I watch movies every week and then write down my thoughts. Read my previous reviews!
My rating is simple, Watch It, It Depends, Skip it.
 |
| Jane Got a Gun - It could have been better. |
Watch Jane Got a Gun
Written by: Brian Duffield and Anthony Tambakis &Joel Edgerton (screenplay), Brian Duffield (story)
Directed by: Gavin O'Connor
Starring: Natalie Portman, Joel Edgerton, Ewan McGregor, Noah Emmerich, Boyd Holbrook
Rated: R
Plot:
In this western, a woman attempts to save her incapacitated outlaw husband from a gang looking for vengeance.
Verdict:
It's not bad, but it's also a lot of wasted potential. There is a much better movie hiding between the writing, directing, and copious flashbacks. The ending undercuts the movie, though Natalie Portman did a good job overall. There are many much better Western movies.
It depends.
Review:
The movie began filming over three years ago, and that was after losing the director, cinematography, and Jude Law the day before filming was to begin. Delays forced Michael Fassbender and Bradley Cooper to drop out due to scheduling conflicts and Jake Gyllenhaal declined outright.
With cast and crew dropping out, it raises questions as to what's wrong with this movie, and it definitely has problems.
Is a man falling off the horse the only way to convey he's hurt? Has there ever been a man shot that didn't fall off his horse? Jane's husband, Hammond, rides home slumped on his horse before falling off right at the doorstep.
He's been shot and his former gang is on the way. It's established Jane is tough as she removes the bullets and cauterizes his wounds with black powder.
I wondered if Hammond being shot in the back had any significance. Obviously he was running away, but how he was shot is inconsequential.
Jane must defend her family, but what chance does she have against an entire gang?
After the first flashback, I wondered if a flashback was necessary. Little did I know that flashbacks would interrupt the movie every ten minutes to nullify any tension or momentum the movie had.
If this movie is about Jane defending her home, we don't need a flashback on how she first met the attacking gang. We're teased with many questions as to how Jane met the Bishop gang, what happened between her and her fiance, and why she married a former Bishop gang member. These questions are to hide the thin plot. Vengeance/defense is a good enough plot, just look at the amazing Unforgiven (1992), but this movie doesn't know how to handle it.
The imagery, production, and costumes look great. The setting feels real, and the actors did a pretty good job, but the story is the weak link.
Employing the mystery of what happened to her isn't a mistake, but relying on flashbacks to tell the story is. Her background should have been revealed through the present day plot. This movie should have been an unflinching march to a deadly conclusion. The flashbacks add very little that we didn't already glean from conversations.
The situation of Jane, her husband Hammond, and her former fiance stuck in a cabin should have generated unbelievable tension, yet it doesn't. The Hateful Eight (2015) did this so well and so recently that the shortcomings in Jane Got a Gun really stand out.
The big battle once the gang arrives isn't bad but it was too easy for the heroes with no consequences.
The biggest mistake of this movie is the happy ending. I was expecting a much bleaker end. Are westerns supposed to have happy endings?
This goes beyond everybody lives happily ever after, to actually undo bad experiences characters have had.
 |
| Kindergarten Cop 2 - So bad it may make you shake children violently. |
Watch Kindergarten Cop 2
Written by: David H. Steinberg (screenplay), Murray Salem and Herschel Weingrod & Timothy Harris (based on the movie written by)
Directed by: Don Michael Paul
Starring: Dolph Lundgren, Billy Bellamy, Fiona Vroom, Aleks Paunovic
Rated: PG-13
Plot:
Muscle car driving, ladies man, top cop, Dolph Lundgren goes undercover at a prestigious kindergarten to get information about a crime from the students.
Verdict:
Sometimes I wonder if my perspective is skewed and whether I could recognize a truly bad movie. Then movies like this appear to remove all doubt. To call this movie an embarrassment is being nice. The story is absolutely terrible and predictable. The writing is a failure, and who would believe that women in their '20s are throwing themselves at a fifty-eight year old Lundgren? It's not even so bad it's good. There are no quotable one liners like the original, and there is no reason for this movie to even exist. I haven't seen the original in many years, but this is a terrible attempt at a remake and a movie. This is terrible.
Skip it.
Review:
This movie brings together the duo of Lundgren and Bellamy who haven't been relevant since the '80s and '90s. In less than fifteen minutes it was clear this is a train wreck. It contains the worst movie tropes from the '80s, '90's and '00s. The writing actively trying to be bad, and the plot is banal. I can't blame the actors but so much. They can only do so much with the non-existent story.
Lundgren has an outdoor gym, a cool car, he's single, yet he's fifty-eight and we're supposed to believe he's a player? Do women like his grandpa vibe? The entire movie I was trying to figure out who they really wanted to cast. Did Thor and Captain America turn this down? Imagine that.
The technical cop details are just as bad. Lundgren has a gun in the interrogation room. He's done enough cop movies to know better, but I'm sure he was in a despondent stupor during this movie. Just look at his performance. This man has a masters degree in chemical engineering.
The subtext of what this means for Lundgren's career is by far more interesting than the movie. On the day he filmed the country line dancing scene in a cowboy hat was he sitting in his trailer thinking, "I've hit rock bottom. This is it."
This is bad on a level I haven't seen in a long time. This is the difference between bad and terrible. It can make anything else you watch better by comparison. Lundgren's character baits kindergartners armed with sticks to attack men with guns. The entire premise is that the cops can't search the school, they have to wait for kids to tell them where a teacher hid a flash drive. Why would a teacher hack a police database anyway? Nothing in this movie makes sense.
 |
| The Man from U.N.C.L.E. - Fun but forgettable. |
Watch The Man from U.N.C.L.E.
Written by: Guy Ritchie & Lionel Wigram (screenplay) Jeff Kleeman & David C. Wilson and Guy Ritchie & Lionel Wigram (story), Sam Rolfe (television series)
Directed by: Guy Ritchie
Starring: Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, Alicia Vikander, Hugh Grant, Jared Harris
Rated: PG-13
Plot:
In this remake of the '60s television series, Napolean Solo is a thief turned CIA agent tasked with saving the world.
Verdict:
It has a lot of style and flash, but lacks story. It's a fun spy movie with a fun deadpan style comedy between Cavill and Hammer. I enjoyed it, but it doesn't quite stand out in the spy movie genre.
It depends.
Review:
This is style over substance. Cavill and the movie are almost a parody of James Bond, fully aware of how over the top the spy genre can be.
Hammer and Cavill are two spies with completely opposite styles and approaches that turn from enemies to allies when Russia and the U.S. partner to stop a nuclear apocalypse.
The dynamic could almost work if the writers didn't try to trap Hammer as the silent Russian. You can feel that they had a lot of fun writing the part of Napolean Solo, but they didn't quite know what to do with Illya Kuryakin. The characters could have been better balanced, but their dynamic would still make me consider watching the sequel. And the ending definitely sets this up as a franchise.
It's up to the actors and the big action set pieces to hold this movie together due to the lack of story. The double crosses are pulled completely out of left field, and the hand holding of showing the same scene a second time now that we know the person's true alliances isn't effective. This happens a couple of times and I wonder if the scenes were repeated just to make the plot feel bigger than it really is.
I can't help but compare this to Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014) (Read my review). Their styles are very different, but they are both recent spy movie spoofs. U.N.C.L.E. feels like it's from the classic Bond era while taking a jab at spy movies, but it doesn't have the stand out fight scenes or over the top action of Kingsman. Kingsman takes the ridiculous premise of many spy movies one step further.
The writing does stand out on occasion, especially when the two spies are trying to one up each other or don't notice a big event occurring in the background and their trivial conversation is at odds with an imminent explosion.
Read my All the Way review
 |
| L'Avventura - Visually stunning. |
Watch L'Avventura
Written by: Michelangelo Antonioni
Directed by: Michelangelo Antonioni (story), Michelangelo Antonioni and Elio Bartolini and Tonino Guerra (screenplay)
Starring: Gabriele Ferzetti, Monica Vitti, Lea Massari
Rated: --
Plot:
A woman is lost at sea, and her lover and best friend start a romance while searching for her.
Verdict:
Visually it's a masterpiece. From the landscapes to architecture, pause this movie anywhere and it will look amazing. This isn't a mystery, the woman lost at sea is a secondary plot. The characters are isolated and apathetic. They have everything, but feel nothing.
It's an unconventional love story that's a commentary on the subject at large rather than depicting a budding romance.
It's one of those movies that I would probably rank as a 'Watch it.' upon a second viewing.
It depends.
Review:
Despite the beautiful people and places, the characters feel isolated and seek attention. When Anna disappears, everyone assumes it's another ploy for recognition. All of the characters would sacrifice a real connection for fleeting entertainment.
When Anna disappears, only the two people closest to her seem to care. They end up falling for each other. They are two islands that slowly come together, but is it a real attraction, temptation, or a passing fling to fill the time?
The disappearance doesn't happen until well in to thirty minutes in. It's a slow movie that you could call measured or deliberately paced, but that doesn't make it seem any quicker. To shorten the movie would rob it of the mood it strives to impress upon the viewer. It is a deliberate choice to have the backgrounds matter as much as the characters.
It takes full advantage of the visual medium in a way that few movies do. The composition is striking in every shot.
Love is an illusion. None of the paired characters on the boat seem happy to be together. The loss of someone Sandro and Claudia care about brings them together, but it's just superficial. Sandro easily falls for, or acts upon his desire for someone else just because she's beautiful.
 |
| The Mirror - Less of a movie, more an experience. |
Watch The Mirror
Written by: Aleksandr Misharin, Andrei Tarkovsky
Directed by: Andrei Tarkovsky
Starring: Margarita Terekhova, Filipp Yankovskiy, Ignat Daniltsev
Rated: --
Plot:
A dying man has visions of his past that include significant events in Russia and parts of his childhood.
Verdict:
I really want to like this. Tarkovsky creates amazing visuals, and this is no exception. I like the concept and it's defiance of a conventional plot, but I just didn't connect. A second viewing might change my mind, or it could be the fact that this is billed as Tarkovsky's best and my expectations were too high.
It depends.
Review:
This is stream of consciousness with images and memories crossing the screen out of order. It's not a typical movie as it's not linear and doesn't follow a basic plot structure. It's an exploration of scenes, crafting each scene for a mood or emotion. The composition and color is an experiment. It's less a movie and more an experience. The imagery is striking. The ending with the music is really good, especially in a movie that doesn't really have a linear beginning or end.
I feel like I'm missing something by not really liking it. There is a lot of symbolism in the movie, but this is going to be one I'll have to revisit later and see what I think.
No comments:
Post a Comment