Reviews

Rehearsal as a title for the second episode seemed like the perfect choice after I watched that episode, but after watching this and thinking about it for weeks I realized how the title Rehearsal connects so well to the title of this episode: Connor's Wedding.

Rehearsal, as the title states, may have the largest set-ups in this show's history. We have been seeing how Tom, Greg and Logan relation have been developing, how Roman and Logan started to get closer and how Gerri was about to get fired. We have been seeing the plans of the trio to develop in a way that plans to go behind dad, again. We have also been seeing Connor and Willa's wedding plans and how fragile the roots of this wedding are. It feels like it is going to fail because the rehearsal of that plan had not gone well in that second episode.

But then... Logan dies. Everything that went according to the rehearsal fails, this is a disastrous wedding where everything that was building up in the rehearsal fails except the one thing that was supposed to fail: Connor's Wedding. Connor and Willa find a stronger bond in this mess of a situation, meaning that everything in the Rehearsal did go sideways. These two episodes together make up one of the best episodes of TV because of how well they complement each other. The set up fails in style and also in the best possible way.

In the Shrek movies, Puss in Boots was a very likable character. I think it is safe to assume that most of the people who love Shrek (specifically Shrek 2) also enjoy seeing Puss in Boots. It is enjoyable to watch him, doesn't interfere much with the themes of movies but has funny scenes and great action. As I was thinking of these things, I realized something. He is just like Saul Goodman from Breaking Bad. Saul Goodman is a great character in Breaking Bad. He is great in scenes he is in and is so fun to watch but he isn't much of a character. Then Better Call Saul came and Saul Goodman (Jimmy Mcgill) became as complex as (if not more) Walter. First Puss in Boots movie wasn't like that for Puss. It was more of the same in Shrek movies. This movie delivers the character Puss in Boots desperately needed and then some. His arc in this movie is amazing and in a perfect world, the script of this movie would get an Adapted Screenplay nomination at the Oscars this year (considering the fact that the competition in the Adapted Screenplay category is nonexistent).

Death is an amazing villain. Having shorter screen time than most characters makes him an even better character. Again another comparison to Better Call Saul, Death is like Lalo Salamanca. Lalo also doesn't have a big screen time in the six seasons of the show, but he is easily one of the most memorable characters. Death is always there, back in the audience's mind, and just when you forget that he exists, he returns. His whistle, his charisma... Brilliant!

Puss and Kitty's storyline and conflict are very complex when you remember that this is an animated movie mostly targeted at kids. The themes of legacy, the meaning of life, and the fear of attachment are very refreshing to see in an animated movie again. The addition of Perrito creates a great contrast between him and Puss and I would even go further to say that it can even spark some philosophical discussions about which way to live is better for you. Legacy or living a life where you are comfortable with your family.

I loved the additions of the three bears and Goldilocks. Their storyline was also fairly interesting to see progress but its pacing could have been better, which makes them the weakest links of the film which is a d**n good weak link if you ask me. The character of Jack Horner. He has very funny moments and is very interesting to see a villain who is truly deeply villainous with no point of return in an animated movie. The conscience bug thing was also interesting to see unfold.

The animation and action scenes are superb. Especially the ones with Death. Death is so good that I can't believe it. There are many jokes that land, songs that are fun and most importantly the movie structurally works. It just works. With this many characters, with this many plotlines, with this many detours, you might think that it is impossible to tie this in a great package. But they do. When this movie is at its worst, it is decent but when it is at its best it is one of the best-animated movies, ever.

Where did this movie come from? I would have wanted to be a kid when I first watched this movie. I would have been scared but I would have loved it. Then I would have watched it again, sometime. And then again. It would have created nostalgia and at my age today when I would have looked back I would have said, "it is not the best-animated movie ever, but it is my favorite animated movie ever." because it would have been. What more can I say?

Ozark ends in a rushed way story-wise but thematically is has been constructed extremely well. The inclusion of Grandpa in the story for this long wasn't a great idea for me but thematically it has been perfect for Wendy, for Marty, for the kids and even for Ruth. The Navarro storyline was exceptional for the whole season and how Marty and Wendy dealt with them was also very interesting to watch. This season made it very clear that the hero we were supposed to root for was not Marty or the Byrdes but Ruth. She has lost everything, she had made wrong decisions but still we are rooting for her because she is relatable, doesn't act in inhumane ways, shows humanlike feelings and has an achievable goal. The villain on her path is the Mexican cartel but to be more precise it is her past. Her wrongdoings. Her villains, in the end, are the Byrdes who are also the villains of the story now. They, as a whole family(which is insane compared to Br Ba), are villains of their own story. An amazing transformation from season 1 to this episode, with well-developed themes. There are some questionable story choices, it was sometimes too slow and sometimes too fast but in the end I think this is a satisfying conclusion even though it isn't an exceptional one. I like the way it ends but am not a super fan of how it came to this point.

I think the most significant weakness in the previous episodes was the grandpa storyline. Grandpa storyline feels like something we had watched before because we did. I do admit that it is interesting and fascinating seeing how Marty and Wendy react to Jonah and Charlotte leaving them. The Ruth stuff in this episode was great but again it was a bit slow and I liked how even though Marty and Wendy's plan to get Mel Sattem into Chicago PD did work, they still failed. It was a nice twist but other than that this episode felt a bit bland and considering we only have 2 more episodes to go, this is concerning.

Marty, Wendy, Ruth, Navarro and her sister. The show decided to focus on these 5 characters and I am loving it. Marty and Wendy relation is becoming more interesting with each episode. What a marriage, I mean. I would watch a show where it is all about the relationship between Marty and Wendy. I like the direction Ruth is heading but I think her arc is way less interesting compared to the other characters which I think is also true for the Grandpa and Jonah. Navarro, sister, cartel and FBI stuff are all very interesting and seeing how Marty and Wendy interact but also fail to interact with them is very fascinating to watch. I love how Marty and Wendy plan things behind their backs. That's why Ozark is a great show. All about Wendy, Marty and how they interact with things(of course there are parts where Ruth shines as well).

Marty reliving his trauma as he makes another person go through the same trauma. A well-constructed comparison. Wendy at Ozarks, is bluffing. Or is she? That's why Wendy is the scariest character in this series. When she threatens you, you have no idea what will happen. The opening scene is again very good but we should have seen that scene sooner. Grandpa and Jonah scenes etc. Are still the weakest part of the 2nd half of this season. I hope it will lead us somewhere.

I loved the things going on in this episode. The first scene was fantastic, just Marty and Wendy discussing this with well-written dialogue and acting. I loved the Navarro stuff and how Ruth continued to cope with grief. Grandpa coming to Ozarks is okay I guess but I don't know what they're trying to achieve with that. But then, Ruth finds drugs just laying around the Snells. If it was somewhere hidden and Ruth knew where it was or found a way to find it with some clue then I would have probably given this episode a 9/10 but I can't just give this an episode bad rating because of a scene but the writers should have known better. For a high quality series like this, they should have known better.

I and my friend were discussing this film and we both agreed that the first half of the film was exceptionally good whereas the we felt that the 2nd part was good but could have been better. Then I rewatched the film and some of my thoughts changed and I texted what changed to my friend and I decided that those messages can become a review so here we go...

The thing which boggled my mind the most was how the Riddler lost. He lost not because of Batman but because of himself. That's a bold choice, maybe a too bold choice. So bold and unseen in superhero films that I didn't recognize it in my first watch. Riddler thinks like a serial killer, like a psychopath. He is the opposite of Joker. Joker had so many plans and because he had so many plans it didn't matter if any of them failed. He had a B or a C plan or sometimes he went with the flow but Riddler has only 1 plan. Any minor inconvenience would spoil the plan. The script is in his head, he is just waiting for the Gotham, Batman and himself to act it out. Batman inspires him, he sees him as someone to follow. No one knows about Batman's rule about not killing(other than Gordon and some police I guess), he says he is vengeance. If someone is vengeance, you expect him to kill. Riddler goes ahead and kills the people who are responsible, to him he is doing the city a favor(and maybe he is, that's a philosophical discussion). In the metro scene the victim is also scared of Batman and says, "Don't hurt me". He is vengeance he works with fear, just like the Riddler. Riddler avenges for the things happened in the orphanage. He blames the corrupt people, he blames Renewal, he blames Thomas Wayne. Riddler thinks Batman is playing with his rules, he thinks he and Batman could make a great team. All his plan depends on that. He thinks he can convince himself in hell(Arkham prison). He says that they are vengeance and that only Bruce Wayne is left. Well... that is Riddler's mistake. Bruce Wayne is Batman. Batman won't kill Bruce Wayne... BUT WHAT IF HE COULD?

Well the film doesn't take that step, just think for a minute. What if Alfred died? What if Bruce Wayne believed Falcone? Well, in that case Batman would have killed Bruce Wayne. The character of Bruce Wayne was already diminishing. Batman was taking his place and if Alfred was dead, then I don't think there would be a Bruce Wayne left because he would hate the surname of Wayne. I would have liked to see how the story would have turned out in that case(or if Alfred was in coma and woke up 30 minutes later into the film).

So Batman can't kill Bruce Wayne in this version of the film and that's why Riddler fails. In the dialogue between Batman and the Riddler, at first Riddler thinks he is convincing Batman while Batman thinks his identity is revealed but then Batman realizes that Riddler had made a mistake. Riddler assumed he wasn't Bruce Wayne and that assumption alone made him lose. Let's assume Batman wasn't that rich or let's just assume he was Cat-woman. Then he would want Bruce Wayne to die as Cat-woman actually says in the film. Then Batman says he isn't playing with Riddler's rules and Riddler loses his mind because his plan failed. Just like that. Riddler assumed Batman was with him, that only a small chat would turn them into partners. So the reason why Riddler's plan fails and Batman's arc are kind of independent. Batman realizes he has to change that vengeance and fear doesn't change the city for good. Riddler wanted to root out the evil with violence but Batman chose to help the people in need. Again, would Batman's approach alone solve the problem if Riddler didn't exist, that's another discussion. I like that there are points in the film which are up to interpretations. It means that the film makes you ponder.

Batman's colors are still Black and Red. At first they meant violence, fear, vengeance now they mean the red torch which saved people. They are still the same colors, still the same Batman just with different ideals. This film isn't perfect. Catwoman's character took more screen time than it had substance compared to Riddler who just needed more. The Batman, is a flawed masterpiece but it is a masterpiece because it is bold, original, tecnically beautiful and it takes risks. It twists the character we know and love, just the right amount.

I mean what a performance! What a character! What a final scene! Give her awards or something I don't know. Seeing how much Wendy is broken to this extent... She is the anti-hero, some might even call her the villain at this point. She is like a venomous snake but also a wild tiger. She is plotting things like Marty but she is also direct when she needs to which Marty lacks. She is the ideal character in all the right ways. She is scary, she is depressed. She lies to herself, she lies to everyone. Her character is getting lost while a new Wendy is getting born. She is my favorite character of the show right now and oh my God I can't stress this enough, Laura Linney is carrying this season. I mean this season is very very good on its own but with Laura Linney, I mean I am in awe. I want her to be in acclaimed films where she is the lead from now on, she has the potential to win an Oscar. That final scene though... She is the lead for me now, Marty is kind of on the back seat and I am more than okay with it now. The show realized the direction Wendy's character was going in the magnificent episode "Fire Pink" and are continuing with the character in all the right ways. And this is just the build-up, I wonder what will happen in the climax. I know one thing for sure though, Laura Linney will be ******* amazing in it.

Passing is a complicated film to talk about because even though it is filled with music, it is very silent. The use of black and white in this film is very interesting both stylistically and metaphorically. Especially after rewatching the first scene of the film after finishing it gave me a lot to talk about. With its style, the film actually distinguishes the white people from the black people but then there is Irene and Clare. They are somewhat similar but also completely different. Irene likes going to cafes white people are but also it is a necessity as shops in black neighborhoods aren't selling the best quality stuff. She says she is satisfied with her life but is she? Or is she deceiving herself. Clare longs to go back to Harlem and that life but again does she really want to be a black woman there or does she like being that "exotic"(as the film puts it) blonde in the black crowd? Both Clare and Irene want to avoid the real world. Irene, especially, doesn't want to hear about lynching and stuff and also her boys to not hear about it. What does this show about her? Does Clare want to pass in both communities or is being the distinct one makes her feel special just like Hugh wants to feel? Is it only her husband's jealousy that made Irene push Clare or was there more to it? I won't answer any of these questions because the film wants you to think about these and answer them on your own. Unfortunately this film wasn't memorable for me even though I enjoyed it while watching it and thinking about it afterwards but I can't say it created the effect it wanted to. Still a great film with style and terrific performances.

This episode had some good jokes but again like the previous episode I don't think there was enough compared to the first episodes of the season. This episode builds up on the Nick and Missy's hate storyline and successfully merges them together but the problem for me was that Andrew again became a punching bag and I would have wanted to see more development from his side(hopefully in the next episodes we will see that). Jay-Lola getting together and breaking up was fine I guess but it just took way too long(almost half if I remember correctly) of a time in this episode for something which didn't change their characters(stuff happened between them but that didn't change their characters nor did it add something to their character arcs). Loved seeing many "monsters" in this episode from the depression cat to the stress fly to shame wizard and of course hate snakes and hormone monsters. After the shame wizard episode I thought they forgot that he existed for the rest of the season, glad he is back.

I like the direction all characters are heading. Nick being heart-broken and then his lovebug dying, Jessi in the same dilemma as Nick(should you say your -best-friend that you love her/him, would that end your friendship), Andrew becoming more mature as he understands his father more, Jay becoming more emotional and, Missy getting a "hate worm". All of these are great and get me excited to see what happens in the upcoming episodes but this episode was just not funny compared to the first episodes of the season which did almost nothing with the plot but were very fun to watch. What I want from Big Mouth is that the plot should progress but I should also laugh a lot but from what I had seen for 5 seasons, the show achieves this rarely(when it does, those episodes are very good) but still I liked this episode because all characters are heading in an interesting direction.

Logan and Ken have to be in the same place but act as allies not as opponents. I was expecting this scenario to play out at some point and it played out in this episode which I thought was a great decision because after a 3 episodes build-up of tension between the two, it was a joy to see how they battled it alone which was often silent, sometimes in "coded" language and in the end directly. Loved the scenes where they are just left alone and they say nothing, it feels so awkward because how they behave when they are with Josh and when they are alone are completely different(a characteristic of the Roys in general). The storylines of Tom, Greg and Gerri-Roman can turn out interesting but for these last 4 episodes they almost did nothing so that was a letdown for me. I am hoping they will play bigger roles in the upcoming episodes(I can see the build-up happening inside them, just wish I had seen more results from these build-ups other than just jokes)

When I look at the reviews here, I see that people are annoyed with Love or they hate her completely and I think that's what we have to think because we are in Joe's perspective. He doesn't want Love so his plan is to find a way to make Love dislike him but if we were in Love's perspective then the plan would have been the complete opposite. The thing is Love is not actually the cheater between these two. Yes she wants to have sex with Theo and all but she doesn't think of him as a partner, she likes her relationship with him just the way it is. On the other hand, Joe wants to get rid of Love and his reasoning behind the foursome is a hidden plan while Love's plan was pretty straightforward. What she wants to gain is to have the same relationship she did with Joe previously. She at first thinks she can ignite their relationship again by swinging but then she realizes that it is violence and keeping a common secret which made them closer. Love and Joe had promised each other that they would kill for each other and Love had realized that killing is what kept their relationship going. The people who went into the cage are all because of Love while Joe did nothing which corresponds with what they want from this relationship: Love wants it to continue, Joe wants to get the hell out. If we were in Love's perspective then maybe we would have wanted this relationship to continue as well and would hate how Joe is unwilling during sex. So I loved this episode because of these things but I have to mention that this episode had some serious pacing issues. The first 25 minutes taking so long and the last 25 minutes being way too fast. I mean having the latter part of the episode play slower would have been way better.

In the finale of the second season, we are disappointed to see that Joe doesn't love Love anymore because what he thinks of love is just some fantasy he created as a defense mechanism and in this episode we continue seeing that this hasn't changed. Joe wants to change, Joe thinks he changes that's why we see the story the way it plays out. We think Joe has changed while having sex with Love because he wants to make himself believe that but in the end he doesn't. He believes in finding the perfect person and despises the people on the opposite sex who have his traits because in the end, even though unadmittedly, Joe hates himself and then also hates Love. This thing was explored a lot in the previous 2 seasons and what makes this episode and hopefully this season different will be how Love views things and how this affects Joe. I want to see some character change happening in Joe, for better or worse, I just want this change to be believable and I think his relationship with Love can accomplish that change. I also liked the death of the neighbor because it didn't come as a surprise for me, it was what Joe would have done(also had done for Beck and Love) so Love with some of the same traits as Joe doing the same thing("protecting" Joe from others) is only natural.

This film has a lot to take in both visually and story-wise. First of all this film isn't a war movie, it is a drama which I loved. I thought the end duel was masterfully done, one of the best build-ups and pay-offs I have seen in a long time but I want to focus on is purely the script and the two characters it has. Notice that I only say two characters because Marguerite isn't a character not because they failed at making her a character but because they were successful at making her a mere pawn. The only time she has been a character was when Jean de Carrouges left for Scotland and she had time to do some daily work. I have heard some people say that her character feels flawless compared to Jean and Jacques Le Gris's characters but it is because she doesn't have one. She didn't have one at that time. She didn't have the chance to defend herself, the trial was between the two duellists not between the accused and the victim.

The film had 2 chances where it could have failed miserably but fortunately it dealt with these perfectly. The first one is the question: "Is Jacques Le Gris lying to himself and the others?" and surprisingly the answer is no. According to him he didn't rape her. In a scene near the beginning of the 2nd chapter we see Jacques Le Gris chasing a woman as a "game" and in the end he basically rapes her with the help of the others. Some might she is willingly there but then my answer is she chose to be there because the alternative was just worse, it didn't mean she chose to be raped. So Jacques Le Gris thinks of their encounter with Marguerite as an adultery rather than a rape. When he looks at her and fantasize then see that she is looking at him he thinks it is because she also wants it too(which is unfortunately still present in some people today). Him thinking like that isn't uncommon in that time period clearly seen by the fact that Marguerite finding Jacques Le Gris handsome is a proof that it wasn't rape(which again unfortunately is an argument some people defend today). In the end Jacques Le Gris still says that it wasn't rape not because he is lying but because it was the truth, for him. Loved this.

The other mistake the film cleverly avoids is making Jean de Carrouges a likable character. Maybe in the first chapter he seems like a protagonist but even there we see that in the marriage they never talk about her life but only about his. How bad of a husband he was(according to today of course, in that time period his actions were seen normal) is way more clear in Marguerite's perspective, which feels like an objective narrator but that's only because she isn't an actual character but just an object in the context of the film which is brilliant. I mean I don't even have to explain how he was about to not get married because some land wasn't in the dowry or how he and his mother(whom I thought was a very complex character) talk to her. The only scene I need to mention is after he learns that she was raped. He says, "I should be the one who had sexual intercourse with you the last" to a rape victim. That's just cruel and proves that he never really cared about her feelings. In the end if Marguerite's life wasn't at stake I wouldn't want either of them to win(or would be okay with both winning). Not because I hated or loved either of them, I just didn't root for any of them meaning the film achieved its purpose. The symbolism from horses breeding to how characters thought stuff played out(and both were right according to them, so can we actually say they are wrong? This is a topic for philosophy though) and how much the Mom and Ben Affleck's character added to the film and so on but then this would become an essay. All these topics can be discussed for a pretty long time so if you had watched this film with someone and didn't talk more than a few minutes about it I strongly urge you because you will learn more and love the film more as you talk about it.

This film is a Paul Schrader film, even if you had only watched 1 film from him, you would know. I like his work, not a huge fan of him but he is definitely a great writer. The film starts with an explanation in card counting and at first I was like there is no way a film can make me learn card counting but then I realized that the movie wasn't trying to teach me card counting. It was just demonstrating that the main character had a lot of free time in the prison to learn that and master poker etc. Then we get introduced to a typical revenge plotline and with slight hints throughout we realize that what the main character wants to do is show the kid that revenge is bs and actually believes that his lesson will work but it is very clear that throughout the journey all the kid thinks of is revenge(Google earth etc.) And in the end the kid actually wins the argument between the two even though he dies(the main character gets the revenge but it is not a clean murder, he wants to get caught after it which I thought was very interesting in terms of character analysis) His love interest(in a way) also provides a lot of symbolism, one being his chance at redemption. The main character is a very complex character and the film is thematically very rich. What I described so far sounds like a 10 but then why 7? Because I didn't feel like I was watching a film. This could have been a better book rather than a film. There is a lot to talk about and it is a memorable experience but I can't say I enjoyed it that much(the suspense was there but only for a short period of time)