Change Your Image
PedanticEditor
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Mindhunter (2017)
So poorly written I barely made it through 1 episode
So poorly written, I only made it through 1 episode - and I had to really try just to do that. The production value is fine (despite the student film looking color grade) and the acting is okay, but the characters are so mind blowingly stupid. I get they're trying to show how little psychological training people had so they can show story and character arcs, but being ignorant doesn't also lower your intelligence, make you full of yourself, and give you unsound judgment in every single aspect of life and work. Especially the protagonist, who is commented on by other characters as being insightful despite reacting to situations and ideas like a bag of rocks with hair that can somehow talk. Every crime-related situation he comes upon, he acts as though it's his first interaction with another human being and amazingly does not engage in any kind of meaningful inquiry or problem solving to try and figure out what's happening - and yet he acts as though he knows more than anyone else in the room. And, no, all of those theories were not invented in the 1970s. Couldn't one of the writers take just a single semester of Intro to Administration of Justice at a community college before writing this so they'd at least get something right? And for a show that's all about psychology, couldn't they have tried a little bit harder to write characters that are believable and internally consistent? Even The X-Files does a MUCH better job of portraying criminal psychology theories than this show does - and character writing too despite the fact that the protagonists on that show aren't always the sharpest tools in the shed either. If you want a really well made deep dive into these ideas, admittedly without the historical aspect, watch the 1986 film Manhunter instead of this show.
Into the Woods (2014)
A total waste
A total waste. No real songs, glossed over/abbreviated stories, more so-so acting than should be in a major production, and unimaginative art direction/costumes. It's supposed to be a musical, but there aren't really any songs. It's almost entirely just sing-songy dialogue that happens to have random bits of music flitting around behind it. The fairytales either need to be "fractured" for silliness or delivered faithfully. Not just muddled for convenience-sake like this. Worst of all, no progression. Most of the way through, the husband and wife characters do a whole speech/song about how the husband's character has changed, but it hasn't. There aren't any character arcs at all by that point in the movie. Oh, and the acting. Red Riding Hood is too old, too loud, and really obnoxious. The two princes seemed very hard to believe as heterosexuals, especially during their big duet. The husband/wife seemed like a modern suburban couple (of green actors). The entire set design is dark blue/green. What's the point of having a production design budget if there's nothing to look at? And who designed Depp's Big Bad Wolf costume, or lack thereof? Not only is that lazy, but it also makes the scene seem more like a weird old man hitting on a young girl than like an animal wanting to consume her. Wrong kind of creepy, guys. Finally, I'm generally annoyed at Disney's new self-flagellating trend to appease classic-fairytale-Disneyfying haters. Once Upon a Time and other such TV shows were bad enough as examples of ironically anti-Disney products. The original versions of the fairytales that Disney adapted in the past were horrific, and I was glad to see them cleaned up and made kid-friendly. Heck, civilized-society friendly. This movie is an example of backsliding. Disney needs to stop the self-hate and embrace its tradition as a positive shaper of our modern mythology. In short, skip this movie. It's abject cultural flotsam.
Broadchurch (2013)
This one's an oddity.
This one's an oddity. The excellent editing and cinematography, gorgeous locations, and fine acting by a few of the players make this compelling to watch despite some extremely overused/formulaic characters and rather banal writing overall - which drop a few too many structural hints as to the end without providing a trail of actual clues to follow. David Tennant as Alec the brooding and pragmatic detective does a fine job filling out what is an absolutely cookie cutter character nowadays. The actress playing the incompetent, dull-witted, and haughty DI Miller also does a fine job. She was dislikable to the last, which is as well considering the position in which all the characters at last find themselves. This is a truly admirable example of how one can take a script that's pure rubbish and force it to be watchable through sheer production value and casting. Worth studying for technical pointers, but don't expect a good storytelling experience out of it.
Odd Thomas (2013)
Overall, surprisingly well done
Overall, surprisingly well done. The characterizations are just expository enough to be good without being too upfront. The acting is mostly fairly good, especially by the Anton Yelchin (who also did well in the recent faux Star Trek films) and Willem Dafoe (who always does a good job). I would be willing to watch a sequel. That said, the movie does have some flaws. Some of its special effects are too gross for kids to watch (the faceless people, a couple of the roach stunts), which is a pity because it would otherwise make a good kids' movie. Also, I have a bone to pick with the writing of the ending *spoiler alert from here on out* Having Odd and Stormy being able to kiss/touch when she's a ghost breaks the rules the movie set up only a couple of scenes before. Also, the ending fanfare scenes of the townspeople cheering Odd and the part where Stormy dissipates into butterflies didn't fit the feel of the rest of the film and took all the wind out of the movie's flow and rhythm. That's just bad writing. Here's the fix I would have suggested: Firstly, it's illogical that Odd forced the gal with the kids to leave but made no effort to save Stormy before the bad stuff went down. He should have told her to go, and then maybe she could have been distracted a little too long by trying to make the customers leave first. Then, in the moment when Odd steps into the ice cream shop and sees Stormy stand, causing his heart to lift and him to smile, the next beat should have been him walking towards her and her trying to speak to him and but being unable to. Then, just as the blow of the realization that she's a ghost hits him, the other ghost appears to notify him it's not over yet. There would be a brief, soul-crushing moment where Stormy urges him that he needs to follow the other ghost, and after the big action sequence she could come back later to pull him from unconsciousness in the hospital and say a proper goodbye then. See? Better, right? Well, I think so anyway.
Hello Sister, Goodbye Life (2006)
Just nope
Wow, the only likable character was the lawyer - and just barely that at times. The mother was the same character she played on Just Shoot me, the college girl was an obnoxious, selfish brat, and the little girl was a horrible, petulant little monster to such a degree that I found myself rooting for the selfish college girl to dump her on the grandparents. Plus the turnaround from things-going-badly to things-going-well was abrupt enough to give a viewer whiplash. Similarly themed movies that were better written include but are not limited to: Big Daddy (1999) (yeah, even that was better), Léon: The Professional (1994), Little Lord Fauntleroy (1936), almost any Shirley Temple movie, Let's Sing Again (1936).
Persons Unknown (2010)
Just a poor representation of human behavior
Just a poor representation of human behavior. I only made it about 12 minutes in before I could no longer forcibly suspend my disbelief. If you appear in a mysterious location that seems to have windows, how is one of your first thoughts not to peek out and try to assess where you are? Then there are cameras everywhere. How is one of your first acts not to smash them all? Watch the episode "Allegiance" of Star Trek: The Next Generation instead of this rather weak attempt at the same thing. It's a similar scenario, but the writing is much better. I gave this one star mostly because it seems like the writers aren't even trying. For shame.
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb... apparently
This movie is shockingly bad, especially compared with the other avengers films, and is the absolute worst Marvel movie ever made. Almost as bad as the Batman vs. Superman movie was for the DC universe.
Fair warning, this review is all spoilers - not that it really matters since you shouldn't see the film anyway.
I saw the film today and I can't help but conclude that the writers of this film were just lazy. For shame! I get that Infinity War is supposed to be the first part of a two-parter, so pretty much all the good guys had to die. But there are ways of making good guys lose without having them act like lobotomy patients throughout the whole story and literally die from stupidity every step of the way (oh, except for Spiderman who is inexplicably the only intelligent character in the story). In what ways were the good guys unbelievably dumb every step of the way, you ask? I'll tell you. And then I'll tell you what some better written alternatives could have been. This is just from memory, so there are probably more instances of bad writing that I've forgotten.
1. Loki gives up a stone to save Thor, even though it may be possible to resurrect him later and Loki knows half the universe will die as an eventual result.
2. Loki goes after the more-powerful-than-gods Thanos a moment later with a knife. An effing knife!
3. The first thing Dr. Strange does is as Ironman for help. Whaa?
4. Dr. Strange gets tangled up in weeds and faints, then to be carried off like a swooned and helpless fairytale maiden.
5. Gamora attacks Thanos first, by herself, even though she knows she alone holds the key to a stone.
6. Gamora gives up the final stone to relieve her sister from momentary torture, knowing that half of all life in the universe will die as a result.
7. Wakanda opens its forcefield, and the super-duper powerful lady stops guarding the last stone in order to fight.
8. Star Lord prevents the other good guys from removing the infinity stone holder from Thanos by deliberately saving Thanos from the mind control lady.
9. Ironman didn't punch Star Lord's lights out when he saw that he was getting ready to do something moronic.
10. Neither did Dr. Strange.
11. Thor stabs the Thanos through the chest with a super-axe (which was obviously stupid in the first place, but even then he has time to pull it back out and chop off the baddy's head), and instead the baddy says "You should have gone for the head" and sucks himself into a portal to escape.
12. Last, and least important but still annoying, the Hulk is effectively impotent for no good reason.
Here are 3 Possible solutions off the top of my head that would have been less poorly written:
1. Dr. Strange is distracted by something even more important for the entire movie, so that the other heroes can die tragically, and in the second movie he stops being too busy and just rolls back time and undoes Thanos' acquisition of the stones - also causing the heroes to not die.
2. Same thing, except Dr. Strange or his compatriot could have opened up and closed one of their portal thingies to snip off Thanos' arm with the stones on it.
3. Thor could have died trying to make the super-axe, or he could have cut off Thanos' head and someone else evil could quickly put on the stone-holding glove thing instead. Either way would have been an improvement.
A Wrinkle in Time (2018)
Extremely disappointing considering what they could have done with the story
I saw A Wrinkle in Time today. The first half hour or so had potential, as the little brother was set up as an articulate champion of justice type who dressed down two teachers for spreading malicious gossip about him and his family, and then supported his sister. All this while apparently marshaling the powers that be of the universe to help find their missing father. The sister started out with some potential too, beating up a particularly vicious bully and walking out on a principal who was trying to tear her down without getting the whole story behind her actions first. The acting and makeup for the 3 universe goddess ladies was rather off-putting and honestly came off as TV movie quality, but the CGI once they crossed over to a new place was impressive.
Unfortunately, the whole movie falls flat on its face immediately after that and never recovers. Leaving the heavy-handed and insufficiently heartfelt scene with the seer out, the little brother disappears briefly without explanation (only to reappear later also without explanation) during which time the kids run through a supernatural natural disaster of sorts and escape in a barely believable (even in the context of fantasy) way. Shortly after the little brother reappears, he touches the hand of one baddie and suddenly turns into a power-mad villain, which makes no sense since he showed no signs of avarice up to that point and not a drop of darkness in his personality to be used in turning him. If anything, the setup made him seem more likely to end up the hero of the story. This is just clumsy writing.
When they finally find the father, despite the fact he's been trapped in the core of evil for the whole universe for 4 years, he shows no signs of having changed in any way - plus he was way too easy to find but that's another issue. Then, even though he's supposed to have been trapped there, he just decides to teleport him and his daughter back home at will. What!?! Couldn't he have done that, say 4 years earlier if it was that simple!?! Also, when he teleports away and the daughter wills herself to stay to go after her brother, the boyfriend is nowhere near and in the end the daughter and her brother go home without the boyfriend... and yet he's there when they arrive home... with no explanation whatsoever. Oh, and one more plot hole regarding the boyfriend. The little brother asked him to come along because they needed his sense of diplomacy, but he never used it once. He barely even spoke. Both he and the little brother had considerable potential as characters, but were not really used at all. What a waste. Finally, the climax "battle" scene of the film kind of undermined the moral of the story (that you should like yourself the way you are) since the argument the daughter made to un-evil her brother was that they loved each other and therefore he couldn't be evil. Huh?
Oh, one last note. There was one little moment when the bother yelled to the sister "Shut up, Meg!" Surely someone working on that movie must have seen the show Family Guy once in their life and realized that line would have all the wrong pop culture connotations for a moderately large portion of the audience? I mean, seriously, I don't watch that show and even I know that catchphrase. There was a lot of laughter in the theater at that moment, and I think that's why.
I'm guessing something important in the original written story was excised from the screenplay to fill it so full of holes. If not, then this is just a very disappointing story all around. Thematically and stylistically, it wants to be Neverending Story, but it just isn't. At all. Not even close.
The Foreigner (2017)
Taken meets Deathwish, but better than either one
This combines the father avenging a daughter and "particular set of skills" aspects of Taken and Deathwish (the original, not the new one which I haven't seen yet) with the considerably better fighting and acting ability of Jackie Chan - and unfortunately some pretty weak writing (which is still better than that of the two aforementioned films it's most like). The action in this movie doesn't disappoint, and Chan is excellent as usual as an actor and physical performer - despite a distinct lack of comedy and poor cinematography that's almost entirely close-ups, making it near impossible to tell exactly what's happening during those great fight scenes. The overall storyline is passable and makes sense, but the narrative progression, the actual storytelling, is very poorly written. The way Chan's character decides to latch onto Brosnan's is full of holes at best, and makes him seem like a destructive loose canon until about 2/3 of the way through the movie. I almost quit watching part way through act 2 except I had faith that Chan wouldn't play a villain. They also should have revealed his background much earlier in the film because that's pretty confusing until almost the end too. Brosnan seems to be phoning it in the whole time, which is kind of unusual for him. Maybe he's not used to playing villains and wasn't sure what to do so he turned wooden. My biggest gripe is basically how bumblingly Chan's character proceeds despite his background and some level of flickering cunning though. Most especially the final showdown wherein he walks into a closed space that might as well be a trap and wins only after taking quite an unnecessary beating himself. Granted, that fight scene is very entertaining, but it does make me question the intelligence of the protagonist to get himself stuck like that.
The Grifters (1990)
Starts out with promise, but spirals out into abysmal trash
First, the good points - all technical. The visual storytelling style and costume/set design are excellent, as is the general editing. The casting is passable as far as acting ability, although nobody really looks the way they're portrayed.
What I hate about this film is that it wasted my time. It started out decent enough, but about halfway through the two supporting characters became illogically bizarre out of nowhere and just gradually became more so from then on. This also threw what little storyline/plot there was completely out the window in favor of all the characters running around doing uncharacteristically brainless and random things like chickens with their heads cut off. The ending was extremely abrupt, to the point where the credits starting was a surprise, and pointless to such a degree where I have to seriously wonder whether the script had even been finished when shooting began or whether they just tried to write as they went along and ended the movie when they simply used up all of their allowed runtime. What an incredible waste of time, money, and technical talent. The writers for this, if you really want to call them writers, should thoroughly reproach themselves for doing such a poor job of it on this film.
The Right Kind of Wrong (2013)
Awful Movie, Great Shooting Location
Although the plot doesn't match, story is basically a lot like that part of the TV show Just Shoot Me wherein David Spade's character fools a model into marrying him. Why? He's a sleaze, so is her current boyfriend, you can't really root for either one because they're both victimizing her. The main character is like David Spade's character, but the woman is more twisted.
It's a suckily written movie about horrible people (nearly all the characters; not just one or two).
Unfortunately, the shooting locations in Canada are so gorgeous I watched the whole thing anyway. I wish they hadn't overexposed so often and color graded so far into the yellow range though, as it kind of ruins the sky and people's faces. It'd be better to just watch a documentary about Calgary and Banff instead though.
Maybe you could watch it with the sound off, except the last 20 minutes or so 'cause there's visually gross stuff, and it would be enjoyable that way. Oh well.
The Journey of Natty Gann (1985)
Very few movies have made me as angry as this one; and not in a good way
There is nothing remotely uplifting, redeeming, or inspiring about this film - although that was supposedly the intention.
Nevermind the bad acting, poor editing, and abysmal directing. It's the writing that kills it dead. Firstly, the method they use to show the daughter as being independent-minded is her smoking with two boys in a bathroom stall. This really only shows her to be self-destructive, and actually kind of dependent on peer pressure. Also. . . kids smoking in a Disney movie? The man with the mouse would not approve.
Secondly, both the father and daughter in the movie are a pair of bona fide s@#$s. The father decides it's perfectly alright to leave his brainless, self-destructive daughter with a self-obsessed landlady who (no surprise here) kicks her out as he skips merrily off to the other side of the country. Oh, and this is after he spends the day looking for her because apparently he in no way keeps tabs on his pre-teen daughter in downtown Depression Era Chicago. This is someone for whom we're supposed to feel empathy and/or admiration?
When the daughter, Natty, sets out on her own, she abandons a dog she adopted a couple scenes before. Like careless father like careless daughter? Then she lets a large, snarling, blood-soaked dog escape loose into a town after it wins a dog fight. I was actually almost glad when a random guy slapped her for doing it. I wanted to slap her myself at that point. The dog predictably shows up snarling and barking at her in the next scene, but sadly it doesn't end the film then and there by mauling her to death as a lesson to viewers not to release trained weapon-dogs into the world. Eventually, Natty avoids starving by the sheer luck that the dog brings her food and basically decides to adopt her.
After the next part, wherein the dog guides her to an a-hole farmer and his pregnant wife - followed by the obvious upcoming implication that the dog would get blamed for an attack on the farmer's chickens - I just couldn't stand to watch anymore. The stupidity and endless pettiness of the writing became overwhelming.
Oh and, by the way, girls from that era (even inner city girls) didn't swear that freely.
All this said, the art direction and costuming is excellent. The cinematography is good, too. What a waste.
Conan the Barbarian (2011)
Not Really a Conan Movie, Not Worth Watching Either
Although this movie is essentially a moderately tweaked remake of the basic story from 80s version, the plot is actually fairly different. Some of the fight sequences in the movie were relatively interesting, but overall this movie exhibited very poor writing, acting, casting, and surprisingly even mise en scène. First let's get the most obvious, and possibly the least important, complaint out of the way. Conan is so thoroughly described in the books as a proto-Celtic guy with jet-black hair, cobalt-blue eyes, and many battle scars, that is stronger (and almost always, but not necessarily always, taller) than any other man he meets. Momoa is a Hawaiian guy with brown hair and brown eyes who (despite a height of 6'4") appears to be shorter and much weaker than several of the other characters in the movie. Secondly, the primary things that make Conan a great barbarian character is his utter lack of angst and philosophical complexity, his strategic mind for infiltration in battle, and his quickness to act. Conversely, the Conan in this movie spends the entire film metaphorically rending garments, takes something like 20 years to exact revenge, and virtually stumbles through the entire story without any sense of forethought. I'm not really bothered by all the naked people (okay, naked women) in the film, as people were generally not that concerned with wearing clothing during the (albeit fictional) time period represented in the film, but I would argue that spending so much time on the long, extremely boring uber-pornographic sex scene was totally unnecessary and added nothing worthwhile to the movie. Finally, the villain proclaimed that barbarians like Conan don't pray or have any kind of religion. To that, I say "Oh, Please!" Conan had his butt saved deux ex machina style several times by his god, and prayed at least once that I read of. I have other complaints as well, but I'm going to stop here so it doesn't get overlong.
I'd recommend the movie for Anyone having trouble with figuring out how not to make a good action movie, and skeezy guys who are afraid to be seen renting 'official' porno.
Content notes: Most, but not all, of the swearing is replaced by Conanisms like (by Crom!). However, a few regular swear words illogically pop up sometimes too. It's mostly not really that gross of a movie either, except for some extremely grotty stuff at the beginning, like the C-section. It is pretty violent though.
To save you from having to actually suffer through this tripe, movie is basically this: After suffering a wound in battle, Conan's mom gets an impromptu Caesarian section with a sword and dies. Years later, when Conan is an adolescent, his father commits suicide in order to prevent Conan from brainlessly dying in an attempt to save him from a trap set up by a crazy warlord. Instead of immediately hunting down and killing the warlord, like the literary version of the character probably would have, Conan spends his adult life angstily searching the earth for the warlord while occasionally running into large groups of slutty, naked slave girls until finally tracking him down, initially getting bi#$%-slapped in a fight with him, and finally defeating him while acquiring a snarky girlfriend in the process.
Taken (2008)
Cool concept, decent opening, poor execution of the main plot
There were many excellent aspects to Taken. The whole opening sequence up until he meets his ex at the birthday was a fine example of character exposition. It told us that this man was a creature of habit, that he was careful, that he was a bit obsessive, that it was his daughter's birthday, that he was nervous and eager to please his daughter with the gift, that he was estranged from either his daughter or from a new family to which she belonged, and that his wife obviously left him and can be an extremely jerky woman.
Nonetheless, there were certain aspects of the writing which bothered me significantly as I watched and I couldn't help but write them down as it played. Many of these will only make sense if you've already seen it, but perhaps it's formulaic enough where that won't make any difference. There are probably some minor spoilers in here to the less aware though, so be warned. Here they are:
1. This super careful guy with "skills" didn't see fit to teach his daughter even the slightest common sense.
2. He doesn't use the cell phone he gave her as a tracking device.
3. When scumbags invade the apartment, he tells her to go to a bedroom and hide under the bed. Really!?!?!?!?! First of all, that's the first place anyone would look for her! Secondly, he should have tried to help her find a way to escape the apartment. No man experienced in escaping villains in his right mind would give this advice.
4. He tells her to leave the phone behind instead of secreting it on her person so he could, again, use it to track her. Seriously, it's not that hard to do.
5. After he knocks out the French sleazy guy's accomplice, he doesn't shove him in the back of the car before pursuing the French sleazy guy.
6. He makes his face known to the Albanian pimp/hooker that are in the trafficking chain.
7. He makes a commotion in the hooker den and gets himself in a bind instead of just quietly killing the john in the stall with his daughter's jacket and discreetly sneaking the hooker out to question her.
8. He warns the villain on the phone of who he is so that he can no longer take them by surprise, also making himself potentially vulnerable in the process.
9. He attacks the family of an old friend he finds out is a sleaze. Seriously, even the old Mafiosos know you don't attack the innocent members of someone's family because that's crossing the line and means that anything is on the table. He might as well have put a contract out on anyone he cared about for the future by doing something so careless and moronic.
10. Allows himself to get knocked out and captured because he's too stupid to look before exiting a door.
11. Escapes his captors through pure dumb luck (this is the least stupid one just because it's remotely plausible, but that still doesn't excuse it as lazy writing).
12. His daughter's line when he saves her is a surprised "You came for me." What kind of a !@#$%^& stupid line is that to write for such a moment? I have a suggestion: How about she says "You're here" and he replies "I'll always be here for you." Not perfect, but a darned sight better.
Also, it's not stupid per se, but it seems unnecessary to have the vocal coach bit at the end. The airport part had a purpose, but didn't completely hit home. They should have ended with a slice of the everyday life they had after it was all over to show what had been resolved in a lasting way. That would have been a more satisfying conclusion.
I recently watched a much more strongly written international thriller named Hopscotch. If you're looking for something in this genre to watch, see this one instead.
Flashdance (1983)
Only worth watching to get all the puns people make about the film
An 18-year-old female daytime welder and evening stripper (more like cheeseball interpretive dancer) waffles about auditioning for a dance school while idling with her various co-workers.
Some of the dancing is good, but most of it is more mechanical than artistic and almost seems to ignore the accompanying music. The camera-work is surprisingly professional though. The editing in this movie is incredibly clunky, jumpy (unintentionally visible and not supportive of telling the story), and the editor keeps repeating the same shots far too close together and too often to be for the purpose of either building momentum or getting a point across. Rather than being a stylistic choice, this seems to be an example of clumsy editing - rookie film student stuff. I lost interest at the 18-minute mark when the writers decided to extend the plot merely by postponing the inciting action of the last act (applying to the school) due to nerves. But I kept watching anyway, so here's the rest: The majority of the film consists of an insipid attempt at a romance story between the protagonist and her wealthy boss. The protagonist is wholly un-compelling. The side characters (an ice skater/stripper and a cook/racist comedian) are uninteresting, mildly offensive, and a general waste of time. The love interest is just a bit creepy, and not just because he's waay too old for her.
Recommended for people intent on watching all 80s dance movies, no matter how poorly made they are.
Content notes: Lots of filthy cussing and some racist language, some partial nudity, soily perverts acting pervy, one brief fight scene.
Medium (2005)
If James Patterson Had Written a Lifetime Network Original Movie...
An emotionally juvenile housewife with psychic abilities works part-time with a district attorney and a detective in Arizona while leaning on her ridiculously tolerant husband and raising her, also psychic, daughters.
The interesting thing about this show is that it often seems to be a playground for some unusual lighting and editing, and homages to known film styles/genres. Unfortunately, this is counterbalanced by an abuse of shaky camera technique that probably causes motion sickness in some viewers during close-ups (I just find it irritating and unnecessary). The crimes are usually gory and described in great detail, but it doesn't quite reach the point of what the TV Tropes wiki calls "torture porn" . . . most of the time. The villains are usually serial-somethings, although the protagonist goes out of her way to catch a few innocent people (self defense cases, etc.) as well. There are a few interesting time travel/what if episodes too. The protagonist spends most of her time acting out and getting insulted when others become offended. The protagonist's husband is the the resident keeper of the mad house, but basically almost seems like an abused spouse for all he has to put up with. The protagonist spends most of her time acting out and getting insulted when others become offended - granted, they make a pretty solid argument for why a psychic might be mentally unstable. By the way, don't watch the final episode if you don't want to be horribly depressed.
Recommended for: People who like Law & Order SVU
Content notes: overly violent and crude for young'uns, sometimes contains extreme verbal/psychological violence. It's a pretty sick show.
Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927)
Minor Technical Leaps Does Not a Good Film Make
An emotionally unstable country man struggles with the choice between his mistress from the city and his innocent country family.
The main problem I had with this film is that it's unintentionally funny when it's trying not to be and unintentionally disturbing when it's trying to be cute or funny. I can actually imagine people acting the way the characters in this film do, but that doesn't mean it's worth putting into a movie. This is a bit of a spoiler, but having a character who almost murdered his wife chase her up a hill yelling "Don't be afraid of me!" is more ironically funny than it is pathos invoking. The early use of a semi-synch soundtrack is interesting and the lantern scene near the end is pretty, but it's not worth the suffering you'll endure if you dislike poorly written/directed films. In short, this movie set the precedent for Oscar winners being the worst movies made each year.
I'd recommended this for people who like Citizen Kane for its heavy handed writing and self- indulgent directing/mise-en-scene.
Content Notes: It's super cheesy, but the male lead is pretty violent and loony (e.g., his propensity for trying to kill women) so use your own judgment when it comes to young viewers.
Saved! (2004)
Don't get peer pressured into watching this movie
A catholic girl tries to turn her homosexual boyfriend heterosexual by going against her religious belief in chastity, but doesn't use protection and gets pregnant. Social stress and outsiderness ensues.
This movie tries to be trendy and cute to force a point, and it doesn't work. The problems with the screen writing aren't un-fixable, but they are pronounced. Namely, too many internal contradictions and way too much preachy rhetoric (which is ironic, really). Firstly, in the beginning, the protagonist VO narrates that she's so pious that she tries to commit suicide to "be with the angels" like her dead father. Isn't suicide supposed to be a mortal sin? According to canon, she'd be with the fallen angels. Secondly, the protagonist then 'fornicates' with a guy outside of marriage - also supposedly a pretty big sin. Thirdly, the only Jew is portrayed as a complete a-hole who smokes (as a social protest?). Third-and-a-half-ly: smoking is portrayed as a cool, rebellious thing. Fourthly, the film repeated the creepy teen movie trope of the parent of the protagonist dating the parent of the protagonist's love interest (smacking of incest much?). As more minor writing flaws, they have the snotty girl do outlandishly criminal things as a reaction to a prank in which she wasn't even identified by name. Illogical. She also has a final meltdown later on after what seems like very little provocation. Also, the final preachy speech by the protagonist & friends at the end tries to make the Pleasantville argument (that attempting to live up to any ideal is wrong because everyone is just too 'different') seem sensible. The problem is that this rather weak argument essentially excuses anything, yet surely all actions and behaviors can't be part of the vast 'moral gray area.' Anyway, I wish I could have those 92 minutes back.
If you still must watch, I'd recommend it for fans of the show Glee; one of the most offensively -ist shows on TV.
Content notes: Contains quite a bit of swearing, some crude language.
Fever Pitch (2005)
Not bad. I was actually surprised to learn this was a Farrelly brothers movie.
It's rare, nowadays, to find a romantic comedy that isn't incredibly disgusting in short doses throughout the entire movie (eg. Big Fat Greek wedding; Me, Myself & Irene). There were only a couple of unnecessarily demented jokes in this movie, nothing unpalatably profane. All around, it was a cute movie with likable characters. I thought the ending was a little abrupt. It feels like they should have ended it at the world series for a real bang up finish. The acting left a little to be desired, but was made up for by the pace of the story. If I'd known it was a Farrelly brothers movie I would have assumed it to be a stomach turning piece of garbage and not watched it, but it seems that even they are capable of accidentally making an okay movie. Good for them, I hope they pull their heads out the rest of the way and start consistently making good films.
Starship Troopers (1997)
Big budget Drive in movie?
You know those movies USA network used to show at three in the morning where a group of nude go-go cage dancers must save the world from aliens armed only with their Barbarella like skills? Cross that with Beverly hills 90210 and you have Starship Troopers. Not since Doomsday Machine (1972) have I so expected to see a man with a furry pink jacket and a handlebar moustache arrive on the scene. Okay, maybe it doesn't quite go that far, but this is the first movie in more than ten years that I couldn't bring myself to finish. Wooden, uncreative writing, equally stiff acting, even bad satirical propaganda. I have nothing good to say about this movie. It's campy, but not in a good way.
Robinson Crusoe on Mars (1964)
One of the best science fiction films of all time.
Pretty well acted, quite well staged, incredibly well written, and (at the time) scientifically accurate; who could ask for more? 2010 is the only film that has even come close since this was made, it's that good. The writing is so believable (how he finds water and food, the reason he's able to ration his oxygen supply, his use of available knowledge), it makes the viewer wonder why no-one is making films like this now.
The strange thing is just how many relatively well thought out science fiction films were made around the same time; The Time Machine (1960), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), and First Men in the Moon (1964). Don't get me wrong, I like "sci-fi" films that cause corn and cheese to pour from the screen as much as anyone (The Brain from Planet Arous (1957), Earth vs. the Flying Saucers (1956) ), but once in a while it's nice to see a real science fiction movie.
The only small thing I might complain about is how he finds an oxygen supply, but I think that can be excused because of the integrity of the rest of the film. Don't even bother renting it, just buy it.
Finding Nemo (2003)
My God! This is NOT a children's movie!
The average viewing public must be extraordinarily callous these days not to at least be a little shocked by the movie's content. This film has the emotional elements of a holocaust film with overtones of horror film. They should have named it "instant nightmare in a film can". This is, by far, the most emotionally brutal cartoon I have ever seen and the fact that it was marketed as a kids movie is unbelievable! The movie begins when an entire family of fish (with the exception of the father and one of his sons) is slaughtered by what looks like a barracuda. When the son (Nemo) goes on a school field trip, he almost does something stupid because of peer pressure. His father then threatens to take him out of school, to which Nemo replies by doing the something markedly stupider out of spite, resulting in his being captured by a diver and taken away in a boat. The father spends the rest of the movie following the direction the boat went when it disappeared. During his journey the father finds another fish with which he can have emotional issues and repeatedly encounters creatures that are introduced in a horrific enough fashion so that it probably kept hundreds of children's beds wet for weeks after the film's premier. The combination of the odious, depressing characters and the slasher-film style directing/music that most of the film seems to possess culminates in producing wastebasket fodder even more potently un-watchable than The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005).
Vanilla Sky (2001)
Predictable, boring, and violent.
Even if I could get past the horrible acting done by all the actors and actresses, except for Timothy Spall and the actor playing the tech support guy, I still couldn't get past the fact that the audience is brow-beaten with 'subtle hints' about the not at all surprizing ending throughout the entire movie. The general feeling that the film was attempting to accomplish (becoming enveloped by nightmare or insanity) was presented with elements from such flimsy, shallow movies as Blowup (1966) and The Silence of the Lambs (1991). The director should have taken his cues from such peers as Terry Gilliam, Federico Fellini, and Milos Forman. Even if the odious directing and the wooden acting didn't offend me the dialogue would still be effusive drivel whose only noticeable purpose is to prolong the length of the piece. I'm sure you can guess what I think it's a piece of.
Mr. Bean's Holiday (2007)
Close...but not quite.
Let me just start off by saying that he shouldn't have re-used old jokes from the show yet again. Beyond that, the first part of the movie (before he meets the boy) was actually entertaining and managed to keep a consistent feel with the character. The middle of the movie, although beautifully shot in classical European fashion, seemed to alternate between letting Mr. Bean be funny and attempting to hurry through the plot in such a way that any intended humorous moments seem forced; I am referring to such scenes as where Mr. Bean was trying to entertain the boy on the train with gags that were not only severely re-used, but also inappropriate for that situation or the scene where he was doing his odd form of busking, that concept had already been done in a much sillier fashion on the television program. After the first stretch of scenes with the boy, Mr. Bean is back on his own for a while, but despite a marked improvement for the remainder of the movie, doesn't seem to regain his full potential for being silly- 'though I suspect this is due to the limited time allotment given for a feature length film. They do manage to introduce a female character in a somewhat graceful fashion, a thing which is rare in comedies, and avoid doing anything really dumb with her.
I occasionally wondered why his teddy bear made no appearance, but I suppose that after his luggage left him so did the aforementioned bear.
Lastly I would just say that this is waaay better than the first movie. It has a much more European feel, it has more humor, less of the jokes are old re-used ones, Mr.Bean isn't forced to talk much, and (aside from the first encounter with the boy) is much more up beat. I hope this isn't really the last we'll see of Mr Bean movies, they're just starting to get good. As for the ending, it was strangely edited, but I liked it.
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Not entirely forgettable, better than I thought it would be.
The very first you'll notice is that the director is madly in love with Hitchcock, from the overly bouncy shot of the old man running in the first scene, to the constant close-ups of everything (even chase scenes), all the way to the shot of blood swirling down a drain. Even the basic meter of the movie is much like the later works of Hitchcock. I wouldn't complain about the acting, it's really kind of interesting to see this kind of movie done by a director and cast that one thinks of as the emotional equivalent of comfort food (porridge, hot cocoa, etc...).
The basic concept of the plot is very reminiscent of several science fiction stories (which is why I forgive the out-of-place computer graphics used to display Dr. langdon's thoughts) and is a refreshing departure from rather more monotonously mundane or emotionally disgusting story-lines that choke the entertainment industry. Having said that, however, I must point out that there is quite a bit of unnecessary material such as the overabundance of scenes where the crazy monk stands around naked and/or beating himself, we can see their makeup department has a talent for realistic wounds, but we don't need that much time to appreciate it. Then there's the constant barrage of hints, making the entire plot known to the audience and leaving no surprises to look forward to. it just isn't as much fun if you already have all of the important story points handed to you by a careless camera shot, a character blurting out something that gives away the end when your only part way through, or a "good guy" that seems just a little too naive to actually be a good guy. Lastly, I found the all of the flashbacks and personal phobias unhelpful, uninspired, and unconvincingly portrayed. Also they never did explain what that ritual was that frightened Sophie as a little girl.
I recommend that you come in just about when they introduce Ian McKellen's character (a scene entitled "Seeking Sanctuary" and watch from then on, you'll miss the boring stuff and find that it actually manages to be an entertaining movie.