Reviews

This film couldn't and wouldn't have been made in any other time that the 2020s. People 20 years ago wouldn't know what to make of it or even understand it. That's a sad truth about the times we live in.

Bredan Fraser is very good as is the entire cast. It's a competently made film. But how are we able to sympathize with the protagonist?

He's a failure in all aspects of life, He's abandoned his family. He's a shameless glutton. He weighs so much that he's house bound. While one might feel bad for the suffering he's brought on himself, are we not to judge him and judge him harshly? Are we really meant to share and admire his "redemption"?

I just can't. Maybe that's my problem, but I doubt I'm alone. We live in a time where people aren't to be judged or criticized in any way no matter what they've done. They deserve our empathy. And acceptance. Our obese protagonist must be some sort of victim. What other explanation could there be?

In a scent late in the film, he implores his students to write something honest. One student writes something to the effect that 'I'm worried my life will be boring'. Charlie is pleased with the student's candor, This film is gaslighting its audience. So meta 2022!

Brigette Bako in 1992 was one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. She's a decent actress as well but this script is a dud. I've watched film twice and I still can't figure out why the main character is suicidal. We see glimpses of erratic behavior, but it doesn't add up.

David Duchovny is competent as usual but again very little to work with. The rest of the cast is mediocre.

Briggete Bako deserved a much better career, she was better than the typical 90's B movie sex pots. She has an elegance about her that could've been used to better effect by better directors and better scripts. Too bad.

You are meant to love this film. Its what the mainstream film critic class tells you should do. In reality, this film is long and boring, its a chore to watch the entire thing. Its heavily steeped in the Baby Boom ethos, which is uninteresting to anyone under age 45.

There are so many "great filmmakers" who are cotemporaries of Spielberg it makes one wonder if any of them are that special. Aside from "Schiedler's List" which was a masterpiece, Spielberg has been hit or miss for decades now. Is a film that celebrates his entire life in the way this does really merited or compelling in 2023? Not really.

Many of events in this film are strange and hard to understand. The antisemitism, which one could see coming from frame one falls flat, I realize these are anecdotes of Spielberg, but there is no context to explain. There was antisemitism in American life in the 50s and 60s and that's unfortunate, but let's be clear, Jewish kids from well to do families were among the most privileged youngsters of the last 60 years.

This film smacks of Oscar Bait and no doubt there would be nominations. I won't recommend this to anyone.

Oh wait, there were cameras in 1996! Yet, this incredible event, witnesses by dozens including military and government officials couldn't be verified to even the slightest effect. The mysterious bacteria than killed a man who had carried a "creature" also couldn't be documented.

This is like a broken record, all sorts of eyewitness accounts, but zero physical proof. This documentary is a big fat nothing burger. Nothing new whatsoever. Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable, especially form 28 years ago. They are hearsay. Events of mass delusion are not uncommon, especially when individuals are seeking attention or are desperate to see something that confirms their biases.

The fact that the eyewitness reports from 28 years ago vary wildly is enough to dismiss this entirely. One dude says in was cigar share, another says it was a saucer that was rotating.

Save your money, there is nothing new or compelling here.

I've never seen such petulant spoiled- rotten kids. The world is ending, and they scream and whine about every little detail. The older boy is the worst, he wants to fight the invaders...who have forcefields that can block ballistic missiles. These kids need a good spanking.

The Martians devouring those brats and spraying their remains all over the place would've redeemed this mediocre effort.

Aliens bury their ships underground. I'd like to know who came up with that nonsense. Like Humans who build tunnels and huge mines would never stumble on to these gigantic tripod machines. Spielberg what were you thinking?

I hesitate to call synth pop music. But you have to hand it to Depeche Mode, they were brilliant at marketing their image. Their music is so derivative of earlier acts its pathetic. The outfits and hairstyles the bus kids had belong in the Smithsonian.

The late 80s were a fascinating time in pop music. Hairbands and New Wave acts were getting tired. The scene was stale. Conditions were ripe for something new. This void was filled by grunge/alterative acts like Janes' Addiction, Nirvana, etc.

The DM show at the Rose Bowl was the last hurrah for the vapid culture of the 80s. Five years later they wouldn't have drawn a fraction of that Rose Bowl crowd.

The music in this doc is dreary and dull. The bus kids are hilarious so its not a total disaster.

This is a fine film, but the story isn't told correctly, or more to the point, it tells one story but concludes with the climax of another, different story. The Mark Schutz's time at Foxcatcher began in the mid-80s and ended after the Souel Olympics of 1988. After that, Mark is no longer relevant to the narrative.

The story of Dave Schulz at Foxcatcher mainly takes place in the 90s. In fact, his murder in. 1996 took place 8 years after the main story of the film. 8 years are glossed over. Dave Schulz's murder had nothing to do with Mark. What went on in those missing years? The film tells us nothing about it. This is a problem for otherwise fine effort.

The cast is outstanding and Carel shines, but if you watch ESPN's fine 30 for 30 documentary about the Foxcatcher years you will see that DuPont the man isn't accurately captured in this film. The real DuPont was a lanky, thin man who actually smiled a lot. He had a goofiness about him that is nonexistent in Carel's stark portrayal. Ruffalo and Tatum do fine work even though they are nowhere near the physical specimens the Schultz brothers were.

I still recommend this film for its psychological study of a man-child like Dupont and how dysfunctional the lives of heirs to great fortunes usually become.

This film would have worked better if the narrative was linear and there was at least some character development. We know nothing about these people other than the small details given in the various retelling of events. We are meant to fill in the blanks. It's really a shame because this has cast any director would dream of.

The non-linear telling of the robbery and its aftermath comes off as more of a gimmick than edgy filmmaking. It's a compelling crime drama and a parable about greed, insecurity and addiction. But it could have been much better.

Albert Finney stands out as does Marisa Tomei. This isn't one of Hoffman's better roles. He was already looking pasty and bloated by this time and his better work was behind him.

This movie is awful by any objective measure. The script is aimless and sloppy, like a first draft from a freshman film student. The focus of the narrative is unclear, is it about race riots? Or is it about mafia thugs run amok, or is it about Tony Soprano's formative years? It doesn't really give any sort of treatment to any of it.

We see gimmicks like violent and brutal torture and killing, but its just gratuitous. The performances aren't good mainly because there's so little to work with. They were featuring an old and dying Ray Liotta with is upsetting to watch.

So, the critics should pan this right? Not really, critics today are no longer interested in the craft of filmmaking.

This is just mediocre. In fact, when I watched it, I thought it was some other director ripping off Linklater. This is truly a B minus effort.

The budget for this must have been tight, having a rundown, abandoned motel being passed off as a dormitory. There is really no campus that we can see. One would think an Oscar nominated writer/director could muster up some funds to do it right. Production value is that of a straight to video teen comedy.

I went to college in the early 1980s and this comes off as lacking authenticity. The jock banter.is just annoying. The performances are uninspired.

Dazed and Confused worked where this fails.

John Belushi didn't have a terrible childhood, he was never abused or neglected. He was a good student from a good family. But this documentary is full of excuses for reasons he had to feel despair. The relationship with his family wasn't ideal, he felt lonely sometimes, etc.

What really happened to John Belushi? Fame and wealth came on him suddenly he couldn't come to terms with it. This at a time when hard drugs were everywhere. So, he became a drug addict and that became the source for his despair, nothing from his youth or family background. Bouncing back and forth from heavy drug use to sobriety is why he was hopeless.

I see what the filmmakers were going for, and its ambitious. Unfortunately, it seems this final product wasn't edited to any effect.

There is simply way too much going on to the point where its impossible to follow. There's nothing clever or nuanced going over people's heads, the premises and situations presented simply don't support the film's conclusions.

It's a shame because, with some cutting and a lot of editing the film might have worked. This isn't a mindless woke movie, there is something there. The subtle unconscious racism at elite colleges and universities is real. How big of a problem is it? That's up to the in individual.

A bunch of white college kids putting on black face at a party is certainly in bad taste, but it is national catastrophe? Probably not.

This film really misses the mark. It's tries to set up circumstances in a way that supports its conclusions, but its done incorrectly.

Yes, hit and run is a terrible felony offense in its own right, but in this case, there are mitigating circumstances. If you as a parent allow your 10-year old child play by the side of a busy road at night, are you not partly culpable? The answer is yes.

The way the Pheonix character behaves is the way NOT to grieve. Is it because he knows he's partly to blame? I don't know, but being obsessed with catching the :killer" while your family is suffering is unproductive.

Finally, if the Ruffalo character has stayed at the scene, would he even go to jail? Probably not and then the Phoenix character would feel even worse, so there's irony in the hit and run.

The weird thing about Joaquin Pheonix, he's great when playing a crazy person, but when he plays a regular guy, he's dreary and unsympathetic.

I don't see why this movie was made at all. This story has been told ad nauseum. It's just a clumsy rehash of well-worn ground. The Bush Administration fudged the evidence to justify a il-considered war.

We've known this far a decade and a half.

Lyndsey Fonseca is attractive but just not believable in this role. It calls for a lot more courage and passion. If you are going to play an escort/sex worker in a movie about an escort, you need to show and give a lot more of yourself. Fonseca is like a scared teenager rather than a character to be reckoned with.

This is unfortunate because the project had potential.

This a particularly dreary Rom Com from the days of endless awful Rom Coms. The lead/writer is pathetic, its like everyone feels sorry for him. Otherwise, this is the sort of project agents get their struggling has been clients, like Chevy Chase, Winona Ryder, Sean Astin, etc.,

Was this a tax write-off?

I've loved this film since its first run in theaters. Largely panned by critics and somewhat of a box office bomb, this film has been misunderstood from day one.

At face value, its t*ts and *ss and violence. I suppose the majority of viewers either loved it or despised it at that level. No doubt, knee jerk feminists were loud and strident haters. Seeing it as exploitation. I believe there is more nuance to 'Sucker Punch'.

It's more of a comment on how girls and young women are manipulated sexually and emotionally. You have to look a bit deeper past the in-your-face sex and violence. Most viewers won't invest themselves enough to see past this which is a bit sad.

Aussie actresses' Emma Browning and Abbie Cornish are exceptional as is Jena Malone. The rest of the cast is adequate.

The dream sequences are sublime, and the soundtrack is simply outstanding. These are some of the greatest songs sever recorded. I would rate this as one of the best soundtracks of the last 20 years.

Gretchen Mol's treatment of Bettie Page is quite compelling. She nails the role and the way plays to the cameras during photo shoots is practically perfect.

Overall, the film lacks in many ways but Mol's performance makes this a worthwhile watch.

Knowing a lot about the late-70s early 80s LA Punk music, I did a lot of cringing during this documentary. The Go-Go's didn't have much if any punk credibility. They were laughed at, spit on, etc., and it wasn't just "White Nationalist" skin heads, it was most in the punk scene. They might say it was misogynistic white men ridiculing them, but the fact was they weren't a good punk band, they were just the first all female act. That's it.

The Go-Go's were first and foremast a pop act that grew in fame with MTV in the early 80s. They were a gimmick act in the eyes of many, They weren't professional musicians, in fact, outside of Charlotte Caffey, they could barely play their instruments.

They did do a lot of drugs, so there's that. Belinda Carlisle's decades long coke habitat isn't even mentioned here. I have the feeling that many things were left out in this revisionist documentary.

So, they were the first all female band that actually wrote and performed their own songs. That's at least something. They didn't make a lot of music, but I'll say one thing in their favor, there are worse acts in the Rock and Roll HoF.

Wayne Williams was absolutely guilty. He was a serial killer and a pathological narcissist. A key fact not even raised in this biased "journalism", the killings stopped immediately after Wayne Williams was arrested. Why leave that out? Why was Wayne Williams on the bridge, driving slowly at 3:30 AM just after a loud splash was heard? This being a bridge where bodies where known to have been dropped from. What in the world was he doing there?

I don't need to list the mountain of circumstantial evidence against Wayne Williams, suffice it to say, if Wayne Williams were white this would have been a cut and dry. Nobody would have given it a second thought.

What HBO is trying to do here is to make this a racial issue 40 year after the fact. The Atlanta politicians are trying to do the same thing. The fact that the Atlanta child killer was an African American was and still is too much for these people to handle. Everything must be viewed through a prism of race. Of course, the KKK is brought into the equation even though there is no proof.

Wayne Williams has been elevated to a celebrity in prison, this is EXACTLY what he wanted. That's who he is. He knows damn well he's guilty and that he'll never see the light of day.

The fact that most African Americans believe William's is innocent, and that the government was sweeping the issue under the rug is profoundly sad. We are now living in a country where people have their own alternate views of history. A Nation can't go forward with beliefs like this

Burn in Hell Wayne Williams, you murdered dozens of children and now you are enjoying the attention it brought you. I can't think of a more evil human than WW.

Directors and Producers have a chance to really make a mark with the right casting choices in supporting roles. In this film, its hit or miss and it drags the film down.

The cast is highly competent with teh exception of Dakota Johnson and teh Aussie muscle boy. This is just gutless. There are so many deserving, little known talents that can make or break a film. Her, whoever made the casting choices screwed up with the safe, predictable choices. If they can get a few more $s by casting a heartthrob, they'll do it.

Hollywood is in deep trouble.

Courtney Love was a monster, the extent to which wasn't truly known in 1996. Knowing every thing we know about her, I can't stand to watch her and she ruins this film.

I observed that most of the negative reviews of this production were from before the series actually played out. That's just sad.

There are many interesting concepts presented in this series. The idea that we have met the aliens and they are us from the future is profound and an idea that many scientists have discussed. This production is well done all around, fine cast, compelling characters, competent writing. We don't get much in the way of FX, but tis just enough. The discussion of quantum physics is thoughtful as well as useful.

The narrative is fascinating in the best tradition of the great Science Fiction authors of the past, where its more about the substance than flashy CGI. Its a take on time travel and breaking the loop. That said, it stretches believability just a little bit too much in the end. Questions and issues existential to the plot are left unanswered or not logically explained That's why this is a very good, not great production.

I would recommend this series to any fan of real Science Fiction.