Change Your Image
kuarinofu
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Joker: Folie à Deux (2024)
Thank you, Todd Phillips
We can all agree that Joker was a masterpiece, and a huge hit nobody anticipated.
This sequel, while obviously not reaching the heights of the first one, wasn't nearly as bad for me as the ratings would suggest. Saying that, it still had enough problems for me not to enjoy it like I did the first one.
To a certain extent, the sequel fell victim to the first film. The ending of the first one has set up clear expectations, and this one went in a completely different direction. And so we got a film that is not standalone and not a direct sequel, but something in-between.
In the sequel we get the same atmosphere, same setting, same beautiful style and cinematography, music, but the Joker from the first one is gone. And I'm not talking about the intended story choices, but the scenes where the Joker is on screen, yet it still feels like he's not in the movie. So if you are willing to accept the fact that this film is an indirect continuation of Arthur Fleck's story - it will work great for you as it worked for me.
I remember my review of the first film where I rated it 9/10 saying that it would've been even better just as a straight drama not connected to the Joker character. And this one was exactly that. A twisted love story of a lonely troubled man with a realistic ending. So I stand behind that and I still loved this one. I might even say that all the name drops like Gotham and Harvey Dent felt unnecessary. The main character in this film could've easily been a Joker character fan, if you get my point.
As for this film's problems, most of them were avoidable with just cutting 20-30 minutes (of mostly musical performances), and adding more interesting character interactions, especially between the Joker and Lee, since they had chemistry and Gaga's acting was perfectly fine.
Less musical performances, tighter scenes, more interesting dialogue for Phoenix to shine would've made this just as good as the first one.
Overall, it's a solid 7.5/10, it's 8/10 if you adjust your expectations and let yourself fall into Fleck's mind and just feel it.
I'm not saying that people who rated FaD much lower are wrong, I'm just sharing my view. This film did an emotional impact on me almost as deep as the first one.
The Crow (2024)
Why even bother
This remake not only does absolutely nothing better than the 1994 classic, it barely hold up as a standalone film.
If you distance yourself from the 1994 film and just try to watch the remake open-minded, as I did, it just fails at every level.
The script is very messy, it's full of holes and inconsistencies, they expect you ignore such an amount of stupidity...I just couldn't handle it. After the first 20 minutes I was already out of the story since I couldn't buy the rehab story with blades allowed and bracelets you can simply cut off and run away. But there's much more than that, this is just a small example of all the nonsense there is.
There was no emotional connection at all, mostly due to the complete lack of chemistry between the main characters and the fact that the female lead just cannot act at all. I would argue that I can be a better actor if I was cast instead.
Since the emotional attachment is missing, all the violence and gore seems completely unnecessary and almost like an action routine. It doesn't feel justified, but I must admit, I was somewhat amused with the amount of cuts necessary to hold the scenes. I mean, it's 2024, you can surely manage a better fight scenes.
Some of the dialogue was so cringy I laughed a lot. Like what where they thinking? If this was written for 15yearolds, the dialogue surely doesn't match the overall rating of the film (due to graphic violence). And if they were aiming for an audience familiar with the 1994 film, well, such a story with this dialogue and characters surely wouldn't impress those.
And finally, I hate to be that guy, but you can't replace Brandon Lee. I'm sorry. I'm not even being a fanboy, just play the 1994 film and with all its flaws the main lead performance would just be incomparable. You can reinvent and reimagine all you want, but there will always be only one Eric Draven on film.
Overall, this film was bad in every aspect, absolutely nothing in it was enjoyable.
Hellboy: The Crooked Man (2024)
Moderate effort
I wanted to title this review "Nice try" but after thinking about it, I don't think that it was good enough to be called that.
The film was plagued with many problems, the budget was clearly minimal for this type of films, the acting (especially the supporting cast face acting) was not good, the story was very simple and there was clearly not enough material for a full film. It would've been good as a short, I think.
With such a shaky foundation, the film, while not being a complete trash, wasn't able to leave even a semi-positive impression. The problems I've mentioned above lead to many drawbacks throughout the film: the introductory scene felt cheap and unnecessary, making the premise a huge coincidence; the setting wasn't convincing either through scenery (it felt more like an East-European or Balkan) or time period (almost nothing related to 1950s); the story structure, pacing and editing needed improvements (some of the slow atmospheric scenes were good, but the film dragged too much); and the most important thing - style and fluff, and this isn't purely a budgetary issue, Del Toro's macabre style made the duology so enjoyable, this one doesn't have that.
The Hellboy lead was fine, I don't think that Perlman has a monopoly on this character. All the slow dialogue and wandering scenes were ok to a certain extent. Not great, though. The action was cheap but they still managed to make those scenes be moderately exciting.
So, overall, the film wasn't offensive or so bad it's good, it was just below average, with a couple of good moments here and there. If it had a little more action, denser story, more Hellboy instead of not so well-acted characters, and more artistic and imaginative scenes - it would've been a 5 or a 6, for now, it's a 4/10. If you're unfamiliar with the graphic novel and only have seen the films (like I did), there might be nothing here for you. If you want to watch it, you'll have to force yourself to break through to the 30-40 min mark, since the beginning was very cheap and weak, and almost doesn't fell like a real movie.
Alien: Romulus (2024)
6-in-1 Alien-Prometheus franchise pack, 600% value, wow, what a deal
Alien: Romulus answered a question nobody asked: "What if a 2hr film was constructed with only references and member berries."
Short answer: You get garbage.
Longer answer - the core idea that transformed a film into a 2hr nostalgia stimulation compilation was clearly a bad one.
There's nothing to rate in this film, nothing to unpack. Like, I can rate a scene from this compilation, but I'll be rating a scene from 1979, or a scene from 1986, or a scene from 2012. The very short transitions between the references are few, and while some of them could have been good, the creators just didn't have time (or intention) to build upon anything. This compilation doesn't bring anything new to the table, rarely providing some unnecessary details, and connects the films in the franchise (Alien/s/3/R with Prometheus/Covenant) that should have never been related.
There were no story, no characters, no acting besides David Jonsson, to whom I should apologize. He was the only redeeming quality in this compilation, but they completely wasted his character, grounding the mountain of potential behind his acting and his character.
There were no twists, no tension, no atmosphere, nothing of value. The only thing you can do while watching this is try to predict which transition leads to which scene from an older film. That's it, you can even skip the scene itself because you know how it is going to resolve. But be warned - they are all borrowed from the 1979, 1986, 1992, 1997, 2012 and 2017 films. Some even have the same lines. It's insane.
The worst thing, probably, was the way they shove in these scenes and references. At first it was just eye-rolling, but as the film progressed, my eyes went into my skull and stayed there. After 20 or 30 copied scenes I felt like I was getting trolled and laughed at.
Overall, I'd rate Alien: Romulus absolutely disgusting/10. It was purposely made this way and it was very annoying. In star-terms, it's a 3/10, where 3 is for the production team and David Jonsson, who was a beam of light in this absolutely incoherent nostalgic nightmare.
Slingshot (2024)
Give it a chance, it's a good sci-fi story
Slingshot, while not a perfect film, was a pleasant surprise for me. I don't watch a lot of films now, but I've decided to pick this one because I love 1408 and The Rite by Mikael Håfström, also, one of the writers is credited for Moon, which was also a good sci-fi film.
While the beginning was very choppy in pacing and editing, I got hooked by the emotional connection between John and Zoe, so I decided to watch it till the end, even despite lots of inconsistencies I couldn't explain, and some weird things not fitting into a sci-fi scenario.
The ending did not disappoint, and while some of the ideas are very reminiscent of the works of some writers and directors of the golden sci-fi era, overall, it was well-executed.
My only two minor complaints are probably the very obvious budget limitations (the CGI and some shots felt quite cheap), and the choice of Casey Affleck as a lead. But the last one is just IMHO.
Other than that, this was a solid small sci-fi film, not made to be too smart or pretentious, not grand in scale, but still relatable and emotionally gripping.
If you love low-budget sci-fi that give you the feels, and you trust a random guy on the Internet - I'd recommend you give this a try without researching anything about it. If you're looking for a sci-fi action, or something grand in scale and ambition - skip this.
Rebel Moon - Part One: A Child of Fire (2023)
So I watched the Director's Cut
I don't know that I am supposed to like here. If the DC is the better version, I cannot even imagine what the studio version was.
Many reviewers have already mentioned that Rebel Moon is huge epic mix of Star Wars, LOTR, Mortal Engines, Dune, Seven Samurai, Warhammer 40K, Game of Thrones and other franchises.
Getting inspired by other franchises is not a bad thing if you can improve and build on it. In Rebel Moon, however, nothing felt fitting. All the borrowed elements worked like if you would make a salad with onions, sand, staples and paper towels. All these things are good in their own respect, but when mixed as food - not so much.
As in many Snyder films, every character was super serious and miserable almost all the time. Interestingly enough, the only characters enjoying themselves were the bad guys.
The evil faction of this franchise (as in the new Star Wars films) is very reminiscent of a certain faction of a certain historical period, which I won't mention. It's obvious. This affects the story much more than in Star Wars (at least in the DC). The amount of violence is overbearing to the point where it breaks the logic of the world they are building. I cannot see any point in complete sadistic obliteration of planets' populations, maybe this is the point and a historical reference, but it still doesn't make much sense. The main antagonist of this part seems quite incompetent with his time and resource management since he wastes so much time on brutal humiliating executions. His whole plan with farmers makes absolutely no sense since the planet they are working on has other big cities with way more resources and people. Also, at least in this film he seems to be the only henchman responsible for all suffering and destruction.
The DC felt like no scenes were cut at all. There were so many scenes which contributed nothing to the story progression or character building. Maybe these were intended for world building, but, as I've mentioned above, this world doesn't work. Orcs from LOTR, Hobbiton farmers, WH40K spaceships and flair (with no religion mentioned anywhere though), Star Wars blasters, sword-wielding samurai witches, hippogriffs, Conan the Barbarian, Gladiator arena fights, Last of the Mohicans natives and giant spiders. No production design can soften the edges so much for all these things to fit into one film. I also can't say I found a single likeable shot or vista besides probably LOTRish horse rides with real mountains. Almost everything looked ugly.
Characters in this film do many stupid things, which isn't a huge problem until they speak. They mostly speak in exposition, descriptions, plot summaries and, occasionally - philosophical ramblings. Some of the supposedly serious lines were so funny I laughed out loud a couple of times. Hunnham's accent was also hilarious.
Some of the characters don't have anything to do in the film at all, even in the DC, probably they are established to be later used in other parts. The best example was the robot character, Jimmy, who only slightly cosplayed Shrike from Moral Engines and then vanished for 2 hours.
While the story was underwhelming at best, the action in this film was mostly bearable. Most of the gunfights were ok, only made somewhat worse by excessive lens flares. Almost all melee fights scenes were not well-choreographed. If you pay slight attention you can spot many inconsistent cuts and choreography joint points. I understand that it is not easy to create a good flow in these type of scenes, but Hollywood has so many professionals to choose from.
The pacing of the directors cut was good for doing household chores. You can never miss anything important. A 5-minute scene of a horny alien trying to inappropriately approach a man shouldn't be an important plot point in a space epic anyway, right?
Since the DC lasted more than 3 hours, there are lots of things to talk about, but since I don't want to stick to the negatives, I don't think I should continue.
Rebel Moon (the Director's Cut) was not an entertaining or interesting film, it failed at telling an interesting story, it wasted a lot of time with unnecessary scenes, and, overall, felt me completely disinterested with what I should expect from this supposedly epic saga.
The Killer (2023)
Needed more of everything
The Killer fits perfectly into that small category of films you want to like but you can't. And you can't even tell what exactly is wrong with them.
The film felt almost like a self-narrated documentary or a video game like the Hitman series.
There was always something going on (besides the first 10 minutes of straight narration, which wasn't that boring btw). It's like "ok, what is he going to do now, ok, what is he doing now". And the unnamed killer just does his stuff, sometimes narrating his thoughts and philosophies some of which make sense, and some completely nonsensical and psychotic. It almost makes you think that we are about to see some interesting transformations in Fassbender's character, but the ending only led to confusion. I want to be honest, I did not quite understand the supposed change that happened in the main character.
If you strip the film of all the procedural scenes, only the barebones revenge story will be left. The dialogue is minimal and the lead mostly talks to himself (or the audience). This was probably the point, to show that his discipline was not based on his career choices but rather his inner psychotic antisocial nature, but the ending contradicted this entirely. You can't connect to the unnamed killer since he does so much unnecessary violence, buy you cannot hate him completely as well. Maybe I'm missing something, but there doesn't seem like there was a lot to miss in this one.
Some of the techniques and things the unnamed killer does make no sense, but I don't want to nitpick too much since it's unclear what was intentional and what wasn't. I'm sure there are plenty of reviews the pinpoint all the illogical decisions and factually wrong things in this (you know, listening to music while sniping, flashing yourself in a window for hours, going CQ with a someone clearly stronger than you, sleeping in a car near the target's house, using a muzzle brake to silence gunshots etc.).
Overall, not a bad film, but Fincher can do better. Also, the script sometimes felt very dated, made artificially fresh by adding modern references like wework, crypto and other stuff. If it wasn't a Fincher film with Fassbender, this would've never get the attention it got, and the ratings as well.
The Last Voyage of the Demeter (2023)
A visually pleasing B-grade slasher that never goes all-in
I watchlisted this film a long time ago (since I enjoyed some of the director's previous works), and now I finally got my hands on it.
What can I say...the Last Voyage of the Demeter felt like a needlessly long, somewhat boring, aesthetically pleasing (besides the creature design) B-movie slasher.
At times I thought to myself that I probably put in a wrong copy of Predator or Alien (they even do the dinner scene!), since it re-used the formula that was done way better 40 years ago, even though the source material is way older than any of the films mentioned. Seriously, this general idea was done so many times in different settings.
I'm not that familiar with the story it's based on, so I was confused by the mythology of the evil creature. The way it acts and its powers seem inconsistent. I've seen tens of vampire movies, and usually they stick to a set of understandable rules. Not in this film though - it crawls, flies, possesses people, and it has fog machine powers, I don't get it. It's not even a spoiler since there was no mystery attached to the story, but the creature in this film is probably the weirdest vampire I have seen. I mean, even in Life Force (1985) the space vampires made more sense than in this. The creature looked like a mix of Nosferatu vampire with a straight up bat. This didn't make it particularly scary. Also, the character who knows more about the creature, you know, the one who is supposed to withhold the information for plot convenience in these films, even she is inconsistent in what this thing is capable of. I thought they were trying to do Blood Vessel (2019) style of Strigoi, but the inspiration was in the looks only.
Apparently the budget was quite high for these types of films, so in terms of production value and the visuals (not the design) everything was perfectly fine. Visually it looked quite authentic, besides some minor inconsistencies like the size of the ship, which didn't feel that big, but then grew up to Titanic levels when necessary for the plot. Also, Captain's cabin placement was weird, and the ship had way too many open spaces and not as much cargo, and a sink? I don't know, this was a real thing at the time. There's a lot to nitpick here, but I'll just say that it left many questions, like why there was an easily accessible gun arsenal on a cargo ship, how the creature was able to move through the ship unnoticed (even behind the locked doors), why would someone carry a blood transfusion kit in his bag on a daily basis and more.
There weren't many characters in this film, and they all fit perfectly into slasher genre molds. You learn to hate them fast since they do stupid things over and over again, and you cannot care when the creature gets them. The archetypes and the dialogue never felt authentic. One should make a conscious decision to buy into the characters. Since the time period the film is set in had almost no impact on the story, the characters with their modernized dialogue and sometimes weird accents did nothing to make this pill easier to swallow. It might just as well had been very good cosplay. I don't know, maybe I'm spoiled by Robert Eggers and his authentic films and just have a very high bar when it comes to buying the characters. In any case, the way the ship worked, the way the crew communicated and took decisions was not convincing. The Captain wasn't a leader or a veteran sailor, the crewmembers didn't know their ship or what it was capable of or how to handle it. Since it was a slasher, there was no need for character arcs, even the main character spilling out his vague motivation was left unchanged up until the end, when he said even more stupid things. Some lines were hilarious, like the famous "It moved because in my country there was no people left to feed on", great line.
The story progressed slowly, leading to the inevitable end. A lot of time was spent on scenes that didn't work for me, besides, probably the Captain (who surprisingly had only two days before retirement (c)). Maybe if this wasn't a straight up slasher film, this story could've worked, like it did in The Terror (2018) Season 1, but it didn't. The ending sequel bait gave me Van Helsing (2004) feels, which made me laugh a little, but not as much since I was almost numb from the stupidity of the events unfolding.
Overall, not a great experience, mostly due to long run time, unimpactful scenes and nobody to root for. The visuals and some kills were great, and maybe if there were more crewmembers to munch on and more creative feedings - I'd enjoy it more for what it was, a very restricted slasher.
The First Omen (2024)
Makes you wish this wasn't an Omen prequel
The First Omen was a solid film right up until the last 20 minutes.
It was very atmospheric, engaging, brilliantly acted, especially by the female lead (it sure felt like she was born to play Margaret). It had some unsettling scenes, mostly gross and uncomfortable, but either way it kept your attention, it was hard to watch but you couldn't turn away. Although I'd strongly suggest discretion if you're a woman or planning to watch this with one. Don't say I didn't warn you.
In terms of pacing, there were so many slow scenes, but I never felt bored, which surely is an achievement.
The setting was interesting, but they never delve into it too much. There wasn't nearly enough immersion besides the looks, which were authentic.
Approaching the third act, the film suddenly felt like it was missing a solid 5-10 minutes. I think we lost a couple of interesting scenes, but this is just my guess since I did catch a jumpskip in the overall pacing.
To make it short, I'd say that the film had two major problems: 1) the premise was insanely stupid; 2) the fact that it was connected to the first Omen film, which made the ending incredibly disappointing.
I enjoyed it up until the last 20 minutes, and the last segment felt like it didn't belong in this film at all, it really stuck out.
Could've been a great atmospheric horror about faith, motherhood, love and revenge. Maybe it even was at some point, but then got repurposed into an Omen prequel, who knows.
5/10 for the atmosphere and Nell Tiger Free's talent.
The Watchers (2024)
A small start but it's a start
Knowing Mr. Shyamalan, his films and his involvement in this particular one, I expected a bizarre spectacle with weird acting, camera pan shots, lots of mysteries leading to nothing, underdeveloped interesting ideas and his other trademarks.
And this was kinda what I got. But I'll say I was still pleasantly surprised by the work of his daughter in her directorial debut. I don't know how much Mr. Shyamalan himself was involved, but in this film, at least his urge for nonsensical twists was confided, and I celebrate that.
Don't get me wrong, this wasn't a great film or anything, it had lots of problems. They expect you to buy lots of things, like if you apply minimal logic the whole story kinda falls apart. Characters (as they often do in his stories) act more on an instinct than motivation, but it's ok. Again, you don't need to be a film guru to understand the difference between a glass and a mirror. The mechanics of surviving, let alone building a bunker in the woods with infinite electricity are to be taken for granted here. Blocking a door that opens in the other direction...well. If you've seen the film you know how funny this was.
The ending wasn't horrible (although I have no idea how everyone knows where everyone lives) and I like that.
Not a bad start, not really a horror film by today's standards, more like a somewhat sloppy fairy tale.
I haven't read the source material so I cannot say anything about that.
In the end, I didn't feel like the film wasted my time, and that's enough for a 6/10 by today's film standards.
Bad Boys: Ride or Die (2024)
That is some producer talent right there
Looks like we live in a world where a "film" like this can make profit. People would actually go and see this, and this is rated above 6 on IMDB? Great.
After the FF series finally intrdocued demigod powers of family and went into space, one would think that products like these wouldn't work any more. But they do.
I have to give the producers credit for doing enough research to ensure that this film contains tiktok memes, call of duty cutscenes action, RGB lighting and absolutely nothing that would insult the intelligence of the target audience.
If you view this as a film, and not a well-produced moderately budgeted content, there is nothing of value.
The story is nonsensical, full of cliches and there is no way you can buy anything that is going on. The ending is spoiled around the 13 minute mark, after that you're just curious how they will get there. Since the story wasn't a priority, the plot just forces the characters to do whatever is necessary to ensure the ending scene happens. Motivations are gound-level, and even these get shifted and switched whenever necessary.
Everybody talks in descriptions and exposition, which again isn't a problem since there is no story to follow, nothing to try to understand, no reason to explore the motivations, people just do stuff when the plot needs it.
The humor ranged between unfunny and obnoxious. I watched this at home so I was able to skip the long Marcus' ramblings mostly. I gave it a chance but quickly understood that I shouldn't have, it really felt like I was an audience member in a comedy club where the Joker from the 2019 film was performing.
The action was over the top, which is expected from the BB series, more so from the 2nd attempt after the exhumation of the franchise. The problem was in that it was way too unrealistic, not in terms of lethality, but literally in terms of excessive CGI. Nothing felt real, so if bright flashes and sound effects don't excite you, there is nothing of value action-wise. For example, I can appreciate over the top action in the Mission Impossible franchise, because I can see real things happening, supported by CGI. In this "film" nothing felt exciting, probably because I've played videogames and seen lots of FPS games trailers to get amazed.
The "getting old for this" and the "one last time" themes were done to death even before this film, so at first they try to do something like this, but quickly abandon it in favour of colorful videogame imagery and excruciating comedy.
So, overall, Bad Boys: Ride or Die was the worst film I have seen in years, if you even consider it one. But I can only congratulate the people responsible for slapping it together, since the numbers never lie. This product was successful despite it being absolutely void of any emotional value.
P. S. Since I live in Ukraine, the drone scenes left a mixed impression on me. I wouldn't say those hurt my feelings, but definitely sparked an emotion the producers probably didn't intend.
Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F (2024)
Safe nostalgia package (an expensive Axel F theme park tour)
BHC: Axel F is just another basic nostalgia-fueled product. Produced and packed for your convinience, containing only the things you remember plus the tired actors after a dust off and clean up, mediocre storyline and action film structure of today (intro action scene, boring, mid action scene, boring, big action scene, end).
Axel F features some variety as these products go. Where Indiana Jones with a 90 y.o. Ford still managed to go full insanity in the last act, providing some good laughs and entertainment - Axel F drives through the story road on a golf cart with no fresh ideas, constantly hitting all the possible cliche bumps. The main villain is so incredibly obvious makes you wonder how is he able to work at the department at all for all these years. Every plot development in the film can be seen a mile away so there's no reason to set your mind for something interesting, not happening.
Why was it so hard to introduce at least a half of a twist to make the story interesting? I don't know. They dedicated more time to re-enacting scenes from the older films than developing something new. Classic producer thinking: "Is this character's actor still alive? Ok, bring him in, write him into the story, even if it makes no sense."
There was a good portion of action in the film, but shot and edited poorly, with lots of green screens, distinguishable stunt doubles and more. I understand that Murphy is just a human being and cannot be as fast and furious in his 60ties as he was in his 20ies, which is prefectly fine. You can even see that in some scenes where we would've seen him running, it was just a hard cut with teleportation. Although I have no idea how you can use such a chunky budget and get a result like this. This didn't feel like a 150m film, to be honest.
And one more thing. Murphy's character has changed through the years, which is fine, but I'd argue that he hasn't changed enough or went into an interesting direction. He's still as much fun as he used to be, but in the older films you could see how smart and professional Axel F was behind that smirk. A talented and persistent street-smart detective, which was a cliche even at that time, but Murphy's charisma covered this. Here he feels like a parody of former self, and is taken as such by everybody else. He's very funny at times, but there was no way you can look at him and say "yeah, that's the classic Axel F".
So, in the end, BHC: Axel F is sill a mass-manufactured producer product. The best thing about this film is that most of the actors from older movies are still alive and well, so they and the crew got paid for this. Which I'm perfectly fine with. Other than that - mediocre even by Netflix standards.
I was mildly entertained wacthing Murphy doing Axel F, he's still a great performer and actor, although at times he looked sad and tired.
If you loved the old films (even the third one), you'll probably still watch this, but forget it exists very fast. If you're unfamiliar with the franchise and just want to watch an action comedy, it's not it.
Civil War (2024)
And the point was? What exactly?
I live in Ukraine and I've had my share of different sights and feels relevant to the film. Many of the things shown resonated with me, although our threat is external, I did understand some of the characters' experiences.
What I did not understand was the main message of the film, if there was any at all. The main plot is vague and serves just as a timer for the movie to end. Each of the characters undergoes changes in different ways but their transformation is never complete. They just dive into different emotional states throughout. This makes the film very unfocused and takes away any weight the ending could've had. It just starts and ends, sometimes transofrming into a road trip movie, sometimes going full action (not that convincingly shot though), and occasionally trips into "war drama" messages mixed with satirical pretentiousness, but quickly forgets it and moves along.
As much as the film was interesting to watch up until the end, it then just ended without delivering any food for thought. Maybe my perspective as a Ukrainian hindered my ability to get the message since death and chaos is just daily life here, but I seriously doubt people can get this desensitized to violence and tragedy.
So, in the end, was this a satirical film about people not taking anything seriously in the era of easily accessible media? Or how the press basically becomes a part in a conflict? This could've been an interesting direction to take, but they didn't do it. So, my guess is as good as yours.
Overall, Civil War was interesting at times, but left no impact or emotional resonance so you will forget you've seen it in no time.
P. S. I'd also like to mention the inconsistent writing, cause some scenes were interesting and the dialogue was great, but other times the plot is so heavily manipulated it just feels super random (the car swap scene). Maybe it was written in turns, although there's only one credited writer, and a good one. Who knows.
Dovbush (2023)
A mountain of myths with a sprinkle of Caribbean spice
Dovbush is a technically competent film that impresses visually, especially with its mountain scenes. Despite a relatively low budget (by international standards), it manages to blend legends and myths about Oleksa Dovbush into an entertaining package. However, this blend is where the film stumbles, presenting a loosely connected mix of random retellings.
Apparently realizing the story lacked cohesion, the filmmakers chose to inject Pirates of the Caribbean-esque vibes, quirky humor, and intense action. This artistic decision makes for easy viewing if you're not too concerned with character motivation, coherence, or traditional script structure. The "final revenge battle" occurs prematurely, leaving the film without a strong climax.
Despite its flaws, Dovbush wasn't a bad film. As a Ukrainian, I was pleasantly surprised by my compatriots' ability to deliver a reasonably competent production. It wasn't as politically charged as I expected, though some character depictions might still ruffle feathers (despite the creators' attempts to distance themselves from controversy in the intro credits).
Should non-Ukrainians watch it? Possibly. Will they be sufficiently entertained? Probably not. While the film does a good job playing with Carpathian legends and myths, the lack of a comprehensive storyline significantly undermines its overall impact.
Wil (2023)
When violence overshadows substance
I watched this film with my wife, expecting a WWII drama, without doing any prior research. Given the current state of world affairs, perhaps we didn't need more war in our lives. This turned out to be a poor choice, as the film consists of about 50% graphic violence and suffering. I wouldn't recommend watching it with people who are sensitive to such content.
The film delivers a message about wartime collaboration and how people move on, seemingly forgetting millions of deaths as if everything is forgiven.
The end credits suggest this is the right approach (?), though it's unclear whether this is the character's perspective only or the director's intention, because there was barely any reflection from the main character besides the beginning and the end credits. So who knows what he's really feeling.
While the movie was uncomfortable to watch, with its dim lighting, 4:3 aspect ratio, and focus on pain and torture rather than emotion or acting, it didn't resonate with me. Instead, I found the writing atrocious to the point that it just annoyed me, wasting interesting possibilities for violence and blank "face acting".
As someone living in Eastern Ukraine who has witnessed similar events, I just couldn'y buy the main character existing in real life. He's intentionally written to be annoying and blank, failing at everything with only a "suffering inside" expression, he approaches an NPC status, rather than an acting figure. In my experience, someone behaving like this wouldn't survive a day in a real conflict. The plot felt nonsensical, relying on intense violence to distract from the poor writing. The Hans Landa cosplayer's motivations were bizarre, seemingly aware of everything from the start but choosing to waste weeks torturing the surrounding of the main NPC. At times, I questioned whether the director had an affinity for violence, though I tried to justify it as artistic expression. While the film's intention is understandable, and if you accept the level of violence as necessary, it might rate a 4/10. However, if you consider the logic of events, it becomes a mess. It's difficult to connect with a protagonist who feels more like a blank video game character than a real person. I don't recommend this film for WWII drama enthusiasts. Also, due to its extreme violence, it's not suitable for easily impressionable viewers.
Anyone But You (2023)
Romantic Escapism with a Modern Twist
Anyone But You (2023) isn't a film I'd typically choose for myself, but it proved to be a good pick for watching with my significant other.
The film is lighthearted, filled with intentionally over-the-top moments and absurd situations. Nothing is meant to be taken seriously, yet the creators manage to avoid going completely off the rails, keeping the film somewhat grounded in reality.
Production values evoke romantic comedies of the late 90s and early 2000s, but with stunning Australian vistas and an abundance of beautiful people, both clothed and unclothed.
While life is obviously more complex than the story, if you're willing to let go and enjoy the emotional journey with the characters, the film will leave a pleasant, short-lived impression.
However, this film is best viewed with someone who makes your heart skip a beat. Watching solo, surrounded by all these attractive people and their seemingly perfect lives, might sting.
Golda (2023)
There surely was a good film to be found there, but they missed it
'Golda' was a slow and somewhat disheartening film, not because of the subject material, but rather due to all the wasted potential.
Seems like most of the possible emotional interactions and dialogue scenes were swapped with obvious and sometimes artsy symbolism and metaphors. Some scenes are so stylized just for the sake of being different it's insane.
Although the format suggested episodic nature (with the first scene), they still limited the film to one particular time period, and it kind of seemed like it wasn't really about Golda either, but rather the war. Surprisingly enough, we get no flashbacks or connections, so it's just a straight story in which you are brought right away. If you're watching this film it's assumed that you have the basic knowledge of the persona. Golda is portrayed miserable and barely holding it together, which is fine given the context of her health and the situation. Yet a biopic about her should probably devote some time to her better and stronger days, so the viewer could fully appreciate her resilience and wisdom even in the dark times.
Overall, I'd say that the film definitely had interesting scenes, dialogue, good music and messages to reflect on (and great quotes by Golda). But for me it was buried under lots of weird stylistic choices and ramping drama up to a comedic levels, which wasn't even funny given the situations they were in. A cheap and basic way to transfer emotional state wasn't suitable for such a subtle film.
Not a horrible film for someone who is not that familiar with Golda and her deeds, but trades too much of the lack of grounded and relatable real-life scenes for artistic distractions.
Un crimen argentino (2022)
Doesn't qualify as a film
First of all, you need to have a solid background in the history of Argentina to understand the setting. The film expects you to know the basics of the time period and the political and military agendas in the country.
Second, the film seems to be lacking a coherent structure. The introductory scenes are not really introducing anything besides shorts of the characters we don't know, lots of names that are hard to connect and unclear motivations. Some characters look similar to each other, so you have to pay a lot of attention to be able to distinguish and them from one another and overall understand what is supposed to be going on.
Furthermore, many scenes are either unclear or misplaced, making the viewer constantly wonder why the things shown are important. They probably wanted to make a combination of a gritty detective buddy film and a pseudo-documentary, since lots of things are supposedly based on a real story. But the blend didn't go well for sure.
So when it turns out that the real story isn't that unique or interesting, the crime itself isn't that special or engaging, the poorly shot final reveal provokes no emotions and there's another reason for that. The reason (and the most glaring issue) is - the were no characterizations in the film. The characters don't reflect on what's going on, so there is no way you can get engaged in the story. They work and have minor interpersonal relations, that is pretty much all there is. I'd say that most of the scenes in the film felt like a videogame cutscene, but videogame cutscenes tend to have more interesting interactions than this film had.
Around 30 minutes of the film could've been cut, but was left in. Many scenes are way too detailed for no reason, and the pace never changed. They tried to include a sense of urgency, but there was never any tension. It just felt like someone with no prior experience wanted to make a film, but had missed all the important elements of a crime investigation thriller/pseudo-documentary.
Some of the acting and dialogue pieces were also very unconvincing, and extras in many scenes felt like they were edited in from a 80ties low-budget police detective series.
Overall, I'd say that this film was unnecessary long, not particularly interesting or engaging, lacking in characterizations and character development, structure, editing, acting and dialogue. It was forgettable, and I had gained no enjoyment from watching it.
I cannot recommend this film.
Limbo (2023)
Not as deep as I wanted it to be
Limbo was an ok film that was heavily lacking in terms of details and substance.
It had the atmosphere, the dialogue and the characters overall felt realistic enough to believe in them. The atmosphere was all present, including a couple of metaphors here and there.
The idea of making it B&W didn't make too much sense for me, maybe it had something to do with the theme of the film, maybe it was made this was purely for the artistic purposes, but I'd appreciate it more if it had colors, just washed out or muted.
The detective concept worked fine, you could easily follow the story with the main character, understand what he was thinking without him directly explaining it. Many things in this film were understandable without direct expository dialogue, which is surely an achievement. Although, I'd appreciate more details and more of actual story. Seems like in real life things might be a little more complicated. The small amount of story the film had was still delivered and the ending was perfectly fine, although the main character's backstory and motivations of some characters were left behind.
So, as a one-time watch it's still perfectly fine, but more depth and real human emotions would've improve it for sure, since the story was either simplistic to begin with, or was simplified in the process.
Master Gardener (2022)
Felt like a waste of time actually
The concept of Master Gardener wasn't new at all, "a man with a troubled past tries to restart his life and so on". I still wanted to give it a try, since the cast and the director ensured some potential.
After the credits hit there was only one question left, what was it all about? There wasn't even that much dramatic stuff happening in the film, to be hoest, and since the characters are barely transofrmed by the situations they find themselves in - there was no noticeable arcs or transformations. In the end everything stayed almost exaclty the same, including the characters.
It felt like just a recollection of a couple of weeks from these peoples lives, including long, stretched scenes of driving around, eating, narrating diaries and so on. Almost like a basic pointless re-enacted documentary.
Scenes just dragged and dragged, slowing it down as much as possible. So when it felt like the movie is going to end, I wasn't sure what story is left to wrap up, since nothing really happened. The main character changed slightly in terms of coping with his past, but didn't really change that much.
Besides some basic people-flower metaphors, there was nothing of interest in this film, so in the end, indeed, this was a waste of my time.
Oppenheimer (2023)
I finally understood Nolan films
I had anticipated a more straightforward, character-driven study of the man who helped to develop the atomic bomb, but instead, I was met with a 3-hour long summer blockbuster and a possibility of hearing loss.
Thinking about this, I feel guilty for not understanding Nolan's summer films since I've seen all of them except Memento. Now it is clearer that this (Oppenheimer) is exactly what I should've expected, but for some reason, I didn't.
So now, understanding that I went to see it with a wrong impression or a misunderstanding of the director's style, I'll give my two cents on this one.
The film's editing was particularly problematic. The director is known for his use of quick cuts and jarring transitions, but in Oppenheimer, this style felt overused and gratuitous. The film's many plot threads were constantly being cut away from, making it difficult to follow the narrative up until the very end. Not much complaining can be done after Tenet and Dunkirk, but again, I expected something different for a bio-drama.
The sound mixing was also poor, with the dialogue often being drowned out by the music. This was especially frustrating during the film's tensest moments when I was desperate to hear what the characters were saying. Again, this was my IMAX experience. Maybe yours will be different.
Another problem is that there's just too much story. Oppenheimer wasn't a short film by no means, the creators wanted to make a deep dive into the political and historical background of some of the major characters, and there were so many of them. I don't think making this a solo film was a good idea, but a Chornobyl-style mini-series - would've worked great. They had so many good actors, but they were forced to fly through the scenes on an airplane bomber since they were limited by the runtime.
Despite these flaws, there were many redeeming qualities to Oppenheimer. The film's performances were all excellent, much so I cannot single out a particular one. The film's visuals were also stunning, with Nolan's trademark use of IMAX cinematography creating some truly awe-inspiring images. The soundtrack was plain gorgeous, and very memorable. Too bad that it was mixed into scenes where it shouldn't have been, and it also had some weird cuts, almost like clipping, ruining the tone. Like it was artificially cloned and stretched. Maybe I'm making this up.
Ultimately, Oppenheimer is a film that is both ambitious and flawed. It is a film that attempts to grapple with the weighty subject matter of the atomic bomb, but it ultimately fails to do so satisfyingly for me. I would recommend watching the film at home, where you can adjust the volume and take breaks as needed.
P. S. I also want to thank the creators for finally giving me an understanding of what to expect, and saving me from later disappointments.
Sharper (2023)
Saved from failure by cinematography and acting
Sharper's base isn't fresh or new. There are tens or hundreds of similar films.
The writing is relatively smart, but you still have to suspend your disbelief a lot, and you're expected to buy some things as realistic.
What saved this film was the A24 treatment, mostly in the looks and feels. I can guarantee that if it was shot like a TV series with default shots and the story was delivered in a straightforward manner - this would've been a disaster.
The other thing - acting. It was actually better and smarter than you would think in the first place. At times you catch some bad performances, but as it turns out - this was intentional, and I loved that.
Besides the looks, the best thing for me was the story's overall plausibility. They didn't pull the twist out of nowhere, and even though it wasn't that twisty - they had some details sprinkled in order for the twist to feel realistic. I hate films that show you one thing and then, in the end, change everything, fooling you straight up. This one was fair in this regard.
Overall, I'd say that it's a 7/10 ok con film. Not memorable for anything besides some atmospheric shots and music. Qualifies for a weekend evening watch-and-forget.
Hypnotic (2023)
Just a B-movie inspired by Scanners, Pusher, Kitsunegari, Ultrasound and more
Hypnotic was a bland and mediocre film inspired by a concept that wasn't really that new.
While watching it, I constantly felt like they just couldn't handle the idea. And it's not the budget. It's the overall delivery of the story. All the characters just spat out exposition, and due to questionable editing, the film felt more like a cutscene in a video game.
They were probably afraid that the plot would confuse people, but there are ways to handle this with less explanation done by the characters. There's nothing to care about in its current state since everyone just explains who they are and what they do or have to do.
All the action was shot poorly and way under the standards of excitement today. The interesting scenes were mostly horror-themed ones, like a chained dog cop buddy and the scissors one. It has plenty of nods and homages to other films, which are easily spottable, but not in a fun way.
All the other technical stuff wasn't good, weird shots, clunky editing, and very uninspired and bored acting. Affleck looked happy only in the last scene, maybe because of his celebrating that it's over now (or maybe something I cannot spoil).
Building "twists" upon "twists" in such a film just adds nothing. There should be rules, and the twists can be surprising only if the film feels real while fooling you. If you're watching under the impression that anything can be fake, it devalues the twists.
Even if you buy the magic aspect of the film, the whole concept of the governmental program is just as implausible as possible. There's no need to try to break it down to understand that such an undertaking would just bring absolute chaos, and nobody would care about the mission they've tried 12 times for some reason.
Overall, I'd say that Hypnotic was a mediocre B-movie with an idea they didn't utilize seriously or in a comedic way. It's something in-between a cheap action film and a supernatural horror drama, not reaching any of these completely. Not sure why Affleck was there, but he didn't seem to care anyway.
Whitney Houston: I Wanna Dance with Somebody (2022)
Technical, metodical, visionless
"I Wanna Dance with Somebody," the biopic about Whitney Houston, is a technically proficient movie that goes into great detail about the events in her life. However, it falls short on delivering a compelling story as it primarily consists of a series of micro-stories that lack a definitive ending and connection to the overall picture.
Although the actors portrayed their characters well, the odd editing and mixed order of scenes made it difficult to establish a tangible connection between them. Furthermore, the film tries to remain neutral and safe by avoiding any characterizations or conflicts, resulting in a sense of detachment from the ending.
The lack of a clear sense of time progression also contributed to the overall confusion. While the costumes and sets were accurate, the color correction and high-quality digital images made it difficult to discern the change of decades. Even though the music was great, there was a notable lack of character involvement and interpersonal emotion.
Overall, "I Wanna Dance with Somebody" was technically sound and the lead actress did an excellent job with the role. However, it felt more like an accelerated theatricalized documentary rather than a captivating biopic, which made it easy to get lost in the middle of the film without a documentary-style voiceover. Despite its shortcomings, the film is still worth watching for its music and technical execution.
Three Thousand Years of Longing (2022)
Well, what is our life but stories and desires?
Three Thousand Years of Longing (2022) is an interesting and original tale about tales, choices, people, fates and wishes. Wishes we crave, wishes we make for ourselves, and where deceptive desires can lead us. Consciously or not.
The film packs quite a lot in terms of characterization, mainly by having lots of characters, with only some having actual substance and most of them being stereotypically stereotyped (intentionally, I guess). Probably this was done to show how simplictic humans can get even in they pretend to be overcomplicated.
I don't know, this film is full of themes, there's literally so much the creators probably confused themselves while making it. I'm saying this because at some point it felt like they got consumed by all the variables and sides they wanted to cover. So they just let go and went full into it. Thus, tonally the film is all over the place. Again, sometimes intentionally, since some of the ideas are so miserable and depressing, you really need a funny moment to look away.
I can go on and on about the different implications and senses, present in this film, but this will take too much time. Maybe try watching it for yourself and see what you'll get out of it. I was enjoyably confused by the end of it due to thematical overload, bizarre storytelling (which perfectly suits the film), and captivating performances. The visuals are also interesting since the more we progress into the stories, the more dreamlike becomes the "reality" (or current time).
I'm glad I finally saw this film, and I'm confident that a second viewing will yield different results, so I'll give it some time and get back to it later.
With all its flaws, it still felt like an experience, like a real film of which we don't have so many in these days of corporate products.