Change Your Image
rememberdave
Reviews
Dune (2021)
Too much following along on mundane action
This is so boring compared to the source material. Very little VISUAL storytelling here. We barely see the worms. We see the worm exit the sand, and people fall in, but then the camera cuts away and does not cut back to complete the action. A helicopter goes down, but we only see this action from a worms-eye view looking out the windshield at nothing but sand crumbs blocking the view, as if we are in the back of the helicopter and have a very limited sight line. It's like they cut corners on mundane action to save money and told very little visual story on the interesting material. Many movies have a helicopter crash in the desert. Not only do we sit through a helicopter crash, we do it so third-rate. There is so much source material-that a helicopter crash scene should be very quick. Spending 15 VISUAL seconds on a helicopter crash for a story that has so much more interesting choices is a real waste. There were supposed to be many simultaneous stories going on but we miss out on them because we are stuck on this main thread. It seems like it was sloppily edited too. Every interesting action sequence gets ended abruptly. How about the poison tooth scene?? Such a let down. You can't get into the atmosphere because we get cut out of it so quickly. We don't have but a split second and then we are back onto more mundane filming. The first half of the movie is pretty good but the story evaporates 1/3 into the movie. Basically it is just good guys versus bad guys for the remaining 2/3. If you are going to have a second watch of this Dune, be mindful of how much time is spent showing mundane action versus action that is unique to this story's universe. How many prolonged fight scenes should we sit through?
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (2022)
Really Good Big Picture type of story
This is the first show in a very long time that has me wanting more. I am into monster of the week type of stories. I do not care for too much small talk and mundane interaction between characters. This story developed rather well and also introduced new characters along the way. We are not stuck with the same few characters episode after episode. Although, my suspension of disbelief gets ruined when writers have the 5 most important people in the world run into each other at a fast-food joint at the same time the 5 greatest armed robbers are robbing the restaurant. Then they all pair up and fall in love. Plus they happen to be good looking too, and only 19-24 years old. I am glad this show did not fall hard into this trap. It ruins it for me every time. I do not want to see personal stories between 2 people that have little to do with the main story. I don't care that characters have feelings for each other. I don't care that they may fall in love. This interaction or context can be demonstrated in other genres, so there is no need to include it here. Show us stuff that only exists in middle-earth. If you need to put the girl and the guy together, do it quickly and MOVE ON! This is a land of make believe and there is so much more that an active imagination can create, and it seems that this show could actually pull this off. Less mundane drama, more active imagination. We need big story stuff with a monster of the week thrown in for rising action.
Crime Scene: The Texas Killing Fields (2022)
Unfocused composition
The only spoiler in this review is that there are no spoiler's because we all know how Netflix documentaries turn out. Netflix, please pull yourself together. There were at least 2 dozen victims. Episodes 1 and 2 were ok but 3 was just tunnel vision. This reminds me of the Netflix documentary with the catholic nun. There was a whole series of events with multiple victims, but the documentary goes off on some singular tangent. These documentaries are getting worse in terms of telling a story about multiple victims. The subject in these Netflix documentaries ends up changing at some point in the series. Just like their other documentaries, we are led down a path in one direction but then we are pushed off a cliff so we land in the opposite direction. Definitely worth the watch if you want to learn about the area, but do not expect to learn about more than 1.5 victims stories out of a few dozen victims.
Star Trek: Strange New Worlds (2022)
I've Tried. Writing is bad
This show must be geared towards kids or something because the writing is very immature. Just the inherent logic of the characters is juvenile. It is high schoolers get to play starship crew members for a day.
The Phantom (2021)
Drags on and on and on.
This is a poor attempt in telling a serious story. The first 45 minutes is redundancy after redundancy after redundancy. Really, do not waste your time. Read an article about the story. Please, save yourself 1h21m.
The Informants: Who Killed Nicole? (2019)
Disjointed
This is really bad. There was so much generic imagery being used when audio recordings were being played. They didn't use any photos of the victims or the crime scene. The editing was bad. Much of the time it felt like the audio and video were out of sync, even though they were not, the editing made it feel as if they were. The main supplier of information is OJ's manager, who, did not know O. J. until 1999, so he was as much a part of the O. J. of 1994 as any of us. An amateur production.
A Model Daughter: The Killing of Caroline Byrne (2009)
Not a good rendition
This movie jumps around the timeline quite often. I really couldn't sympathize or dislike any of the characters due to the amount of jumping around. The bad guy yelled at the victim a few times in flashbacks, but we were not shown much incriminating material or actions from the bad guy. He seems like a stupid, but this doesn't make one a killer. We see that his story doesn't quite add up and that he has a few odd behaviors, but these are not explored beyond surface level. This entire movie is surface level. There were sad moments, but I was sad because the actors portrayed themselves as sad. They were great actors. It is natural to want to cry when you see someone cry, so this movie is mostly watching people be sad. The cinematography was not that great either. The music came in at awkward positions, but there are also too many quiet scenes. It had the vibe of a head-case movie with quiet conversations and super cold coloring. This was an all around sad movie.
Exhibit A (2019)
Misleading
This show is about different local court systems that allow untrained experts to test and make conclusions on pieces of evidence. This is NOT about debunking currently used scientific methods, or that scientific methods are generally used incorrectly by trained experts. The first episode begins by making a generality that video evidence can be misleading. But then it shows us a case where the video was not in question but the expert who reviewed the video was in question. The expert was an ex-cop, and had complete flaws in his logic. So the evidence does not fail, just the people that are used to interpret the evidence have failed. The system has failed these people. Each episode does not come to conclusion either, nor does it answer any conflicting statements made by people on both sides of the case. The blood spatter?? So did any tests show that the other drops were not blood or was this just the opinion of the defense attorney?? Another person in this episode said the other spots were not tested to determine if they were blood. So were they tested??
Interview with a Serial Killer (2008)
A bit misleading.
Very little was learned from Arthur, himself, in this interview. The important details of his crimes we learn from detectives and the narrator. At the very least, one could say that Arthur was less than candid. He does tell us about a few horrible events of his life, but he only spoke about what is already known, or what he has claimed. There were no secrets revealed, no motivations acknowledged. He often put the blame for being killed on the victim. The victim wronged him in someway. When the topic of the two murdered children came up, he refused to speak and threatened to end the interview. This may have been because he was ashamed of killing kids and could not justify their murder in his mind. This is very common in serial killers that usually target adults, but had killed children along the way. Ted Bundy, Ottis Toole, and others did not like to talk about killing children. Being stuck in prison as a pedophile with violent offenders does not help getting these creeps to talk about their crimes. He would go back and visit the bodies that he dumped, but he never acknowledges this. When he was caught taking a piss next to a body he previously dumped, he claimed that he forgot it was there. In sum, he has been, and continues to be, in denial and vague. The doctors and detectives talk about this fact. This seems to be a widely known attribute of Arthur; that he is in denial and cannot face the facts of his desire and motivation.
We learn that he has a daughter and grandchildren. They love him like any child would. He loves them just the same. They learned about each other after he was convicted. His children did not get to know him on the outside, so he never had the opportunity to let them down. He was already a serial killer when they met. They never have, or will, live with him on the outside. The description of this film mentions his surprising family bonds. After watching this, what did the filmmaker want us to infer from the usage of surprising family bond? That his daughter loves her dad that she never knew pre-conviction? Or that a serial killer says that he has love for his family? All serial killers have family members that they love, and parents of serial killers continue loving their child that is behind bars. There was no surprise presented in this familial relationship. This could have been better without Arthur involved. I am sure the filmmaker knew ahead of time that they would be walking on eggshells during this interview. Given this knowledge, I would have prepared more informative material regarding his crimes to include in this film in case Arthur was a bad interview. The interview was bad, at least what was presented. Arthur acknowledges that he is a monster, but would not acknowledge any facts of any of the crimes that could incriminate his dignity or make him look any more repulsive. I appreciate that the filmmaker landed the interview, and if I assume that there were such stringent ground-rules, I would have sought out a head-doctor to teach me how to get this man to talk about his crimes like many of the other deranged individuals do. Since they are behind bars for the rest of their natural lives and can no longer be charged for the crimes, get them to open up. Arthur does little opening up. More time of this film could have been spent ABOUT Arthur than it does WITH Arthur. In sum, many of the issues with this interview were well known in advance. Doctors and detectives all have known about his denial. Given these facts, it is not surprising that the interview turned out like it did. It is just a shame that the filmmaker chose to use so much of this interview in this film. With the amount of shame Arthur seems to feel about himself and not his victims, more time could have been spent on his crimes and what was learned from his crime scenes.
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)
Nothing new, except actress!
This part in the film series reused everything that was interesting in part II and just made it corny and illogical. With part II, we know that the third test of the Genesis project is underway. The Federation is looking for a planet in order to test Genesis. We have gotten this far because the other tests have succeeded. The underground cave from the second test was a paradise. From here, it would have taken at least some time to prepare test 3, and they would have reviewed test 2 at least a little bit. It did not take a genius to see that test 3 was failing. Savik and David knew something was wrong early on. In sum, the cave paradise of test 2 didn't destroy itself and was a tried and true success after 2 tests. This movie cancels all of that out apparently. Another logical sticking point in my side is when Savik gives David a hard time about using Proto-matter and all the lives lost due to him using this proto-matter. At this point in the movie, no one had died on the collapsing planet from the good guys at least. The Genesis Device could be used as a weapon regardless of the existence of proto-matter. Where does death actually occur due to the fact that proto-matter was used? The device was already deadly if it were used where life already exists. So here we are canceling out earlier logic from the previous film, or at least, added confusion. Who did the proto-matter kill that a non-proto-matter device would not kill? And finally, the actress who played Carol Marcus was not in this film. When the Klingons are watching the stolen proposal for the Genesis project, it is now Kirk giving the proposal instead of Carol.(I am sure this is because in real-life the actress was not in this film.) How do we explain why Kirk is now in the proposal to the Federation? The Federation is hip-deep into the Genesis project. There is no need for Kirk to record a new proposal. The project is already on stage 3. Moreover, if he was going to record anything regarding Genesis, it would have been updated material. It would have included everything regarding Khan setting off the device, etc. It seems like the producer or director wanted to show the very costly, but very cool Genesis simulation so bad but they didn't have the actress's permission for the briefing portion, so they used Kirk, but didn't provide a practical, logical reason in the story why Kirk was the person presenting this very old information. To the Federation, this is old news. Why was Kirk saying word-for-word what Carol Marcus had said? Why the change? And then who was Kirk's intended audience? Logically, they would have the scientist explain what the scientist invented, but again, The Federation is well beyond the introduction stage with Genesis. This whole movie seemed to be stuck on the introduction of Genesis. Also, the Genesis Device was used up in the last movie so malevolent parties have to go after the data regarding Genesis not the device. Physical device versions currently do not exist. The Klingons in this movie behaved as if Kirk is the only one who has this information in all of the Federation, yet, in the beginning of this film 2 random Han Solo type dudes were able to steal the plans from The Federation. This fact makes Christopher Lloyd's motivation a little flaky, or even disingenuous. It was almost like he had a personal grudge like Khan, yet he did not have a personal grudge. Why bother with Kirk so much. Go after a scientist on Savik's ship. Don't destroy it. He wanted Genesis, but the writer wanted him to have to go through Kirk to get it. Just before Lloyd's character dies, he yells at Kirk, "GIVE ME GENESIS!!!" His henchmen just killed one of the main scientists that created Genesis by picking him at random to kill in order to get Kirk to submit. David and Carol have no special allegiance to the Federation. Why was he messing with Kirk again?
I think Genesis really did kill this movie. If they wanted to wrap a movie around Genesis, maybe they should have just started out on Earth where they learn that Romulans, Klingons, and others are all trying to get their hands on Genesis information, or maybe one of them already has had it for a little while? I know Kirk and the Enterprise needs to be a barrier for the bad guys, but a barrier to information that probably quite a few upper-rank members of the Federation and multiple scientists has knowledge of, makes Lloyd's character seem dumb, and dumb characters are no match for Kirk.
By The Search for Spock, Genesis is not going to be secret for long and to go through Kirk is like taking the long way around a mountain.
They also spent too much running-time on the Genesis planet itself. The kid should have grown into an adult Spock in one sequence/shot. Too much running-time was spent with adolescent Spock. A continuous transform into adult Spock would have made a great scene. If they started the movie on Earth, we wouldn't have needed Savik either. No need for 2 actresses. I liked Robin Curtis, but it is hard to ignore that she is a different actress playing an established role.
Too much carry-over from the last movie. The Wrath of Khan should have been exposition only, or mostly. TWOK had many events and seemed to span multiple days of movie-time. TSfS picked right up, kept the same pace for a little bit of the running-time, but ran out of steam by ACT II.
In sum, at least half of this movie's running-time seemed to take place in a few hours of movie-time. This film has too many mundane moments and unnecessary actions that really don't move the story forward. We basically watch an afternoon unfold for the last half of this movie. The writer did a poor job of reusing the elements from TWoK, and they seem forced. They used the elements for the sake of using them and not out of creative desire.
Out of Thin Air (2017)
Serious story, poorly told
This is a sad story, and the film may have good intentions but does not make you sympathetic to these people. We do not really learn about the murdered victims, and only hear from 1-2 of the 6 people charged with the crimes. It begins by leading the viewer to think the leader of the group is like Charles Manson. Then they are charged with 2 murders because of forced confessions. Next is about 30 minutes of one of the 6 charged talking about how she had a hard time separating fact from fiction, and STILL can't separate the two. That is the DEPTH of this film. They note how the police and court people declined to be in this film. We do not hear from the families of the murdered men. Of the six people that were charged with the murders, we only hear from one or two and we learn that one has passed away, but otherwise, we do not hear from anybody else or their whereabouts. Zilch!! Of the six charged that appeared in this film, they do not talk about where they really were when these crimes went down. We learn very little about what happened to the victims in the days leading up to their disappearance and we do not hear from their families in this film. Either this was poorly researched or poorly structured. I give 4 out of 10 for the production quality being well done. If you are looking for the actual mystery of these two murders to carry into this film you will not find it here.
The Keepers (2017)
Heartbreaking
Regarding the two murders, this series does not bring any new facts to light. It does throw out 2 possible suspects into the forefront, but it seems that a few details, that could discredit these suspects as being suspects, may have been left out. Meaning, I do not believe the priest had anything to do with the murders, and I believe this is the consensus of the filmmaker too, This does a disservice to the viewers that want to watch a true crime get solved before our eyes. Nothing is learned by these filmmakers creating this series. (Not in the actual show at least) Hopefully someone came forward with relevant information to find out who killed these 2 girls. Moreover, it seems more probable that one of the victims was using a false memory of being taken to the body by the perp priest, because her details of the scene and body were wrong. Also, the only way that the court would entertain the idea of opening a case against the priest was in the context of a suppressed memory being brought to light. So the main witness that said that the priest took her to the body was discredited almost immediately due to differing details of the crime scene and the body. This was the main tie-in between the two stories. This discrediting basically severed the murders from the child abuse stories rather early on. Therefore, this is mostly about the abuse of children. Yes, the perp had a cop brother, but he was not on this case, and probably not involved in any way, for the filmmakers would have made that clear, so anything that may have been covered up in the 1960s was to protect the school and not the particular priest and other perps. It is a shame that the statute of limitations ran out. Basically, this sicko priest died a few years ago. Many of these crimes were committed in the tight communities of the 60s and 70s, so even the church is not the same as it was back then. They did not know how to handle this scandals back then. The community treated this problem more of a local matter and not a global matter. There is no one to punish for these crimes anymore. Plus, I believe a victim has 7 years to bring criminal charges against another. Unfortunately, I believe the victim does have the responsibility of coming forward if they want the perpetrator punished. It is probably much easier to come forward today than it was in the tight knit community days. I believe more harm could be done if they allow too many years to pass. The one victim may very well have led herself to formulate some old memories. This is something that people do unfortunately. It may not be intentional, but I could see how something "fuzzy" by default can hurt others. It is the equivalent of a polygraph test. It has flaws built into it by default. Imagine if I told you, the reader, that I saw you in 7-11 the other day, and that you had blue jeans on? You may be able to keep reiterating your last few weeks and imagine yourself wearing jeans in a quick-stop. you may even come to believe that you were in a quick-stop recently. You may not of been in a quick-stop whatsoever but may have a very small recollection. If you keep thinking about this, it actually becomes real to your brain, and to anchor a case on this could be problematic. With other evidence, sure this could be handled VERY lightly, but as the main item of proof, not so much. This reclaimed memory thread ties the murders to the horrible child crimes. And there really is no one left to punish for the child abuse, so this is why I took off a few stars. They investigated the murders and came up short, but they still made the film. It should have just focused on the abuse, but we know who committed those crimes, and we know that he died around 1999. Tthis had very little to do with the murdered sister.