Change Your Image
orangelifer
Reviews
Duvidha (1973)
Sometimes slow paced is simply boring
The opening shots are lovely, and as I enjoy older films,particularly outside of the mainstream, I had hopes I'd enjoy this. I did not. It honestly might be the most boring film that I managed to see through to the end. The pace is slow. Very,very slow. And basically nothing happens. I did not want a fast paced thriller nor did I expect any eroticism. But I had hoped to see the characters do something. Anything really. Some might enjoy this film as a visual poem. I admit, I don't have the patience for it. If I had seen the two characters who are in love interact with each other,I would have felt something. Without that,this film just seems emotionless. Also,I just didn't understand some of the film,which is due, at least in part, to my ignorance of Indian culture. The ending in particular confounded me. *Spoilers* I had assumed the ghost had won the contest but instead he was trapped in a bag and the human husband returned home with arrogance. Later I realized asking one of the men to enter the bag was I guess a trick to see who the ghost was because a human could not really fit inside it but at first I was surprised it was the ghost in the bag because the trapped ghost's begging seemed more typical of the husband. Also, a ghost should be able to get out of a leather bag...it's a ghost afterall. So I figured if indeed it was the ghost in the bag, it should be able to find a way back to its lover. Nope. I thought perhaps the wife would "join" the ghost in some otherworld. Nope. The movie ends solemnly with the wife sadly resigned to duty, alive but feeling dead. What is the point? I'm not saying I thought there would be a Hollywood happy ending. But really, what is the point? I learned afterwards of a newer film "Paheli" based on the same story. After reading the plot,I see the ending of the newer film is much closer to what I expected for this one.
Variety (1983)
Feminism?
Pretty much every review here states this film is clearly feminist. It is? Well the film maker says it is so I guess it must be. This supposed feminism was not at all apparent to me. It's not that I feel pornograpy can't be feminist. I understand how a woman could feel empowered by certain kinds of porn. But watching this, all I saw was what seemed to me a very typical hetero male fantasy. A young "decent" woman becomes obsessed with a much older man who is extremely condescending to her and treats her like she has to comply. She very much likes complying apparently. I admit I didn't understand all the plot, particularly the aspects involving the corrupt labor union. I guess the older man is some kind of crime boss? In any event, in terms of feminist ideology, this feminist perspective of wanting an older powerful man to overtake you looks a hell of a lot like traditional sexism.
As for her stalking him being turning the tables on male chauvinism...how?
Seems like a girl being desperate for an older man to ravage her is a pretty common fantasy for men. The film looked interesting at first but by the time we get to the point where the lead character Christine is just reciting sex movies in extreme pornographic detail, it seemed like the film was designed for that certain kind of guy who really likes porn but also likes to consider himself an intellectual. Honestly I completely lost interest but I forced myself to get through to the end. I understand why men want to think this is feminist. Perhaps if I dissected the film I'd understand how the filmmaker sees it as feminist. I'm not interested in putting forth the effort.
Unmade Beds (1976)
Paris imagined
Admittedly I have no idea what happened in this film, or if anything actually happened or if it was just the lead character's fantasy. The film opens with a woman seemingly explaining all the events we are about to see. This is probably the only film I've seen that has done that aside maybe from silent films. The initial narration didn't make anything particularly clear to me. That's fine. I don't demand discernable plot from movies. I love films that recreate a dream state. For me however this film is tiresome. It is focused on Rico a young man obsessed with French New Wave who lives in NYC and pretends it is Paris. I've watched little French New Wave and I'm not sure if this film pays homage to it or is a satire. Either way, the film seems intentionally pretentious and to me very annoying.
But I'm glad I sat through it. It's only a little over an hour long and I appreciate anyone making a film with a limited budget. I'm not blaming the filmmaker for me not getting it.
Rhythm Thief (1994)
Unexpectedly Touching
Yes,it is a visually beautiful film but it is also much more touching than I expected. The main character Simon (Jason Andrews) is seemingly rather unlikable but becomes very obviously human as it moves along. The end of the film is both very sweet and very tragic. Ultimately what seemed like a fairly detached depiction of alienation becomes unabashedly romantic in the finale. While the end is extremely sad it is presented as being some form of happiness.
The film is also quite funny at times. Kevin Corrigan gives a likable energetic performance as Fuller, the enthusiastic protégé wannabe to Simon. It's obvious from the start things probably won't end well for Fuller. I didn't feel much truthfully for either woman that Simon was with although Marty the hometown girl grew on me.
A dynamic film that is definitely worth watching and worth owning.
The Incident (1967)
Alright but...the point is?
Basically,two bad guys decide to have "fun" scaring and humiliating people on a subway train until someone stands up to them. No severe violence occurs on the train until someone fights them.
Not sure if the film is making a statement about standing up for yourself. If so, what? Oddly, the two bad guys did virtually no physical harm to anyone on the train until the one character who was not a New Yorker stopped them. He got stabbed in the side (maybe will be okay?) and he injured both of the bad guys. Yes, he stopped them but at what cost? He could die from his stab wound. While the baddies are capable of violence they hadn't actually harmed anyone. They toyed with them and threatened them but strangely did almost no physical harm. I'd say it's better to suffer through the degradation and live than stand up for yourself and die.
The film kinda builds up to nothing. I was a little nervous about seeing the film because reviews said it was hard to watch. No, it's not. Films about the Holocaust and about lynchings are hard to watch. Films where someone abuses their partner and children are hard to watch. This? Nothing happens. Yes, the scene where the bad guys harass the Black couple is grotesquely racist. But it stops short of being truly heinous. Same is true of how they treat the gay man. I feel like the filmmaker was holding back. At the start of the film, one of the bad guys beats a man for no reason. When they first get on the train, they try to burn a sleeping homeless man. This sets you up to expect real horrific violence. But then nothing. I didn't want anything gruesome to happen to the passengers but after a while it seemed unrealistic that these guys didn't take it a little farther. I've seen more brutality from bullies in 1950s TV Westerns.
Butt Boy (2019)
The ending kind of ruined it
Ok, I wasn't sure what to make of it for a long time. The concept of a man (seemingly) murdering children and small animals in his butt was wildly distasteful but also completely impossible. I viewed it as a sort of surreal crime drama with a hint of dark comedy which somehow takes place in the present and the 1970s/80s at the same time. It's an absurd film and the people who made it know that, and I appreciate going for something "out there". That's why I chose to watch it. Nearing the end we find that the beings the main character put in his butt are actually still alive inside a strange alternative dimension. Great! No horrible child murders afterall. But for some reason I cannot fathom, the writer chose to have one of the two children die inside the butt dimension. Why??? This is not a serious film. Why have a tragic ending? I mean, even the dog escaped alive even though he'd been in there a decade and probably would be dead from old age by now. (Yes, time is the same in the butt as it is outside. We know this because a baby aged ten years inside there.) I really thought both children would get out alive because it's ridiculous to make a film this silly then end on a sad note for no reason. The only explanation I can imagine for why the writer made it seem that one boy died is because perhaps a sequel was being planned that reveals the boy is actually still alive but stuck in a different dimension.
Monk: Mr. Monk Makes a Friend (2007)
Monk already has friends
I hate the premise of this episode (and frankly I don't like season 5 in general, but I digress). Monk acts like a child thinking he's finally made a friend for the first time. So...Monk and Leland Stottlemeyer aren't friends? That's odd considering later in the series Stottlemeyer goes out of his way to fake Monk's death, risking his own career. Near the end of the series, Stottlemeyer even makes Monk his best man at his wedding. Sounds like a close friend to me. And what about Natalie? Sure, she's technically Monk's employee but it goes far beyond a business relationship. For Monk to act this desperate for a friend is an insult to his actual friends.
Monk: Mr. Monk Meets His Dad (2006)
Nothing sweet about this reunion
This seems to be an attempt at a sweet Christmas reunion between father and son,but there is nothing sweet about it. Monk's father abandoned him at age 8. His dad made no attempt to see him in 39 years until he needed to get out of jail. Well,of course Monk wouldn't want to get him out. Why should he? His father really doesn't even try to fake feelings of regret for leaving his children. He just shakes it off with, Well, I'm here now. What's really beyond comprehension is how Monk's friends behave. Stottlemeyer and Natalie push him to have a road trip with his father, telling him most people don't get a second shot. Second shot at what? Having a father who cares? This father clearly doesn't in any meaningful way. Telling someone they got a second shot usually means they did something wrong. Eight year old Adrian Monk was not to blame for his father leaving (although his heartless father has the gaul to tell Adrian that he and his brother and mother are the reason he left). Monk's friends don't even seem particularly understanding of why he wants absolutely nothing to do with his father now. As the story progresses, the father proves himself to be basically lacking in any redeeming qualities. He named his son from a later relationship after himself, practically nullifying his previous children, and while he brags about junior constantly, all the brags are lies. Junior actually just smokes pot in the basement. Finding out Adrian is a skilled detective, the father declares he didn't know he had a son he could actually be proud of. Wow. Well, the father can't take any credit for Adrian's talents. Furthermore, is societal success the only thing of value to this man? Would he have not abandoned Adrian if he'd known Adrian would be a respected detective? The episode ends with Adrian happily learning to bike with his father. No. This is not a happy story. Adrian has the right to forgive his father if he chooses, but he has absolutely no reason to. The father doesn't seem to have any sense of love or compassion. Quite frankly, he's rather cruel. There's nothing touching about this story, where the father doesn't care about the hurt he's caused and ultimately the people around him treat him like that hurt doesn't really matter.
Me Before You (2016)
Cruel message
Was interested in seeing the film until I read how it ends. I realize you should watch a film before reviewing it but I honestly don't see how anything in the story could make the finale okay. I cannot fathom why so many people loved this film and say it is about loving and living against all odds. The male lead found love but then kills himself anyway. This is the exact opposite of living life despite obstacles. The message of this story seems to be that life is not worth living if you are paralyzed and you should kill yourself to save yourself and people who love you from agony. This a cruel, horrific, dangerous message.
Diagnosis Murder: The Last Resort (1998)
Another fantasy
I don't need TV to be realistic and I certainly don't expect this series to be. But finding out at the end that every single thing that happened in the episode was an elaborate set up just to catch one man? Well,that's the fun of fiction I suppose. It doesn't have to be rational.
Little House Years (1979)
A Three Hour Clip Episode
I'm really surprised all the reviewers on here rated this so favorably. It's a clip episode. A very long clip episode (well, three hour movie to be precise). No matter how much I like a series, I'm not enthusiastic about watching a bunch of recaps of other episodes.
Gunsmoke: The Round Up (1956)
Doesn't really fit the series
Honestly maybe it just goes over my head. Maybe I need an appreciation for Sam Peckinpah. I don't know. I just know my gut reaction to the episode was that it wasn't good. Matt Dillon was out of character, from my perspective. The script seemed forced and odd. It just doesn't feel like an episode of Gunsmoke. Do I like the fact Dillon actually shows emotion? Sure. But none of it felt natural to his character. Because of the rather melodramatic and artificial feel of the show I figured it was one of the very first episodes. But no, it is from season two.
Tastes differ of course. This did not appeal to me.
Gunsmoke: Ash (1963)
Touching friendship, disappointing story
I really enjoyed the first part of this episode. Anthony Caruso and John Dehner as Ash and Ben are a joy to watch. I was particularly happy to see Dehner in a good hearted, compassionate, goofy role as nearly every character I've seen him play is serious and usually villainous. Seeing him play this jovial character made me wish I'd seen him do more comedic parts.
Then Dehner's character Ben gets hit on the head and the brain injury makes him angry, mean and violent. So now Dehner is playing his normal typecast: bad guy. I realize to others this will seem silly but I was genuinely disappointed that the rare opportunity to see Dehner in a western playing an upbeat role was so brief.
Caruso as Ash tries hard to deal with Ben's unpleasantness but sadly ends up killing Ben to prevent Ben from committing murder.
Yes, the ending is somewhat touching as Ben on his deathbed (his kindness restored) claims Ash acted in self defense, therefore saving Ash from a murder charge. But I wanted a different story.
This entire episode is contrived. Yes getting hit in the head can cause a personality changing brain injury but would getting shot be likely to "fix" the personality change? I doubt it. But of course, this is a tv show. I'm willing to accept far fetched plots as long as they're fun. But this wasn't, for me anyway. I would have enjoyed an episode about these two characters that didn't involve Dehner becoming mean and didn't result in his character's death. I know when I watch Gunsmoke a tragic ending is a strong possibility. I'm ok with that sometimes even though it can be painful to watch. I have trouble,however, settling for a sad story when the plot line is rather absurd. If we're going to have a story that's unrealistic, it might as well be a happy one.
Gunsmoke: Abe Blocker (1962)
One viewing is enough
I don't understand why so many viewers here seem to love this episode. One called the story "pleasant". It definitely is not. This is a thoroughly sad, unpleasant episode. The young couple we are introduced to at the beginning are murdered and scalped half way through. More people are murdered. The entire story is death and killing. Gunsmoke tends to be gritty and I respect it for that. But ultimately it's intended to be entertainment. Not only is this episode depressing, in my opinion it's somewhat boring. This is not an episode I desire to watch more than once.
Magic Christmas Tree (1964)
Not that disturbing, just extremely bad
I had heard of this film when I happened upon it at a thrift store. I figured "why not?" and bought it. I had expected a truly disconcerting and ominous film. Okay,it is kinda creepy,but that is mostly because it us just so oddly bad. I don't see the tree as "evil" as some do. I think it was supposed to be an agent of good,although I don't see what good comes of a boy wrecking havoc in his community by making people chase each other and run after their delivery trucks. Overall,the tree seemed to be helping...I think. Mostly what I notice about this film is that it has almost no plot,terrible acting,and boring scenes that go on forever. The lawnmower scene is pretty excruciating. But the idea is a bit creative,even if it goes nowhere,and the fact the filmmaker chose to have one the three friends at the beginning be a black child was at least a bit progressive for 1964. The film has maybe a few merits.(By the way,whoever thought this movie was homoerotic must think that EVERY film is homoerotic.I just don't see it.) So,yes,it's bad,it's creepy,and it would probably scare some children,but I don't think this is the evil monstrosity that some say it is.
Space Precinct (1994)
Fun
I can't imagine that show cost over a million per episode! Yes,it was one of the worst shows ever.But so what? I don't think it was hiding it! It was like a (slightly) more adult version of the Power Rangers,with cheap costumes,cheesy scripts,and all you would expect of a B movie.But it was fun.Of course,I'm biased,because when the series ran I was 13,and developed a crush on Rob Youngblood,one of the actors on the show.Never the less,i think it was good as what it was,one of the most absurd sci-fi series ever.The highlight of the series:Two against the rock.At least I think that was the title.My favorite episode,no contest!