Change Your Image
t_d_w2002
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Fall Guy (2024)
Am I the only one who thinks the film could greatly benefit from a longer runtime instead of a shorter one?
Before seeing this film, I read a few reviews that left me a bit perplexed. After seeing it, some of the complaints I've seen start to make sense while others seem wildly off the mark.
I left the cinema with the impression that the biggest problem with The Fall Guy is the draconically enforced runtime. I've seen reviewers complain that the movie does not know what it wants to be, action, romcom, or crime thriller, and I thought, why can't a movie be all of those? After seeing it, I realize the problem lies in the fact that the film does not have enough runtime to properly cover all the aforementioned aspects. The solution is NOT trying to be only one thing or get shoehorned into one genre, but to give it more runtime/breathing room so that it can blend all of those genres organically and congenially. Unfortunately, in today's world of vastly shortened and rapidly shortening attention spans, I imagine whoever cut this movie must be under immense pressure to make it as short as possible, and it's also very possible that the original cut was much longer, and then got repeatedly forced by executives or whoever to make the final cut shorter and shorter and shorter, until it was just bare-bones without any 'meat' left. Every scene felt massacred to the point that only the bare minimum was kept to ensure the audience can still follow the plot, and nothing else. But more often than not, it's everything else - the bells and whistles, the fluffs and frills, the throwaways lines, lingering glances, silences, non sequiturs, seemingly unexpected or inessential dialogues, the "Leave the gun, take the cannoli"s, that give a movie character and personality, and more importantly, they help flesh out characters, so that the audience can grow to care about them in the story. It's very possible that so much of The Fall Guy ends up on the cutting room floor that characters like the assistant Alma (Stephanie Hsu), producer Gail (Hannah Waddingham), and even female lead Jody (Emily Blunt) and main villain Tom Ryder (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) felt severely underdeveloped. I sincerely wish they would release an extended version/director's cut or whatever they call it these days in the future, because I believe this movie would be greatly improved with more runtime, and more 'meat' to most of the scenes and characters. What's sad is that I've seen people complaining that the movie is too long, which is somewhat understandable, because everything that help build character/nurture style felt absent (probably cut) so of course the audience would end up bored and uninvested, thus wanting the movie to end quickly. But the solution is not to make it even shorter, but to give it enough time to properly build both the characters and the story!
That said, at the end of the day, despite a savagely reduced runtime, some of the heart and love woven into the fabric of the movie still shines through, and that's what saved the movie, and that's usually what makes a movie worth watching - that you can tell it was a labor of love, and that the creators (director, writers, actors, stunt performers, all the cast and crew etc.) put their heart in it. You'd think it would be hard to tell, but the audience can somehow always feel it, even when the execution might not be perfect, and the ways of expression can be meandering and weird. But this movie almost didn't make it, because soooo much of it must have been cut!! And thank god for Ryan Gosling's ability to elevate a movie even when it may be struggling in other aspects!
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Interesting premise, but the rest of the movie failed to live up to it
This movie offends me on such a fundamental level that I wanted to give it a 0. But then I remembered some truly bad movies where it's obvious that none of the screenwriters, directors, or actors involved was actually making an effort. In my opinion, these are the kind of movies that deserve a zero score. In the case of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, it is clear that some of the creative personnel behind it were genuinely, and dare I say with great (albeit misguided) artistic passion, sensibility and integrity, trying to express something through it. That's why I gave it 3 stars, for effort.
The reason I didn't like this movie is not because I found it confusing - I understood the plot perfectly, nor is it because I cannot suspend belief for a sci-fi twist - I've enjoyed many a sci-fi and fantasy movie in the past. What irks me the most is the kind of movies that present a sci-fi or fantasy premise, and then do not build on the premise in a logical or consistent way. Of course, some leeway and artistic license are always allowed, or even welcome, since movies sometimes can't and shouldn't be research-paper accurate. But if a movie veers too far away from logic and reason, without utilizing absurdity or parody as a deliberate artistic treatment, then it is just plain pointless and obtuse. And this is a movie that takes itself seriously. The problem is, if one is to entertain, somewhat seriously, the possibility of highly precise selective memory erasing technology, then the least interesting aspect would be to use it to salve relationship pains. Governments and secrets services would go crazy for this kind of technology for espionage, mind control, loyalty conversion, airtight non-disclosure procedure, and a million other usage scenarios. And people would freak out over the enormous ethical issue of invading the sanctity of one's mind. The only imaginary situation where such technology would be even remotely considered suitably justified would be to treat extremely severe case of PTSD, schizophrenia or depression perhaps. The world as we know it simply wouldn't be the same with this premise. To even suggest the idea that people would willingly erase their own memories just to alleviate romantic woes is an insult to the audience's intelligence.
Imagine going into a movie knowing its premise revolves around a time machine that normal people could use for a fee, then finding out in this fantasy world, all the people only want to use the time machine to re-freeze their melted ice-cream, and nothing else. If it's a skit in a comedy, it might be funny. But this movie seems pretty serious about itself, which just makes it look like vacuous nonsense.
Apartment Zero (1988)
They don't make movies like this anymore
I recently went through a sudden bout of Colin Firth obsession and was digging through his filmography when I came across this hidden gem.
Apartment Zero is a gripping, intense, offbeat and immensely original psychological thriller filmed three decades ago. Some of the preferred techniques (like the frequent use of super close-ups and the style of background music) employed here might be reminiscent of vintage films from a bygone era. Much like in fashion, pop music and pop literature, certain cinematic styles, themes and techniques went in and out of fashion throughout time, sometimes induced by influential works of the time, changes in social and ideological landscape, or technological advances. This gives works from a certain era a decided "look" and "feel", which may seem dated when revisited decades later, though I do not think "dated" is necessarily a bad look. Retro can be cool and inspired. Since this film is older than me and I'm not much of a cinephile, I have no idea if this film was viewed as original and unusual when it first came out as it is now, or if films of that period all had that similar style or theme. But I can't help but be hopelessly pulled into the story and immersed in the protagonist's strange and oddly specific world, even though there was no flashy CGI or overly picturesque scenery and set pieces to grab one's attention at every turn. Like many reviewers has said before, the acting by the main characters and the supporting cast was superb. And there was nothing else to distract viewers from the characters and their story. Colin Firth gave an indelible performance that made his typecasting later in his career seem much more lamentable. Nothing was wasted, and the entire thing was a consistent, coherent, and unexpectedly convincing piece of story-telling.
Since I watched this film during a Colin Firth binge, I can't help but notice the evident changes in the style of his films throughout the years, which I think more or less mirror the stylistic evolution of filmography as a whole in the past three decades. I'm not saying these changes are bad, but I do regret that films like this are less likely to be made or enjoy box office success nowadays.
Aquaman (2018)
Where did all these raving reviews come from?
I came in with high hopes since this movie got some pretty good reviews. I left sorely disappointed. The script is wooden with characters making nonsensical decisions solely for the purpose of moving the plot along. The dialogues are terrible, like they're written by middle schoolers. And the perplexing music choices that do not match the scenes one bit!! The only saving grace is the amount of effort and creativity they put into building an underwater fantasy world, which not many movies have done before. I'll give them that.
But I simply cannot understand how this movie got such a high score! Astroturfing maybe?