Change Your Image
TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews
Reviews
Marvel Studios: Assembling a Universe (2014)
We didn't let him walk from the trailer to the set. We drove him all the way there
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the MCU films, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 43 minutes long. This is found on Disney+. It spoils a lot of the movies, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about creating Marvel Studios, so that they could guide the adaptations themselves. Getting Jon Favreau, and the leads. The jump from Iron Man to a team-up. Doing a manhunt story for Hulk, like on the TV series. Using Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D. to connect the separate entries. Using humor to ensure the audience have an easier time accepting the fantastical elements of Thor. How complex and interesting Loki is. Making good use of the Tesseract to tell compelling stories. Why Steve is chosen to become Captain America. Ensuring that we can see some of Tony in Howard Stark. Bringing all of the individual heroes together in The Avengers. Upping the stakes after that. Making it more personal. Showing what happens next. Doing One Shots. Explaining what happens with Abomination after we saw him last. Agent Carter. All Hail The King. Coulson returning in Joss Whedon's 2013 effort. Winter Soldier and exploring Rogers being stuck in the present, dealing with things no longer being black and white but morally grey. The Guardians of the Galaxy and doing something unexpected. Age of Ultron and introducing the Maximoffs. Doing different subgenres.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Marvel 75 Years: From Pulp to Pop! (2014)
There were days where we did things, that if we tried to do them today, we'd probably get arrested
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew(as well as famous fans), all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the MCU films and behind-the-scenes footage.
It's 41 and a half minutes long. This is found on Disney+. It doesn't spoil the movies.
They talk about the history of Marvel Comics and Studios. Why Guardians of the Galaxy was chosen for adaptation. Turning from stuff like romance(!) to superheroes. Stan Lee's humble beginnings and influence. Affecting people's perception of WWII, creating Captain America in response to the Nazis. Depicting him punching Hitler on the cover. The troops loving to read about Steve Rogers. Seduction of the Innocent, the Comics Code Authority, and how it negatively affected the industry. Creating the Fantastic Four. How the Hulk was inspired by Frankenstein's Monster, and came out of the Nuclear Age. Spider-Man being the first teenage superhero, the first one with real life problems. Drawing frames like they were storyboards, and as if the character was coming at the reader. Writing stories about big political issues of the day, including trying to inspire better treatment of minorities. The soapbox. Shows, both animated and live action. The gritty 1980s. Bankruptcy. Making Iron Man 1, and how risky it was, how little people thought of it before it came out. Becoming part of the House of Mouse. The Netflix shows. We get a very brief preview of the then-unreleased Agent Carter.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Marvel Studios: Expanding the Universe (2019)
That means everyone's a superhero
This consists of interviews with the casts and crews(it is in part Kevin Feige's D23 introduction to the Marvel Studios shows, which is what what this is about), all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subjects, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 12 and a half minutes long. This is found on Disney+, and ultimately does basically boil down to an ad for the streaming service, complete with a little love fest and playing it safe. With that said, it's very good. It spoils a lot of the MCU(up to and including Endgame), and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They briefly go through the character arcs of a few of the leads. They talk about character development, spending time with them between fights. Surprises. The fun they can have and all the creative freedom within, for example, Loki(the series). How happy they(including and especially Hayley Atwell herself) are to keep bringing back Peggy Carter. Getting more Ronin. Being able to add more diversity through Kamala Khan.
I recommend this to any fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. 8/10
The Importance of Being Earnest (2002)
"To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune. To lose both looks like carelessness."
I won't give away the plot here. All I will say is that two people both claim to be Ernest, and it leads to complications.
Oscar Wilde was incredibly talented. His verbal comedy, his farces, his criticisms of the absurd aspects of the upper class, their superficiality, and lack of moral basis for their values. This movie comes out 107 years after the first performance of the original. It's incredible how much of what he pointed out still hasn't changed, given how different the world looks, in many respects, over a century later.
When you adapt a play into a film, you have to find a good balance, between staying true to the original physical limitations of the stage, and delivering a visual experience expected by the theatre going public. This does quite a good job at it. You can easily see how this was originally on sets, while the cinematography and editing are used to add little touches, such as reaction shots, without getting distracted from the words and acting, given that those are key to making the whole thing work.
I recommend this to any fan of the author. 7/10
Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
You mean you saw the man? You can identify the murderer?
When a man is found killed on a train, which is temporarily stopped by heavy snow, it is up to master detective Hercule Poirot to solve the case and catch the guilty party.
This is an excellent Agatha Christie adaptation. The immensely talented ensemble cast do an incredible job, bringing the memorable characters to life. There are countless clues along the way, and like many of the best mystery stories, it is in fact possible to solve the case as a viewer, if you pay extremely close attention, albeit you may not have enough information to do so until the reveal is almost upon you.
The filming really captures the size of the titular transport, and you get to appreciate the exotic location - part of this was indeed filmed in Istanbul. All of the writing is tight, and this moves at a sharp pace. Subtle points are made about the power dynamics and uneven relationships between, among others, rich and poor, husband and wife, aristocrat or military and regular civilian. It never feels preachy, and yet there is clearly more here, than a corpse and a bunch of suspects.
This contains tragic backstories, some of which is shown, brief and slightly bloody violence, which is largely suggested rather than depicted, and a little mild-to-moderate language. I recommend this to anyone who enjoys sleuth stories. 8/10
Bloodshot (2020)
You may not need a past to have a future, but you do need a better-than-decent film to get a franchise
U.S. Marine Ray Garrison(Diesel, sleepwalking through this) is killed, and is resurrected by the RST organisation. They've replaced all of his blood with nanites(oh don't worry, it's going to get much more ridiculous. And if this was just significantly more entertaining, a lot of us could go with it), giving him rapid healing(sadly, he's a lot less interesting than Wolverine), and increasing his strength and speed.
Let's pretend that we didn't see the trailer and have everything spoiled. Bad marketing shouldn't be allowed to ruin a good product. Honestly, it's not like they couldn't have made it look appealing without giving away the twists. There are other compelling things about this property. I haven't read the comics - I would like to. Even if I hadn't heard that they were great, I'd figure they were a lot better than this. I'm going to try not to dwell on the fact that, similar to Assassin's Creed with Michael Fassbender, this was something that was never going to work as well as a movie adaptation as it did in its original format.
The various augmentations are cool, clever and see (at least a little) memorable use. There's even stuff involving multiple enhanced soldiers. I do wish more of it was fighting, and less of it was chasing. Literally every single action scene in this is uniquely different from the rest of them, and there are several that I haven't seen something very similar to in any other flick. It can be incoherent and it overuses slow motion.
How is the plot both so slow to even start, and yet able to then stall almost immediately? Why was it apparently impossible for them to make anyone other than KT(González, getting way too little to do) sympathetic? What is the point of introducing so many pieces of potentially badass sci-fi tech, if it's all going to be used so little? Who working on this was in love with the effect of Bloodshot reforming a part of his body that was just blown apart, and couldn't they have been removed from this? When will studios learn, that if you make a movie out of a graphic novel that is *very* of its time, you have to to do something to update it? Where did all the fascinating ideas disappear to, after the cast talked them up in interviews?
This contains violence that is at times just short of an R-rating in gore, and some moderately strong language, and some hinted-at sex. I recommend this only to those who feel obligated to watch, whether it's based on liking the source material or being a fan of someone working on it. 5/10
The Death of Stalin (2017)
Nod as I'm speaking to you. People are looking to me for reassurance and I have no idea what's going on.
1953. When Stalin suddenly dies, the Council of Ministers scramble for power. There's a very simple problem: The man's endless paranoia meant he preferred to surround himself with people that would never think of joining forces to assassinate him. As such, they're a contemptible bunch, who despise and mistrust each other as a matter of course. How could they possibly determine who should be in charge?
There's an early scene in this where Joseph, The General Secretary himself, is not quite perished. He appears to be unable to speak, and simply points, in order to communicate, the only thing his body is still capable of doing, and with what may well be his last breath. The half-dozen high-ranking individuals present all try desperately to guess what he is trying to convey. Maybe he's trying to indicate who should take over his position? No, it's definitely something about that painting! He's saying... we saved him? No, he's celebrating the people flourishing under socialism! Maybe he's asking for something to drink...? Quick! Somebody get him a glass! Make sure it's water! Not milk, he hates that!
It reminded me a lot of that bit in the Life of Brian, where the the titular apparent Messiah, accidentally drops one of his sandals, while fleeing his followers. These faithful immediately try to to build religious tenets around this seemingly meaningless act, that may not even be done on purpose. I believe this is intentional, as this even casts one of the Monty Python crew in a major role. In general, they got the exact right actors for this, and they're all bringing their a-game.
I'm not going to spoil here whether or not we find out what he was trying to say with that otherwise futile last gesture. Honestly, I think focusing on that misses the forest for the trees. What is crucial to both of these sequences, is that we are watching all these people grasp at straws. Trying desperately to understand that, which, if not understood, might suddenly kill them, for no readily discernible reason. This shows how they were always leaping back and forth, all the time, between the extremes of execution and safety from it. It's like maneuvering a minefield. Part of how it conveys this is that It uses many different types of comedy, to great effect. You never know exactly what kind of joke you're going to get next. There's a scene in the politburo which is worth the price of admission by itself.
This film captures perfectly just how unpredictable the Soviet Union was. And how easily someone who, through their loyalty, thought they were relatively safe, can suddenly be victims. We are not talking about a meritocracy. All of the best generals and doctors were killed, each of them suspected of conspiracy and treason. If you were personally close to the ruler, you had to constantly do things that he wanted, to keep him pleased, and thus not so eager to have others murdered. And for the vast majority of his people, you couldn't even attempt to do that. You could live your life, doing your best to live up to his is utterly impossible standards, and one day, out of the blue, the NKVD show up, and your family never sees you again. I doubt anyone who didn't experience it can truly understand the extreme level of constant dread these people lived in.
I think it is important to to have the discussion whether or not this is the right way to attempt to cope with the countless tragedies of the ill-fated USSR. We should consider if if the gallows humour of this is disrespectful to the 50 million people who died in their own country, a huge chunk of them due to their leader's poor decision-making, and always through no fault of their own.
Personally, I find this movie is careful to mock the perpetrators of the violence, and not the victims. And I would argue that this is simply the only way to process these horrors. Which is necessary to do, to move on. And think about just how much "The Steel Man" would *hate* this depiction, if he had lived to see it. I see this as The Producers about The Eastern Bloc.
Some details are not completely accurate to historical accounts. Still, the atrocities that this depicts *did* actually happen. A few of the events in this simply happened years prior, some individuals were in a different situation, and some liberties were taken to make this a more impactful piece of cinema. I'm not saying this applies to all negative reviews of this, but I did see several people insist that what we see in this can't have actually happened, when it literally, demonstrably, did. Others say that it's inappropriate to have so much vulgarity, and show these physically adult men behaving like immature school children, when this is exactly how these people actually did speak and carry on.
This contains strong language throughout, as well as violence, and some sexual references. I recommend this to anyone who enjoys political satire. 8/10
Kiss of the Spider Woman (1985)
Lost in a world she carries deep inside her
Two men share a cell in Brazil. The political prisoner Valentino who fears that soon he will be interrogated again, and they will attempt to force him to give up the names of his brethren. And the the openly gay Molina, whose thoughts seem to always be about love, and how how their loved ones on the outside are coping with them being in prison. The latter recalls to the former a movie(supposedly made in the 1940s, and its golden hue works both as what film looked like back then, and as this imagined escape from being locked up into a deeply romantic fantasy, getting far away from the claustrophobia, and the isolation, physical as well as social) he loves with a powerful story.
This is gripping from start to finish. It seems as though these two could not be any more different, and yet clearly both of them have at least some empathy for the other. And the movie has a similar effect on the viewer as well. By the time you've watched this entire thing, which I urge you to do, you will completely understand both of them. The actors really dive into their characters, and it's some of the best work I've seen from them, and I've long done what I can to catch everything they've made.
This contains some violence(and discussions of such), strong language, and brief sexuality. I recommended to to everyone who finds the concept at all interesting. 8/10
Enemy (2013)
Haunting
One day, a man realises that there is someone out there who appears to be his exact double. What is the connection between them?
I'm not going to go into what the deeper meaning of the film is in this review. For those looking for that kind of thing, I personally found the videos by Renegade Cut and Chris Stuckmann to help in the deciphering. I will say that I already loved this film before I was sure what it meant, and my appreciation has only grown once I understood it.
Denis Villeneuve's work is not for everyone. However, if you find that you like it, in my experience, the more of it you see, the greater your urge to catch everything he's behind. He is a master of tone, of planting images and ideas in your mind that you may not understand when you first watch the movie, but which you can't stop thinking about. This has a real oppressive mood. It also has excellent acting. Jake Gyllenhaal is incredible, as usual.
This contains some strong sexuality, nudity and language. I recommend this to those who enjoy solving puzzles. 8/10
Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil (2011)
Why are we laughing?
The Happily Ever After agency try to save Hansel and Gretel from the witch in the gingerbread house.
I'm going to try to be as objective as I can be in this. I love the first one, although, even if I didn't, I still would only think this one was mediocre. It's not completely without merit. To get the obvious out of the way: the animation is much much better this time around. The first one essentially reimagined the story of Red Riding Hood into a mystery story, with four distinctly different perspectives on the events leading up to and including that fairy tale's ending. This one has a more straightforward action-adventure approach. Obviously that isn't going to have the same effect, but then they also couldn't just do the same thing again. The Wolf(Warburton, who clearly realises how much lesser this is than the first entry) sees his character assassinated(...not literally), as he's made really stupid so they can use that as fodder for Laughs.
This is simply nowhere near as funny as the original. It goes the the Zucker-Abrahams route, by including as many jokes as at all possible, hoping that it will make the end product better. It does not. Somewhere between 1/3 and maybe even half of the material, simply is not particularly good. There's too much crude slapstick. The puns are painful. I like Hayden Panettiere, a lot, and when it comes to Hathaway, it's not like I'm an Anne stan or anything. However. it is hard to deny that they are not equally talented, at least not at the role of Red.
I recommend this only to those who simply need to watch everything related to these characters, and everyone else is basically better off pretending it doesn't exist. 5/10
Prisoners (2013)
Why are you making me do this?
When two girls, aged 7 and 8, disappear in a good neighborhood, detective Loki(Gyllenhaal, determined) struggles to solve the case, and the parents consider taking matters into their own hands. Just how far are they willing to go to get their daughters back?
This movie has a lot going for it. A very compelling mystery that keeps you guessing. Great writing. You really understand why the different characters do what they do, even when you, many times, realise that what they're doing, is only going to make things worse. The acting is powerful. This might be my favourite Hugh Jackman performance, it's definitely up there near the top, with The Prestige and Logan. The film leaves you with a lot of interesting questions to ponder. This is 2 hours and 20 minutes without the end credits, and 27 if you do count them.
This features a lot of disturbing content, as well as some violence and strong language. 8/10
Nightcrawler (2014)
You find that you simply can't stop watching
Lou(Gyllenhaal, charismatic and intense) is driven, has no morals, and he needs to make money. So when he realises that getting footage of violence, when the police respond to crimes, is a good way to do that, he jumps at the chance.
This really makes you ask questions, such as, "when it comes to brutal images in the news, where does the line go?". It would be easy to point the finger, and say that it's all on "journalists" who blindly follow "if it bleeds, it leads". But this goes beyond the surface, pointing out that, if viewers at home didn't tune in for this footage, then they would stop favouring it(even if they might not stop showing it all together). Perhaps we as human beings are to some extent drawn to grisly images, and that's something we need to own up to, and figure out how how to not let it go too far. This is a movie willing to be completely, terrifyingly honest about how far some will go to feed it. Some of the characters do take issue with this exploitation. This typically gets shut down by those who do not. Which is something that could very easily be preachy. But it doesn't get to be like that, due to the deft hand of first-time director Dan Gilroy. This is 1 hour and 49 minutes not counting the end credits, or 53 if you do include them.
In addition to what I've already mentioned, this also contains strong language. I recommend this to anyone who has the stomach for it. 8/10
Nightcrawler: If It Bleeds, It Leads (2015)
He's a product of capitalism that says "success at any cost"
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subject and behind-the-scenes footage.
It's 5 half minutes long. This is found on the DVD of Nightcrawler. It spoils a lot of the title, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about the inspiration. How Gyllenhaal saw the role, his dedication and how the role was shaped. Getting the perspective of real-life stringers, who do say they wouldn't actually move a body, albeit they freely say that the adrenaline is part of the appeal to them.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
The New Mutants (2020)
A mix of what we've seen before and surprising changes
Dani(Hunt, reasonably promising newcomer, not ready to carry something this big, her role gradually forming an identity over the course of this, and sadly not quite compelling enough to get away with having little personality at the start, which is in part due to the script, as Split pulls this off) wakes up in in a creepy hospital, an old classic of a setting that this dusts off, only to not take much advantage of. She is told by Dr. Reyes(Braga, serviceable, as are other cast members, albeit some of whom mangle accents) that she's a mutant, whose powers have just manifested, and finds four others like her staying in the same institution. Soon after, their nightmares come to life and start hurting them(a very welcome deviation from other ghost stories and the like, where too frequently, the apparitions go "boo", and that's it). What is actually going on? And how do they stop it, before it kills them all?
At the risk of being as cliche as the film itself is in its worst moments, I wanted to love this. I do want to be clear that I'm not bitter about the disappointment. And this review will not be warped by that. I'm going to try to cover both the good and the bad, as I hugely disagree(though I do of course respecting their opinion on the matter) with anyone saying that it's entirely one, or, more frequently seen, the other. First off, how wild is it that it took 20 years of the film continuity before we saw the release(note that I did not say "development") of an entry, that uses the X-Gene as a metaphor for puberty(which is part of how it originated in the comics, as those were the target audience), *and* that is so heavily focused on those going through it(instead of so many team members that are adults, for an emphasis on the allegory of minorities, which is extremely important, not that the two are mutually exclusive), and their angst? This is very much a teen movie(with the number of the tropes you'd expect from such) made for them, about them... and whilst it's not *by* them, clearly those behind the camera have a ton of sympathy and empathy for them. If I were to direct anyone to go for taking this in, it would be them. Either way, it's not worth risking Covid for. It seeks to emulate The Breakfast Club, and sometimes that really works. There's a clear passion for it and understanding of the material. However, unlike many other "inspired heavily by someone else's work" pictures(Sam Raimi got a lot of his visual style from the 1963 version of The Haunting, and while not everyone devoted to one of those will feel the same way about the other, I wholeheartedly encourage checking out both), here, I would honestly just say to go catch the original.
Everything this does well, you've seen it done, at least a little bit, better elsewhere. The most you could say is that this is a very unique mix, and that if you're you're really into one or more of these, then this might scratch that itch. Before this, I didn't expect to see John Hughes mixed with Freddy Krueger. I admire that. Yet, I'm not sure I would say that they really gel. And the sense that these are five outcasts suffering detention, where ultimately the authority figure doesn't care that much about paying attention to what they're doing, goes against that we are explicitly told that the people in charge here, are well aware that these kids are potentially dangerous. On more than one occasion, the fact that they aren't always watched carefully(despite the omnipresent cameras...), leads to situations that could have gotten someone injured, badly. There are times where it's more luck than competence that prevents things from going horribly wrong. The scares are never all that effective, nor does this, at any point, even briefly, consistently maintain a sense of terror or suspense. I would personally chalk it up to a lack of experience on the (otherwise clearly talented) director(Josh Boone)'s part, rather than the often dreaded, and with good reason for horror, PG-13 rating. At the same time, this not being an R does take some of the bite out of most of the more potentially impactful material. Yes, by the end of this you have a very strong sense of each of these people you've been following are, still, there are better character studies out there. This suffers from a lack of focus. The lesbian romance is very sweet and I honestly have nothing negative to say about it. Outside of the the average at best climax, there is almost no action or tension in this, and the use of abilities is limited and not memorable. Knowing that this is unlikely to get a sequel(which, to be perfectly fair, it had great reason to expect to get, when it was initially in production) makes the small scale, and distinct setup for future installments, frustrating.
This contains a little bloody and disturbing violence, suggestive material, and moderate to strong language. I recommend this to those who still find the idea appearing after all these criticisms - I mean, I'm not unhappy about my viewing of it. 6/10
De forbandede år (2020)
Profound
Starting on April 9th 1940, this follows a Danish family, and the friends, colleagues and such, of its various members, as they struggle through the moral grey area, the non-stop compromising, that can be unavoidable when trying to live your life in an occupied nation during a World War. Agreeing to work with with the Nazis sounds like tacit support of them, but what what if is the only way to to avoid having to fire dozens of people with families to feed?
While I haven't read the novel upon which this is based, I can say without a doubt that this is one of the book adaptations that appreciates the challenges that come with that. It manages to handle a massive amount of material, with over a dozen major characters, involved in a handful of different subplots(one could argue that there might be a couple too many), without simply ending up overwhelming. It does move very fast, and there are definitely times where you struggle to keep up with why this or that person behaved in a certain way, as their growth sometimes flies by and it's hard to keep up with it. There are times where it goes from one of these storylines to another too abruptly. This is definitely a movie that requires the viewer have a strong base of knowledge about Denmark during WWII. It is not going to hold your hand, and you are frankly going to be confused, if you go into this not knowing very much about that. The acting is convincing and these all feel like real people. You've known people similar to them in your own life. Some events are dramatised, yet most of this is credible and authentic.
This contains a little bloody violence, as well as brief sexuality and nudity. I recommend this to anyone who enjoys fiction dealing with the period. 8/10
Tenet (2020)
How does he keep outdoing himself, and raising the bar for all future filmmakers?
The protagonist(John David Washington, a great lead) is recruited to stop a major threat. I won't reveal more detail than that. Thankfully, he won't have to face it alone. He'll be working with Neil(Robert Pattinson, all charm and wit). Hypothetically, if he had other allies, I would not give away here who they are. I won't reveal the exact nature of the role of Kat(Elizabeth Debicki, somehow matching her work in Widows. Covering a lot of the emotional spectrum). But I will say that, if I didn't love everything about this(don't get me wrong, I absolutely do), honestly, even if, in fact, I *hated* every single other thing about this movie, it would still be worth watching for her performance and presence alone. They are up against a formidable threat: Sator(Kenneth Branagh, very sinister). Can they possibly save the world?
The director continues to master spy movies. In some ways this is James Bond with a mindbending sci-fi twist. Nolan has returned to the heights of quality of The Prestige, The Dark Knight and Inception. It has the best and biggest action set pieces of his career, and it's the most visually compelling. Even for him, this is incredibly complex. It won't be enough to pay close attention and try carefully to figure everything out while watching. You'll have to go over everything afterwards. It may take multiple viewings. I won't claim I understand everything in this yet.
This pushes the PG-13 rating, and contains a lot of exploration of abuse, some deeply disturbing violence(even though it is more hinted at than clearly shown), and a little bit of strong language. I recommend this to every fan of anyone working on this, with the obvious caveat that I would not want for anyone who fears for their safety in a theatre due to Covid to risk harm to themselves or those around them. 10/10
The Babadook (2014)
This is the kind of new thinking that will keep the genre fresh
Amelia(Davis, completely convincing when threatening, when overworked, and when sweet. While this may be the first thing I see her in, it definitely won't be the last) lost her husband 7 years ago. She has not really processed this pain. Part of this is that she has no support system. And as callous as it may seem to admit, something that contributes to this circumstance is her son, born on the night of his death, as he was driving her to the hospital to deliver. His name is Samuel(Wiseman, immensely talented for his age), and he is high maintenance. He's obsessed with the idea of a monster, under his bed or in his closet, constructing multiple ranged weapons(!) to defeat it, and promising that he will protect his mom from it. How long can this hard-working single parent put off grieving? And might there be serious consequences to doing so? In fact, is that why the titular monster starts tormenting the pair?
This is courageous enough to tackle not only one, no, two, taboo subjects: mourning, and when "motherhood is anything but a perfect experience for women". Obviously, handling these without creating something deeply offensive will require a deft hand, a strong understanding of psychology, and a lot of emotional maturity. Thankfully, writer-director Jennifer Kent has all three to spare(for me, she's up there with Patty Jenkins as the best female directors out there, and whose future work I eagerly await). There are so many ways in which this movie could have failed completely, and she steers clear of all of them. Though you may not realise from when you first start watching this, there is a tremendous amount of empathy flowing through this picture. It's not interested in pointing fingers or assigning blame. It carefully avoids being mean-spirited, and what may at first glance appear to be exploitative, you later find to be necessary for the exploration of the themes. This is one of the best horror movies I have ever seen, creating terror through careful sound design.
This contains a little sexuality and strong language, and some bloody violence that may not be plentiful, yet is intensely effective. I recommend this to everyone that the concept appeals to. 9/10
Monster (2005)
Well worth checking out
A hyperactive child causes stress for his mother, until one day, a toy monster he's been fixated on comes to life.
This is primarily of interest due to it being a sort of prototype for The Babadook, by the same writer and director, the immensely talented Jennifer Kent. It's especially interesting to compare the two, and look at what was already present here in this short, and what is only in the later movie. I won't detail any of it, since doing so would require spoiling both of these, and I'm not going to be doing that in this review. However, it is a stimulating exercise, that I fully encourage anyone interested to do.
This is filmed and edited well. The strain that it puts on this single parent that her son is always running, playing, making noise, screaming, is conveyed well, without us just being frustrated watching. This is 9 minutes long without end credits, and 10 with them.
It is legitimately tense and scary, although other than that, there isn't any objectionable material in this. I recommend this to any fan of the film it was later turned into. 8/10
Tempting Fate: The Stunts of 'Paycheck' (2004)
Fun for everyone
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subject, behind-the-scenes footage, storyboards, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 17 half minutes long. This is found on the DVD of Paycheck. It spoils a lot of the title, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about planning out stunts. The motorcycle chase. Wet pavement. The construction site. Doing everything practically rather than CG. Zert gun instead of using squibs. Gift shop. The hydroponic garden, which had to be cut down.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Paycheck: Designing the Future (2004)
It was always a bone of contention. "Do we need this"
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subject, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 18 and a half minutes long. This is found on the DVD of Paycheck. It spoils a lot of the title, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about the core concept. Casting Affleck. Taking inspiration in North by Northwest. Working with Eckhart. The relationship between the romantic leads. The train tunnel. Accommodating John Woo's filming style. Being fans of The Killer, and wanting to work with the director. Him having the entire thing in his head, editing it before it is shot.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Gamer (2009)
Definitely needed some more beta testing before release
In America, at some point in the not too distant future, gladiatorial death matches are made legal. If you survive 30 battles, you're released. And guess who has 27 under his belt? Kable(Butler, sadly not as over-the-top as in 300). He wants out so he can protect... his vintage car? no, wait: his wife and daughter. It's just that they have so little agency and impact on the plot, they might as well be. They literally exist so that the audience have an easier time empathizing with him. I mean, he is a death row inmate. Did I not make mention of that part of already the ridiculous concept yet? I don't know why this isn't set in a dictatorship(or a country ruled by corporations, a la RoboCop), as these would make the idea so much easier to believe.
I wanted to love this movie. Satire and social commentary are among the best and most important fiction. When it's done right. One of the big problems is that this appears to have an incredibly cynical outlook on regular people. Including its own audience. And the hypocrisy of criticising the popularity of films including violence, sexuality and other provocative materials, while being a prime example of such. The filming and editing are as stylized as the excellent Crank movies, without the frantic pace, simplicity and, well, clearly those are not set in our reality, which makes it a lot easier to accept the outlandish stuff.
I recommend this to anyone willing to wade through the frustrating elements of this, because if you are, there really are some incredible things in this. 6/10
First Person Shooter: The Evolution of Red (2010)
This was no exception
This consists of interviews with the director duo, some of their crew, and experts, clips from the subject, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots. It focuses entirely on the digital Red One cameras that were used for shooting.
It's 16 minutes long. This is found on the DVD of Gamer.
They talk about filming in their unique, unconventional way. The invention of it. Getting to see it early by name-dropping Crank. The DP had to be convinced, but was won over. Being one of the first projects to use it. Dealing with the off button on the side. Its versatility.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Inside the Game: Controlling Gamer (2010)
Was that real? Did I dream that?
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subject, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 76 and a half minutes long. This is found on the DVD of Gamer. It spoils a lot of the title, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about how they got the idea. It being relevant. Not being able to go as far as with cheaper work. Budget compared to other stuff of the same scope. Locations. Guerrilla film-making techniques. Valletta both being beautiful and having the vulnerability required. Crews and the locker room scene. C. Hall enjoyed the experiences, such as beating up the big tough guy, and Butler expresses being impressed with his work on it. Ludacris wanted to work with the writer/director duo since the first Crank. Sedgwick enjoyed how loose things were. Lohman usually turns down action roles, but ended up agreeing to do this one. The importance of cinematography and color pallette, to clearly distinguish the game worlds from each other. Using some of the buildings that were devastated by Katrina for locations. Going from a small budget to a big one. The possibility of doing it in 3D. How fast they got complex set pieces in the can. Gerard uses fake blood to pull a minor prank. How they created organic carnage. Going with guns that look like something we don't have yet, while not so futuristic that they fire lasers. Capturing the chaos of a first-person shooter. Choosing the aspect ratio. Being limited to 1 million for all the CG, when their competition sometimes had 80. The importance of the graphics successfully conveying vital information. The value of the partially classical score.
This contains some graphical violence. I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10
Dark Blue (2002)
Doesn't quite stick the landing
LAPD. For many years, Eldon Perry(Russell, giving a great deal of charm to a scumbag) has handled the streets the old-fashioned way, like he prefers to. But things might be changing soon. Arthur(Rhames, refreshingly not seeming like he could explode into violence at any point) wants to clean up the force. And it seems like it's just a matter of time.
This is pretty good as a companion piece to Training Day. In a few ways it is superior to that, in most ways, it is slightly inferior to it. The acting tends to be great. This is not an action movie. It's currently listed as being a crime-drama-thriller, which I agree with. With that said, there are a handful of tense and suspenseful scenes, and the climax is decent. It's cliched. The pacing is overall too slow, and is perhaps the main place where you can really see that Ron Shelton is not used to this kind of film. The fact that, despite fitting with the movies themes of corruption in law enforcement, ultimately the LA riots are background only, and that some of the depiction of the riots is problematic, is one element of this being exploitative.
This contains a little nudity and sexuality, and a bit of strong, bloody violence. I recommend it to big fans of Movies about crooked cops. 7/10
A Return Home: The Making of Prison Break Event Series (2017)
I think it will be equally crazy and enjoyable to watch
This consists of interviews with the cast and crew, all of whom have something compelling to add within their area of expertise(and there is a very clear love of what they're working on), clips from the subject, behind-the-scenes footage, and incomplete effects shots.
It's 12 and a half minutes long. This is found on the season 5 DVD release of Prison Break. It spoils a lot of the title, and so will this review, so that I can go into more detail.
They talk about that it was because Miller and Purcell were working together on The Flash, that they got the idea to bring it back, but Fox had also been talking about it without them knowing. It being topical. They realised that the story was basically the Odyssey, so they went all-in on that. The relationships between the characters including the new ones. Reuniting with the old cast. Feuerstein loved it being inspired by Homer, and the chance to play evil. Lavi was very happy to be working in Morocco, where she's from. Filming some stuff using drones.
I recommend this to any fan of the property. 8/10