Change Your Image
TheEveningSoother
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Fall of the House of Usher (2023)
Quintessentially Edgar.
In my opinion, polarising creations are always fascinating, and generally I don't think ill of people who happen to dislike what I enjoy very much. I'm not particularly fond of being meta in my reviews either, but I feel that in the case of "The Fall of the House of Usher" something needs to be said on this matter.
I'm not going to question personal taste when it comes to the technical aspects of this show, such as acting, directing, and production value. Personally, I think is an excellent TV series graced by some seriously spectacular money shots (the rave party's abrupt ending comes to mind), but that's just my take.
The hill I'm ready to die on is about whether or not Flanagan did justice to Poe's work, and I'm afraid I won't be very forgiving to whoever says he didn't.
Poe didn't just write Gothic literature, he added heavy personal touches to it that would eventually become genre-defying, and ultimately, the most iconic aspects of his work. If you ask Chat GPT to write like Poe, that's what you'll get.
But whilst extremely picturesque and entertaining - and tempting, from a Production's pov (the costumes, the Victorian gloomy setting, the riddles, it's a guaranteed spectacle) - those elements are the proverbial arabesques on top of something infinitely more substantial.
The deep psychological implications of his work is what makes Poe a genius, and not just a good writer. The man described illnesses and neuro-divergences centuries before there was even a name for them. He delved in universal fears and anxieties that not only have transcended his time, they couldn't be more relevant today: the unhealthy approach toward death, living in an alienating society that has lost its human touch, feeling the constant pressure of uncertainty.
The core of Poe's work is bleak and modern, and Flanagan captured it to perfection with "The Fall of the House of Usher". Above the must-have iconic references, he resisted the easy road of a shallow costume piece, and focused his script to what's underneath instead. I, for once, can't praise him enough for it.
The only reservation I may have with this TV series is about the title's choice, which may have mislead some spectator to believe that this was going to be an adaptation of the eponymous short novel instead of a broad homage to Poe's greatest hits.
Other than that, as a longtime fan of Poe's work, I won't shy from stating that "The Fall of the House of Usher" is storytelling at its best, and nothing short of one of the most quintessential Poe-esque piece of content in existence.
Asvins (2023)
A film that SUCKS with the power of a thousand vacuum cleaners.
I felt reluctant to review this film at first, because whilst I'm a cinephile with a good knowledge of most of the major cinema industries (European, American, East Asian, Australian), I'm very lacking when it comes to Indian films.
I'm trying my best to fill the gap, which was one of the reasons why I decided to watch this film in the first place (the other is my passion for the horror genre), but after finding "Asvins" absolutely dreadful, I was afraid I didn't have the necessary cultural tools to express an educated opinion about it.
I got some of my confidence back after seeing that most of the reviews in here aren't from western people, and they all agree on the fact that this film is atrocious. It isn't a cultural thing then, "Asvins" objectively SUCKS with the power of a thousand vacuum cleaners.
But first, the good things that spared this film from receiving a ONE star review from yours truly: It starts promising, with a charming animated sequence that digs deep into the Indian lore to create the premise for the plot. I found it delightful and fresh. And I also liked the directorial choice of differentiate the various "planes of existence" shown in the film through the use of different coloured filters. Simple but effective.
And that's all the good news I can give you, I'm afraid. The rest is simply unwatchable: From the lethargic pace to the ridiculous acting, it's a cliche-fest of massive proportions where not much really happens.
To add insult to injury, Tarun Teja Mallareddy has also decided to treats his audience as simpletons by repeating over and over throughout the film the few relevant points of an otherwise filler plot; whilst using all the possible means to do so (storyboards, exposition dumps, voice-overs) BUT by showing and not telling.
Cinema's number one rule isn't good enough for Tarun, apparently. And that could explain why his film isn't good enough for pretty much anything or anyone. AVOID like the plague.
Smile (2022)
...and don't forget to smile! :)
It's undeniable that "Smile" is one of the best horror films of 2022.
Not only it has all its technical aspects in check (cinematography, acting, editing, and so forth), it's mindful when it comes to its plot, and it shows insight and structure toward its chosen core: Psychological Trauma.
It's a perfectly enjoyable film as is, definitively above average (and not only for its genre), so I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it.
But I can't help to mourn a bit the masterpiece it could have been, if only Parker Finn had decided to dig a little bit deeper with its metaphor, and to get inspiration from the essence of "It Follows" instead of grabbing its most superficial aspects.
Those two films show glaring similarities on the surface, but also crucial differences, the strongest one being the "entity": In "It Follows" it becomes an extremely rare example of a truly and utterly unavoidable evil, whilst in "Smile" it gets to win only because its plot armour allows it to.
For this very reason I find "Smile"'s ending lacking, and in light of the heavy metaphoric elements in the film, downright questionable.
It's pretty straightforward that the "entity" is an embodiment of trauma, and for a good chunk of the film it acts accordingly: it haunts its preys, it drags them in isolation and alienation, it can become generational, and it spreads on whoever lays eyes on it.
But going forward the metaphor gets muddy, and instead of adding meaning to it, the film follows the very formulaic horror trope of "save yourself from evil by spreading it".
I think we can all agree that whilst is unfortunately common to hear about victims of trauma inflicting trauma to others, nobody has ever saved themselves from their inner pain by spreading more of it around.
"Smile" is smart enough to introduce the topic with sensitivity, but it fails to find an equally insightful resolution to the issue. Which, in my opinion, would have been "The Babadook" ending.
The "entity" should have been be unbeatable (and it wasn't: there's one very easy and particularly horrible way to get rid of it without hurting others, but I was very relieved the film didn't go there. Not the message you want to spread, ffs), because there is no beating trauma.
But there's coping with it, and growing stronger despite of it. And as a therapist, our Dr. Rose should had known that better than most.
Run Rabbit Run (2023)
Weir Peter? I hardly know her!
Unlike this film, I won't go beating around the bush and I'll tell you straight away the problem I have with it: The very last scene.
Previously said scene, we had 100 minutes of an half-cooked plot that fails miserably at being "The Babadook", and although Sarah Snook gives her all and the cinematography is competent, both the story and the characters are somehow too shallow and yet too convoluted to function. Not an easy perfect storm of *meh* to achieve - I'll give them that - but pretty much that's the only thing this film really nails.
Still, because of the aforementioned strong performances from Snook, and some moody scenes sprinkled here and there, I would have regarded this film as watchable. Fruitlessly slow and disappointing, sure, but not offensively bad.
Then, they decided to show their full-blown pretentiousness by closing the film with the renowned slow-mo scene from "Picnic at Hanging Rock".
Nope. Go home "Run Rabbit Run", you're drunk.
I understand the temptation, and the cult status that PAHR has, especially down-under. But if they really wanted to go there, they should have earned the privilege by building an eerie as hell, rock solid psychological horror; not a run-of-the-mill spooky flick with headless chickens as characters, and the inner depth of a puddle.
A Quiet Place Part II (2020)
It does the mash (it does the monster mash)
In my opinion, the main issue with the "A Quiet Place" franchise rest on the diabolical mix of a premise too stupid to be taken seriously, and the absolute tonal seriousness of the story.
Both the first film and this one would have worked well if they were either a silly monster flick, or a horror drama dipped in realism, but they ended up being an unholy mash of both.
Clearly, it wasn't done on purpose: if those
recurring (and dragged, tbh) scenes permeated with soft warm light and populated by characters doing something sentimental (and/or heartfelt)(and/or melancholic) tell us something, is that Krasinski clearly was aiming at a premium horror family drama.
So he has to thanks the lack of dept of his writing if his deep-felt universe also has strong elements straight outta the monster flick's realm.
It's hard to set apart this film from the first, because more than a sequel, is an appendix: A Quiet Place II mimics perfectly all the good (beautifully shot, well acted, great action/tension scenes) and the very bad (preposterous scenario, B-movie aliens, dumb plot devices, headless chickens as characters) of its precursor.
In term of plot, it does the barely minimum to kick the tin can down the road, and the few revelations in the aliens' lore are the final head-shots to an already extremely implausible setting.
Personally I enjoyed this one a tiny bit more than the first, because it has a very cool (although nonsensical) opening scene, and sizes down a little the drama in favour of action and tension.
In conclusion, this franchise is proof that neglecting the monsters in your films is bad juju: if your treat them as a afterthought because the serious stuff is all that matters, they WILL burn your top-shelf horror drama to the ground.
And no, not in a entertaining-to-watch sort of way.
De uskyldige (2021)
Potentially great. Ultimately, not really.
This film had the potential to be a real gem, in my opinion: The 9 and 10 stars reviews are not lying when they praise its well crafted moodiness, its somewhat fresh take of a not-so-fresh horror topic, its psychological (and social) undertones.
But for me, the indecisiveness of Mr. Vogt between a child-like POV and full-blown realism killed the film stone dead: In the best case scenario is owed to the dedication of maintaining that sense of eeriness and isolation at all cost; in the worst, to laziness.
Whichever the case may be, the audience ended up with:
1. A premise too outrageous to be plausible, and yet too unambiguously rooted in reality to be expressionist (I'm not a stickler for fully exposed plots, but the random presence of several "gifted" kids in the same block of flats is just ridiculous).
2. Dreadful actions which pays extremely vague consequences, if any (parents seems rather chill when faced by clear signs of abuse toward their autistic child; after two freaky murders in a row in the same area, still there is no presence of authorities in sight; in Norway corpses left to rot in summer don't smell, and little girls are unfazed by their pet disappearance).
3. The cat (to the reviewers who mocked the cries of outrage for that scene because "it's fake", I'd say that is also a horror trope old and lazy that doesn't belong in any relevant film that came out after the '90s unless is titled "John Wick". Using animal cruelty just to showcase the starting point of an escalation of violence is the most unimaginative trick in the book, and I gladly avoid films that relies on such trope. I would have done the same with this one, if they paid me the courtesy of a trigger warning).
At the end of the day, artistically speaking "The Innocents" is graced by a good atmosphere and some striking scenes, whilst plagued by the lack of a credible and full-fleshed structure.
Unfortunately, for me the former doesn't go anywhere near of balancing out the latter.
13 Minutes (2021)
Solid movie get unfairly bashed by wrong target audience
"13 Minutes" is nowhere near the 10/10 I gave it, but the appalling rating that many reviewers decided to dump on it needed some counterbalancing.
It's a solid drama that realistically would sits comfortably in the 7 area, if it wasn't for the fact that apparently a good chunk of its audience expected a 100% full blown disaster movie with dramatic undertones, whereas it's pretty much the other way around.
I can't really fault the movie for this misunderstanding, given that it doesn't try to trick the viewers in any way, and its tone and pace clearly belong to a drama piece right from the start.
The movie balances four intertwined story-lines on the eve of a massive tornado strike, and touches several controversial topics such as homosexuality, abortion, immigration, racism and social disparity with the right amount of sensitivity.
"13 Minutes" paces itself without dragging, keeps the characters and the story interesting, and when the tornado finally hits it truly comes out as a terrifying force of nature. As a matter of fact, I do appreciate disaster movies, and I won't forget this tornado any time soon.
Let's be clear, it's not a perfect movie: The end needed a bit more bite to really nail the message on the head, for instance. But all in all is a well crafted, well acted story that deserves a chance.
As long as you don't expect it to be "Twister", that is.