Change Your Image
edog101
Reviews
The Mandalorian: Chapter 4: Sanctuary (2019)
Very childish
This episode was horribly cheesy and contrived. I found myself rolling my eyes a lot.
Venom (2018)
Underrated
What can I say? I went in expecting it to suck and ended up thoroughly enjoying it. Don't write this one off.
World War Z (2013)
I liked it
I'm surprised by all of the ridiculously harsh reviews, so often paired with 1 star votes, which I view as absurd. I'm sorry, no matter how bad this film is, it's a far cry from Johnny Mnenomic (and that piece of refuse has an average score of 5.3). Equally amazing is the percentage of reviewers who have been compelled to opine that 28 Days Later is a better film. Personally, I wasn't especially impressed with 28 Days Later, which was full of scenes where I found it especially difficult to suspend my disbelief. For example, there was one ridiculous scene in 28 Days Later, I recall, in which the protagonist et al, while trying to escape a mob of angry zombies, manage to drive over a pile of vehicles in a VW Beetle or some other compact car. So I guess my question is, why are these 28 Days Later fans nitpicking World War Z? Perhaps the gore factor wasn't high enough. Perhaps expectations were too high. Personally, it was nice to see a zombie movie where the director decided not to titillate our morbid curiosity with scenes of gruesome cannibalism. I also thought the special effects were brilliantly done, especially the scenes that took place in Jerusalem. Overall, I felt World War Z was a satisfying, fairly epic, action movie. Perhaps the people who hated it were looking for more horror--another Dawn of the Dead (reboot). I really do think the film, when viewed on its merits, warrants the current 7.2 rating on IMDb. Just wanted to make the point that WWZ is hardly as bad as some people are saying it is. It's actually pretty solid and I doubt you'll be bored watching it.
Limitless (2011)
Swiss cheese
It's impossible for me to discuss this film without revealing spoilers, so be warned. It's entertaining enough to warrant a 6/10, and if you can suspend your disbelief and are only looking for fairly vapid, escapist entertainment, you'll find enough of it here to serve your purposes.
But, believe me, if you have half a brain, you won't be able to escape some terribly nagging questions revealing super-massive black holes in this film's plot. For example, you may find yourself wondering why the protagonist, of all people, would be the first one to iron out the kinks of the drug. The drug, after all, was originally developed by a multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical company--with apparently no ambitious drug-popping employees who might also figure out how to properly calibrate the drug themselves. This question begs others, which will in turn beg yet more. Yes, myriad contrivances will occur to you after watching the film, but only for perhaps five minutes, before you decide to forget about the whole thing and ponder something more interesting, appreciating for one last moment the fact that the film managed to adequately distract you for the previous hour and half.
The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) (2011)
Shame and Disgust
Perhaps if emotional impact alone is the basis for awarding stars, I should afford Human Centipede II more stars than the one I gave it (zero stars were unavailable). But I simply cannot engage in that form of moral gymnastics today. I feel nothing but shame and disgust after having watched this film. I take little solace in the fact that I did not actually pay to rent it--I can thank a friend for that--because I still feel as though I have participated in something so awful, so nihilistic and vile, that I fear for humanity itself. I am not here to pass moral judgment. I do not blame the director, Tom Six, for making the film any more than I blame myself for viewing the film he made. Does the film classify as obscenity? Does it contain any value, any artistic merit? Perhaps, in that it has affected me deeply enough to compel me write a review--or rather, a warning--something I rarely do. I feel the need to cleanse my soul, as though warning others will somehow provide me with some form of ethical catharsis. Regardless of what I write, however, I still feel hollow inside, knowing that this film was created with great deliberation and forethought by thinking, breathing human beings--people who chose to participate in its creation just as I chose to watch it.
State of Grace (1990)
Neo Noire Epic
Just caught this on television and was so impressed with the film I felt compelled to write a review. I'm positive we would have heard much more about this film if it hadn't been released at the same time as Goodfellas. Other users have already lauded the superlative performances by Oldman, Penn, and Harris, so I'll save myself the trouble. Like any great film those behind the camera deserve as much credit as the actors on screen.
The direction by Phil Joanou is phenomenal. I missed the opening credits, and throughout the film I had the feeling I was watching an overlooked DePalma masterpiece. I was wrong, but if you've seen The Untouchables or Carlito's Way, I think you'll see where I was coming from. Perhaps this is partially due to what might be the finest aspect of the film--the incredible score by Ennio Morricone (who also wrote the Untouchables score).
BEGIN SPOILER
One criticism of the film I have seen on this message board concerns the climactic gun fight at the end. Some argue that the scene is contrived. I would argue that a careful viewing reveals deeply rooted theological themes questioning the nature of existence and the divine (hence Terry Noonan's monologue referencing a "state of grace" as an idea, versus the ugly reality of earthly life). The slow motion gunfight at the end is juxtaposed with images of the simultaneously occurring St. Patrick's Day parade and associated Irish Catholic cultural imagery such as the four leaf clover. It occurred to me that what at first blush appears to be a contrived battle in which the hero prevails against all odds, is in fact a cinematic nod to divine intervention (and in that sense it is a deuce ex machina, and a contrivance--although in my mind, a forgivable one). Frankie Flannery fires shot after point blank shot at Noonan, each one of them missing. Noonan stands motionless as the bullets whiz by and does not return fire until Frankie runs out of bullets. Only then does Noonan fire a single bullet, which hits Frankie square between the eyes, killing him instantly. To me, this symbolizes a divine answer to Noonan's existential questions, as well as a nod to the biblical maxim "I am my brother's keeper" (Book of Genesis)--which can be applied with equal force to Frankie, who is punished for committing fratricide, or Noonan, who is saved for seeking retribution on behalf of Jackie, his murdered friend and putative brother.
I should mention that I am pretty much an agnostic bordering on atheist, so personal feelings about the merits of religion or the existence of god played no part in my assessment of the film and what I view to be its theologically inspired themes.
Le scaphandre et le papillon (2007)
Beautifully Directed Lies - This Film is Pure Libel
A film professing to be based upon a true story should stay true to the story. This one does not. I was so moved by the film after watching it last night, I decided to do some research on Jean-Dominique Bauby. And what did I discover? The truth is, the filmmakers took some serious liberties with the truth, portraying Mr. Bauby's girlfriend as a narcissistic flake who couldn't bring herself to visit her paralyzed lover, while at the same time glorifying the mother of his children as the steadfast, dutiful companion who remained loyal despite Bauby's love for another woman. In fact, the opposite is true. Bauby's girlfriend was constantly by his side, while the mother of his children visited him perhaps three or four times in total. She was traveling with her boyfriend in America when Bauby died in his girlfriend's arms.
The real story, as represented in the book and by Bauby's friends, was needlessly altered by the filmmakers. One can only imagine the very real pain and harm the filmmakers have caused to the people who were there for Bauby during his final years. The liberties taken are libel, no doubt about it, and it is a testament to the integrity of the real heroine, Florence, that she has not sued over the abhorrent way in which she is portrayed by this piece of pointlessly subversive garbage.
Furthermore, Bauby never asked to die--not once. His speech therapist apparently refused to see the film after reading the lies in the script. The filmmakers apparently have respect neither for the living, nor the dead.
I feel cheated by this film. In fact, I feel sick to my stomach. The real story is just as interesting, and equally inspiring--if not more so. Knowing the truth about this film gives one a sense for why collective society is mistaken about so many things. We can thank the arrogance of the entertainment industry--which now includes the news networks--for our ignorance. We must be diligent in our skepticism, and tenacious in our pursuit of the truth. Reality is the only source of true wisdom and understanding.
I wish others felt as offended by this film as I do. Disgusting and beneath contempt.