when it's making fun of the cultural differences between characters. However, more often than not, this movie will fall back on the same old lowest common denominator tropes that makes most studio comedies so boring. Most of this consists of wacky situations where things go cRaAaAaAaAaZy, lame raunchy jokes for 40 year olds, pop culture references that already feel dated, men being objectified to an obnoxious degree and a lot of painful, cringy dialogue.The story is more of an excuse to string all the bits together, there's not a lot of cohesion to it. There's an attempt to give the movie some weight at the very end, but because it doesn't really put in the work during the first two acts, it doesn't land. Again, I'm not the target demographic, but I wasn't the primary target for Turning Red or Beef either, and I ended up really liking both of those. This is just lazy and formulaic by comparison.
3.5/10
This is tense and provides food for thought, but I’m not sure if this was the best way of telling this story. Sticking very close to the real events gives it an authentic feel, however it’s not the most cinematic. Compared to a movie like The Insider, which admittedly feels like a more sensational and inauthentic whistleblower story, this is not as interesting to watch. The first thirty minutes are filled with a lot of moments of dead air, for example, and the cinematography is pretty dull and grey. The movie is mostly elevated by the acting and writing, but as an overall experience it’s on the forgettable side.
6/10
Wow, how the mighty have fallen. Was this season produced by the Hallmark channel? The schmaltzy music that plays in the background every other scene, the forced feel-good vibe, the corny jokes, the cringy musical interlude during this episode, that fucking Ed Sheeran montage…. it’s all so incredibly lame and cheap. Any of the sharp wit and quirk from the first two seasons has completely disappeared from the show. Instead this entire season felt like a bunch predictable, bland, sentimental nonsense made for the broadest of audiences.
The first two seasons are very nice and easy to like.
The third season is pretty awful.
It feels directionless, episodes are too long, the renewed focus makes it feel like a melodramatic soap opera, lots of misfires with the comedy (e.g. the Zava character doesn’t work at all), some of the acting got too cartoonish; the show took a swing and it turned into something that doesn’t work.
It’s nice that it tried to break down some barriers with the integration of real issues such as homophobia and racism in sports, but some of that stuff feels so tacked on or handled in a way that doesn’t make sense.
This movie’s trying really hard, it throws a lot of stuff at the wall. It’s this coming-of-age film, but there are shades of exploitation, heist, kung-fu and Bollywood movies, not to mention the heavy Edgar Wright influence on the filmmaking and editing. It sounds like a wild, eclectic ride, but for the most part the material isn’t really here. I don’t think the comedy is all that strong and mostly trying way too hard, it’s very ott/extra and can get quite annoying. Moreover, the kung-fu stuff is poorly captured, and there’s not a story beat or character arc that isn’t predictable. Still, there are individual bits I enjoyed (e.g. there’s some fun, wacky stuff during the wedding), and the acting, cinematography and music are all relatively solid. I also really like how it integrates the cultural backgrounds of the characters to add some more colour to the plot, but the movie as a whole doesn’t work for me.
5/10
