Change Your Image
aka_tourette
Reviews
The Father (2020)
Probably not a 10, but I give it a 10
The most moving and haunting picture I've seen since... I don't even remember when. I poured my eyes out. This is a contained film, with small budget, the one that a debutant director makes, where all the money go into writing and acting. It's cinematography in the most pure form. The story is also intelligently directed, making yourself doubt throughout the film what's real, pushing the public to identify with the main character, living his tragic experience.
The fact that Sir Anthony Hopkins, himself an 83-84 years old senior, plays a man born in 1937 named Anthony, makes the film the more soul-wrenching.
Olivia Colman also gives a most powerful performance, showing her extraordinary acting range, from the light-hearted Hot Fuzz to The Favourite and now this. I don't have enough words to praise this picture. A must watch.
The Wind (2018)
Nothing wrong with this picture
It is filmed in digital, so the image is a little washed up, especially in the interior scenes, but the main female character gives a very good performance. The men are not that convincing, but nothing to cry about. They are pretty much average, minding they don't have much to work with. Obviously, the female characters and their neurosis is the theme of the film.
Those which complain about the flashbacks in other reviews are infantile. The flashback are not hard to follow at all. The picture wouldn't work without them. More than that, some more obscure ones leave you thinking about the film after you finished it, wondering what exactly had happened, making you want to watch it again.
It's a minimalist picture reminding me of The Lighthouse, which I've seen recently, although not that good. More creative camera work would have increased the dramatic feel of the scenes. But, in the end, it's a good, small movie, worth watching.
Support small, independent creators.
Brightburn (2019)
A good idea wasted on bad pacing, bad cinematography and just bad writing altogether
I think they don't know how to make movies anymore. They appear to not understand the fundamentals of telling a story. You can see it everywhere, from GOT to Star Wars The Farce Force. The premises don't match the conclusion. The causality is forced. Everything feels unnatural, incomplete and altogether unsatisfying. The characters are superficially developed, the story is rushed, the relation between the characters lacks justification. Sometimes you feel these people in Hollywood have completely lost contact with reality.
I give you one simple example. Boy visits aunty in the middle of the night, says some strange things and aunty sends his back home on foot, through the darkness, in Hill Billy's land sank in pitch black darkness. HOW ABOUT GIVING HIM A RIDE HOME?! HOW ABOUT INVITING HIM IN TO HAVE A TALK, INSTEAD OF KIPPING HIM AT THE DOOR LIKE A BLOODY HOBO?!
Now, about the physical quality of the product. I know they make all these movies on digital. I know the FED destroyed the dollar and there are no more resources to make anything decent. But, goddamn, these flicks look bad. Everything is washed up. There's no contrast. There are no shadows. The image has no depth. Doesn't matter! Fill everything with some kick ass CGI and we're done. Compensate the lack of development in the story with one action sequence after another, spiced up by some gory details and sell it to the popcorn and Coca Cola vegan diet public. They swallow everything.
I give this movie 1 star just because is so clumsy made. Probably is not 1. Probably is a 4 but really it doesn't deserve any concessions made.
And, yes. They had to put some propaganda in it. There's some anti-gun small talk in there, which makes completely no sense, as the father and the son are seen later going together hunting (meaning they were very well accustomed with guns) and at the end they even introduced an Alex Jones caricature accompanying the destruction of the world, which looked so bad, I feel sorry for the actor, which is a known one, and which, in these times, apparently can get only these kind of miserable gigs.
Nocturnal Animals (2016)
expensive student movie
Looks like a movie done by a beginner, which I'm not sure Tom Ford is. It's shot in digital so everything looks pretty flat, especially the open areas. The movie is very slow, with too long scenes, awkward and irrelevant dialogues. There is also a typical liberal Hollywood moment with characters labelled as "bourgeois, conservative, racist, Christian, materialist, republicans". I'm not kidding. A personage makes this characterization of some people, like reading from The Social Justice Warrior Hand Book. It almost made me leave the theatre. The action sequences are not very dynamic and fall flat. The slow, human interaction, scenes are all close shots. No environment present. Very low environmental sound, which gives you the impression the characters talk alone in an empty room. The synopsis on IMDb is misleading. "Violent thriller she interprets as a veiled threat and a symbolic revenge tale"? There's almost no trace of that in the movie. The main female character reads this simple and not very original story novel manifesting some strange anguishes which you can't link together with anything happening. The abrupt ending is flat like the entire movie, leaving you glad that it's finally over as the only satisfaction. 4 out of 10.
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)
painfully bad
This is not Gore Verbiski's movie anymore, but I was very surprised to find out that the same writers of the previous parts wrote this pile of crap. To summarize, this is a collection of clichés, thin jokes and too clean pirates. Captain Jack is Captain Jack, but, yes, cleaner and much less inspired. Associating him with a forgotten love (Penelope Cruz), which is sassy and untamed, is a huge cliché. The plot, as a new adventure without any relation with previous stories but a map, is very poor crafted. The action sequences are just unreal, especially the escape from the court of King George. Everything feels artificial and crafted on commission. It's really an irony that this movie had the highest profits from the series. It shows that the public is really stupid or was unaware of how bad this is. Which is not an excuse, because I had the feeling this is going to be very bad from the first trailer I've saw( I watched the movie on HBO). Bad, bad, bad, worst corporate money making fast food type of a movie.
Moartea domnului Lazarescu (2005)
brilliant idea to waste
I'm Romanian, and this is a Romanian movie; a very awarded and appreciated one in the west. But this is not a good movie. The director, Cristi Puiu, makes here the same mistake as in his previous movie, "Marfa si banii". Before anything, this is not an artistic film. It's a reality show with no vision from the director. The camera is all the time fix, so a lot of the characters talk with the back turned. Mr. Lazarescu is 70% from movie time a laying corpse, so I don't know what kind of extraordinary performance he's putting in this film. And this is not his fault. The only good thing here is the idea. Yes, is a cruel world, and we all live the misery of the old age, and the illness that comes with it. And I'm sure that the sanitary system is a disaster everywhere, especially for the poor. Yes, is a great idea to waste with no money, no time, no screenplay and no director. This didn't achieved half the greatness of The Morometes, the best Romanian movie of all time, made on the communist era, after the novel with the same name of Marin Preda. This movie is under all the stupid propaganda Romanian movie from the communist time. It's the mark of the almost dead Romanian film industry. We have great actors, great theater performances but no film industry at all. I believe that the occident appreciated this movie because has confirmed the opinion that the west has about Romania. The opinion that we are some kind of gypsy of the Europe living like animals in Transilvania or something like that. And the Romanian appreciations on this site is only patriotism.
House of 1000 Corpses (2003)
If you don't like horror, don't watch it. This is a real one
I have seen The Devil's Rejects first, so my comments on this is influenced by the sequel movie. This is a much better one. Zombie looks here as a better writer. The movie looks like a collage of classic horror theme, and is very like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre II, but doesn't matter because everything works better in here. The lines are not a piece of art, but they fit very well in the story. The interludes with the monologues gives the movie a more psychedelic feeling. I love Bill Moseley's lines, even they don't mean a thing. Baby Firefly is a spoil evil child and so her behavior in The Devil's Rejects is justified. The image and the atmosphere is perfect, and the movie is not spoiled with the bad idea of making the audience sympathize with the mad family, like in the sequel. The entire movie looks like it was made with a bigger budget than The Devil's Rejects. The House of 1000 Corpses should have been mentioned in the movie as the lair of Doctor Satan, because the title is not justified. You barely see a few dead bodies in the entire movie so just calm down. The cop is also better, then the one from the sequel. Is only one thing that is missing. Because all the horror is wide open to your eyes every minute, the film doesn't deliver that feeling of building tension, to really scare the pants off you. It's pure horror, like every horror movie should be. I don't understand those who blame this movie fore the brutality, the crazy behavior, the strong language. Aren't you seek and tired with Jason and Freddy slashing stupid teens in stupid teen movies. This is not everywhere like Britney Spears. If you don't like horror, don't watch it. And if you like Britney, go to hell.
The Devil's Rejects (2005)
Zombie can direct, but he's no writer at all
Lately I started to watch horror movies, beginning with the classics. Well, they all suck big time, with some exceptions like a few parts from Texas Chain Saw Massacre 1974. So, I expected a lot from the rejects. The movie poster was pretty impressive. Finally, some horror movie characters, not like that stupid, skinny, dressed in black pyjamas dude from SCREAM. But the rest was really disappointing. The fault is on the reviews that I read here, who took my expectations to high. How should I put this? Zombie can direct, but he's no writer at all. The movie and characters are unbalanced. So, they are ruthless, sick criminals, but in the end we should feel sorry for them, because they are still good funny guys, who were kids once. What's with that crap? There is no moral meaning in this, no point to make and it feels unreal. And then is the violence which is so blamed here in some reviews. Yes, there is some blood, and some stupid killings, and some almost unbearable sexual humiliation, but there is not enough dynamism, with camera moves and stuff. Don't get me wrong. You can show less, and make the audience see more. The acting is good for that script. Otis is pretty impressive with that hair and blood dirty torso, and Baby Firefly is mean and beautiful, and scares me to death thinking that a woman can be like that. But, in the way that a horror movie should be, this is not it. For that, go watch HAUTE TENSION, which is made by the french (what a shame) with Romanians actors (in secondary roles) and part Romanians crew. Yes! I'm Romanians. Go see a brilliant director, brilliant image, brilliant acting, brilliant graphic violence, brilliant killer. The best horror movie I ever seen, after The Passion of Christ, of course.