Change Your Image
clareizaguirre
Reviews
The Office (2005)
Great comedy but exhausting to watch
I can ever watch more than three episodes of the office in a row, two max usually. The scenarios, the characters, the uneasy energy ad misplaced feelings are just too exhausting to watch! But a great performances, writing and character development. P. S surely Michael Scott has A. D. H. D!
The Hangover (2009)
Tick box American comedy
It's well written, the acting is spot on, the premise is good. The night after is somewhat familiar even, though minus the baby and tiger. I guess my problem with the film is something it can't help - being so totally American! American humour in these kinds of comedies is always pretty extreme, usually sexual in some way and a bit gross out. And most of the international audience love that, and that's cool! It's probably a boys film more than a ladies, not that ladies won't be amused but boys will relate to the kinda awkward friendship circle, the hazing, the humour. Unless you're a stripper or a psycho bunny boiler gf there's not many people for ladies to relate to, but hell, it's a film. I respect the writing and the reception plus it's popularity just not my kinda thing, I prefer more quirky, dry humour, less obvious, but I knew that going in!
Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018)
Definitely not the right storyline choice for this interactive special
Super boring, unengaging story. I didn't care between choices or sympathise with the characters. I find black mirror episodes very hit or miss, sometimes full of genius but others more gimmick or farfetched than creatively CRAFTED. I feel they could have set a more interesting premise, more real or heartfelt than totally out there choices based on a semi reality or dream-like atmosphere. Like the choices matter on a human level. But maybe technology is the focus and the distraction here. Some love it and I wanted to but it felt offbeat to me.
Turn Up Charlie (2019)
Just ok
I like Idris and I want to support a British sitcom with a primarily black cast as those aspects are totally awesome but the series is mediocre at best. Like the other review, I blasted through the season as the episodes are so short but I did wonder at times if it was in the 'so bad it's good' territory or the 'it starts to feel better because you've a excepted it's bad' territory. I like the premise but it's execution falls short. If you like Idris and retro house/garage/dance give it a go. If you like Dawsons Creek style children talking like intelligent brooding adults give it a go. And if you want to see Idris wear a pink hoodie, give it a go.
Fighting with My Family (2019)
More drama that comedy but good British film
Love Stephan Merchant's stuff and always like to support the British film industry. It's cool to watch a true story, particularly about such a unique narrative filled with eccentric people. The film had a great message - believe in yourself and others will believe in you too. But I have to say the documentary about the Knights is much more entertaining and full off life, as brooding and wonderfully diverse Florence Pugh was in the film, she has nothing of the charisma Saraya Knight has. It's a nice film to watch about a triumph over adversity, discovering your self-identity and success against the odds, but 70 percent of the narrative was super serious and slow paced - I guess I wasn't expecting that!
Worth a watch, but check out the documentary too. Cool film for teens to see a heroine succeed in her given discipline and with her unique looks and style playing to her favour.
Friends from College (2017)
Couldn't get into it
It's a pretty fast paced comedy series which also draws on drama. It's kinda hard to summarise as I really didn't like any of the character (which I guess is the point) but. I guess it's hard to really want to see the messy personal lives of a group of people who can't stand each other, all have ridiculously lavish lives, the best jobs and are all attractive. Feels a little cliche to me. Everyone has a secret and whether or not they will be revealed or not I don't know as I can't watch another episode. Two was enough for me. Bang average!
Loudermilk (2017)
Gritty, witty and droll
I'm a cynic when it comes to comedy series and usually watch them expecting nothing original. However, Loudermilk is pretty original! Despite the lead's grumpy Tarantino-style droning on about music some of the time, the premise is authentic and sound. Loudermilk is a recovered Alcoholic who leads (AA?) meetings with a motley crew of regulars. His straight talking, no BS diatribe usually cuts straight to the bone, but anyone who knows this guy knows he can't do it any other way.
Throw in a potential love interest who has just moved in nearby (I really don't think she can act btw), a teenage girl coming off smack who needs Loudermilk's help, his AA sponsor roommate who seems to have started to drink again and a host of other characters (potentially too many narratives to be invested in) there's enough to keep variation per episode. I have only seen half of season 1 and it's pretty smart comedy. You don't finish feeling like you've fried your brain after a Paul Rudd film, more like you're pleasantly amused after the awkwardness of Curb Your Enthusiasm. Give it a go!
The Square (2017)
Awkward, thought provoking and downright absurd
It's the first time I've seen anything by director/writer Ruben Östlund, but it won't be the last. The same goes for the dashing and charming Claes Bang who really fills the screen in every scene he's in.
Don't watch this film if you are easily bored, you need constant entertainment or you don't like to muse over meaning. It's a comedy, a drama and an artistic exploration all in one. An art curator in a high-art museum in Sweden faces the benefits and vices of his position. He is a public-facing persona, answerable to society, but is he answerable to himself?
To me, it's a constant shift of power to the powerless and vice versa. Of the civilised to the uncivilised and vice versa. Who really are we in life, the mirage we display? Or the living person dealing with the raw and sometimes challenging realities. There are so many meanings in this, watch it to find your own interpretation.
I love how Östlund wanted each scene to be stand alone, not contrived to carry the story but to raise a moment to ponder exactly what is going on, right now - bringing some immediacy and some 'now' in the film. It doesn't sound much but that's a pretty cool concept and approach considering our split attention and distraction led lives. It is broken down in segments without immediate meaning that keep your watching but at the same time it holds your attention for the whole film due to that! Fascinating really.
You (2018)
Penn Badgley is the star in an otherwise underwhelming series
The premise is good, that of a charming but creepy guy taking advantage of the very vocally online life of a pretty young girl (who needs to invest in some curtains) in order to get her to fall in love with him (and other things). And in that role of Joe, Penn Badgley is truly awesome- there could be no one better. He actually looks a bit like my friend which amused me in his scenes. Observant, smart as a whip and very droll Joe has a smoothness about him that could charm anyone. But I found the acting of his love interest Beck truly terrible! I can look past it as new actors need chances but it was so distracting!
And here lies my other problem, the character of Beck is SO CLICHE. She wants to be a poet, she's a dreamy creative type in a big city, she loves the bad guy who treats her badly, she's a secret sexual minx and she is the only one with substance in her shallow group of friends. Oh, and she needs saving! Damn. I honestly didn't care what happened to Beck's character in the series as there was nothing of weight to grab onto with her, nothing to draw you in other than her sexuality and beauty.
It's a shame really as the script was sharp and pretty witty. I guess that is mostly from the original book however. I find people's beguilement with the series baffling, but of course it's just a matter of taste. It felt a bit teen romance for some of it, YA and a twisted romanticism for a brooding psychopaths killer. I must admit I only watched three episodes, I wasn't invested in the characters unfortunately, it didn't pull me in. I can't think who to recommend this to as a didn't understand who the audience was for - let's say females in their early 20s (but don't get any ideas girls, you don't need a Joe in your life, just saying).
Penn Badgley is a yes though.
Tony Robbins: I Am Not Your Guru (2016)
A great documentary letting the man do the talking, and the audience to do the thinking
When my partner and I saw this documentary pop up on Netflix we were interested. My partner new about Tony Robbins as an author (turns out he is a just-about-everything millionaire/billionaire type) and seeing footage of life coaches/motivational speakers and huge crows is always enthralling viewing - even if just to be amused by the spectacle.
The filmmakers don't feature heavily in the film, as far as i remember there's no narrator other than Tony speaking. Occasionally the interviewer can be heard quizzing Tony when he is reflecting after one of his shows but otherwise they remain present, active but silent. I love that approach. You can watch and take in the spectacle, performance and adrenaline of the situation. See the man (only a little) behind his performances, but mostly concentrating on the content of his conferences in 12 hour sweaty blocks. The guy himself is an astute guy. Highly skilled with words, psychology, emotional intelligence he strips his audience members bare, risking all for their 'betterment'. Who knows whether they continue to improve or whether it was only a temporary fix. The fact that so many keep returning and paying thousands of dollars for a few days conference would suggest the latter - also that the high energy, high octane experience is like a religious experience, drug or meditation taking them into a trance (or hypnotised state) .
There is no doubt Tony cares, it is obvious through his tears. We hear his back story as he references it sometimes to his audience, sometimes during the interview. He explains how he made himself and how he wants to help others. That is all genuine. I guess what is interesting is that money is involved. And the sheer, sheer number of people that attend - sometimes 10,000 people - how do you reach them all, how is the experience even a little personal. Watch and see.
It's a documentary to watch if you like biographies, find people and their complexities interesting and want to see a man at the top of his game. If you're highly cynical (like me) you might chuckle a fair amount at the theatre, but that's the content, not the documentary itself which is brilliantly and sensitively made.
Ant-Man (2015)
Paul Rudd, the universal everyman, short, cheeky and always forever Paul Rudd
I don't want any superhero films, ever. No interest. I gave this 6 stars because it would be unfair to give a film a bad review because of that reason. It seemed fine for those who know the comic or love the genre, good special effects and music and acting. My problem is Paul Rudd. Is it possible to see a film without Paul Rudd perhaps? Yes, he seems lovely. He seems funny and short and loveable and...Paul Rudd. Whether he tries or not he is pretty much always Paul Rudd. I just can't believe he is in such a heroic and powerful role? Why was he cast? Is there really such a shortage in the whole world that little Paul Rudd was cast as a superhero? The dude can act and I on'y have a problem with him personally but he is hard to take seriously in this film, I believe.
He has kind eyes and is reasonable and like an out of shape once cute dad. He's little and geeky-cool. Like always gets the girl but screws up. Anyway, that's just my opinion. I can't believe the film didn't include that kind of camp chicken dance he seems to do often as well, it would have been the icing on the cake.
Just waiting for him to appear in a horror film now as Paul Rudd, with a different hairstyle as that is the only thing that ever changes.
Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising (2016)
Brings nothing new to the beer pong table
Can Seth Rogan be a in a film without it involving pot? Is it in his contract or something? My partner loves him and all of his films. I don't. Because I am more into films we usually watch films I want to see, so something has to give. That means watching all three Bad Neighbor films. TBH I can't even remember the first two other than being scarred from the sex scenes between Rose Burns and Seth Rogan. And actually, maybe this is only the second? I don't know and I don't care and I'm not going to find out.
The all-male writers obviously thought they had stumbled on revolutionary territory over the revelation that sororities can't have parties. Cue the rebellious Chloe Moretz (who by the way in this is cool, I liked her) setting up her own with two suddenly best friends. Of course it is in the old house where all the Frat problems of Rose Burn and Seth Rogan's characters first began. The girls meet Zac Effron, the man child with issues that force him to run around the neighbourhood without any shoes on. He is however as great as he possibly can be with his performance considering how basic his character is. Anyway it's another all out battle between houses as Rose and Seth want to sell their house blah blah with Zac needing to chose a side- his forever peter pan young side or his old past college side.
Just one of those extra films that gets made to make money at the box office. Doesn't matter how bad the first, second or third films are if they do well in the box office expect more of them. Inane? Yep. But everyone keeps watching! This film obviously heavily involves pot smoking and how cool smoking is. I don't care about smoking but I am starting to think that Americans do it all the time and seem to think it's as rebellious and serious as getting out the old heroin syringe.
So yeah, I can't really be bothered to summarise.
Safe (2018)
Michael C Hall and Amanda Abbington hold it together
I watched it all. Some episodes were great and had you looking forward to the next, others dragged on. All in all, it was just above average but I do feel the acting was good, and I enjoyed the setting. There are a lot of plots and subplots running around and as ever, everyone seems to be connected in some way. The final reveal just wasn't enough to convince me the whole plot was worth it, however. As a Brit with an accent similar to Michael C Hall, can I just say his accent was EXCELLENT! Genuinely, I have never heard an American actor do it better and I have seen many films and countless series. Overall quite gripping in parts if you like British murder mysteries but not one of the best of its kind in the genre- too many unbelievable occurrences.
Suits (2011)
Slick, witty but in the end far too gossipy
Wow, Suits is good in its own way but it has an extraordinarily high score for what it is- better than both The Killings, Homeland, The Walking Dead, Broadchurch etc. If it had got a better score than Narcos I would have broken something.
My partner and I tried Suits, not really us but we gave it a go anyway due to majorly rave reviews. We tend to prefer grittier shows, but the promise of style and substance was appealing, plus with so much good stuff to watch, to immediately shut something down just because it doesn't slot within your usual interest seems a bit limiting.
Suits showed some potential in the first season and also the second, fast paced dialogue, interesting events unfolding, amusing characters and high risk decisions. Actually, the characters were well fleshed out, whether you liked them or not and you did get a clear sense of who each were and how they operate so kudos for that. As a woman I particularly liked that there was a strong female lead in the form of Jessica, who is endlessly classy in her demeanour and vernacular, and only a touch power mad. She also dressed conservatively and whilst she is a striking woman she wasn't a sex symbol really which is so, so refreshing. The lead protagonist Mike is quite a forgettable character. Having a dodgy history in selling weed (some hilarious prices being thrown around for that by the way) he spends his law career dodging bullets, worried that many things about his past will be unearthed.
The stars to my taste have to be Louis, who is smarmy, flirtatious and quite outrageous in character but endearing in his enthusiastic passion for his hobbies and his career, he is also great at what he does which ultimately wins secret respect. Harvey is the man all the girls want and the guys want to be, another standout character. Unnaturally calm, collected and a bit of a maverick, he could lead the series singlehandedly in my opinion.
In Needless to say I wasn't overly keen on the characters of Rachel and Donna who though originally became friends through a joint appreciation of razor sharp witticisms, it seems they ended up doing what so many female characters in TV shows do and just discussing guys, sigh. Gossiping, sigh. We already have a billion other shows in that format! A billion other shows centred on love, romance and life. OK so Suits is about sex, money and power but it isn't graphic with what it shows and it should also not be generous with the amount of time these two are spent gossiping like teenagers. There is a humour running through this show, a tongue-in-cheek understanding that each character uses their strengths to deceive, to outwit and to win but by God can't these woman use their brains rather than their beauty. I am not a feminist by the way, just a keen viewer of good, purposeful, reflective TV that challenges you. It's tiring to see such stereotypes, because at least in this legal setting I viewed it because I thought it wouldn't be the case.
Finishing both the first and second series made way for too much of the aforementioned and therein we stopped watching and my 6* review was cast.
An Open Secret (2014)
Uncomfortable, but like many important works, the uncomfortable is important to watch
SPOILERS*
This need to be watched, viewed, discussed. It puts a human angle on an inhuman subject and I am grateful it exists. It's not an objective documentary as none possibly can be, but it does allow for either side to be addressed. It covers many angles, those of the accused, the victims, the families. It shows what life can happen after for those who have suffered abuse, though all incredibly brave and tenacious. This past year (2017/2018) has taken a real gleam and shine away from the glitz and glamour of Hollywood -with claims of adult abuse by high up Hollywood executives and actors. This documentary really touches on that same topical subject, though not of adults, but of children. It deals with grooming, managers, entertainers, both TV and film and the innocent victims of children and families who wanted to believe in good people in the land of opportunity.
Up until recently and even as an adult, I couldn't even begin to fathom that Hollywood would attract those to exploit ambition and talent. They were all in it to work collaboratively, to push the boundaries, to collectively and artistically change the world, right? I write scripts, I idolise directors, I applaud film writers. But I think the mirage has finally dissipated for me now.I guess it should for everyone because it's that mirage that reels in both the idealistic and the hunters. That is the point. It is the land of opportunity, but sometimes that comes at a cost- a cost that should not be present, cannot be regulated and continues to act above the law. It is terrifying to think how high it goes. If any of you have seen The Keepers- it was all rather familiar to that. Though this time, the power was the dream of making it and the fear of not, the Archdiocese was nowhere to be found.
I found this harder to watch than I anticipated. Perhaps not only due to the content and theme but the injustice of it all, the lives ruined and the lack of retribution. I really do thank the filmmakers for taking the time and effort to make such a sensitive and balanced piece, for the victims who have spoken out and all those who were interviewed in it (well, bar one- you know who). It's important to keep this dialogue current, as it seems, it is not going anywhere- thank God we live in times now where we can at least have an independent documentary about it.
Couples Retreat (2009)
Clichéd, stereotyped and truly terrible
In case you hadn't caught the drift of the other reviewers, Couples Retreat is bad. With such a great ensemble cast and its classification as a comedy you would think that the film would have at least one funny scene but amazingly it didn't! I'm all for enjoying films that are so bad they are good but this was just painfully awful and with such wasted potential too! In isolation, Jon Favreau- top writer and actor, Vince Vaughn- yes always the same character but he is undoubtedly a pro, Kristen Bell- quirky, fun and a great comedy actress, Jason Batemen- who doesn't love Arrested Development, even the great British national treasure that is Peter Serafinowicz pops up in a role plus the man that is Jean Reno from Leon fame! It's actually quite incredible that this combination could go badly.
Sure, a couple wishing to reunite their love and passion en rope their unsuspecting friends into the 'holiday of a lifetime' in the picturesque resort of West Eden isn't groundbreaking stuff, but there is a solid foundation from which to develop the film- isn't there? Thinking there would be jet skiing, snorkeling and lazing around the friends are shocked to find out there is a very strict itinerary in place per day. And from hereon it it is cliché after stereotype after character flaw after cringe.
Also where the hell did they find Vince Vaughn's Dad from? I haven't seen such bad acting in a long time. The three stars came from Peter Serafinowicz, John Michael Higgins and Jon Favreau making me raise a smile ONCE.
I think I need to go and lie down because this irritation is causing a non comedic hernia.
Rake (2010)
A unique take on a legal drama comedy TV series
Unlike Suits (Which I liked for 1.5 seasons then stopped watching) you won't be yearning for the polished lifestyle or impossible suaveness from this chaotic series. Raw to the bone, our protagonist is clear about his brilliant skills and vices, though never concerned enough to change his pattern of behaviour. In Cleaver Greene we find a scruffy, self-destructive yet well versed anti hero who regularly messes up, finds himself in seedy situations and rather enjoyably, doesn't always get away with it. Complete with a questionable moral compass and unique understanding of the law, Rake is only mostly lovable and only slightly hateable. A truly unique spin on the law/drama/comedy genre Rake isn't for everyone with its controversial, politically incorrect narrative. It is for that reason (other than its individually) that I find its charm. Beautifully unapologetic Rake manages a mix of murder, sex, drugs, prostitution, terrorism, politics and even bestiality within its episodes without you feeling like you need a bath or wanting to change channel.I must say Richard Roxburgh as Rake is impeccably cast. The script too by the combined forces of Peter Duncan, Richard Roxburgh, Charles Waterstreet and Andrew Knight is truly exceptional.Be entertained, amused and even informed as Rake makes you wince, laugh and squirm.
The Babadook (2014)
Well directed, acted and a visual feast but missing the fear factor
The Babadook can't be faulted for the acting, or directing, choppy editing and cinematography. Even the Babadook book itself is charming in a dark and quirky way. The plot and Babadook itself can be decoded after the film has finished as to whether it is a metaphorical or empirical force which is always an enjoyable post horror discussion. Undoubtedly a film about grief, depression and loneliness this film raises some interesting introspective points as well as questioning sanity itself. as it is better than many horror films out there I wanted to say it is OK viewing for most, I didn't find it remotely scary however but is satisfying in its slotting into the psychological horror genre with ease.
But.
Not entirely sure why all the adults hated Samuel without any understanding or care to understand his needs. Of all of the children I have known that have emotional/behavioral needs people go out of their way to understand them, most of all children. It seems cold and unrealistic that adults would openly detest him. I understand he hurt children but to loath a child for this who is clearly in need of help just appeared off to me. Don't entirely understand either why the Mum and child never really left the house. Who in their right mind if they were freaked out would repeatedly sleep in the same room and house night after night? Also, shouting at the Babadook made it retreat? I'll have to try that next time I have a creepy encounter. What is the Babadook and what does it want? I found myself asking that question throughout, what is the point of it if it is in fact real? I guess that's why people assume it is a manifestation of guilt/trauma/bereavement, she finally took control of her life and that manifestation drew away.