helloamazon Reviews

Asteroid City (2023)

A Wes Anderson overdose in the desert: More of a stiff stage play than a "real" movie

[5/10 · 20 June 2023]

Let me start off by saying: I have seen all of Wes Anderson's movies, some of them even multiple times.

I can therefore certainly appreciate his quirky and unique style that made him a favorite at various film schools and among art-house movie lovers.

Asteroid City feels like a very concentrated version of his latest movies in a bland pastel color desert setting:

The black-and-white scenes in old TV formatting as well as the theatre-like setting reminded me of the "The French Dispatch" (2021) in particular.

The newest movie doubles down on these "theatre/stage play" concepts, the sum of all parts unfortunately feels like a Wes Anderson overdose at times:

Too many actors (the usual staple of big-name actors is larger than ever in this one, only Bill Murray seems to be missing), yet with no real lead role present and very little character development.

The overall plot appears to be going nowhere until the credits roll - while the 1950's SF sub-"plot" also feels wasted when the Alien in his bright green UFO has a screen appearance about as short as the mythical 'Jaguar shark' in Wes' classic "The Life Aquatic" (2004).

Asteroid City looks like Wes jumped the shark on his own ideas and prior body of work.

Overall, the movie unfortunately feels too dry, stiff and boring to me (I would never write this about a prior Wes Anderson movie), even with its relatively short running time.

Summary: Asteroid City will most likely only please and appeal to his most hardcore fans. Another IMDB reviewer summed it up perfectly with this headline: "Nothing happens in the middle of nowhere".

4/10 , maybe rounded up to 5/10 for the (as always) beautiful decor and the immaculate attention to detail.

I hope Wes returns to "real" film-making one day. I wanted to see a "real" movie by Wes Anderson, not a "Wes Anderson doing Wes Anderson" stage play in the desert.

Tschugger (2021– )

One of the best Swiss TV productions/series ever - Fargo meets Switzerland

[9/10 · 15 December 2022]

"Tschugger" (both a dialect and light swear word for "policemen" in the rural Swiss canton of Valais) worked great for Swiss audiences and it will probably work great internationally - even if some local nuances and in-jokes regarding Valais (where the entire series was filmed on location) will get lost in translation.

Great actors (some of them are laymen, not even professional actors!), great overarching and fast-paced plot with many sudden twists and turns.

Regular moviegoers will spot lots of influences from (cop) movies and TV series like...

• Fargo (not just because there is plenty of snow in both the Fargo and Tschugger settings, probably the most direct association)
• Super Troopers (as well as earlier cop movies/series such as Starsky & Hutch, Miami Vice or Beverly Hills Cop)
• Braunschlag (2012, Austrian TV series)
• Headhunters (2011, the very good Norwegian thriller) or
• Crimson Rivers II: Angels of the Apocalypse (but "Tschugger" isn't nearly as dark and somber as the Crimson Rivers sequel and has more comedic elements).

The only major downside in my opinion? Season two (both seasons only feature five episodes each) goes a bit overboard towards the action-packed finale compared to all the earlier episodes - but that's only a minor minus overall.

Give Tschugger a try, it truly deserves a broader international audience and distribution.

Certainly the best and funniest Swiss TV series in years, if not decades, in my opinion.

9/10 (one point deduction for the over-the-top finale).

Mad Heidi (2022)

Mad Heidi is NOT the first Swissploitation movie - but it's quite a good new entry to the genre

[7/10 · 8 December 2022]

It goes without saying that you need to like or at least be familiar with the "exploitation" genre to fully enjoy this movie; a soft spot for "trash" movies like Iron Sky (the first one, not the terrible sequel) and similar "trashy" B-movies also helps.

I however disagree with the authors/directors of Mad Heidi that they single-handedly invented the "Swissploitation" genre in 2022 with Mad Heidi.

Older Swiss movies should take the credit for pioneering this movie niche, for example (my list below is by no means exhaustive):

• Sommersprossen (1968, German title)
• L'inconnu de Shandigor (1967, French title)
• Several early movies by the Swiss director Erwin C. Dietrich, mostly released in the 70s and 80s (to be fair to Mad Heidi, many of Erwin's movies were shot abroad, not in Switzerland)

There are also newer examples like these more extreme Swiss splatter movies:

• Projekt Fleisch (1999)
• Nutshot (2019)

Mad Heidi is another good, updated entry to the genre with many nods and references to famous directors like Tarantino or Rodriguez. The two Mad Heidi directors are quite open about this aspect and even list movies that influenced Mad Heidi's story telling and plot, namely:

Machete, From Dusk Till Dawn, Kill Bill (Vol. 2), Danger 5, Lady Snowblood, Heidi (the classic 1937 and 1952 versions, obviously, since Mad Heidi is a trash/horror parody on the original story), Coffy, Foxy Brown...

The movie doesn't take itself too seriously and makes fun of Switzerland and clichés like chocolate, cheese and xenophobia, much like earlier domestic classics such as the comedy Schweizermacher (aka "The SwissMakers" internationally, 1978). The more you know about Swiss cliches, the more you will enjoy the funny details and easter eggs in Mad Heidi.

But rest assured: Even if you are only vaguely familiar with the original Heidi saga/plot and the fact that many Swiss take their cheese seriously you can laugh at most jokes.

The splatter/special effects, the level of detail in many movie props (e.g. The "final boss" Neutralizer) and the performances are quite good; some are even very good - especially considering the tiny budget of just around USD/CHF 3 million (much of the total budget was raised by crowdfunding).

(For a quick comparison: Other genre movies like the trashy Iron Sky II sequel cost six times that amount and are much worse. Starting with a confusing script...but I digress.)

The overarching revenge plot in Mad Heidi is quite simple/predictable. Some critics may dismiss the entire Mad Heidi movie as pure "fan service" - this is however very understandable since much of the budget was raised using crowdfunding methods, as discussed above.

We may even get a sequel one day since the open ending leaves many avenues to explore.

I rate this movie 7/10 cheese wheels. Maybe it's even worth 8/10 if you really like this genre of movies.

PS: In order to reach a broader international audience (and since many foreign actors like genre specialist Casper Van Dien have leading roles) the movie was shot in English, with only a few sentences or words in Swiss German mixed into the dialogue. Surprising at first, but understandable given the global distribution target.

Lupin III: The First (2019)

Great 3D CG entry for Lupin, with a splash of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

[8/10 · 26 January 2021]

If you are familiar with Lupin's history in Anime, you have most probably seen "The Castle of Cagliostro" (1979). If not, I would watch that highly rated older movie first as an introduction to the characters.

This new Lupin movie from 2019 (released in Japan in late 2019, the Covid epidemic, unfortunately, prevented a wide cinematic release in many countries in 2020) almost rates as high in my opinion; the 3D animation quality, in particular, is fantastic.

The story/plot is somewhat predictable and (especially) the last third shares some parallels with the third Indiana Jones movie. That's not a major issue in my opinion (the third movie was released back in 1989, most movie viewers won't remember details).

It's a fun and fast-paced kids' (especially suited for older kids and teens) movie that adults can enjoy as well.

I would rate it at least 7+/10 and add an extra star for the excellent 3D / CG animation quality, 8+/10 stars in total.

Soul (2020)

A variation of Pixar's "Inside Out" targeted at Adults

[8/10 · 27 December 2020]

I will keep my review short: This movie is the most "adult" film yet from Pixar (having watched all of their theatrical releases since Toy Story 1). I'm not sure kids will appreciate or even get the somber notes and adult themes (the meaning of life, life after death), even down to details (key emphasis on Jazz music).

It feels like Pixar's "Inside Out" reimagined for adults (but not like "Inside Out 2.0", the setting in Soul is too different).

As such, it was maybe a blessing in disguise that Soul wasn't released in theaters and got a smaller home release due to the Covid pandemic in 2020. I'm not sure this movie would have met Disney's box office expectations given the huge budgets of Pixar movies.

It will be interesting to see if Pixar goes down this more experimental and adult-oriented route in its upcoming movies.

I watched Soul back-to-back with the new "Sonic" (2020) movie by coincidence. The video game-inspired Sonic CG movie felt a lot more like a Disney "feel good" family movie than Soul from Pixar - which doesn't make Soul a bad movie, it's just very different from what you may be accustomed to from the latest Pixar sequels and core Disney franchises.

Summary: I wouldn't watch Soul with pre-teen or even teen kids. This is Pixar for young adults and adults.

8/10.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

Let's bring the saga to an end - a convoluted fast-food sausage designed by a committee

[6/10 · 19 December 2019]

The Rise of Skywalker feels like eating a giant sausage in front of a hungry audience waiting for closure after all these decades (with lots of mustard, thanks to the FX).

Not a great meal, more like fast-food to somehow feed and "please" most viewers in a very hurried fashion:

Let's re-use every ingredient out there (using dead actors instead of dead meat) and cram everything into one giant mix to create that final sausage fast-food that the fans were craving for since 1977:

And you better hurry: Very fast cuts that don't feel like classic Star Wars - simply because otherwise the same content would need hours to develop and mature (probably worth another whole trilogy instead of one final movie). There isn't one memorable scene, it's cut - cut - cut in a frenzy across the Galaxy until the credits roll.

Content and locations probably worthy of a Star Wars 10-12 trilogy crammed into one single movie.

I don't really blame this movie or the director. It's a final effort to combine all open strings, close plot holes, and resolve open subplots from other movies (I'm looking at you in particular, Star Wars 8). A nearly impossible task for one film.

Just one example: It looks like both the Jedi and the Sith get more and more power(ful) with each SW movie. This makes the storyline harder to believe and inconsistent, the new "moves" creep into borderline fantasy instead of classic SW Sci-Fi with established rules. Why even build own or fight enemy spacecraft at all when one guy or gal can take down or at least neutralize entire fleets of starships? The force is strong there, but not so much with this final movie.

Summary:

6/10. A movie by committee. Not bad, but not very good or even good either. This film like a cloned SF action flick with a huge budget. Disney fooder for Christmas (and I don't blame Disney as a corporation on principle, I like "their" new Mandalorian TV series a lot so far.).

PS: As a point of reference and benchmark I would rate The Phantom Menace as 2-3/10 and The Empire Strikes Back as 9-9.5/10. This movie is somewhere in the middle, the extreme 1/10 and 10/10 reviews popping up on IMDB should be disregarded.

Blade Runner (1982)

Still a masterpiece

[10/10 · 18 December 2019]

I can only repeat what others have written already: "A Milestone Of Science Fiction And A Cyberpunk Masterpiece "

Visually stunning for a movie made in the early 80s, the movie covers deep philosophical questions facing humanity in the 21st century (mega-corporations ruling over gig economy workers, environmental destruction, genetic engineering...) and what it means to be human.

In short: A Timeless classic.

The movie may feel a bit slow for today's audience but it's worth giving the plot time to unfold and to pick up the details (especially the gorgeous visuals, the visual overload almost requires a second or even a third viewing).

If you watch(ed) other SF films released post-1982, including many Anime and music videos, you will see the huge influence Blade Runner had on character designs and settings.

I will go even further: Blade Runner (it's worth repeating that it was released back in 1982 already) still feels very ahead of its time even decades later and is one of three most influential SF movies of all time in my opinion, along with:

• Metropolis (1927)
• 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Add the first Star Wars movie from 1977 and the original Matrix movie (1999) if you want a list of five movies with two more successful (in terms of box office) works. Or swap these two additions for niche movies such as La Jetée (1962) or Brazil (1985) if you want to exclude blockbuster/mainstream examples.

PS: Watch both the original theatrical release (1982) and then the Final Cut (released in 2007) of Blade Runner to find out which one suits you better (in this order). Finally, I also recommend the sequel Blade Runner 2049 released in 2017. Make sure you don't skip the three short films as an introduction to the sequel, sort of a story bridge from the original Blade Runner:

• 2036: Nexus Dawn (2017)
• 2048: Nowhere to Run (2017)
• Blade Runner Black Out 2022 (2017)

These three short films are available for free online and are also included in many disc releases of Blade Runner 2049.

Iron Sky: The Coming Race (2019)

A HUGE Disappointment - the first Iron Sky movie was much better with a smaller budget

[2/10 · 8 May 2019]

I loved Iron Sky 1 for what it was, a good SF B-Movie with some very sarcastic and even intelligent political in-jokes.

The sequel is a big disappointment, unfortunately (and, to reiterate, I write this as someone who loves B-movies and I even donated some money for this sequel during its crowdfunding phase):

• Weak plot and no credible bad guy. "Jokes" that simply don't work or are tired ("jailbroken" iPhones in 2019?), coupled with wooden acting. However, I don't think the actors are to blame a lot given the weak script and plot they had to work with.

• The special effects are not much better than in the first movie, where did the budget (around 3X the amount of the first movie, 20+ million versus 7-8 million Euro!) end up? For example, the director asked for extra crowdfunding money for some additional "Vril" kill scenes that add next to nothing in the final version.

• Weak communication with funders, credibility is broken or lost. "Normal" moviegoers get to see the sequel weeks or months in advance - and since the movie leaked out to the usual Internet sites, there was and is no sound logic in NOT providing a digital copy (or at least a stream) to backers who funded this in good faith many years ago.

(The movie ended up in development hell because of legal troubles with the FX team from the first movie concerning intellectual property, I will spare you the boring details. This results in more of the jokes and puns that COULD have worked a few years ago now being outdated as of 2019.).

Recommendation for a third Iron Sky movie (which is at least hinted at when the credits roll):

Get a better scriptwriter, get a better scriptwriter. Did I mention to get a better scriptwriter? And maybe a new director as well.

Update: It looks like the Finnish production company behind the IS franchise went bankrupt (no wonder given the box office flop), therefore a third movie to end the trilogy on Mars looks very unlikely at the moment.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

A Miracle Has Happened! (For A Hollywood Sequel) - BR 2049 Feels Like A Slow-Paced Art House Movie With A Blockbuster Budget

[10/10 · 20 October 2017]

To quote Sapper Morton's character in the movie:

"A miracle has happened". How so?

BR 2049 is a blockbuster sequel that pays tribute to the original BR movie (but not in a slavish way, like eg. Star Wars VII did in my opinion) and to intelligent SF cinema in general.

First, 2D or 3D? 3D doesn't add much to this movie and some details/sharpness gets lost in dark(er) scenes. One nice scene in 3D is Deckard's first appearance with his gun (as seen in the trailer, no spoiler) - but that's about it. I recommend watching it in 2D with a very good sound system.

The bad (minor details):

• If there's one weaker performance, it's the god-like business magnate Wallace. Jared Leto is overacting, but maybe that's wanted and not his fault when you hear director Denis' casting call and the long monologues attached to Wallace's character in the script.

(On a side note: Originally, director Denis V. Wanted to cast the famous singer and actor David Bowie for Wallace. He, unfortunately, died before BR 2049 started shooting in 2016).

• The new BR 2049 soundtrack is a little too bombastic/industrial at times. I personally liked the original Vangelis score in the first BR (1982) better. It was and is a timeless movie score/soundtrack.

Now, for the good and great, "the miracle":

I still give the movie a 10/10, if only for the sheer courage of the studio and director to go ahead and make this sequel.

Blade Runner famously bombed back in 1982 at the box office.

This resulted in no spin-offs, almost no merchandise sales (compare that to Star Wars with its huge merchandise machine running over several decades etc.).

There was almost no visibility for Blade Runner among younger audiences as of 2017, except for cult movie audiences and SF lovers.

That's most likely not enough to make a decent return on a $150-200M sequel (the projected budget of BR 2049) over three decades later.

To quote Sapper, it's a miracle that Blade Runner 2049 exists the way it exists:

Slow pacing (on purpose), 163 minutes run time, very few action sequences, R rating.

That's also why most lovers of the original BR seem to love this sequel (judging from other user reviews).

I wasn't the only one being reminded of Stalker (1979) and similar SD movie classics. BR 2049 has Tarkovsky and Kubrick's influences written all over it. It is a visually stunning art-house movie with a blockbuster budget.

Finally, the CGI and all the effects are very well integrated, the CGI doesn't feel tacky and there are still many miniatures and real sets used. A believable SF / cyberpunk setting.

A masterpiece for SF cinema - and among (usually weak) Hollywood sequels in particular.

Make sure you watch the original (I recommend the 2007 "Final Cut") and the three short movies (2022, 2036 and 2048, all available for free online) before you watch BR 2049.

This is a movie that can be enjoyed a second time or a even a third time - again, much like the original Blade Runner from1982.

PS: Movie lovers should really support such visual works of art with some intelligence, these are qualities even rarer today in most of Hollywood's sequels. BR 2049 proved that a blockbuster miracle with art-house quality visuals is still possible. Otherwise, we as movie consumers will get what we deserve: Fast & Furious 27, Transformers 9. It's just sad to see that Transformers 5 probably ends up making more money than BR 2049.

Dark Star: HR Gigers Welt (2014)

Great Documentary - Giger Beyond Alien

[8/10 · 18 November 2014]

A great documentary that premiered a few months after HR Giger died. Unfortunately, it was started when HR Giger's health was already clearly deteriorating. The interviews with him are quite short, many are with his personal and professional entourage.

The storytelling is not very linear, some old footage from Giger's youth and from his various movie/Hollywood assignments are mixed in. You will see more interview clips with Giger himself in these segments.

As an introduction and indicator if this movie is interesting to you, watch the short movie 'HR GIGER HOME MADE' (available for free on YouTube), which uses the same setting in Giger's house and garden.

I would recommend this movie to all (surreal) art lovers, especially those who might have prejudices and only know his body of work (Giger also was quite often reduced to his work on the Alien creature, which doesn't do him justice at all) but not the real and unique person/artist behind it.

Master of the Universe (2013)

Could have used other people being interviewed, clearer questioning

[6/10 · 7 January 2014]

Since another user (Thomas) has already written a longer review that I mostly agree with l will keep mine focused on some details:

• The documentary has some rough cuts between topics because the questions are seldom audible. Maybe it would have been useful to add graphics in written or formulate the questions clearly; it is especially annoying because a few questions can be barely heard off-camera. This should be an either-or.

• Watching the film without any economics or basic banking/trading knowledge could be hard at times. For example, there are formulas about swap products or the sums of bad loans issued/outstanding by large German banks (and their bad bank successors) written on the windows during the interview. Similarly, a number of open legal cases against Swiss banking giant UBS are cited by the interviewee (he is reading out of one of the latest UBS reports). Without further explanation, these topics seem cut together and could confuse the average viewer (same for oil bonds discussed by the interviewee or a Deutsche Bank ad for retail investors discussing long and short derivative products on the platinum price). Adding buzzwords without explanations or at least introductory statements make the interviewee gain an aura of superiority that is not warranted.

• The interviewed person sometimes comes across as biased against hedge funds versus established (big) banks, for example when discussing Greek bonds in distress. He focuses on the mess (hedge funds taking advantage of the fact that the Euro is supposed to be saved by politicians, acting as vultures) after it was said and done, not on the mechanisms and people who created the mess in the first place. There's a reason why hedge funds "attack" weak countries, they had large deficits and/or cooked their books to enter the Eurozone. It should be noted (at least in my opinion) that the latest crisis was largely caused by big banks and insurance companies with investment banking arms/units acting as hedge funds - the difference being that they were granted a public bailout while hedge funds acted on their own (no taxpayer bailout) this time.

The causes and roots of the latest financial crisis outside the realm of each bank (artificially low interest rates and the general role of central banks, subsidized housing promises in many countries by politicians, the removal of Glass-Steagall act in the United States and other de-regulation etc.) are only touched upon briefly when the rise of globalized, more deregulated banking system is discussed in passing. In contrast, the problem of financial "innovations" sold to investors with mediocre knowledge of said products is well discussed with an example. This makes the discussion of the crisis somewhat anecdotal, only one problem area was discussed.

• Confronting the interviewee with another person, say a person from critical groups or NGOs such as Attac or Occupy! or even other investment bankers disagreeing in an open discourse could have helped the movie in my opinion. Without such interruptions, the former banker can present his theories and recollections, there are no dissenting voices - only brief TV adverts or news clips are mixed in, 95% of the movie time focuses on the interviewee answering questions in the empty skyscraper. We as viewers are forced to take his personal opinions as facts, which is sometimes hard to accept for viewers with some knowledge of the subject matter. On the other hand, people with no or basic knowledge of the subject matter will find it hard to follow.

In summary, I may have overly focused on negative points in my review.

This was not my intention since this movie gives a rare insight into the world of investment banking, these people rarely want to be in the spotlight and it probably took some convincing to find a suitable interviewee (who probably only agreed because he quit his latest job and is in voluntary retirement now).

For example, hedge fund manager Paul Tudor Jones is still buying up any circulating copies of the 1987 PBS film 'Trader' featuring him and his firm Tudor Investments because he apparently hates the movie.

It may take years before we get another detailed insight into a trader's or investment banker's mind through a documentary.

I recommend this documentary for people interested in (investment) banking and the latest financial crisis as well as the ascent of globalized investment banking since around 1980.

In addition, I recommend the following movies as introductions on similar subjects:

• Inside Job (documentary, covers latest crisis) - Margin Call (fiction, covers latest crisis) - Barbarians at the Gate (1993 classic, based on a true story)

PS: Speaking of other movies, I was more than once reminded of the "Margin Call" setting when watching this movie. Both films take place in a eerily quiet skyscraper with artificially lit empty conference rooms and hallways; sort of a dehumanized setting with no natural sounds or other influences from the outside (real) world.