Shout by Jordy
VIP8I’m pretty sure that this movie served as an inspiration for many of the GTA games, especially when you look at the yellow and orange soaked hues of everything that takes place during the day.
That’s pretty much the biggest compliment I can give this film, because the directing and editing are shit, the comedy is godawful, the music is obnoxious, the acting sucks, the racial stereotyping is annoying and unfunny, and everything is really predictable and cliche. In short: it’s full of Michael Bay’s lowbrow, overly commercial and at times pornographic sensibilities.3/10
loading replies
@adelin-hogea I didn’t know that! Thank you for letting me know!
Garbage. Some of the dumbest, misinformed satire I’ve ever seen. Even if you ignore its fascist argumentation and pretend it’s just meant to be stupid nonsense, it still reeks of that typical unfunny early 2000s comedy. Just because you’re making a movie about stupid people, doesn’t mean your movie needs to be equally as stupid. This has no real vision, annoying performances, cheap use of music, bland cinematography, no attempt at writing proper jokes; it’s awful. It’s kinda sad because you could probably make a really great satire about the complete dominance of stupidity in society, democracy or whatever, in fact this is coming from someone who can easily get annoyed at all of that. However, this film only has one trick up its sleeve, which is to portray the stupid masses through as many different caricatures as possible. It’s like watching Adam McKay if he somehow became even more middlebrow after making Don’t Look Up. Please skip this, the joke’s really on the people here who think it’s good because ‘wELl ThIs Is a DoCUmenTarY nOw’.
2/10
loading replies
@astranora You don't need to tell me to grow up when you're the 34 year old with an Ash Ketchum avatar
I'm kinda sick of arthouse films copying the Nicolas Winding Refn aesthetic, but if you're gonna do it this well, I can't complain. Love the synth score and neon aesthetic, it's easily its strongest asset. Unfortunately, the script and overall direction are junk. I feel like it's trying to give you the Brian de Palma/John Carpenter version of something like Bound or Thelma & Louise, and if that sounds like an awkward mix of tones, you'd be right. I really didn't care for the romance that's set-up during the first act due to the awkward dialogue, flat characterization and lack of chemistry between the two leads. Once the crime plot develops, it has a hard time justifying the motivations of characters in a way that doesn't feel contrived or stupid. It gradually becomes more camp as it goes along, but not in a way that I found particularly rewarding. By the time it reaches its conclusion I was laughing at how unapologetically trashy the film gets, leaving any real attempt at substance in the rear view mirror in favour of something more groteseque, which falls completely flat. Leading up to those moments, it kinda feels like the film wants to have it both ways, because it integrates these poorly executed surrealist moments and an underdeveloped theme of female body language that doesn't quite jell with the rest of the plot. It's one of those films that would've benefitted from less pretension and instead focussing on making sure that you care about the central relationship, because the end result here is quite a mess.
4/10
loading replies
@somnomania I’m not, but I really liked All of us Strangers from last year and Moonlight is one of my favourite films. I don’t think I have trouble relating to a perspective that’s different from my own, but I don’t know, it just didn’t work for me here.
Shout by Jordy
VIP8Quite 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
loading replies
@etdj I’m not saying they needed to show the holocaust, I acknowledge that not showing it is one of its strengths. But to me hitting the indifference emotion for 90 minutes isn’t that interesting, especially when it isn’t super heady or conceptual besides that. Sure, it brings the ‘there’s still tragedy hidden all around us’ point home effectively, but it isn’t much of a climax or arc. It’s too thin to build your whole movie around that, it doesn’t leave much of an impression. With the way it’s constructed now I feel like this should’ve been a 20-30 minute short.
Review by Jordy
VIP8This is a movie for people who are into Woody Allen type stuff, it reminded me of Marriage Story in particular. The dialogue and acting are definitely the main driving force here, and Sandra Hüller delivers a pretty great performance. The core ideas that the movie gets at about relationships, guilt and justice are compelling, but it’s not always told in the most efficient way. The pieces ultimately click into place in an unexpected way, but it takes a clunky, elaborate set-up to get there. Tightening up the beginning and very end would’ve improved the experience a lot for me, mostly because I wouldn’t have to hear that stupid 50 Cent song 80 times. Moreover, due to the story structure and constraints of a legal drama, the movie suffers from an overabundance of exposition. There are so many scenes where I wish they’d just cut to whatever the characters are talking about, instead of a boring close-up with someone reminiscing over a memory. I’m also not the biggest fan of how the courtroom scenes were staged, some elements are on the cheesy side. The prosecutor in particular felt like a Suits character, he doesn’t work for me in this more realistic context. Finally, the technical aspects of this movie are just fine. As is often the case with movies like this, the cinematography is competent but lacking in style or vision, nor is the score very noteworthy. All in all, it’s adequate but the accolades are completely overblown.
6/10
loading replies
@axx_axx His more famous work falls into that category, yes. I was referring more to how it’s about the complexities of relationships and driven by the performances and dialogue.
Shout by Jordy
VIP8It’s pretty amazing how despite often working in the same genre Scorsese continuously finds ways to keep it fresh. It’s one of his longer films but flows effortlessly because of Thelma Schoonmaker’s editing. Combined with a script examining the hypercapitalism of Las Vegas and solid performances (which to be fair has everyone play the exact part that’s expected in a Scorsese film), this is another win.
8/10
loading replies
@dulneth-p Same, so I wouldn’t say it’s as good. But if you’re generally into Scorsese mob films I can’t imagine disliking this
Barbenheimer: Part 2 of 2
This was never going to be a your average summer blockbuster given the incredibly overqualified cast and crew involved. However, having just finished it, I am still blown away by how far they pushed it. Is it too highbrow and intellectual for its own good? Maybe, I don't see this gaining universal praise from the general audience, but I'd say that's a good thing. I have yet to come across an accurate read of this film by the online outrage economy (or middle aged nerdy Youtube critics, for that matter), so perhaps it's not as preachy or on the nose as thought by some. This thing is directed with such vision and precision, for my money it's the boldest blockbuster I've seen in a long time. Gerwig and her team truly knock it out of the park here: the set design for Barbieland is amazing and colorful (the shitty lighting and lack of liquids are great touches), the campy-yet-sincere humor feels very fresh, there are interesting references to filmmakers like Jacques Tati and Wes Anderson, it has razor sharp commentary and so many memorable scenes. The script feels well read and clever, taking its obvious influences (The Truman Show, The Lego Movie, Toy Story and Elf, to name a few) in a different direction than what's expected. It proves that you can still use meta and self-referential tropes as long as they're executed tastefully. It's also brewing with themes and subtext, trusting the viewer to read between the lines and find the detailed nuances in the script (well, for the most part). Will Ferrell doesn't even serve a real narrative purpose, but conceptually he makes the film a lot more interesting. During the third act it occasionally starts to spell things out a little too much through clunky monologues, which I'd argue is its only real flaw. Besides that, I thought this was a blast. Robbie, Gosling and Ferrera all deliver nuanced, funny and at times emotional performances, there's not a single dull moment and it's one of the rare blockbusters where the production value actually shows up on the screen. Major props to Robbie and Gerwig as producers for getting it made, I almost can't believe some of this stuff survived Mattel’s pr division as well as the Hollywood system.
8.5/10
loading replies
@the_argentinian My four favourite movies of the year are currently Barbie, Spiderverse, Nimona and MI7 (all of which I’ve reviewed, btw). Come again?
Review by Jordy
VIP8Barbenheimer: Part 1 of 2
This is the kind of film I really don’t want to criticize, because we don’t get nearly enough other stuff like it. However, mr. Nolan has been in need of an intervention for a while now, and unfortunately all of the issues that have been plaguing his films since The Dark Knight Rises show up to some degree here. Visually it might just be his best film, and there’s some tremendous acting in here, particularly by Murphy and RDJ. However, it makes the common biopic mistake of treating its subject matter like a Wikipedia entry, thereby not focussing enough on character and perspective. As a whole, the film feels more like a long extended montage, I don’t think there are many scenes that go on for longer than 60 seconds. There’s a strong ‘and then this happened, and then this happened’ feel to it, which definitely keeps up the pace, but it refuses to stop and let an emotion or idea simmer for a while. There are moments where you get a look into Oppenheimer’s mind, but because the film wants to cover too much ground, it’s (like everything else) reduced to quick snippets. It’s the kind of approach that’d work for a 6 hour long miniseries where you can spend more time with the characters, not for a 3 hour film. I can already tell that I won’t retain much from this, in fact a lot of it is starting to blur together in my mind. There are also issues with some of the dialogue and exposition, such as moments where characters who are experts in their field talk in a way that feels dumbed down for the audience, or just straight up inauthentic. Einstein is given a couple of cheesy lines, college professors and students interact in a way that would never happen, Oppenheimer gives a lecture in what’s (according to the movie) supposed to be Dutch when it’s really German; you have to be way more careful with that when you’re making a serious drama. Finally, there are once again major issues with the sound mixing. I actually really loved the score, but occasionally it’s blaring at such a volume where it drowns out important dialogue in the mix. I’m lucky enough to have subtitles, but Nolan desperately needs to get his ears checked, or maybe he should’ve asked some advice from Benny Safdie since he’s pretty great with experimental sound mixing. My overall feelings are almost identical to the ones I had regarding Tenet; Nolan needs to rethink his approach to writing, editing and mixing. This film as a whole doesn’t work, but there are still more than a few admirable qualities to it.
Edit: I rewatched this at home to see whether my feeling would change. I still stand by what I wrote in July, though the sound mix seems to have been improved for the home media release. It sounds more balanced and I didn’t miss one line of dialogue this time around. I’m slightly raising my score because of that, but besides that I still think it’s unfocused, overedited, awkwardly staged and scripted etc.
5.5/10
loading replies
@jonlevity Yeah, I wish he’d make a small comedy or something completely out of his wheelhouse. His films haven’t evolved for the better since Inception.
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.
loading replies
@the_argentinian I won’t argue it had ‘edge’, but the comedy used to be a lot sharper and intelligent. Yes, the show was corny, but it mostly tipped in the direction of being wholesome and heartwarming. There was less of an emphasis on melodrama and sentimentality, it was more of a straightforward comedy, almost like a sports sitcom. Trust me, I rewatched the first two seasons not too long ago, they’re very different from what this is.
Man, they don't make smart science fiction movies like this anymore.
loading replies
@the_argentinian Ex Machina? Annihilation? After Yang? Blade Runner 2049? Arrival?
This is essentially Spielberg's Almost Famous. It's way too sentimental and white, which is a complaint that's often thrown at Spielberg's work (one I don't always agree with myself), but this is undeniably him at his schmaltziest. Every genuine emotion is buried under such a deep layer of cheese that the entire picture ends up feeling phony and disingenuous to me. There's an unironic record scratch sound effect in here at some point, and it's just so corny. Michelle Williams is also a major victim of the direction, her performance and the dialogue she's given are awful. The other performances are passable at best, with Gabriel LaBelle and Paul Dano being the clear standouts. Visually I did not find the movie to be that compelling, it's overly reliant on a generic orange/teal color grade, but there are some strong moments that illustrate the power of visual filmmaking very well. John Williams' score is probably one of his most forgettable ones, it sounded like a composer who's trying to do an imitation of Alexandre Desplat. I just don't really see the overall appeal. Emotionally it clearly doesn't work for me, but I also find it to be lacking in substance. We don't learn that much about Spielberg as a filmmaker or artistic force, it's mostly focussed on him as a person, which doesn't interest me as much. He probably poured his soul into this project, but to me it's a perfect example that artists should not be in charge of their own memoir, because it doesn't focus on the interesting stuff.
4/10
loading replies
@jidar My problem wasn’t the amount of white people in this movie. If that’s true to his memory, I really don’t care. My problem is that the material is approached in the whitest way possible (sentimental, schmaltzy, corny, dramatically over the top, etc.).
Shout by The_Argentinian
I thought it was one of those manipulative movies about a disable person that everyone treats like crap. Of course the audience will feel bad for him. How could you not?
That's why the emotional pay off didn't work for me but I see how it could make people cry.loading replies
@the_argentinian Yes, this is true … but, wouldn’t it be a lot easier to write this character like the nicest human being who’s simply down on his luck? It’d literally be the most predictable way to get at you emotionally. I agree that this movie is manipulative and that the main character is too unlikeable for the movie to work, but at least it didn’t take the easiest route
Shout by Elliot
VIP6Jeez, the snowflaky reactions of straight white men because not every single episode and narrative centres them - anything deviating from that priority is apparently "woke". Get over yourselves, you egomaniacal bigots.
Anyway, another great episode that nicely expanded Ellie's backstory - bonus points for the Mortal Kombat II appreciation, too :nerd:
loading replies
@dw11 You’re pulling the ‘the inclusive people are excluding me’ card? Sure. Next time you’re gonna call yourself a liberal, don’t pull from the incel playbook.
Also, you don’t need to lecture me about equality or victimhood culture, I’m very well informed and it’s even within my field of academic expertise. Trust me, I’ve read plenty of studies about that. However, none of them used the amount of people saying the N-word at a Jane’s Addiction concert as a form of measurement, so what do they know. Nevertheless, those studies came to the conclusion that racial/gender/sexual equality in modern societies are still improving decade by decade, despite there still being a long way to go. Some of your examples and previous statements illustrate that pretty well.
Shout by Elliot
VIP6Jeez, the snowflaky reactions of straight white men because not every single episode and narrative centres them - anything deviating from that priority is apparently "woke". Get over yourselves, you egomaniacal bigots.
Anyway, another great episode that nicely expanded Ellie's backstory - bonus points for the Mortal Kombat II appreciation, too :nerd:
loading replies
@dw11 You might want to do some more research if you think that the 80s were the true age of liberalism for all social groups. As I already pointed out, people being complacent with their social position isn’t the same as true freedom or acceptance.
And you’re right, we are on different evolutionary paths, because people like you are likely to go extinct sooner rather than later. Young, educated and/or culturally intelligent people will typically accept and embrace inclusion, so you’re fighting for a cause which is increasingly becoming a non-issue year by year. In fact, most people already don’t care, so maybe ask yourself who’s creating the ‘new age of division’ here. I pray you’ve come to your senses in a few decades when nobody’s even bothered to bring this up anymore.
Shout by Elliot
VIP6Jeez, the snowflaky reactions of straight white men because not every single episode and narrative centres them - anything deviating from that priority is apparently "woke". Get over yourselves, you egomaniacal bigots.
Anyway, another great episode that nicely expanded Ellie's backstory - bonus points for the Mortal Kombat II appreciation, too :nerd:
loading replies
@dw11 I understand that the world may seem like a magical place growing up, but I think you still lack some maturity if you think that acceptance and inclusion is about ‘laughing at gay stereotypes’. Maybe place yourself in their position for a second. Would you feel included if there were no straight white men in media, except Ron Swanson from Parks and Recreation? So only the most exaggerated, stereotypical version of a straight white man. Does that seem right or inclusive to you? Gay people exist everywhere and they deserve stories told about them, you’re gonna have to mature and adapt to that. Or you can just stick to movies and tv shows specifically targeted at people like you, but simultaneously leave no cultural footprint whatsoever, such as The Terminal List or anything produced by The Daily Wire. The choice is yours.
Shout by Elliot
VIP6Jeez, the snowflaky reactions of straight white men because not every single episode and narrative centres them - anything deviating from that priority is apparently "woke". Get over yourselves, you egomaniacal bigots.
Anyway, another great episode that nicely expanded Ellie's backstory - bonus points for the Mortal Kombat II appreciation, too :nerd:
loading replies
@2ls1t These are the same kind of people who would complain about black people being in movies one century ago. Deep down they know they’re out of touch and behind the curve, but it takes years to realize that. It’s fucking embarrassing, I apologize on the behalf of straight white men.
If you’d ask me what the highlights of the previous 2 Ant-Man movies are, I’d probably answer: I don’t remember much about them, but I liked those quirky scenes narrated by Michael Peña and the creative use of shrinking powers during the set pieces. For as forgettable as both movies are, at least I still remember the set piece with the train in the first movie, or the kitchen fight from the second movie. With this movie, I'm already having trouble remembering any specifics, because all of those typical Edgar Wright touches have been erased in favor of being a big CGI extravaganza. So, allow me to do a general breakdown of the three acts instead.
1st act: We get a set-up that's similar to Spiderman: No Way Home, which means it’s in a hurry to get to the main dish, making every main character look like an irresponsible dumbass in the process. Once we get to the quantum realm, we're met with a lot of cringe comedy. The design of the world is fine, it feels like a mashup of prequel era Star Wars, Avatar, The Fifth Element and Spy Kids, not like an original creation. A stronger, visionary director probably would've made a big difference here, or at least one who knows how to use the volume stages, because that might’ve avoided the Spy Kids comparisons.
2nd act: Jonathan Majors arrives to do some actual acting, and he somehow pulls it off despite the hammy, pseudo-intellectual lines given to him by the script. Michelle Pfeiffer also gets some time to shine, when she's on the screen with Majors it feels like the movie actually comes to life for a brief second. Still, the scenes with Kang feel tonally inconsistent with the rest of the movie, and I’m not sold on the idea of him being the Avengers level threat we’ve been waiting for. When it comes to the other actors, most of them are given nothing interesting to do, the supposed co-lead of this movie (according to the title) included. I don't like picking on younger actors, but it needs to be said that Emma Fuhrmann expressed more emotion during her 10 second appearance as Cassie Lang in Avengers: Endgame than Kathryn Newton did here. In terms of story, this portion of the movie is all about set-up and clunky exposition as delivered through monologues. One of the characters even gets introduced with his own 'previously on Ant-Man' recap, which I find insulting and shows what little faith this studio has in its audience. Besides, it probably would’ve been better to cut this character, because his inclusion is easily one of Marvel's worst creative decisions (the design and visual effects are laughable). Generally I'd say this act is pretty boring, and occasionally embarrassing.
3rd act: The movie decides it wants to be Aquaman instead, so we're getting an extended battle sequence of stuff fighting other stuff, with plenty of flashes, lasers and more stuff. It's big, it's loud, and I check out. Every cheesy crowdpleaser deserves its fair share of deus ex machina moments, but this movie spams the action movie trope of 'our main character is in peril only to get saved at the very last moment' to death at this point. Furthermore, the cringe comedy makes a big return, with Corey Stoll delivering a line so bad that it will become a meme (you'll know once you see the movie). More punchy stuff, more pew pew, more 'comedy', and thankfully the movie finally decides it has wasted enough of my time. We get a final montage that includes the first good joke of the movie, and the credits roll. Nothing is achieved, absolutely nothing. This is a cynically conceived advertisement that does not deserve your time.
3/10
loading replies
@skinnyfilmbuff Thank you! I think this one took about 15 minutes to write, which is mostly because I had organized my thoughts already in my head when I walked out of the screening. Some movies take a bit longer, especially the ones with like deeper themes and layers. It all depends on the movie, if it’s a generic action movie I usually don’t put in that much effort
Simple, effective, but a little too straightforward and predictable to really blow my mind.
Still, I like what it's saying about migrants, marginalization, postcolonialism, etc.
The cinematography still looks excellent, but the score hasn't aged as well.7/10
loading replies
@the_argentinian nah I just think the composition sounds clunky, and the heavy clipping at points doesn’t sound great. Sure, that’s a byproduct of its time, but there are a lot of 60s movies where this isn’t an issue
This movie....made no sense to me. There is a mystery behind the pool itself, but doesn't get explained at all. That's is the most interesting part, but doesn't find it's way into the film at all. So it's just a bunch of nonsensical filler in my opinion, which tries so hard to be "artistic".
loading replies
@indigoviking It’s not a movie where looking at it strictly from A to B will make you understand it. He’s a writer looking for inspiration, that’s just character development to get you emotionally invested. They also establish that he’s a self-centered asshole early on, because he’s sexually attracted to Mia Goth and doesn’t mind getting jerked off by her. Then we get to the pool/cloning stuff, which is a little abstract, but basically the idea is that it takes away your personal responsibility; you no longer need to behave by the rules of society. When Skarsgard’s character realizes this, he smiles, his ego gets the better of him and it unlocks his inner psychopath as a result. He then gets wrapped up in those crazy adventures with the other rich assholes, which for Skarsgard’s brain becomes an addiction, so much so that he cannot leave the island by the end of the film. Furthermore, he needs to do increasingly crazier stuff in order to feel any mental stimulation, that’s where those psychedelic montages come in. That’s quite haunting and scary, right? If you think it’s far fetched, maybe look up some interviews with hotel managers who used to host celebrity parties.
In the end what the movie’s saying is pretty clear: people need to be held accountable for their actions, and the rules need to apply to everyone. The movie illustrates why a well functioning juridical system is so important, it puts our ego in check.
This movie....made no sense to me. There is a mystery behind the pool itself, but doesn't get explained at all. That's is the most interesting part, but doesn't find it's way into the film at all. So it's just a bunch of nonsensical filler in my opinion, which tries so hard to be "artistic".
loading replies
@indigoviking You’re looking for stuff you’re never going to get out of it, because that’s not what the movie is interested in. It’s not about the technicalities or the mystery of the pool, that’s just something that exists in the world of this movie.
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
loading replies
@j0k3r2g0 Yes that must be it, thanks!
Shout by Gary Ellis
Woke film. The grand finale is a black woman destroying the most famous piece of art created by a white man.
Shame, it was a good film up to that point.
loading replies
@gazz1e So it wasn’t woke when Daniel Craig’s character was revealed to be gay? Good to know we’re making at least some progress
This movie predicted moder toxic fans.
Anyway, I don't know how can anyone not like it. The most accessible SK adaptation.loading replies
@the_argentinian Indeed, and it even predicted they would act like mentally deficient manchildren. Feels far ahead of its time doesn’t it? It probably seemed like an absurd, far fetched story back then.
Not a fan of this. What saves some of it are the fresh ideas it brings to the table, it’s good at playing with your expectations. At the same time you can also really tell that this isn’t the most experienced filmmaker. The camerawork, lighting and music are mostly bland and only pop sporadically during key moments. The horror is ok, it makes the mistake of showing some of the supposed scary stuff in broad daylight, and it occasionally resorts to cheap techniques (hectic editing; annoying, unearned jump scares). Its logic gets very thin in places, and while the acting is passable, it can get kinda bad at times (the dialogue certainly doesn’t help either). You can excuse some of that for the fact that it’s aiming for shlock, but I think this gets kinda lame next to a movie like Malignant.
4.5/10
loading replies
@the_argentinian Only during some moments. Most scenes have boring shot/reverse shot editing, close ups with uninteresting framing and generic orange/teal colour grading. I expect a little more effort.
This is the kind of modern horror movie that dudes will hate because they can't stand the characters. I thought it was fun and well paced.
And the final reveal was hilarious. Definitely wasn't expecting it.loading replies
@the_argentinian She-Hulk gets hated on by fragile men because of the feminism. This is an entirely different beast, the hate I’ve seen is mostly directed at the characters being annoying (some of whom are men, by the way). I don’t see how that kind of hate is related to gender lol, I don’t think the people who hate Succession are exclusively men.
This is the kind of modern horror movie that dudes will hate because they can't stand the characters. I thought it was fun and well paced.
And the final reveal was hilarious. Definitely wasn't expecting it.loading replies
@the_argentinian You think women won’t hate on a movie because you can’t empathize with the characters? It’s not a gender thing, it’s a dumb people thing.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Between this and Cherry, it’s becoming more and more clear that the MCU’s best director is called Kevin Feige.
Netflix clearly spent a lot of money on this, you can feel the price of your subscription going up with every new set piece that’s introduced, but the end results are still unforgivingly bland and generic nonetheless.
It’s their attempt to compete with Bond, Bourne or Mission Impossible, but if anything this feels like a poser imitation of those superior blockbuster franchises. The plot is in fact literally ripping off both Skyfall and The Bourne Identity at the same time, but forgets about any of their depth in regards to story and character.
The Russos are clearly trying to recapture that same tone and spark from their Captain America: The Winter Soldier days, but they end up making something that’s more akin to the quality of Red Notice.
In terms of directing they kinda got outdone by their own second unit director with his Netflix action flick, as I’d argue that Extraction is a marginally better film than this.
The action’s poorly done and cheaply put together, lots of annoying editing choices (heavy overuse of drone shots, quick cuts and can the Russos pick a normal font for once?), corny dialogue, distractingly bad CGI, boring visuals and music (why is everything so low contrast, foggy and muddy?); not a lot to recommend about this one.
The acting’s fine, Evans is having a blast, but I have absolutely no idea why an extremely picky actor like Ryan Gosling chose this script in the first place. It seems like a paycheck movie for someone of his caliber. Just watch The Nice Guys instead of this if you want to see Goose in an action comedy, we don’t need these 200 million dollar direct to streaming action films.4/10
loading replies
@balazs955 Friends? I’m not huge on that lol. With challenging content I’m also referring to arthouse stuff (which incidentally includes Drive, maybe try some of NWR’s other films like Bronson if you were into that one), because right now you’re only watching the most normie, mainstream stuff that’s out there, which in turn leads to your takes being basic and poorly thought out. Not that you can’t also watch dumb action films, you can of course (I’ve actually given positive ratings to some Fast and Furious films, many Marvel films before Endgame, 300, lots of 80s classics, just to name a few), but there are still standards, even for that kind of movie. I hate this mentality of ‘just shut your brain off/don’t take anything seriously’, I think that’s really dumb and just an excuse to justify that you’re watching crap.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Between this and Cherry, it’s becoming more and more clear that the MCU’s best director is called Kevin Feige.
Netflix clearly spent a lot of money on this, you can feel the price of your subscription going up with every new set piece that’s introduced, but the end results are still unforgivingly bland and generic nonetheless.
It’s their attempt to compete with Bond, Bourne or Mission Impossible, but if anything this feels like a poser imitation of those superior blockbuster franchises. The plot is in fact literally ripping off both Skyfall and The Bourne Identity at the same time, but forgets about any of their depth in regards to story and character.
The Russos are clearly trying to recapture that same tone and spark from their Captain America: The Winter Soldier days, but they end up making something that’s more akin to the quality of Red Notice.
In terms of directing they kinda got outdone by their own second unit director with his Netflix action flick, as I’d argue that Extraction is a marginally better film than this.
The action’s poorly done and cheaply put together, lots of annoying editing choices (heavy overuse of drone shots, quick cuts and can the Russos pick a normal font for once?), corny dialogue, distractingly bad CGI, boring visuals and music (why is everything so low contrast, foggy and muddy?); not a lot to recommend about this one.
The acting’s fine, Evans is having a blast, but I have absolutely no idea why an extremely picky actor like Ryan Gosling chose this script in the first place. It seems like a paycheck movie for someone of his caliber. Just watch The Nice Guys instead of this if you want to see Goose in an action comedy, we don’t need these 200 million dollar direct to streaming action films.4/10
loading replies
@balazs955 Don’t mistake this for me for being a smug, pedantic asshole, I honestly say this with the best of intentions: you should improve your film literacy. Read some reviews by professional critics and watch some more challenging content. You’re being quite idiotic at the moment.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Between this and Cherry, it’s becoming more and more clear that the MCU’s best director is called Kevin Feige.
Netflix clearly spent a lot of money on this, you can feel the price of your subscription going up with every new set piece that’s introduced, but the end results are still unforgivingly bland and generic nonetheless.
It’s their attempt to compete with Bond, Bourne or Mission Impossible, but if anything this feels like a poser imitation of those superior blockbuster franchises. The plot is in fact literally ripping off both Skyfall and The Bourne Identity at the same time, but forgets about any of their depth in regards to story and character.
The Russos are clearly trying to recapture that same tone and spark from their Captain America: The Winter Soldier days, but they end up making something that’s more akin to the quality of Red Notice.
In terms of directing they kinda got outdone by their own second unit director with his Netflix action flick, as I’d argue that Extraction is a marginally better film than this.
The action’s poorly done and cheaply put together, lots of annoying editing choices (heavy overuse of drone shots, quick cuts and can the Russos pick a normal font for once?), corny dialogue, distractingly bad CGI, boring visuals and music (why is everything so low contrast, foggy and muddy?); not a lot to recommend about this one.
The acting’s fine, Evans is having a blast, but I have absolutely no idea why an extremely picky actor like Ryan Gosling chose this script in the first place. It seems like a paycheck movie for someone of his caliber. Just watch The Nice Guys instead of this if you want to see Goose in an action comedy, we don’t need these 200 million dollar direct to streaming action films.4/10
loading replies
@balazs955 The only thing that’s stupid is to try and invalidate other people’s opinion. Maybe just say nothing if you don’t have anything useful to add? Besides, it’s not like I wrote a massive hot take, it was generally poorly received by critics and audiences.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Between this and Cherry, it’s becoming more and more clear that the MCU’s best director is called Kevin Feige.
Netflix clearly spent a lot of money on this, you can feel the price of your subscription going up with every new set piece that’s introduced, but the end results are still unforgivingly bland and generic nonetheless.
It’s their attempt to compete with Bond, Bourne or Mission Impossible, but if anything this feels like a poser imitation of those superior blockbuster franchises. The plot is in fact literally ripping off both Skyfall and The Bourne Identity at the same time, but forgets about any of their depth in regards to story and character.
The Russos are clearly trying to recapture that same tone and spark from their Captain America: The Winter Soldier days, but they end up making something that’s more akin to the quality of Red Notice.
In terms of directing they kinda got outdone by their own second unit director with his Netflix action flick, as I’d argue that Extraction is a marginally better film than this.
The action’s poorly done and cheaply put together, lots of annoying editing choices (heavy overuse of drone shots, quick cuts and can the Russos pick a normal font for once?), corny dialogue, distractingly bad CGI, boring visuals and music (why is everything so low contrast, foggy and muddy?); not a lot to recommend about this one.
The acting’s fine, Evans is having a blast, but I have absolutely no idea why an extremely picky actor like Ryan Gosling chose this script in the first place. It seems like a paycheck movie for someone of his caliber. Just watch The Nice Guys instead of this if you want to see Goose in an action comedy, we don’t need these 200 million dollar direct to streaming action films.4/10
loading replies
@balazs955 I don’t know what gave you the impression that I’m some elitist piece of shit, but you certainly made me laugh. Also, don’t use the whole ‘you do it if you know so well’ argument, that’s just stupid and contrived at this point
