When it comes to ghosts and romance, I usually stay away. It can devolve into schlocky tropes and predictably. However, this movie was an absolute refreshing change of pace that I absolutely loved. There's an intricate story about dealing with trauma at the heart of the film, and the plot goes in numerous unexpected directions. It's cinematically gorgeous, the apartment set reminding me of a well done haunted house. Also the cast gives excellent performances all around, making you really connect with the characters and their experience. My only criticism is that the intricacy of the plot may be a little clearer on a second viewing. Overall, I really highly recommend this one to anyone looking for a ghost story that's not going to end where you think it will. Fantastic!
Reviews
8 Reviews
Poor Things
(2023)
I actually walked out
25 February 2024
I tried to watch this. The concept of an updated Frankenstein has so many possibilities, and this movie did well at BAFTA. There are a lot of great actors and it's visually fantastic. But as soon as the lead discovers her sexuality, it devolved hard for me. If I wanted to watch a porn, I'd watch one. This actually made me feel very uncomfortable. Consider they open by mentioning her mental age and physical body don't match, so when these scenes first kick off.... it just felt gross. The focus on sex is so intense that I couldn't get into the story of her growth. Honestly, if they edited out the almost 30 min of just sex scenes in the first half, we might be able to enjoy the story. Genuine disappointment.
Ferrari
(2023)
2hrs 11mn of miscast people being sad
9 January 2024
I went to to this movie mostly because I like the actors. Adam Driver and Shaylene Woodley are great actors, but they're terribly miscast. I couldn't buy them as Italian, and Driver's accent sounded more Russian to me. Penelope Cruz is the only believable character, and she does knock it out of the park. Were it not for her performance, I would give this film a 4.
The main issue is it's a lot of talking and emoting, but not actually showing us anything. We spend more time on Ferrari's relationship issues than with the race. That would be fine if we were given more than a 5 second flashback regarding how he had a kid with each woman. We're told what happened, but not shown. Similarly, other characters are paper thin. I can barely tell you anything about any of them other than the best acted racer was played by Patrick Dempsey.
Then we come to the racing, which is almost entirely in the last 30 min of the film. How do you make a major race boring and predictable? By mentioning it's importance a bunch of times, but again they show us nothing to build any tension. The film doesn't show any of the track till the actual race and you only know it's important for business reputations and sales. Also I have a major issue with the crash scenes, which use very obvious CGI. The CGI work is pretty bad, to the point where one death was almost laughable.
Ultimately, this was an ambitious project with a good cast. But it is beyond boring. If you know nothing about Ferrari, this isn't a good place to start learning. I recommend watching a good documentary rather than waste your time with this movie.
The main issue is it's a lot of talking and emoting, but not actually showing us anything. We spend more time on Ferrari's relationship issues than with the race. That would be fine if we were given more than a 5 second flashback regarding how he had a kid with each woman. We're told what happened, but not shown. Similarly, other characters are paper thin. I can barely tell you anything about any of them other than the best acted racer was played by Patrick Dempsey.
Then we come to the racing, which is almost entirely in the last 30 min of the film. How do you make a major race boring and predictable? By mentioning it's importance a bunch of times, but again they show us nothing to build any tension. The film doesn't show any of the track till the actual race and you only know it's important for business reputations and sales. Also I have a major issue with the crash scenes, which use very obvious CGI. The CGI work is pretty bad, to the point where one death was almost laughable.
Ultimately, this was an ambitious project with a good cast. But it is beyond boring. If you know nothing about Ferrari, this isn't a good place to start learning. I recommend watching a good documentary rather than waste your time with this movie.
Five Nights at Freddy's
(2023)
Massive script issues
31 October 2023
Just saw Five Nights at Freddy's. That.... was a hot mess. Let's talk about positives first. The Jim Henson Shop out did themselves bringing Freddy and friends to life. They did primarily practical effects and it shows, the animatronics being the best part of the film. Another positive is the music, which was outstanding!
Unfortunately, that's where my positives stop. This film has two major problems. First, it's PG13. This movie would have benefitted greatly from an R rating, it was tamer than the games. Second, the film can't decide if it is for fans or newcomers. The actual FNAF storyline is largely secondary to the plot of the lead character trying to discover who kidnapped his brother as a child. It's annoying, because when it's not being FNAF, it's just boring. (Also maybe it's the direction given, but the leads were pretty bland). They try to do a mystery thing with the FNAF storyline that doesn't work if you know the games. Matthew Lillard was perfectly cast, but woefully underused (He's in maybe 15min of the movie). Overall, I have to give FNAF the movie a C-. If you want a good version of Five Nights in film, stick with Willy's Wonderland, it's much better.
Unfortunately, that's where my positives stop. This film has two major problems. First, it's PG13. This movie would have benefitted greatly from an R rating, it was tamer than the games. Second, the film can't decide if it is for fans or newcomers. The actual FNAF storyline is largely secondary to the plot of the lead character trying to discover who kidnapped his brother as a child. It's annoying, because when it's not being FNAF, it's just boring. (Also maybe it's the direction given, but the leads were pretty bland). They try to do a mystery thing with the FNAF storyline that doesn't work if you know the games. Matthew Lillard was perfectly cast, but woefully underused (He's in maybe 15min of the movie). Overall, I have to give FNAF the movie a C-. If you want a good version of Five Nights in film, stick with Willy's Wonderland, it's much better.
Asteroid City
(2023)
Performance art that lost its meaning
7 July 2023
I generally like weird cinema. The cast and interesting visuals drew me in. While pretty to look at, the actors can't do much when they have nothing to work with. This is a film about a play within a play within a tv show. The trailers show nothing of the black and white play portions, and I think there's a reason for that. They make absolutely no sense within the film narrative. Instead of a story about a father coming to terms with the loss of his wife (as the trailer advertises), we actually have a pretentious discussion about how to write and craft a story. Everyone is an actor playing a role within a role, so why do I care about any of them or their supposed struggles? Am I supposed to be invested in the play story or the play within the play that is Asteroid City? It's long, pretentious, self-indulgent style over substance and boring. So I'll end this with a quote. George Sanders in the film All About Eve is a theater critic. He says of one play "It made the minutes fly by like hours." This made seconds fly by like years. Definitely skip, I'm not sure even die hard Wes Anderson fans will like this one.
Professor T
(2021– )
Great elements, but...
19 June 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed the series as a casual watch. The acting, music and cinematography are all spot on. However, the original Belgian series had 13 episodes in its first season. The British series attempts to shove the same amount of content into six episodes. You barely have time to get to know the characters and become invested in their stories before the season is over. This is most evident in the alcoholism subplot for Inspector Rabet and the father subplot for Anneliese. Given the shortened length, the writers would have done better to either cut one of those subplots, or saved at least one of them for season 2. It also gets too goofy with the visualization of Professor Ts thoughts. Where as the original show used that as an interesting visual element, the British show makes it seem like he's having intermittent acid trips. This aspect is made less effective in the British version when one character (a girl with Downs Syndrome) seemingly interacts with the same weird visuals he's seeing. In the original, only Professor T reacts to the odd visuals, making it clear these are his inner, personal thoughts. (I do want to note that the episode with this girl is the best in the British series and exceptionally moving at times). Honestly, if you have PBS Passport or Amazon you can access the original Belgian show, and it's far better than the British version. If they do make a season 2, the writers will need to slow things down a little and clarify a number of elements that just didn't translate well from the original Belgian show.
Spiral
(2021)
Pretty good Saw spin-off
6 June 2021
I actually really enjoyed the movie. The story is pretty good, the traps are brutal, and the characters are enjoyable. Its main flaw is that about halfway through, if you know the saw series well, you'll be able to spot the killer. This is really more of a Saw spin off than a true Saw 9, but its worth the watch.
Texas Rising
(2015)
Going OK until....
7 June 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I love the cast for this series and it really had a lot of potential. I can even say I was enjoying the series as long as you don't think about its historical inaccuracy. It's sad you can't trust the History Channel to show you history, but this was an OK cowboy fiction.
However, I saw part three tonight and was tempted to turn off the series all together. There is a horribly violent scene with a family being slaughtered by Comanche. Now, setting aside how negatively the series tone is towards Native Americans, the excessive violence in this scene was unnecessary. Why do we need to see an entire family (small children and puppy included) horrifically slaughtered in every gory detail? It doesn't add to the story in the least and I personally found it offensive and unnecessary. There are other parts where sex and violence just seem to be included for no reason than because it can be, and it isn't needed for the story.
I don't know how to feel about this series in total, though I'm debating if I really want to see the next part after part 3. If you do watch this, understand that it has a great cast but they can't save the film from its underlying flaws such as bad direction, excessive/unnecessary gore, and serious historical issues.
However, I saw part three tonight and was tempted to turn off the series all together. There is a horribly violent scene with a family being slaughtered by Comanche. Now, setting aside how negatively the series tone is towards Native Americans, the excessive violence in this scene was unnecessary. Why do we need to see an entire family (small children and puppy included) horrifically slaughtered in every gory detail? It doesn't add to the story in the least and I personally found it offensive and unnecessary. There are other parts where sex and violence just seem to be included for no reason than because it can be, and it isn't needed for the story.
I don't know how to feel about this series in total, though I'm debating if I really want to see the next part after part 3. If you do watch this, understand that it has a great cast but they can't save the film from its underlying flaws such as bad direction, excessive/unnecessary gore, and serious historical issues.
Tell Your Friends