Arconada Reviews

Gold Run (2022)

I could not avoid laughing at unexpected moments

[5/10 · 4 May 2024]

Gold Run promised to be a gripping war drama. However, I could not avoid laughing at unexpected moments.

The film's saving grace lies in its remarkable visual effects. The cinematography captures the chaos of war with gritty realism.

Unfortunately, the character development falls flat. The actors seem trapped in caricatures rather than fully fleshed-out roles. The protagonists lack depth. Similarly, Anatole Taubman, portraying the Nazi officer, resorts to clichés rather than genuine complexity.

War dramas typically evoke somber emotions, but Gold Run could not make you feel that. If you are looking for a more authentic war drama, you'll likely find yourself disappointed.

Pulang (2024 TV Movie)

Cliché, but the soundscape is interesting.

[5/10 · 21 April 2024]

"Pulang" is a movie that falls short of its expectations. The disappointment sets in early as the viewer is confronted with an abundance of clichés that make the story predictable and undermine any chance of originality. The theme of a rebellious teenager who does not fit within family traditions has been executed many times before and shows nothing original here. Moreover, the acting is not very good.

One of the few positive aspects of "Pulang" is its soundscape. The sound designers have made efforts to enrich the viewing experience with interesting surround effects. Unfortunately, this is not enough to rescue the film from its clichéd pitfalls.

Overall, "Pulang" leaves much to be desired. The abundance of clichés make it difficult to become invested in the story or the characters. While the soundscape offers some relief, it is not sufficient to compensate for the overall disappointment of the film.

Nr. 10 (2021)

A bit disappointing

[6/10 · 13 August 2022]

Much hailed by critics, my expectations were to high. Having seen all of Van Warmerdam's previous movies I can safely say this one is the least typical for his style. There is only one typical Warmerdam moment and that is when Gunther nails Marius foot to the ground. (No spoiler, it's in the trailer.) For the rest, I will not go into detail, because I don't want to reveal the plot. Is there a plot? Anyway, I can only advise you to temper your expectations. Maybe then, you will like what you see.

The Whistlers (2019)

Chronological order

[6/10 · 21 April 2022]

It's a trick to make a rather simple movie seem smart: changing the chronological order. It sets the viewer arrears, wondering what part of the story he's looking at. This movie suffered from that. In the end it does not make the movie better.

Persona (1966)

This is a play, rather than a film.

[5/10 · 2 December 2021]

Persona would probably be successful on a stage, but movie making developed such a different visual language that it is hardly a medium for this story.

The Forgotten Battle (2020)

Good movie, disappointing soundscape

[7/10 · 3 November 2021]

This is a good movie focusing on the fights around the Sloedam. However, the battle of Walcheren consisted of two additional amphibious attacks and an inundation of the island. The budget did not allow to show these parts. But what the movies does shows is credible. The villages of 80 years ago are convincingly rebuild and the acting is good. But were the sidelines really necessary? The fights around the Sloedam started on 31 October. The storyline that introduced Jamie Flatters/William Sinclair took place half September. A bit far fetched, it seems. The same goes for Gijs Blom/Marinus van Staveren. Did they really need to build an expensive Russian frontscene to introduce a disappointed German soldier? I think they could have saved some money there, and instead have some extra budget to include the other fronts in this battle. Anyway, the film entertained me, that's important. One last thing, the soundscape was mediocre.

Blackway (2015)

A scamped work

[3/10 · 20 April 2020]

This movie was available to me as Blackway and before buying it I looked it up in IMDB. I don't know what went wrong, but I mistakenly got the impression it was rated at 7/10. And with this respectable cast I started to look at it with too high an expectation. The first half of the movie made me already wonder why it got this high rating, but alright, still half the movie to go. Another half later I finished a disappointing movie, though. Wat was this? A contractual obligation to make this, therefore a scamped work? What a waste of talent and money, I am sorry. The whole plot seems unlikely. Killing the bad guy for the reason of him stalking a woman and wasting her cat, and for being rude to a man who lost his daughter, it is a bit over the top, isn't it. There is no surprise at all. Every scene is smoothly laid out to explain the next. Oh yes, there is a surprise. When Lester gets shot, he miraculously gets better every next scene, and in the end you would not think he must have a big wound in his body. All in all, disapointing.

Nightwatching (2007)

A totally convincing Rembrandt

[8/10 · 11 March 2019]

This is the first movie with a totally convincing Rembrandt. From the first to the last line of text I was not looking at an actor playing Rembrandt as I thought he was, but I was looking at Rembrandt. A deep bow for Martin Freeman who did an excellent job.

By the way, several of the principal persons were played by actors with a good likeness.

Rembrandt broke with the tradition of static group portraits of militia men and painted a much more vivid scene. Greenaway makes an interesting movie by inventing a murder plot to explain that. It makes the movie entertaining, but what attracts me the most is the chiaroscuro efffect Greenaway adopts for this movie, the chiaroscuro that was the hallmark of Rembrandt.

Don't expect a whodunnit, an entertaining narrative is what you are getting

Irreversible (2002)

Impressive film, but ...

[5/10 · 9 December 2018]

Although this is an impressive film, I wonder how interesting it would be if it would have been edited in chronological order. I mean, the reversed order is just a trick to spice up an otherwise rather empty film, don't you think. The focal point of the movie would then be the rape scene, which is not really a reason to go to the cinema.

Alles over niets (2013)

Bad acting

[5/10 · 11 November 2018]

I am sorry, this movie is hard too swallow just because of the bad acting.

Het hart van Hadiah Tromp (2018)

It failed on the script

[6/10 · 18 March 2018]

Watching this movie I got the impression that everybody wanted to make a good movie. The idea was a lighthearted romantic comedy with a few song and dance interjections. However, a good movie starts with a good script, and it looks to me it failed because of that. Unrealistic dialogues, implausible twists and cardboard characters made me loose all willingness to follow this story. To bad, because you can notice the effort everyone made.

Publieke werken (2015)

Unsatisfying

[4/10 · 10 September 2017]

Three story lines, maybe effective in the book but not in this movie. The most interesting part, only 30 minutes, is the struggle between the protagonist trying to sell his shop and the investor who doesn't want to pay what the shop owner is asking. The rest seems only padding to fill it up to feature length. To bad, because the eye candy is satisfying, i.e. the image of old Amsterdam.

Clip (2012)

Depressing

[3/10 · 27 August 2017]

Don't spend time on this movie, it is depressingly depressing and leads to nothing. It is about adolescents without future in a derelict suburb in Serbia. These young people apparently were not guided in there change-over from child-play to sex-driven behavior, they are now at. They show no restraint at all. The film ends how it started, it is an empty container. There is another reason why this movie is to be avoided. If a character is sad, the actor needs not to be, he acts as if he is sad. If character is happy, the actor acts as if he is happy, he needs not to be. If a character has sex, the actor acts as if he has sex. You feel where this went wrong. The actors, minors, indulge way to much in sex, explicit sex. And although the credits say prosthetics where used, it is obvious this movie crossed the line between a play and pornography. And that is more than sad, considering that the leading part is played by a girl of only 14 years old. You could just as well say this movie borders on child abuse.

Casino (1995)

Looking back

[6/10 · 27 August 2017]

I saw this movie 20 years after its initial release. Yes, I know, that is late. But it gave me the opportunity to look at it from a perspective where movie styles have changed. Did it stand the test of time? It is safe to say that this movie more or less concluded the typical mafia movie era, movies with overactive swearing gangster-types, Italian lingo, violence, extortion, addiction. I must say, watching this film gave me the feeling that I had seen it all before. This is a template movie, a template for the style, a template for the characters, a template for the violence, templates for practically everything. As a result everybody is behaving one-dimensional, behaving as expected, no character development. Joe Pesci is really a caricature of himself, Robert De Niro is flat. Sharon Stone's part is at times interesting to watch. All in all, this movie gets 6 out of 10 from me, mainly because the pace is okay.

Zurich (2015)

Good, but hard to digest

[8/10 · 25 February 2017]

At the moment of writing the rating for this movie is 5.9. I believe it should be higher. The movie is very fragmented and therefor it is hard to get into the story, but when you do you're not disappointed.

The movie consists of two parts. First, it starts with a story of a tormented woman trying to find something in the truckers world. Wende Snijders plays this woman, and everybody who already know her from her singing career, knows that she is able to tell a story with just her face. She is exactly right for the role. Whatever the mood, depressed, sad, tired, enjoyed, she can put it in her face. The movie starts with a surreal scene of her next to her car in a canal looking at a cheetah on the water's edge. It ends with a stolen dog being killed by a truck. The second part is a flash-back. It explains why the stealing of the dog is so dramatic, why she is not able to take care of a little girl for a while when she is asked to, and why she pursues that quest in the trucker world.

The structure of the movie seems odd, first a story about the searching woman, followed by a flash back, an explanation how it came to be. But by doing so, the editor was able to use a dramatic scene as the end of the movie. And that really increased the tension.

A clever made, well acted movie, that requires some effort and attention to watch it.

About Time (I) (2013)

Why do people like this film?

[5/10 · 27 December 2015]

Why do people like this film? It's a romantic comedy without a plot. The story-line is simple. Man decides to find a girlfriend, finds one, they marry, have three children, father of the man dies. End of movie. Of course that is not enough to fill a movie, so the director added a twist. The father of the man told him, when he turned 21, that the men of the family are able to travel back in time. All they have to do is to step in a dark secluded space, think of the memory they want to go back to and clench their fist, and voilà! Nice idea to fill the rest of the movie. Unfortunately their are so many flaws in the story, it got annoying to me. It's a nice idea to travel back a few minutes, maybe a day, to redo something that could have been better, but sometimes the steps are major, and at some point the man finds out that his first child is now a son instead of daughter. His father explains him he can't go back before the conception because if he changes the past just a tiny bit, out comes a different child. Nevertheless, unexplained is how he manages to get his daughter back. Another thing, he can travel back in time, but not forward. So he has to relive his live with his changed past. If this is only a few minutes it is quite all right, and there is a funny scene in the movie where there has been taken advantage of that. But to prevent that the movie will get boring by showing the reliving, the director just skips to the present again. So it looks like he travels forward in time as well, but he doesn't. You have to realize that for the major flaw in the end of the movie. The man travels back to the moment his father is still alive, and the father decides to have a father-son moment so he travels some 20 years further back with his son to skip pebbles on the sea. (That is before the moment of conception of his three children!) So now the son, a little boy, has to relive his entire life, remembering all the changes he made to his past to get where he was some 20 years later. But the father will only tell him that he can travel in time when he will be 21. So by then he will probably have forgotten all his changes... However, the end of the movie shows he still managed to redo them all.

This simple romantic comedy has no plot, the time-traveling part is infested with flaws. So, why do people like this film?

The Squid and the Whale (2005)

It's an actors movie

[7/10 · 15 November 2015]

Although the movie shows excellent acting, it doesn't go anywhere. The Squid and the Whale is a display in the Natural History Museum. It shows a fight between a giant squid and a whale, and it seems to be used as a metaphor for the fight of two parents. The parents separate in the beginning of the movie. Some attempts are made to get together again, but when one shows willingness the other one rejects that, and vice-versa. In the end the sons have left their father as well. And that is the entire plot. So not much is going on this movie. However, the acting by almost all actors is very good, and it is a feast to see that. So all in all, I gave this movie a 7/10, but mainly for the acting.

United 93 (2006)

It is a sickening movie to watch.

[8/10 · 11 November 2015]

It took a long time before I was able to see this movie. Hollywood does not have a good reputation when it comes to films about real events. But I was surprised to see that the events where depicted in a clean way. No superheroes running around in this movie, no over-the-top heroism. Yet, it is a bit awkward to see people, like Ben Sliney, play themselves.

It is a sickening movie to watch, because the outcome is known. Four terrorists hi-jack a plane, kill the pilots and head for the Capitol building to destroy. The passengers panic but on the airline mobile phone service they find out that already planes hit the WTC and the Pentagon. So they decide to regain control over the plane. Although they manage to take out 2 of the terrorist their action is too late, the terrorist at the control lets the plane crash. Most of the events are filmed with a hand-held camera so the movie effectively takes you into the cramped space of an air liner.

The movie is sickening because you know the passengers are not going to succeed. The movie is also sickening because you look at people, the terrorists, who believe that their god will give them access to heaven because they murder people. These terrorists seem like intelligent people, so they should know the difference between believing something or knowing something. Yet, they behave as if they have no doubt about murder. That their god orders them to do that. But it is just something they believe. Did they never ask themselves the question, what happens after death? Do we go to heaven and will our god say, ah, you did a good thing. Or will he say, oh, you are the ones that murdered these people, but your victims are already here in heaven. I can't allow you to mingle with them so you won't come into my heaven. Go next door, to hell. Anyone who knows the difference between believe and knowledge, would have thoughts like that. They didn't. Who did that to them, who brainwashed their minds so much that they chose to die. Whoever, it must be an evil person, probably someone who would never do that himself. Someone who defends the comforts of his life here on earth, who whispers the promises of death in the minds of numskull to retaliate on his enemies. It is a sickening movie to watch.

Little Boy (2015)

Melodramatic

[6/10 · 29 August 2015]

This film is well made. It is a Disney-like story about an American family torn apart by the second world war. And the film also shows the position the Japanese Americans were in during WWII.

Yet it is rather melodramatic, it contains all the necessary elements, like - you can achieve anything if you have Faith, crying boys, the daddy-daddy scene, and all is well that ends well. Unfortunately the title is not a surprise, and it is only waiting for that card to be played. I liked the film during watching, there is not a moment of slackening, however in retrospect the film did only have a few surprises, so it doesn't grip you like it should.

All in all, good, but only barely.

Borgman (2013)

Good Warmerdam movie

[8/10 · 5 June 2015]

To enjoy this movie, you have to know what a typical Alex van Warmerdam movie looks like. He is known for his surrealistic movies. Most of his movies contain a fair amount of black humor, and humor is like sugar in a soda, i.e. It makes it accessible for a lot of people. This movie does not contain humor at all so it might be repellent for some. It is a horror movie, but not in the gory Hollywood way. The horror is in the domination. Step by step, evil creeps into the dominion of the unsuspecting victims. The first line in the movie is an important clue what this evil is. So if you did not notice that, you will have to wait until the end of the movie wondering what drives this evil.

As this is a surrealistic, an absurd movie, there is no reason to question all the events. Maybe, they would be strange in real life, but this is Warmerdam life. The start of the movie shows some people, driving out evil of there community. The way that happens is a good example of the surrealism in this movie. Evil works according to a plan, but is not clear what this plan is, and why all the events fit into that plan. Don't question it, immerse your self in this movie, and get scared by the power of evil. Enjoy.

Fury (2014)

Good movie, but it deserves a better ending

[8/10 · 3 January 2015]

Fury is a good movie, but not particularly realistic. The experiences of Norman Ellison show very well how the ethics of people degrade in battle. Towards the end realism fades, however. The enemy army unit is loudly singing in a war zone, making it obvious that they will be spotted. Although nearby, it takes ages for the Germans to reach the Americans. A gimmick that seems to be copied from Inglorious Bastards - it worked there, but not here. The Germans carry anti-tank weaponry, but do not use it. Enemy fire sometimes entirely stops because of a dramatic scene taking place in the tank. The enemy behaves like brainless characters in a video game, going back and forth depending on the events taking place. A sniper in camouflage suddenly appears when needed. After the battle, dead Germans are scattered all around, like matches dropped from a box, but for unknown reasons they do not cover the road. If the director would have restricted himself to a small unit of the enemy with only limited weaponry, it would have improved the realism of the final scene. But don't get me wrong, the movie was good. I gave it 8 out of 10 points.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

Entertaining and technically impressive but no direction

[7/10 · 8 November 2014]

I must say, I enjoyed this movie. It is impressive to see a world full of cgi environments and cgi animals, almost as good as the real thing. To enjoy this story you will have to accept the premise that apes get intelligent, and to also see the developments of struggle for power behind the back of the protagonist. Just like humans, isn't it. However, the story does not go anywhere. I mean, we know how it starts, it is explained in "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" and we know how it ends as explained in "Planet of the Apes", so this should be an intermediate part of the saga. But the only thing we learn is what we already learned from the previous film, which is that humans and apes don't get along. In the final film of the saga it is shown that humans get to be submissive, tamed and exploited by the apes, but this transition is not yet made in this movie. That's a missed opportunity, I think. It could have added some spice to the plot.

The Tree of Life (2011)

I liked the acting in this movie

[7/10 · 3 September 2014]

Acting is make-believe you are looking at the character instead of the actor. I liked the acting in this movie. Of course, it goes without saying that Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain are able to do that, they are professionals, but what stands out for me is the acting of the children. It was so good, even with the camera so close it sometimes almost collided with the children, and still they remained in character. Wonderful.

That said, nothing else in the movie impressed me very much. The story was erratic and slow, no plot at all, just every day life of a family in the 50s going through an ordeal, in a dreamy kind of narrative.

Oh, I almost forgot. Old Jack, played by Sean Penn, does not unite with young Jack. It seemed an entirely different person. I don't know why, because Penn is a good enough actor.

Cross of Iron (1977)

This movie had it's day

[5/10 · 11 August 2014]

Sam Peckinpah was known for the display of violence in his movies, but since then directors like Tarentino set the new standard. So what worked in the 70s does not necessarily work now. What remains is a movie to be judged on its message and on its acting.

The movie is about the personal fight between a 'rusty' soldier and an upper class officer. The soldier does the fighting, the officer is only there to get his decoration, because he can't bear the humiliation to go back to his entourage in Germany without one. This collision between interests is the theme of this movie. It is an interesting theme but the movie is only partly able to display it. The story is fragmented, some events hardly fit into the movie. The end is very sudden, it seems no one knew how to finish the movie, or maybe the budget was gone. Anyway, it seems rushed.

But that is not the biggest problem. Acting is. Good acting should make you forget you are looking at an actor. Instead the actor must be able to make you believe you are looking at the character he plays. High ranking stars James Coburn, Maximillian Schell and James Mason were chosen for principal parts. James Coburn is not really an actor, he is only able to show his face and it depends on the movie whether you accept him in his role. In this entire movie he remains an out of place James Coburn. James Mason is a good actor but profoundly British and his part is to small to see him as the German he is playing. Schell is the only one who is able to make you forget he is a star, and merges with his character in this story. So the movie fails primarily on the acting and secondly on the flow of the story.

This movie seems to be out of date, maybe it was good in its time but it misses the extra to still be attractive. That is too bad because the theme is interesting.

How to Describe a Cloud (2013)

A fine and quiet story

[6/10 · 19 March 2014]

This is a fine, quiet story about a Chinese girl, torn between her work and the care of her mother. Although the general impression is good it leaves a lot of questions unanswered. F.i., why did a Dutch crew make the effort of going all the way to Taipe and shoot a movie in a foreign language and foreign culture? Where do all the different story lines interconnect? Are there any answers to the different story lines? Why was the professor so shocked? Did the girl actually see the creature or was it just a figment of her imagination. Why did the movie end like it did? Maybe the story lines should remain open, I don't know, but I was left with the feeling that the movie was not finished. Anyway, it's good to watch a quiet movie. They are so rare, nowadays.