Reviews

12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Allegory of the powerlessness of childhood
22 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I feel like this movie isn't so much of a statement as much as it is an exploration.

Although the titular Character is John, there is sort of a secondary protagonist who appears at different moments thoughout the film. We aren't told directly what the relationship is between 13 year old John and this 12 year old girl, but it is implied that she is John's mother (in flashbacks).

The film explores and contrasts two different scenarios:

Being a child who feels completely oppressed by childhood, and is completely unable to alter the fixed way adults see him even as inside his own mind he is convinced of his own maturity. The desire to escape his childhood is so powerful it causes him to invent pathological schemes to seize control on his own terms. Because adults will not readily concede power and control to children, children usually submit and take their place until the reach a certain age and begin to question this hierarchy.

John seems to want more than anything not to be alone, but to be heard. Scenes throughout the film depict adults cutting him off or discounting what he has to say, and it only when John takes control by force that his family will actually sit and listen to him.

The female protagonist on the other hand is forced unwillingly out of the comforts that childhood affords and is thrust into the frightening world of adulthood when her single parent makes the sudden announcement that she is leaving. Faced with the fact that she will no longer have protection and advocacy from a fully grown adult, the terror of having to contend with the world on her own is the last thing she wants.

There is a bit of "the grass is always greener" effect, and while John seems to have gained control and liberty by displacing the other members of his family, he begins to feel the burden of responsibility and self sufficiency that adulthood eventually thrusts on all of us.

I think in effect the film was a reminder that children really do at heart desire to be children, protected and loved and heard, but not at the expense of being treated as a possession. There are times when John reveals himself to be exceptionally intelligent and adults continually refuse to acknowledge him, driving him further into isolation and resentment of the world around him.

While it is fortunate that MOST children never enact such elaborate and dangerous schemes to feel a sense of control, I'd be lying if I said no child ever fantasizes about things like this. I'm in my thirties but can still remember the awful fantasies I had to have as a child in order to soothe my way out of familial anxiety.

What some viewers might not realize is the movie is not so much to be taken literally. At least I don't think so. Viewers might wonder what did the family do that was SOOOOOO bad to deserve what John does to them? Is John simply a sociopath? I think the implication is that childhood can be like a death by a thousand cuts and even though it's usually not enough to push us over the edge, this film dares to depict the brutal fantasies that even the most innocent children can have when they feel powerless.
36 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Goldfinch (2019)
3/10
Like watching paint dry in a stuffy rich person's home while sipping tea
28 December 2019
I find what hooks me to a movie are complex and interesting characters I can relate to, and this movie didn't offer that for me. Nobody was likeable. Even from the opening where we have a villainous character delivering a monologue, he was not even interesting, I didn't want to know much more about him, I just wanted him to stop talking. Not even the child who just lost his mother could elicit my sympathy, he was just so flat. Nicole Kidman seemed to just be playing a mom from stockphotos. It was unbearable to watch any more of it past the 20 minute mark.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
55 Steps (2017)
7/10
Sympathetic without being depressing
19 October 2018
55 Steps is an inspiring legal drama about a victim of psychiatric "care" seeking legislative protection from forced medication on behalf of the mentally ill. Hillary Swank, who is always great to watch, does not disappoint as the patient rights advocacy lawyer fighting for a just cause, but I was pleasantly surprised by how believable the often-typecast Helena Bonham Carter's dynamic and nuanced performance was as real-life plaintiff Eleanor Riese. This film is sure to be underrated but you definitely shouldn't miss it if you or anyone you know has experienced being inside a mental hospital.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Skip the trailer if you want to have a better time
22 September 2018
Having loved the first Unfriended film, which is by a different director, by the way, I was super excited to see this one.

To be fair, the first Unfriended had its flaws. This one has more.

For those who want to see it, I recommend not watching the trailer. The trailer is what got me so excited, but there are so many spoilers! You basically find out how half the people die just from watching it. Watching the film after having seen the trailer was kind of like, "Tell me somethign I dont know already." I was left disappointed, wanting something more. WTF.

The acting here is not bad except for a few crying parts that feel awkwardly forced, and the characters are almost likeable even if they are a little dumb at times. This is not about a villain decimating a group of geniuses. Personality-wise, they are for the most part a group of average millenials you might find hanging out on the internet, who are modestly relatable albeit some slight charicaturing. However, even without the trailer ruining it for me, this film just felt empty. It wasn't enough. It felt brief and incomplete and the ending was just dumb.

I seriously prefer the first Unfriended movie over this one. Unfriended (I) I found scarier, the deaths more chilling and gruesome, and the overall cat and mouse feel as the villain toys with its victims much more riveting than Unfriended: Dark Web, even though this version's evil hackers and assasins for hire are more real-worldish.

If you prefer horror flicks with a semi-realistic storyline, you'll prefer this one over the first, probably. But I think the first was far more entertaining and interesting with just as talented of a cast if not more, so if you haven't seen it, give that a shot first.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Snowpiercer (2013)
3/10
So disappointing
21 September 2018
Some interesting cast members, like Jamie Bell and Tilda Swinton. Altogether could not sit through the whole film. The exposition was awkwardly unsatisfying. The story felt choppy. There were just too many damn fight scenes, it felt like watching a live action arcade game. The special effects were very cheap looking. Don't attempt a movie that's going to need an incredibly high budget to pull off, if you don't have that budget. Maybe there was a cool message behind it all. I don't know. It bored me too much.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dear Dictator (2017)
3/10
Try again, Odeya Rush
4 July 2018
Young actress Odeya Rush seems like she could follow the trajectory of a Mila Kunis - type actress comedienne. She's pretty, gifted and fun to watch, as her facial expressions and moody teenager, deadpan humor are deftly handled. Some of the interactions between her and the mother were genuinely funny. I think the life she injected in her lines is why the film (and its trailer) appear promising at outset.

However, the film ends up being worse than a typical "reality" tv series, and of course, even less realistic. Attempts to address morality and equality are overshadowed by some really weird stunts that are more awkward to watch than they are funny. Seriously, she throws a used tampon at somebody and then gives a girl a thong - wedgie to the point of tearing the undergarment out of the girl's pants. That's the kind of thing that might be good enough for a stupid viral YouTube video, but it doesn't belong in a movie. It no longer shocks us or even entertains us to see things like that, if it ever did.

I think Odeya's talent deserves a better frame than this trashy drama. And I don't need to say what everyone has already said about Michael Caine. We are all shocked that such a fine actor would lend himself to this. His acting is not bad as "The Dictator" but he cannot rescue the movie from its poor storyline and excessive failed attempts at comedy.

The film tries to be shocking, I guess, with the above mentioned scenes and also some explicit foot licking. It tries to be relevant, hip, and interesting to teenagers or whatever, duh. But the people who produced this don't seem to know what makes a good movie, or they don't care. Big names don't save films like this - it only adds up to wasted talent.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Better Life (2011)
8/10
A tearjerker for me
27 June 2018
After reading mixed reviews on IMDB, I decided to give the movie a try. It was well worth it - the film has virtually everything I look for, in film, and the only reason I wouldn't rate it higher is because of my subjective feelings for other films I love just a bit more. (I've never rated any movie a 10 on IMDB. That's just how I am.) The pace is stable, does not linger on exposition or fill the time with pointless scenes, nor does it wear you out with constant action scenes. The cinematography is as good as you could expect for a drama that isn't trying to be an "art film" - with some beautiful and gritty settings and appropriate lighting, The story is solid, with a couple of interesting surprises, and the script comes across very natural - far more so than many TV series or direct to Netflix movies. The casting and acting, however, is what carries it all the way home.

I'll admit much of the time I was teary eyed watching this film, especially the ending. I don't typically hunger for "feel-good, family-friendly fare" because in the real world there is a turmoil in humanity that once you see it, you can't unsee it - and any movie that attempts to sugarcoat that while attempting to address a serious subject, to me, feels pretentious. However, in spite of this movie's excellent portrayal of a father and son in an increasingly desperate situation, the movie DID make me feel good, even while making me cry. It gave me a release.

Demian Bechir make acting look easy for his Oscar-nominated role as Carlos, an undocumented Mexican immigrant working as a landscaper in Souther California and trying to support the life of his troubled teenage son. Carlos is unflinching in his dedication to supporting his child, no matter how tense things seem between them. Luis, fourteen, is increasingly restless with his life in a gritty, low-income neighborhood, where he and his friends picture their futures with less and less optimism. Day by day, the ominous proximity of gang activity beckons Luis to drop out of school and succumb to the 'hood life, which already seems to have appealed more to his best friends than the perceived alternatives of washing dishes or mowing lawns.

During a heated conversation about Luis' suspension from school for an altercation with another student, Luis shouts at Carlos to "Go mow some lawns!" The helpless alienation Bechir portrays as Carlos, despite his tireless efforts to provide the best possible future for his son, is reminiscent to Kevin Spacey's father-daughter relationship in "American Beauty", though played with a much more serious tone. During one of the more heart-wrenching dialogues in the movie, Luis questions his father, "Why did you have me? Why do all these poor people have kids?"

After a devastating theft threatens to destroy their future, it is interesting to see how both Carlos' and Luis' different moral codes interpret the scenarios they encounter as a team - Carlos, the law-abiding citizen, who respects authority and tries to make as little waves as possible, and Luis, with his high ideals and desire to take fairness and retribution into his own hands because nobody else will.

This film, though its content could be powerful enough influence people regarding current social ssues, does not resemble a propaganda film, in case you were curious. Far from being a political commentary, it is a story about family, hard work, and difficult choices, though in order to tell that story, realistic examples are shown of the emotional deterioration faced by real people, brought on by the fear of losing their jobs or worse, the forced separation from their families or children, regardless of sole provider status.

As I said earlier, "family friendly" isn't always a draw for me, but yet I feel relieved this film is appropriate enough to be shown to middle school aged kids, provided they don't mind reading some subtitles. (Most of the movie is in English but there are some Spanish parts.) Cursing and violence are fairly minimal, and there's no sex. I hope that some social studies teachers will take advantage of this film's temperance and use it to catalyze discussion with their students.

"A Better Life" is a film about a hard life, one that aches with hope, and certainly should make you think, but should not make you bitter. If anything, you may find a newfound admiration for people who are faced with situations like Carlos and gratitude for comforts you took for granted. Whether or not the story itself is something you think you've seen before, I doubt you've seen it acted better. "A Better Life"'s characters are strong, courageous, and not easily forgettable. At the end of the movie, I was shaking. I couldn't wait to write this review.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fight Club (1999)
3/10
One kind of comformity in favor of another
1 June 2018
Like a bro comedy, with less comedy and more bro, bro!

I had this film recommended to me (and quoted) so many times, that I'd begun to think it really must contain some life changing pearls of wisdom. I eventually decided to watch it. Well at least forty minutes or so of it.

The beginning was very intriguing actually. The cynical observations of the protagonist, regarding himself and the cookie cutter life others like him so often fall into, were an intelligent critique of consumerism and materism, if not stale already by now. Perhaps it was more novel at the time the film was released.

David Fincher's directorial style probably had something to do with how it felt like it was going to be a "cool" movie. The fact that Brad Pitt was in it promised the same. I started to fall for it, yet things turned downwards not long after Brad Pitt's character was introduced.

I felt like I'd been swindled. I feel like people who like this movie have been swindled, like someone snapped their fingers and strobed some lights and said, "You will now appreciate the following film". Or maybe ...the things I dislike about the movie are exactly what people like about it. I don't know. It seemed like a joke to me how the movie poses as cerebral and intellectual in the first "act" so to speak but then gravitates towards gratuitous testosterone cult indoctrination that can be found in any other random action flick. Except this one has Brad Pitt, oooh, star power!

And Brad Pitt's character is no philanthropist. He charms his way into the protagonists life and begins to influence him, acts like he possesses the Tao of life, after revealing to him that some of his antisocial hobbies are: inserting pornographic material in the reels of (non R rated) films while working as a movie projector (scene of little girl's crying reaction to giant cock in movie theater is supposed to be humorous), and urinating/spitting/ejaculating into strangers' food while working in the kitchen of an upscale restaurant. Stuff we should all look up to, for sure. I really hope people watching this don't actually think Brad Pitt's character is someone who they'd like to be, but no doubt, many probably do, because the film makes him into almost a patriarchal, however rebellious, figure. Though it's not a true rebellion, because the world is full of tough guys and cowboys and punks who just don't give a fuck, there is absolutely nothing new about it.

So, after criticizing the conformity of men who adopt a life of working in suits and acquiring fancy stuff that advertisements insist they need, the prescription is a new kind of conformity - the old fashion macho male stereotype kind. In other words, don't be a workaholic, don't care about wealth or belongings, care about brute physical strength and drawing some blood! Grrrr, yeah! That's what life is all about! The protoganist forgoes the group therapy he was addicted to previously, in favor of a new group, and a new kind of therapy: he is so desperate to be able to feel something that he needs to get punched in the face, apparently. Sounds like somebody has issues. Good luck with that.

I could not bare to sit through the entire thing. It's a pseudo-intellectual, gender-stereotypical, chest-beating outting aimed at an audience of young men who need something a little more than UFC - overanalyzing the mildly philosophical moments so they can pretend they weren't just under hypnosis from the adrenaline rush they get watching fight scenes. After all, it's named fight club, not think club.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Now Jake will star in anything, huh?
1 June 2018
The good first. The movie did a very good job in slowly ramping up the tension and unease in the scene where some crazy men accost a family attempting a late night voyage on a mostly deserted road.

Yet, you could see that in so many other movies.

So its originality you're looking for? Nocturnal Animals strives in earnest to find originality. Therefore, for the first five minutes or so of the film during the opening credits, we are treated to two morbidly obese women shaking around butt naked in slow motion. Sorry to comment on their figure, but they were obviously chosen for that exact purpose, to be sensational. And then that scene really carried no meaning further into the film, other than to establish that our heroine and her husband worked with an art gallery.

The slomo cellulite dance is never revisited, thank goodness, but the film ended leaving me with the same sense of "um, why?" that it began with. Although not hopelessly vague, I suspect less people would understand what point the movie is trying to make if there wasnt a sentence or two describing the plot of the film that people can read before choosing to watch it. And then even knowing what is supposed to be happening here - women regrets past mistakes and begins to wonder if the scary book her ex husband wrote is a veiled threat - is not rewarded with much of a conclusion.

Jake Gyllenhaal's character(s) in the film also came across as... somehow not right for Jake Gyllenhaal. Dialogue marks him as a peceivably "weak" man yet the camera titillates over his muscular body; just a small example of the casting paradox that is also felt in other ways I can't describe. It feels like he is forcing himself into a role not written for him. Amy was alright playing the rich mopey girl, but not enough to call the performance exceptional.

I give this a 4 because it didn't suck so much as to make me hate the film - I did sit through the entire thing after all. I just feel it deserves considerably less than the average rating. Tom Ford can make a good film, no doubt - so watch A Single Man instead. This one's more of a hollow art piece, for people who think wine tastes better when its in a fancier bottle.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
From Afar (2015)
5/10
Miserable masochist revenge fantasy
27 March 2018
An old-guy-meets-young-guy love story, er, hate story, perhaps. In their first encounter, Armando, the old one, promises money to Elder, the young one, in exchange for removing his clothes while he masturbates. Elder is a supposedly-straight homophobe who wails the older, gay man in the face, leaving him passed out on the floor while he steals his wallet. That's their first "date". Then they keep coming back to each other for more.

On the positive side, the acting is not half bad, especially from the young lead. He completely filled his character's shoes, right down to the body language. It didn't feel like he was acting at all. When he was supposed to be an asshole, he was a total asshole and then some. No matter how absurd the idea of his chemistry with Armando, his portrayal of unbridled passion was still shockingly convincing. The role of Armando does not require nearly as much acting by comparison. He mainly makes the same hollow face for the entire film, indicating that he just feels terrible all the time. There is nuance to both of the main characters which makes you simultaneously hate, pity, and maybe even root for them, capturing quite honestly at times the complexity of human nature and self-inflicted suffering.

All the while the characters are exploiting one another, there is never a single moment or conversation that indicates a genuine mutual interest or respect has developed between them. Suddenly, romance appears to blossom out of a couple of drinks, which I found highly unbelievable given the characters' demeanors. Armando doesn't smile even when, against all odds, he gets what he's been dreaming of. Their mere togetherness suggests perpetual self-loathing on behalf of both characters, as they ultimately can't seem to resist hurting each other.

An interesting change develops in one of the characters towards the latter part of the film, but then the story ends abrubtly and disappointingly. The lack of music in the end credits and the muted color palette perfectly exemplify the sense of emptiness one gets from the film in general.

I was hoping for and somewhat expecting a different outcome. The story's arc does not seem based in reality. The characters, Elder in particular, frequently seem guided by an unseen hand that makes them do things real people probably wouldn't do. The overall product manifests like an intoxicated, angry, revenge fantasy in which a homophobic man gets his comeuppance, but not before first being objectified and salivated over like he's a piece of meat. If you're not already bitter, you might want to avoid watching this cold-hearted film.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Someday we'll be able to be who we are
28 December 2017
I can never stand sports movies, because I hate sports. Remember The Titans? Nah, I'd rather forget. But Emma Stone was the main draw for me to watch Battle of the Sexes. I figured this movie would be different and my intuition was right.

I did not know anything about Billie Jean King prior to watching the movie, so that left a lot of plot elements a surprise to me. I think that helped, but I still found the movie enjoyable enough to watch two nights in a row. I was taken by surprise to find out that Billie Jean falls in love with a woman, since as I said, I never knew anything about her. The fact that this happened in the 1970's when you just COULDNT be a woman in love with a woman and also be a celebrity sports hero at the same time is of major importance to understanding this film and empathizing with its characters.

This movie is likely going to affect heterosexuals, particularly males, in different ways than it did me. Unless you are an empath or have been through what Billie Jean goes through in her relationship - the denial, the shame, the secrecy, the longing for freedom of expression ability to live authentically - you're not going to pick up on the nuances of this film as much, though you may still enjoy it. It's sort of like watching a movie about the civil rights movement when you were never oppressed - many have difficulty understanding what thats all about. Me on the other hand I got teary eyes by the end.

I was very moved by Emma Stone's emotional, conflicted, yet resilient portrayal of Billie Jean as a young woman trying to change the world doing what she does best - tennis. I feel like it was a perfect part for her. I was also impressed with Andrea Riseborough, playing the role of Marilyn, Billie Jean's hairdresser. The main comedic moments in the movie come from Sarah Silverman's dry humor as Gladis, Billie Jean's manager, and Steve Carell as outspoken self described male chauvinist and tennis hall of famer Bobbie Riggs, but it is less of a comedy movie and more of a movie that happens to have a couple of laughs to break up the dramatic moments.

The cinematography is colorful and nostalgic. They did a good job bringing the 70's to life again. The soundtrack is also perfect for the story.

Maybe not one of my all time favorite films, but I really didn't dislike anything about it, and it has given me even more respect for Emma Stone as an actress.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Death Note (I) (2017)
5/10
Disappointing introduction to the franchise
26 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I had heard from several people that the Death Note anime was worth looking into. I had planned to eventually get around to watching it, but understanding that it was a series, decided to check out this movie form first since it would take up less time if I ended up not being thrilled. I came in with a fresh mind and no preformed opinions about Death Note so to speak.

Things began rather OK- the concept of the story, which is of course very fantastic and requires one to withhold any thoughts of "that could never happen" (Well, duh) was intriguing for me and I got an immediate sense of how the storyline could be as addictive as I had heard. Unlike your typical horror film, virtually every character in this film who dies a gruesome and graphic death is someone who you WANT to die. This, for me, is refreshing, because while it is still over-the-top violence, I didn't have to feel for the characters whose deaths I watched. Also from the get-go the special effects were pretty fun to watch.

Before I criticize the film too much, let me just say that I believe it must be an extremely tedious task to write and direct a film based on a comic and make live actors portray it a way that comes across as natural and coherent. As someone who has never been engrossed in comic books or manga, I have always noticed this strain. Even Spiderman or Batman movies which are some of the best in their genre have moments which seem a little bit awkward when trying to imagine them in "real life". (Like the Green Goblin...) However, Death Note has already been made into animation and that is probably where I should have gone first.

This particular take on Death Note tries to force a detailed story into a short narrative and has a rushed feel to it. And while actors seemed as though they were putting a lot of effort into their roles, the characters they were playing felt so hollow to me. Some have quirks and idiosyncrasies developed quite extensively (One is obsessed with candy and always jumps into a crouching position like a wannabe ninja) but personalities not so much.

Overall the film seems to have been lost in translation from the original. I get the sense that the original is better, and I appreciate the concept. Spending more time on character development and less on action scenes may have helped.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed