Cris_Drg Reviews

Manifest (2018–2023)

Great at first, AWFUL by the 3rd season.

[4/10 · 28 January 2023]

I watched the first 2 series almost back to back. Despite a few glitches in the first few episodes, the writing ended up being solid and well thought through. I could not wait for the next episode.

Well... dunno what happened with Season 3, but the writing became APPALING. I have no words to express the excruciating pain of watching the dumbest thing happen on screen with so much ease. Things stopped making ANY sense, almost as if the story was moved along by throwing of dices.

I am so sorry they ruined what could have been a perfect show. Writers are SO, SO important. We need to give them more credit and we need producers to fight stronger for the good writers out there. One guy without a functioning brain and it all goes bad.

My advice is to stay well away from this, to avoid the disappointment when it stops making sense.

Immortals (2011)

When will the filmakers learn not to mess with perfection?

[5/10 · 27 December 2021]

The Greek mythology is full of wonderful stories and characters, magic and wonder. These myths survived for millennia, proving their value transcends culture and time.

So I will never understand why some people take something that was already perfect, chop it away until there's nothing but a skimpy bone left, and them fill it back up with stupid crap to make up "a new story". Why? Why?!?

Why didn't they just tell the story of Theseus as it was written in the Greek mythology? Why mess it up so badly that nothing makes sense anymore?

This little film is enjoyable if all you want is to spend a couple of hours watching some heavily edited and CGI-ed fighting, hoping to find a story in there somewhere. Turn your brain off or you will be pissed to no avail for the duration of this pile of nonsensical characters that make dumb decisions for no reason or plots that lead nowhere.

This incoherent story has nothing to do with the famous characters it namedrops; it's just shameful intellectual theft. Don't let it spoil for you the actual story of Theseus, or the Titans/Gods wars which are a lot more interesting. I hope there's a special place in Tartarus for all these writers who murder legendary characters and stories.

Mortal Kombat (2021)

A coward for the lead and terrible writing

[1/10 · 19 August 2021]

Great special effects, pretty good fight choreography, but this trilogy needs a writer. Someone smart enough to add some substance to this story.

For example, finding your magical inner power could've been an amazing self discovery story for each character - an opportunity for the audience to get to know them and start to care about them; not a stoopid, superficial plot trick that gets resolved in seconds, while we watch trash talk for 1.5 hours.

The promise of the plot is that the protagonists turn their flaws into super-powers. But no.

Earth's mightiest fighters are weak and poorly trained, and the guy who's supposed to train them won't, because he's clever like that. So there's no good reason why these fighters are horribly bad the whole movie yet win their fights at the end.

Also the bad guys are breaking the rules with no consequences bc the Universe has been organizing Mortal Kombats with strict rules 9 times in a row, for millennia, but now is like "Nah, we're cool".

So Earth's defenders get clever and break the rules too and... they fight, and they say all the MK lines, but there is no MK; and they sorta win, but also no. And the bad guys are dead, but also not really, because "death is just another portal".

Who wrote this?!?

And oh, btw, we have a fake "protagonist" - Cole FingWho? He is a loser. He loses EVERY fight. His super-power is getting beaten up and giving up. His own kid can see it. He is here bc he's related to Scorpio. That's right: nepotism got him the lead in a MK film.

So does he learn anything in order to find his magical gift? No, he doesn't, we do: that his wife is a LOT braver than him.

I was hoping his kid is the actual hero - a surprise reveal, as the story starts with a baby GIRL being the only survivor of the bloodline of Scorpio. But nope. The storyline is a complete waste of time - don't get invested.

All the characters are badly written, superficial puppets you don't really care about. I would've given it 2 stars for writing Sonya as a badass, but it got down to one star the moment I saw that smart kid from the beginning of the movie yell repeatedly, like an idiot: "Dad? Dad? Dad!?" .... while her dad was fighting a creepy being, with 4 arms and magical powers.

Just don't.

The Loss of a Teardrop Diamond (2008)

Wooden Characters, Choppy Script

[2/10 · 12 August 2019]

This is one BORING movie.

The main character is a confused, spoiled brat, acting like she's either drunk, doped or bipolar, sold to us as someone "educated in Europe" and "interested in art" and at odds with the local culture and customs of some old town "back home". The truth is just a bad script, confused character writing, no arc development and probably lousy directing.

Evans is the pretty, silent lead male; inconsistent and poor writing makes him seem just plain dumb, with a rigid insistence on morality that only support the dumbness. He's mostly like an impossibly beautiful doll - a wooden doll. Too perfect in his simplicity to even seem slightly realistic. When he cries at one point (bc his mom is crazy and can't recognize him) you can see the real loss here - Evans's talent wasted by a talent-less writer and a dumb script.

Lots of other characters describe these two throughout the film in ways that make you only feel more confused (are we watching the same people, here?).

Things happen that make no sense and nobody is explaining them; people have wild reactions out of the blue with no reason, no explanation given. (why did she HAVE to say she found the diamond even though she hadn't? how is that socially required?).

The aunt is the most irrelevant character on the planet, has a few monosyllabic lines, no reactions whatsoever, could've been played just as well by a pillow on a couch - yet most of the plot is "driven" on her behalf.

And when the movie is based on the social obligation of a "already too old" young woman to attend a debutante ball, but later develops into a party where everybody plays a social "game" that involves kissing for 3 minutes (and actually involves sex in the back seat of a car) makes you wonder: when did this film turn into a parody?!?

Ellen Burstyn is the only character who seems realistic, and she too is wasted in this horrible mess. Her character makes absolutely no sense for the story, so I can only assume someone thought it would add some depth to the main character.... but, nope. Of curse a spoiled, superficial woman would give someone drugs to die - not because she understands, but bc she's so impressed by this woman's story of drug use and the happiness that brings (which she quickly puts into practice). So instead of showing us an evolved, philosophically sophisticated woman, we get to see, again, just how messy she (and this whole movie) is.

If you want to see a horribly written scene, take a look at the one that creates ALL the drama of this silly movie (when Fisher loses the earring) aka "There dumb people pretending to do things". If we didn't know by now that none of the actors involved are idiots, I'd also say that some horrible acting too. It makes you scream of them - let's just move on, shall we? it's obvious none of you actually wants that thing found or gives a damn, so... let's get going!

Olympus Has Fallen (2013)

just enjoy it; bitch about it later.

[8/10 · 19 September 2014]

I decided to write this after reading several negative comments about the lack of logic and so on. yeah, yeah, so what?

This is a very entertaining movie. So it does have a few holes in the fabric of logic, but you're not going to notice them. Because it's that good. and fast.

Yes, for once I would like secret service, army and police to not be dummies in front of enemy fire; you know, if Butler can see a missile coming, so can they. They are trained personnel, they should act like it.

Also, I for one would not let a plane get so far into DC; and I wouldn't just ask them politely to buzz off. I'd say logic would qualify for such a plane to be shot down with no warning. You're above the city, you're not supposed to be here, you're heading for the White House, game over. And why would the pilots position their fighting planes at just the right level for the intruder's machine guns to wipe them out? any 10 year old with a computer and a flight simulator knows better.

Anyways... there are lots of logic problems, BUT all of this could actually happen me thinks. If we consider that it all went down in 13 minutes, we add in the chances of less-smart individuals being part of army, police, etc, we add apathy and being caught off-guard by an incredibly bold, fast and very organized team of professionals that have inside information, and all of this could happen. Routine and not paying attention is responsible for lots of work-related accidents.

There are 2 things that I find inexcusable though: 1. there's the army general who sends in the seals blindly and then refuses to abort even when it was obviously a losing move. And to top it, then tries to blame it on the one guy who's been doing all the great things. Now: why would the acting president NOT relieve this guy of command? he just proved incompetence and lack of integrity. what is he waiting for? full on treason?

and 2. the most incredibly stupid president of all times, a moron with a savior complex who takes away the credit and dignity of all the other officials by ordering them to commit treason and put the entire country at risk. there is a reason why these codes to arm nukes are protected by different codes given to several different people. we don't expect him to be smart enough to know about code-breaking computer programs or the prisoner's dilemma, but how about respect for his colleagues? how about someone calling him out for being the weak link in the chain, the one that will destroy his country? how about telling him off? you know, have some back bone, some dignity - Mr. President, it is MY job to protect these codes, even if I die doing it. sorry, but what you ask me to do is treason (and possibly genocide), so... nope! you don't get to tell me what to do.

(please notice I'm not saying anything about this guy actually creating the whole situation by over-riding his security protocols. because I'm sure this happens a lot - people are always disrespecting the rules that are meant to protect them; which is why this plot can actually happen to a certain degree).

Of course we will never know how an abort mission protocol for nukes is actually blowing them up, but... whatever. Let's not let these details ruin the fun. This is a very entertaining piece of film, let's just enjoy it.

One more thing: try to ignore Butler being red in the face. let's assume sun-burn and move on.

Continuum (I) (2012–2015)

sad turn out for series 2

[3/10 · 17 June 2013]

why, oh, why?!? why have a perfectly good story and great characters, and then turn them all into complete morons that act randomly? why throw away tension build up and have it all meshed up into one big lump of "Drama"?! Keira, baby, you were one great woman and a hell of a cop; now you're a telenovela diva. what have they done to you?!?

series 2 of Continuum is a total disaster. get yourselves as far away as possible from it. it's the saddest thing ever to see something great turn to dust like this. dunno if they changed writers, or executives, or if they're all on drugs and forgot what they were writing about on series 1.

Private Practice (2007–2013)

re episode "War"

[5/10 · 1 May 2010]

this started really well. drama was dealt with nicely, not too much, not too little. strong, deep characters and well coordinated character arcs. this lasted for like 2 series. afterward, it turned into this idiotic fruit salad, where everybody sleeps with everybody and nobody needs good reason to say or do anything. character arcs and descriptions were thrown into the garbage bin and I struggles hard to keep watching what used to be one of my favorite shows.

so this is about the episode entitled "War".

from the writing of this episode, I get it that the target audience is IQ bellow 80, with lots of prejudice and repressed mother issues. the writing is so bad in this episode, I have to wonder if it was written by or for monkeys.

by the info they show in this episode and others, Violet IS ready. she did indeed "the work". so what happens goes against what the audience KNOWS, but nothing on the screen acknowledges this.

the only problem I can think of is Violet did "the work" someplace else (not on display for her "friends"). By all possible judgment, she did what a responsible adult should do when faced with such a terrible tragedy, and what a therapist knows she needs to do to make it right. nice writing so far. very smart and it shows someone did their research. as we've got accustomed with, Violet is a great professional, even when dealing with personal issues.

then it all goes rotten when the plot is twisted so that the most stupid conclusion seems to be right - except nothing in the plot supports it. other than the awful writing. (what happens when a plot goes a way that is not natural for the characters, but pushed by the writer's agenda).

• the Judge says something really stupid - which basically means "I'm not gonna do my job and judge this, I'm gonna let your friends do it (despite their obvious personal agendas and emotional problems)". right. because "judges are...stupid"?

-No specialist is called to testify, by either party. Seriously? although there are specialists there, their opinion should NOT count, and should NOT be aloud by the Judge because they are interested parties - yet it does and it is (hello bad writing).

-the point where the "friends" are not ready to accept Violet has dealt with the attack, because the friends have not dealt with their own emotional stakes in it and because they has not witnessed her process of recovery - this is so obvious, yet it is not even mentioned in the film. why? the characters have been really smart, quite brilliant so far. the lawyers are presented as smart. and this is such an obvious point that the whole plot revolves around it.

the "ordinary" person may not know that the way Violet dealt with the the attack is actually quite right, but the ordinary person is NOT a therapist, or a specialist. but there are such people in the film - that could and should have brought it up. there's a (formally) brilliant therapist - Violet herself, and her therapist from NY (who's NOT being called to testify for mysterious reasons). also her ex by, Sheldon?, who's never been an idiot before in this film, but now suddenly is - or simply acts out of character, by judging it as an uneducated person would instead of what the character is.

so- what could've been a great episode, and a great lesson for the audience about how to best deal with personal tragedy, turned into a fruit-cake. lots of sugar, bad for your health. I guess the target audience is neither smart, nor educated - and they need to keep it like that. smart, educated audiences would cost more, and these writers would lose their respective jobs.

had this been a producer's decision, I apologize to the writers. they had to sell their souls for food, cos that's the (real) world we live in, right?

My Sister's Keeper (2009)

nice, emotional argument to disregard a child just cos you want to

[4/10 · 20 March 2010]

the film is very nice, very emotional. good acting, good directing, some very emotional scenes. I cried. you'll probably cry too. there's this child that's dying. and she knows it too. what can I say: scary stuff, right? so we have this most perfect family - and I mean PERFECT. great looking, all of them. having a blast with each other. happy, happy, happy. they love each-other, they take care of each other. I mean everything is great. their "only" problem is the one kid has cancer.

well... if we were to pay attention, the parents are actually neglecting the other 2 kids in every way possible. and that is NOT the story here. that's not even mentioned. we glide over it to get to the good stuff - the tearjerkers: there's this kid who wants to die, and she's making it happen by a clever plot.

this is scary, right? death. everybody is afraid of dying. we should focus on this. the minor detail about taking a nice, healthy kid and making her ill, putting her life in danger - this is not important. sub-plot! the fact that her parents made her just for this, and she serves no other purpose around the house - let's say this fast and get it over with. the 3rd kid being a school drop-out and practically invisible for his parents (cos he's unusable) merits no more than 20 sec of screen time. let's focus on how brave that cancer girl is. and what a great parent mom is, right? she's so attentive with the sick one... she sacrificed everything.

so - the problem with this film is that is an emotional argument in favor of being a horrible parent, and a horrible human being all together. and using kids for spare parts. they might die. that's OK, it's for a good cause. they will suffer. no problem. the cause is noble. they will never have a normal life again - ah, small price to pay. shall we ask them? what for? they're kids, they don't understand. and our morality - well - it seems to serve our fears. we're afraid of death so we do everything we can to prevent it. and I mean, everything.

so it's nice a film - for all the wrong reasons. the real issue here is how far can a parent go at being a sadistic monster before we notice it.

The Man from Earth (2007)

Not So Great

[4/10 · 12 September 2009]

The premise is very promising, and so are the chosen characters. The problem may have been the limited imagination and intelligence of the writers who could only do so much.

The story development is simple-minded and lacks depth. The acting is bad, and the lack of character-depth doesn't help either. It's hard to accept that a bunch of university professors have such a limited understanding of life; any complex issues are 'clerverly' avoided. Like mentioning Buddha in one phrase as 'the wisest man I've met" and then moving on fast. It seems a big deal, when in fact it's just smoke.

While the lack of emotional content may be somehow explainable for the man who's lived 14000 years, the lack of emotional content of the whole film can only be explained by the fact that the writers are merely browsing. They could not decide what's important and what's not.

This premise deserves better treatment - it deserves better, smarter writers. I can only imagine what it could become.

This film - is not worth it. This is all you need to know: "what if a man would live for 14,000 years? what would he be like?"

Kate & Leopold (2001)

a film about a barking dog, and other loud noises

[2/10 · 21 November 2008]

Whoever made this probably had no idea how to elaborate that 'genius idea' into a whole film. So they put in a dog. Things happen in this 'genius' of a film not because they make some sort of sense, but because the dog barks, or runs, or needs to go.

You know Leopold is smart and inventive, and a visionary, cos you're being told so. You'll have to ignore the fact that he acts like a total moron. It's that stupid dog! It barks so loud that anyone would be just as pointless in the same house with it.

There's one character in the way? Not to worry. One short twist of the pencil, and poof! He's gone. Just when you need to. We need another one? Poof! There he is: how? why? who is he? Details! You're thinking too much - just sit back and enjoy: it's a love story.

Kate is The 20's Century Woman, of course. By which I mean she's hysterical, completely irrational, angry at and obsessed with her ex, and really thick. What's not to love about her!? Don't think too much about the fact that her personality has no consistency or substance. That's how women are, you know. They lack depth, and they yell a lot, and you can't reason with them. They make no sense whatsoever! Which is what I could say about this film. It sounds great in theory, but it ends up being noise.

28 Days Later (2002)

good looks, a no brainer

[2/10 · 30 April 2007]

The "rage-virus" infects human beings and the whole world collapses. As Chance has it, a man survives and stands witness to the end of society.

But to my surprise and distress, this man just happens to be one of the most stupid persons who walk the earth (and "happens to be" is a poor excuse to base an entire film on). He wakes up in an obviously devastated hospital, and doesn't get it. Walks around for hours in an obviously devastated town, and still doesn't get it. Picks up a news-paper, takes a brief look, and throws it away (shouldn't he like to learn what had happened?!). Then, he goes to a church where he meets a monster-like priest, eyes popped out, blood all over his face, sounding like a enraged wild beast and he asks, gently "father, are you alright?".

And no-where do we learn that he'd sustained some brain damage and that's why he's acting so bizarre, to say the least. Did I mention that he was screaming all over the obviously deserted, empty town-square 'hello, anybody'? That must be learned helplessness from some other stupid film, cos any real person would've looked for other people in a more practical, reasonable way.

So, the poor man who spent hours walking around the town finally meets some other healthy people and suddenly he remembers he has a family! And suddenly becomes very, very emotional and concerned for them, throwing a temper-tantrum at the mere thought of not being aloud to go home.

The rage metaphor is great, and the real-life footage in the beginning is very moving - but this is a badly written story, and poor characters.

I won't even mention the fact that they blame the demise of the human race on the save-the-poor-animals activists (way-to-go, guys! they're not that smart, either, are they?!?).

If you have a brain and can't give it a brake for 110 minutes, don't. Chances are, if you'll ever wake up in a deserted world you'll walk around pointlessly crying 'help!' until you'll starve to death. Than again, what else can you do – right?

Daca aveti un minut... foarte bine! (2003)

courage is a choice

[8/10 · 10 November 2006]

this is a film-school exercise, with all the expectable shakes and tribulations. the poor handling of the camera might scare you off at first, but if you stick through, you're in for a surprise.

it could be mocking the new door-by-door sales-men techniques, or family violence. not sure.

although the plot line is rather confusing, the resolution is liberating, fun, and very powerful. the last scene saves the day (and the film), by good acting with a helping hand from writing and editing.

don't bother with who's who, or finding any moral to the story - it's like wham-bam recipe for an interesting... experience.

Morometii (1987)

The silent beauty before the storm

[9/10 · 10 October 2006]

This film brought to life one classic in Romanian literature - actually, only the first volume. It's a story centered around a an uneducated, poor, 'simple' man - Moromete, a dreamer at heart, a great pretender - pretending his problems away until they blow out of proportions and burst out.

Giulea must've chosen to keep it black &white – and it helped create authenticity, and depth: the poverty, the tension, and emotionally bleak atmosphere of the Moromete family really gets to you.

It could be my attention spam shifting for the second hour, but I saw how the composition and the planning of the scenes disintegrate along with the story plot. The first half has an inner consistency, an inner beauty - the carefully prepared composition, the candle light faces or the contre-jour, slightly overexposed and soft look are very impressive. It looks beautiful while it feels gloomy, and that makes you an accomplice. And the camera always looks up to Moromete – he feels like a giant in his made-up world, he looks like one to us. Then it all falls apart – and the focus moves from form to content.

The silent beauty before the storm. Weelll, at least it shows it could've been beautiful, despite lack of money or illness.

If you don't know the story... his idealism keeps him from emotionally connecting to his family – he takes care of 'business', he cares for them financially, but fails to recognize them as human beings. They're as real to him as the politicians he comments on – and make no mistake! This is a very smart man. Many fathers make the same mistake, with predictably the same results.

Interestingly enough, as if giving Moromete a chance to redeem himself as a parent, his youngest son resembles him – a dreamer and a thinker, begging for a chance to embrace his true nature. Again, Moromete fails to see what's important, what is already lost and what can still be saved. The dreamer in me hopes that the second part of the book restores hope – for the first ends in failure.

As far as I can tell (never having read the book) the mistake this man makes is not choosing his own destiny, pretending to be something he's not. He projects his own flaws onto others, oblivious to the intrinsic imperfection of human nature and reality he demands perfection. He basically refuses to face life while pretending to know everything about it, except his own refusal. And, the worst of all (in my eyes), he doesn't know when to stop the charade and acknowledge his loses. A blind mule.

While that may be a fine way to live your own life, it's a heavy burden for children left without the care, love, attention or guidance of a parent, but with the blame of needing them. That's his "crime", and he never accepts to suffer for it. His own pain – had he accepted it and expressed it – could've set him free.