Change Your Image
ian_watts
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
We Own This City (2022)
The highs are near The Wire, but the lows are much lower
First of all, this is 100% worth watching. Especially for fans of The Wire or those who love detailed police dramas.
Jon Bernthal gives an outstanding performance on this, Wayne Jenkins is one of the most compelling characters I've seen in a long while.
And this is where the highs are, watching the extent of the crookedness of the Gun Trace Taskforce slowly be revealed. Some incredible scenes, particularly those on the street showcasing Jenkins' history.
But then we arrive at the lows of this show. And none comes to mind quicker than Wunmi Mosaku, Ian Duff and the Civil Rights storyline. I can see they were trying to explore the bigger picture here, but the characters and story have so little to do with the rest of the plot and are generally so unrealistic it makes it pretty hard to take their scenes seriously by the back end of the season.
But the bigger problem at play here is that this storyline misses the element that makes the rest of this show, and previously The Wire, so great. And that is showcasing the virtues and sins of each character/department. In the Wire particularly, there is no character that isn't laid bare for their weaknesses as well as their strengths.
But these Civil Rights characters in We Own This City are apparently saints. They seem to be the only ones who 'get it' and of course the lack of immediate radical change is the fault of the oppressive patriachy holding them down from all sides... oh and also it's Trump's fault for some reason. It's hard not to call it for what it is, which is a bunch of virtue-signalling nonsense.
The rest of the show, which this Civil Rights storyline pretends to be a part of, is of the kind of depth and complexity you would expect from David Simon and Ed Burns.
Soul (2020)
A spectacular fail
Pixar obviously got over-confident after getting it so right with Inside Out. But the afterlife? Yikes, what were they thinking! Their view of what could be beyond this life is so unnappealing and simplistic it had me wanting to stop 20 minutes in. I also have to echo other reviews here that there is no story here that a child would want to follow, something Pixar usually does so well and is really at the heart of all of their films. They were on the money with Inside Out because it was based around personality and love, things that we all have tangible relationships with and can confirm how accurate their interpretation was. But wow, Soul is a huge wizz in the wind with some downright juvenile conceptions of what could be beyond this life. And all that just to make the point of 'appreciating the little things', the jazz movie I thought I was getting would have been a much better vehicle for that. Stick to this world Pixar.
Dumplin' (2018)
So many things not working here...
A very lame and mediocre attempt at something that had real potential. Some of the terrible messages include:
- Support means telling people they don't need to change at all in any way.
- Your parents should be defied because you definitely know better.
- People should have to accept you for who you are. No matter what that means, or how little you know about life and your place in the world.
But the worst part of this movie has to be the characters. A product of the cringe-worthy and predictable writing. All lame caricatures of annoyingly familiar and shallow stereotypes.
The missed opportunity is that this film could have had a great message, such as: all people are layered and different despite their surface appearance. And that unique character is developed by going through changes in life, not avoiding them.
3 out of 10 bananas.
JFK: The Smoking Gun (2013)
Amateur hour, watch JFK instead.
This is a TV grade documentary that sensationalises an old theory which had been forgotten about, and probably for good reason.
Problems with this theory:
1. Warren Report
The theory relies on the autopsy as hard evidence for entry wounds and trajectory. The film basically confirms the highly contentious 'single bullet' theory and also that a lone shooter made the first two shots (not to mention it just seems to be assumed that Lee Harvey Oswald had to have done it) based on this evidence. However, it is well known (and even mentioned in the film) that the Warren Report and autopsy are both unreliable and were both compromised.
2. JFK (film)
There is only one mention of the film JFK and absolutely no mention of the work of Jim Garrison (on which the film JFK is focused). The work of Jim Garrison is much more thorough and answers a lot more questions than this theory.
3. The grassy knoll
The film conveniently does not mention that MANY people heard shots and saw smoke from the grassy knoll. This theory dismisses the grassy knoll because there is not entry wound from that direction. But the theory relies on the botched autopsy. The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK move back and to the left from impact (as pointed out in the film JFK) locating the shooter at the grassy knoll (where the best shot is). Something this film does bring to light that Oliver Stone's JFK does not is that people smelt gunpowder on the street. But if you consider the wind blowing back towards the book depository (which is mentioned in this film), then the grassy knoll becomes the prime location for the smell to be coming from.
4. Colin McClaren (useless Australian detective)
Colin McClaren is nothing more than a film making device to try and reinforce the theory and make it more believable. Basically a case of: insert expert who agrees with everything we want to say. He may have read many documents about the case, but they would not be any documents that you or I couldn't get a hold of, definitely not the calibre of the evidence that Jim Garrison was working with (same applies to Donahue). He didn't meet any of the suspects or associates involved, didn't conduct interviews or have the kind of authority you need to investigate this properly. The film even shows this guy visiting tourist attractions about the assassination. The only 'new' evidence he presents is information that the film hadn't presented to us yet. Most importantly, for a detective, he doesn't ask why! He never discusses motive or what people could be involved, he just simply mirrors what Donahue has already said.
5. Accidental shooter
Just when the film gets to its most believable stage and suggests that the secret serviceman Hickey in the car behind may have fired the last shot (which is not all that believable) it makes the bizarre conclusion that Hickey most likely accidentally fired. It is particularly frustrating for someone like myself (I am from Australia) to see many Americans not look at the shooting with a free thinking mind, almost as if it is totally impossible for a US agency to take out its own president, even though it is one of the most logical explanations.
... On a side note, this film talks about how the secret service were out late the night before and attributes this as to why Hickey was able to get the shot off. But doesn't it make more sense that they had been enticed to go out in order to lower the guard for the next day?
Ultimately this film not only makes a mess of its argument but also fails to explain the important side of the JFK assassination, which is WHY it happened. Look at what was happening at the time, JFK's relationships with government bodies and other groups in the American public, the explanation requires much more than a ballistics analysis. Oliver Stone's JFK gives the best picture so far, watch that instead of this.