Reviews

The RAZZIES Awards have a favorite: Napoleon as worst movie and Ridley Scott as worst director; for sure.

Joaquin Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby; deserves at least a nomination.

Napoleon was perhaps the only French that made things difficult to England; expecting British director do something respectfull would be a dream; but thjis time not even the real history was respected.

Tha main characters fought 61 battles and very few are shown; events are not even in order and many main characters are absent or shown without explanation. Suddenly is fired and suddenly comes back but never is clear.

So how it gets to almost three hours; basically shown his personal romantic problems; it show him as really bad lover; but his wife ends loving him even after cheating on him ? Kirby is NEVER HAPPY OR SMILING with him; but suddenly is in love ?

There many more stupid and badly created situations that could take too long to explain.

JUST FORGET THIS PIECE OF CRAP.

It is obvious that most of the reviewers never read the original and not even saw Coppola Dracula (perhaps the most close to the book).

The Demeter is a very small part of the book; just a few lines never a great or even important part of the history.

Second; there are lots of crucifixes but Dracula ignores them; like had no effect against him

Third; Dracula looked like a person; in fact a very sensous one. Here is basically a monster from that NOSFERATU movie that NEVER GOT THE RIGHTS to use the character.

Nothing against women; but the only one here shoots better than males and even fight more; there was a #MEETOO# in the 19 century ?

Vampires need to be buried (in his own land; thus the reason of the boxes full of dirt) to convert; and the do not burn immediately until the really feed (that is not even in the book). In fact the ones here never drink, not even kill anybody

On top of all that; as always characters does the most stupid things and are killed in order of importance. But as nobody is very defined almost nobody cares.

Corey Hawkins is very good actor and he does his part very well; but his part is basically VAN HELSING with the name changed

Liam Cunningham is good as always; as is Woody Norman that creates the only terrifying part of the move

Taking liberties with a clastic is one thing; but basically changing the mythology ignoring most things is basically chaotic. This is what these people had done.

In brief ; terrible made adaptation, far from horror and not even Dracula is right. Do not lose your time.

THE MEG 2 is lot more comedy than the first one; which does not mean is soft. There is heavy violence everywhere very impressive stunts and the MEGs itself are very terrifying.

The main difference; the first was more dramatic with some important characters dying. In this one; only the bad one (and some very secondary ones died).

In any case, the movie does the best avoid unnecessary dramatism; which does not mean lacks entertainment.

The movie starts a little slow but the tension and action increase very soon. The last act is spectacular with the action divided among the different characters.

In brief; perhaps not as good as the original for some people but a lot of fun.

Christopher Nolan is an ambitious director who is always trying to impact and surprise. He is able to do it sometimes BUT NOT ALWAYS. TENET his previous movie was too difficult to follow for many people and not that satisfying at the end.

OPENHAIMER is basically the same. The first hour or so is about a very particular (far from humble, almost mad) person who suddenly become incredible recognized to the point of being the chief of the Manhattan Project. Cillian Murphy is excellent but is never clear how a semi communist, semi womanizer suddenly became so recognized.

Then another hour is about the project itself and discussions with a fellow scientists until the the bomb is made; even without much knowledge is basically the most appealing part; but his wife crisis (she is an alcoholic who despises his children) shown and strangely resolved. Also; how a person the created such thing could become so pacifists and worried about humanity.

It is something logic but the movie changes the characters without any kind of progression or moral dilema.

The third part of the movie; a very complicated political situation were Truman (play by Gary Oldman who also did Churchill) is depicted not as a nice or grateful person and lots of other politicians are shown even works (outstanding Robert Downey Jr. Who started a naïve person to become the worst of all enemies); but is resolved by Rami Malek (in his only real scene ) in from of the Congress.

Suddenly Oppenheimer about to be CRUCIFIED and the next scene shows him receiving a medal from the President

The point is the movie three hours long has big continuity issues. Most of us know, history and understand what happened but will young people really be clear ?

In brief; is not bad but is unnecessary long in empty parts and to too short in many important aspects.

Original Fast and the Furious was copy of Point Break (a not very successful masterpiece that later become a cult classic) exchanging surf boards by cars. It worked and guarantee a sequel but Diesel was not interested so it was replaced by Tyrese Gibson. The movie was highly successful but produces decide to do a cheap one in Tokyo; that end up with a Diesel cameo granting the fourth installment.

The fourth part had the original protagonists and made some money; so after a while Diesel become one of the producers and with the higher budget and few spectacular scenes became an absolute blockbuster.

That luck lasted for the next four movies; keeping mostly the same cast (minus some dead that came back to life) and strongly villains and spectacular almost realistic scenes.

Weil it is not the case here. The only good thing is Momoa doing the bad guy and having fun; and John Cena doing some kind of sympathetic monster.

The rest of the cast; as good as usually is; has very little to do; and has little interaction with Diesel.

Diesel itself is a complete disaster. He barely act and is basically Superman; it was a thief originally but now became a generous loving person who only cares about his family and friends.

Louis Leterrier and usually good action movie director used to lower budget movies; does not seems confortable with this one.

The special effects are very poor; that last sequences is really lame and very cheap made and the movie is overload with fight sequences and very little cars ones. In fact the most spectaculars are the ones showed from FF 5 a few times during this movie.

To make matters worse; the script is absurd; overly long (141 minutes) and the movie has no ending; leaving open for X2 or XI

In brief; do not lose your time; is obviously the intention was to squeeze the franchise make some extra bucks but at least should have try to keep the level of the previous movies.

Joaquin Phoenix was the main reason I saw this movie and even himself; a great actor, seems mostly lost in a one dimensional unexpressive role.

I was never a fan of Ari Aster; HEREDITARY and MIDSOMMER were too long and boring and the "horror" was very little an nothing really that original.

What he was trying to do here? Everything Everywhere All at Once was a great complex movie; with difficult but precise logic that gives a very refreshing and welcomed message about families; particularly mothers; and when very deserved OSCARs trophies.

Stanley Kubrick EYES WIDE SHUT; did something similar several years ago.

In this case; nothing really makes a lot of sense. It is like short stories without a proper ending; the terrifying neighborhood, the PSHYCO killer, the overprotective family, the theater play in the woods and the return to mother's home. All start terrifying but never end in any kind of logic; even worse the inexplicable end.

There are lots of rhetoric and frankly boring long moments that if the sound is not good you are going miss a lot (in any case nothing really that interesting); never an explanation of the ridiculous penis shaped monster; the imprisoned twins or the amphitheater statement completely different from what we had seen before.

In brief; it last three hours (it was supposed to last four an perhaps some things could have been properly defined) but you could do a lot of things better; like seen EVERYTHING EVERWHER ALL AT ONCE that is really a FAR BETTER MOVIE and less pretentious.

A movie directed by the MAD MAX series and also a few good kids films; with the great Idris Elba and Oscar winner (perhaps too hysterical for my taste but obviously a great actress ) Tilda Swinton has a too good pedigree to be a failure. Well is sadly the worst I have seen in cinemas in a very long time; and believe I see a lot of crap since the pandemic.

The story in itself is absurd. A very hysterical and solitary woman; travels to Turkey for conference and in a market shop finds a bottle with a Genie inside.

The Genie ask her for three wishes in order to be liberated from the bottle. The woman argue she has no wishes but wants to hear the Genie story.

The Genie tells three absurd and not very bright stories; between some discussion about love, desires and other things; at the end she makes her first desire. To be loved by the Genie.

All these happens during the first hour and a half but it feels like a five boring hours.

Then they back to England and after series of uninteresting and frankly nonsense situations Genie get almost dead (or something) so she makes couple of wished so she survive and left.

At end the Genie comes back to visit her and stay with her while she is still alive. End of movie.

Contrary to what you think; the movie is not romantic; not funny. There a lot of atrocious nudity and some light violence but nothing entertaining .

Even chemistry between the leads is absent. Perhaps that was something forced. It is never clear if she is almost mad or simply imagination.

She is reciting a book she had written; but how much is real or not is never clear; but in fact it does not seem to matter either.

The original idea it was somewhat interesting; but Miller did not seem to pointed to something better or at least with a clear message. The only message you might get is "Women are hysterical and men are dumbs"

In brief do not loose your time. If you wan something strange but with a lot of sense see "Everything, everywhere all at once" a movie incredible well done. Perhaps a little too long but still marvelous.

This is one of the strangest movie you will ever seen and perhaps the goriest too; but with almost no violence. There is however a boy assassination by his own mother that could be disturbing.

In a dystopian (perhaps) future, surgeries and deformities showing has become the new sex or sex show.

A couple (Viggo Mortensen and Lea Seydoux perform some shows where new organs are removed from Viggo's body. The father of the dead kid (mentioned early) ask the to perform a an autopsy show with his kid's body. Contrary to which you might think; this a philosophical movie and not an horror one (well considering the public might be terrifying). But be certain that you will thinking about it for a long time.

A vicious gangster come back ten years later to killing the members of the gang that betrayed him including his wife and looking for his son.

It look simply but it is not.

We are able to see most of what happened him and the reason of this hate. Dead are some violent and some time extremely bloodies.

The end does not seem not very clear but is absolutely logical to everything that happened before.

The direction is superb. There is not even a minute the movie is boring. Even not violent scenes are perfectly staged. The acting is outstanding and everyone makes the thing believable.

In brief; if you do not have a problem with some blood; see this movie; it is not boring at all.