Tag Archives: film

Boy Kills World

Posted on by

This was extremely violent and brutally gory. That does not bother me much, but there were more things that did bother me in Boy Kills World.

According to IMDB, “Bill Skarsgård stars as “Boy” who vows revenge after his family is murdered by Hilda Van Der Koy (Famke Janssen), the deranged matriarch of a corrupt post-apocalyptic dynasty that left the boy orphaned, deaf, and voiceless. Driven by his inner voice, one which he co-opted from his favorite childhood video game, Boy trains with a mysterious shaman (Ruhian) to become an instrument of death and is set loose on the eve of the annual culling of dissidents. Bedlam ensues as Boy commits bloody martial arts mayhem, inciting wrath of carnage and blood-letting. As he tries to get his bearings in this delirious realm, Boy soon falls in with a desperate resistance group, all the while bickering with the apparent ghost of his rebellious little sister.”

The positives for me was Bill Skarsgård, who I think was really good as the deaf/mute hero. My only problem with him was my own. When I looked at Skarsgård, all I could see was a combination of professional wrestlers Cody Rhodes and Edge and it distracted me constantly. Again, that is not the fault of the film and I thought Skarsgård was very good as this action character.

The action did not work very well for me. There was a lot of camera movement in the fight choreography that was annoying. The fights and the blood did become a bit dull for me because it was overdone. Too much blood and violence dampened the effect of both of them.

The voice over of Boy’s inner thoughts was hit and miss for me. There were some fun lines with it, and others that just felt like it was out of place. I did like the fact that the internal voice was the voice from Boy’s favorite video game as a youth, but the use of “Finish him” or “Fatality” seemed excessive. Funny at first, then not so much.

I became bored by this movie rather quickly, and by the time the third act came around and there was some movement on the story (predictable as it may have been) I had checked out. Not the worst film I have seen this year by a long stretch, just not very good.

2.6 stars

Abigail

Posted on by

This movie was awesome, but I just can’t shake the feeling that it could have been so much better, perhaps even the best movie of the year, but it has to settle for awesomeness thanks to the trailers.

I went into the film wondering why the movie would reveal in the trailers that the little girl who had been kidnapped was, in truth, a vampire. I did not understand the idea behind it, but I gave them the benefit of the doubt, thinking that perhaps there was another, more dramatic reveal in the film that made it okay to give away this major plot point.

After seeing the movie, I am even more flummoxed about why the studio would give away what could have been a major twist in the story in the trailer.

The first part of the movie treated this like a kidnapping story and that the crew of hired thugs were to babysit the hostage in this old, spooky house. There were times in the early part of the film that tried to make the little girl, Abigail, into a victim and the film tried to pull on the heartstrings of the audience. The thing is, I knew the whole time that Abigail was a vampire.

It also tried to play a bit of a game of “who can you trust” by making it seem as if Frank, played by the amazing Dan Stevens, was behind the entire thing, and that would have been a cool twist, had I not known that the little girl was a vampire. All this early part of the movie would have worked so much more had they not spoiled that reveal in the trailer.

And the argument would be trying to get people into the theater, but I honestly think there could have been a way to weave together a trailer that painted this into a different picture, while protecting that one major concept. The reveal of Abigail as a vampire would have hit so much harder, been so much more impactful if I did not know it was coming.

After all of that, this movie still rocked really hard.

I was shocked to see at the film’s beginning that Alisha Weir played Abigail. Alisha Weir was the lead of one of my favorite movies of a couple years ago, Matilda the Musical. I absolutely loved her in that role and she is fabulous here too. She is an amazing young actor and she has a bright, bright future. In what could have been a one note role in Abigail, Weir brought so much emotion, vulnerability and power to her character while still being sinister and downright terrifying.

The rest of the ensemble cast was great too. Melissa Barrera was fantastic as the main protagonist, who was the character that the audience was intended to connect with and I certainly did. However, they still imbued her with plenty of mistakes and a back story that was filled with mistakes. She was a bad ass, but also a character with more regrets than happy memories.

Dan Stevens is always amazing, and this is no exception. This is a character that is anything but likable, but you still find yourself rooting for him even though. Dan Stevens does a tremendous job with this character that had surprising depth for this type of movie.

Kathryn Newton, William Catlett, Kevin Durand and the late Angus Cloud formed a ragtag bunch of lowlifes that mixed beautifully with the horror/comedy vibe of the film. Giancarlo Esposito had a small, but meaningful role as well.

As I mentioned, this was a horror/comedy film and I laughed out loud multiple times at some of the situations that these characters wound up in.

I might have legitimately given this movie 5 stars had the vampire twist been kept as a secret. I came out raving about this movie even without the surprise, but I can’t help but think it would have been so much more without the spoilers.

4.75 stars

Immaculate

Posted on by

Sydney Sweeney has now appeared in two of the worst movies of 2024. First, Madame Web and now this religious themed horror movie, Immaculate.

According to IMDB, “Cecilia (Sydney Sweeney), a woman of devout faith, is warmly welcomed to the picture-perfect Italian countryside where she is offered a new role at an illustrious convent. But it becomes clear to Cecilia that her new home harbors dark and horrifying secrets.“

I should not single out Sydney Sweeney, because there is no doubt that she is the absolutely best part of this fart of a movie. Her performance is savage, and she dominates her screen time.

The problem is that the film is just not very good.

The first hour of the movie was very dull and it spent the entire time throwing jump scares at the audience where the music suddenly spikes loudly, only to see nothing in particular. It was one of the most prolific uses of jump scares I have seen in quite awhile.

While the film’s premise had some promise, the film just goes off the rails in the third act, settling for shocking moments over any sort of storytelling. While I appreciate some of the swings it took in that final act, particularly right at the end, it depends on shock to create emotion in the audience, not anything to do with character or story elements.

Sydney Sweeney was really good in this. She gave it her all. The material was just not up to the quality of her performance.

1.3 stars

Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2

Posted on by

Last year, in my opinion, the worst movie of 2023 was Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey. By far. Despite the negative word of mouth (and honestly, probably because of it), I saw that movie on streaming and hated it. There were several movies that I saw last year that, in my movie reviews, I said that this ‘new movie’ would be the worst movie I saw that year, except that I had seen Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.

I was very surprised to see a sequel already to this horror schlock. What was even more odd was that I saw that it had 100% on Rotten Tomatoes at the time (6 reviews).

Admittedly, this sequel is better than the first one. Honestly, that bar was REALLY low.

Then, it kicked off with an opening between Rhys Frake-Waterfield, the director, and Scott Chambers, who had assumed the role of Christopher Robin. They spoke about their new Pooh cinematic universe that they are building including movies featuring horror-takes on Pinocchio, Peter Pan and Bambi, and then even a Poohniverse film where all the monsters assemble like the Avengers. I’m not making this up. The most unbelievable part was when they spoke to the director of the upcoming Bambi: The Reckoning, Dan Allen, who said if you liked movies like Jaws, Aliens and Jurassic Park, you will love Bambi: The Reckoning. What?

Then, Pooh 2 started with an animated intro which made me pause. I thought it was very well done, and I was intrigued with the set up coming out of the opening. Could this actually be a good film after the pile of crap that the first one was?

Short answer: No.

The very next scene was a kill scene with Pooh, his new cohort Owl and a reanimated Piglet, attacking and killing three of the worst female characters you will ever see in a movie. There was no rhyme or reason to it. It was just to have some kills, and I realized that my initial possible thoughts (dare I say, hopes) would go unfulfilled.

I am going to say this. I actually thought when the film focused on Christopher Robin in the first act of the film, it was decent. I liked the conflict of Christopher Robin being accused of being involved in the 100 Acre Wood Massacre (which was basically the first film). Chris had become a doctor and he was struggling not only with the events of the last movie, but also a trauma involving his brother when he was a young boy. All this piqued my interest.

Sadly, that entire storyline was interposed with some of the dumbest scenes of Pooh and Owl killing random people in graphic and gory fashion. Some of these kills were laugh out loud funny, and I did that several times. They took away most everything from those initial scenes with Chris.

By the end of the film, I hated the Christopher Robin story too because they had taken it in the most bizarre and stupidest path. Predictable too. I said several points during the film that were so obvious that it was shameful that they tried to pass them off as reveals.

There were several story elements that were brought up, but either never followed though with or tossed aside with a rampant abandon.

The film did look better. Frake-Waterfield and Chambers had said in their intro that the success of the first film allowed them to approach this one with a considerably larger budget and it did show in the look. However, just because something looked better, does not mean that is better.

Case in point, the film introduces Tigger late in the third act and does nothing with him. He is there for basically one slaughter scene and he was a tiger with long claws that killed people. No sign of “the tops are made of the rubber, the bottoms are made of the springs” that you might associate with Tigger. The film did nothing to establish that this was the Tigger we knew. It made him generic.

The relationship between Pooh and Chris took an even more messed up twist that was completely unnecessary and barely acknowledged.

Yes, this is better than last year’s film. I don’t think that this is an automatic, no-doubter for the worst movie of 2024. However, I am not saying that it won’t be the worst movie of 2024. It will be in the conversation.

1 star

Road House (2024)

Posted on by

I just watched the original Road House on Hulu this morning. I wanted to have seen it before watching the remake on Amazon Prime tonight. I did not love the original. I did not hate it because I could see the appeal. The 2024 version of Road House I did not love, but I liked it more than the original.

Jake Gyllenhaal steps into the role of Dalton (who gets a first name in this movie, Elwood), this time a former UFC fighter whose career ended after a tragedy. Dalton’s name was enough to intimidate most people so Frankie (Jessica Williams), who owned a bar named Road House in Florida came to find Dalton and offer him a job to help clean up the bar.

Just like the original, Dalton discovered that the backwoods town had problems with certain individuals who want the Road House gone.

These people bring in Conor McGregor to try and kill Dalton.

I was actually more engaged with the character of Dalton immediately in this movie because of a scene with a train. I found him more interesting than the late Patrick Swayze version.

The villains were every bit as one dimensional as the original. Even McGregor was just the violent killer character.

This was just as violent as the original with Gyllenhaal being quicker to fight than it was with Swayze. The fight scenes were very brutal and displayed Dalton’s skills in mixed martial arts.

There were less involvement with the rest of the bar employees in the new film than the original, but they were there in the scenes.

Gyllenhaal is the star of the film and I thought he did a really solid job. The film is not brilliant, but I was entertained and I did find it better than the Road House I watched this morning.

3 stars

Road House (1989)

Posted on by

As I was going to Amazon Prime yesterday, I saw that the new Road House movie starring Jake Gyllenhaal was now available for streaming. With the schedule, I plan on watching that later this afternoon or evening, but I thought I should watch the original 1989 movie starring Patrick Swayze first. I have never seen Road House even though it has a large cult following. I have heard a wide variety of opinions on the film. Everything from it is a favorite movie of all time to it is one of the worst. I found it on Hulu/Max so I watched it this morning.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, “The Double Deuce is the meanest, loudest and rowdiest bar south of the Mason-Dixon Line, and Dalton (Patrick Swayze) has been hired to clean it up. He might not look like much, but the Ph.D.-educated bouncer proves he’s more than capable — busting the heads of troublemakers and turning the roadhouse into a jumping hot-spot. But Dalton’s romance with the gorgeous Dr. Clay (Kelly Lynch) puts him on the bad side of cutthroat local big shot Brad Wesley (Ben Gazzara).”

Starting off, this is a silly, mostly stupid, film with poor dialogue and simplistic characters. It is not a very good film.

However, it is entertaining. It is one of those film that you need to approach knowing what kind of film it is and not to expect a lot. There is fun to be had in the mindless violence and one-note characters.

This is basically a 1980s-style Western, with two main characters, Dalton and Mason (Sam Elliott), who are the silent, gunslingers, who coming into the town to clean it up. They are Clint Eastwood-like characters coming face-to-face with the mustache-twirling villains. The story fits right into the genre of the Western, right down to the shootout in the finale.

I will say that the longer the film went, the more ridiculous it became. There is no attempt at realism and it felt much more a cartoon than anything else.

It was awesome to see the late Terry Funk in this film. Sure, he was not much of an actor, but he wasn’t supposed to be. As brutal henchman, he was right in his element.

The more I reflect back on this movie, I can see why people enjoy it, but it really is not a movie that I would recommend unless you are bored on a Saturday afternoon and looking for a really dumb film to pass the time.

Arthur the King

Posted on by

This was the second film I saw today that I disagreed with the Rotten Tomatoes score. Arthur the King, the new dog movie starring Mark Wahlberg, had a 65% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I did not find it as enjoyable as that.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, “Over the course of ten days and 435 miles, an unbreakable bond is forged between pro adventure racer Michael Light (Mark Wahlberg) and a scrappy street dog companion dubbed Arthur. Based on an incredible true story, ARTHUR THE KING follows Light, desperate for one last chance to win, as he convinces a sponsor to back him and a team of athletes (Simu Liu, Nathalie Emmanuel, and Ali Suliman) for the Adventure Racing World Championship in the Dominican Republic. As the team is pushed to their outer limits of endurance in the race, Arthur redefines what victory, loyalty and friendship truly mean.“

I really felt as if this film was pushing the boundaries of emotion manipulation with the times it put the dog in jeopardy, and the fact that this dog somehow followed this group of people across some brutal environments because Michael gave him some meatballs was just too much to believe. Yes, it is a true story, but I find it difficult to swallow.

There were some dramatic moments in the film, including one stunt with bicycles and a wire that was harrowing. The landscape was beautiful and was shot very well.

I never doubted what was going to happen in the movie. It was very predictable, which is not always a bad thing. Here, it just felt so manipulative that I rolled my eyes more than I should have.

I do love Simu Liu, but his character was really inconsistent throughout the film and it does not do an adequate job of explaining why he is as he is. Some of his scenes are in direct opposition to moments earlier in the film and even Simu’s great charisma could not help these moments.

A major problem I had was not necessarily the direct problem of the movie, but they showed WAY too much in the trailers, including several scenes from the very end of the movie. Any real tension there may have been in the scene was robbed because I knew there were scenes we saw in the trailer that had not yet happened in the movie. Scenes including the end of the race and subsequent after effects. Some films are hurt by their trailers, and, in my opinion, this is one of them.

I think a lot of people will love this movie, but I am not one of them. It was a basic story that we have seen dozens of times with a dog and a manipulative story. Still, it was not an offensive film and families should like it.

2.75 stars

EYG 2024 Academy Award Picks

Posted on by

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/awards-insider-oscar-nominations-2024

Here are the picks from EYG for tonight’s Academy Awards. I am giving the Should Win, Will Win choice for each. These are my picks, the nominees I think are going to win, not necessarily my favorites.

BEST PICTURE

American Fiction
Anatomy of a Fall
Barbie
The Holdovers
Killers of the Flower Moon
Maestro
Oppenheimer
Past Lives
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

SHOULD WIN: Oppenheimer

WILL WIN: Oppenheimer

BEST DIRECTOR

Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest
Yorgos Lanthimos, Poor Things
Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Martin Scorsese, Killers of the Flower Moon
Justine Triet, Anatomy of a Fall

SHOULD WIN: Christopher Nolan

WILL WIN: Christopher Nolan

BEST ACTRESS

Annette Bening, Nyad
Lily Gladstone, Killers of the Flower Moon
Sandra Hüller, Anatomy of a Fall
Carey Mulligan, Maestro
Emma Stone, Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Emma Stone

WILL WIN: Lily Gladstone (I’ve got a feeling on this one. I could see Emma Stone winning easily too)

BEST ACTOR 

Bradley Cooper, Maestro
Colman Domingo, Rustin
Paul Giamatti, The Holdovers
Cillian Murphy, Oppenheimer
Jeffrey Wright, American Fiction

SHOULD WIN: Paul Giamatti

WILL WIN: Cillian Murphy

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Emily Blunt, Oppenheimer
Danielle Brooks, The Color Purple
America Ferrera, Barbie
Jodie Foster, Nyad
Da’Vine Joy Randolph, The Holdovers

SHOULD WIN: Da’Vine Joy Randolph

WILL WIN: Da’Vine Joy Randolph (LOCK!)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Sterling K. Brown, American Fiction
Robert De Niro, Killers of the Flower Moon
Robert Downey Jr., Oppenheimer
Ryan Gosling, Barbie
Mark Ruffalo, Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Robert Downey Jr.

WILL WIN: Robert Downey Jr. (Almost a LOCK)

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Justine Triet and Arthur Harari, Anatomy of a Fall
David Hemingson, The Holdovers
Bradley Cooper and Josh Singer, Maestro
Samy Burch, May December
Celine Song, Past Lives

SHOULD WIN: The Holdovers

WILL WIN: Anatomy of a Fall (I have not seen this film, waiting for the June Swoon.)

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Cord Jefferson, American Fiction
Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach, Barbie
Tony McNamara, Poor Things
Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest

SHOULD WIN: American Fiction

WILL WIN: Oppenheimer

BEST INTERNATIONAL FEATURE

Io Capitano, Italy
Perfect Days, Japan
Society of the Snow, Spain
The Teacher’s Lounge, Germany
The Zone of Interest, United Kingdom

SHOULD WIN: Society of the Snow

WILL WIN: The Zone of Interest

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

The Boy and the Heron
Elemental
Nimona
Robot Dreams
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

SHOULD WIN: Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

WILL WIN: I’m uncertain for this. I am tempted to say The Boy and the Heron, but I’ll stick with Spider-Man.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

Bobi Wine: The People’s President
The Eternal Memory
Four Daughters
To Kill a Tiger
20 Days in Mariupol

Haven’t seen any of these. I’ll guess 20 Days in Mariupol

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

El Conde
Killers of the Flower Moon
Maestro
Oppenheimer
Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Oppenheimer

WILL WIN: Oppenheimer

BEST EDITING

Anatomy of a Fall
The Holdovers
Killers of the Flower Moon
Oppenheimer
Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Poor Things

WILL WIN: Poor Things

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

Barbie
Killers of the Flower Moon
Napoleon
Oppenheimer
Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Barbie

WILL WIN: Poor Things

BEST HAIR AND MAKEUP 

Golda
Maestro
Oppenheimer
Poor Things
Society of the Snow

SHOULD WIN: Poor Things

WILL WIN: Poor Things

BEST SOUND

The Creator
Maestro
Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One
Oppenheimer
The Zone of Interest

SHOULD WIN: Oppenheimer

WILL WIN: Oppenheimer

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

The Creator
Godzilla Minus One
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One
Napoleon

SHOULD WIN: The Creator

WILL WIN: Godzilla Minus One

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN

Barbie
Killers of the Flower Moon
Napoleon
Oppenheimer
Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Barbie

WILL WIN: Poor Things

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

“What Was I Made For?”, Billie Eilish and Finneas, Barbie
“I’m Just Ken,” Mark Ronson and Andrew Wyatt, Barbie
“The Fire Inside,” Diane Warren, Flamin’ Hot
“It Never Went Away,” Jon Batiste, American Symphony
“Wahzhazhe (A Song for My People),” Osage Tribal Singers, Killers of the Flower Moon

SHOULD WIN: “I’m Just Ken”

WILL WIN: “What Was I Made For?”

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

American Fiction
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny
Killers of the Flower Moon
Oppenheimer
Poor Things

SHOULD WIN: Oppenheimer

WILL WIN: Oppenheimer

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT

The After
Invincible
Knight of Fortune
Red, White and Blue
The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

SHOULD WIN: The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

WILL WIN: The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

BEST ANIMATED SHORT

Letter to a Pig
Ninety-Five Senses
Our Uniform
Pachyderme
War Is Over! Inspired by the Music of John & Yoko

SHOULD WIN: Letter to a Pig

WILL WIN: War is Over! Inspired by the Music of John & Yoko

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT

The ABCs of Book Banning
The Barber of Little Rock
Island in Between
The Last Repair Shop
Nai Nai & Wai Po

Again, have not seen any of these. Guess: The Last Repair Shop

Imaginary

Posted on by

2024 must be the year of imaginary friends. The film IF with Ryan Reynolds is out later this year, and this weekend dropped the latest horror movie featuring the idea of the imaginary friend.

According to IMDB, “a woman returns to her childhood home to discover that the imaginary friend she left behind is very real and unhappy that she abandoned him.”

Here is the thing with Imaginary. I was fully engaged in the first 2/3rds if this movie. I was invested, surprisingly so. Then, in the third act of Imaginary, everything absolutely fell off the cliff. The last third of this movie absolutely crushed the enjoyment from the first part of the film and brought this rating way down.

So what went wrong in that third act? Without talking in spoilers, the problems are varied. The movie suddenly falls into exposition. It starts to explain things and doesn’t seem to stop. SO MUCH EXPLAINING!!!! And it was multiple scenes.

Not only are they over explaining things, they are explaining things that we just saw happen, as if we were not smart enough to understand what had just happened. There was one scene in particular where once the action ended, the characters told us what we had just seen. I do not like to think the movie thinks I am too dumb to understand what I am watching. This sure as hell is not Dune 2.

The third act became ridiculous. The story was convoluted and then everything had to be explained. Things happened that did not make sense. The special effects were okay, except for the look of the bear. The monstrous bear known as Chauncey looked like a fraud Bigfoot on a poor video recording.

The acting was, at best, passable, but the writing was extremely weak and the dialogue felt wooden in a lot of times.

They used a bunch of jump scares in the film because they could not really create the type of horror that built on it normally.

I was enjoying the first two acts, despite the fact that it was a little slower. But that third act just drove the film into the ground. I went from being invested to laughing at the scenes. It has been a long time since a movie took this hard of a turn into badness for me.

1.5 stars

Spaceman

Posted on by

So this must be the weekend for science fiction.

I watched Spaceman, the third sci-fi movie of the day for me. It is also the one that I am the most conflicted about.

It is very well known that I am not a fan of Adam Sandler. However, he has had some more recent, serious movie roles that I have enjoyed, so seeing this still left me with some hope. After watching it, I am just unsure what exactly I watched.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, “Six months into a solitary research mission to the edge of the solar system, an astronaut, Jakub (Adam Sandler), realizes that the marriage he left behind might not be waiting for him when he returns to Earth. Desperate to fix things with his wife, Lenka (Carey Mulligan), he is helped by a mysterious creature from the beginning of time he finds hiding in the bowels of his ship. Hanuš (voiced by Paul Dano) works with Jakub to make sense of what went wrong before it is too late.”

This is most definitely a slow burn sci-fi movie, which I do not mind. I have always enjoyed a good slow burn character piece, and this is definitely a film that embraces the pace.

Adam Sandler does a decent job in this performance, but it does feel strange at times. I have to say, I did not realize that he was supposed to be an astronaut from the Czech Republic until midway into the film. There was not much about Adam Sandler or his performance that screamed Czech.

Then, things go really weird when the creature voiced by Paul Dano arrives and begins a deep, psychological and internal discussion about just about everything in Jakub’s life. I don’t want to spoil the creature, but your acceptance of this creature will depend if you think the film is a decent sci-fi film or a silly facade.

There are things about Paul Dano’s character that I would like to discuss, but I can not go into it without spoiling some specifics so I will not do so. Let me just state that one of the big themes of the film deals with the loneliness and isolation of Jakob and how that might affect his mental state, and I’ll leave it at that.

I went back and forth with Dano’s character, so it is the reason why I am unsure how exactly I feel about Spaceman. This is the central relationship that we focus on and I am mixed on it. I found it more interesting overall than silly, so there is that.

There was an interesting use of flashbacks to tell the story of Jakob and his life. I did enjoy the manner in which the movie displayed the flashbacks and how the story on earth maintained a different visual style than the scenes in the spaceship or from the flashbacks. I thought the direction of these scenes especially, from director Johan Renck, was solid. I am not sure that I got enough out of the scenes to understand some of the decisions made by Jakob, especially in the area of Lenka. Carey Mulligan has some good moments, but not enough of them to really matter.

I do think the film missed some opportunities to really take this into a strong character piece and deal with some heavy ideas and themes. What they did was okay, but I think there is an outline of something that could be truly good.

You should check it out on Netflix. This is one that I think you could hate, but I found enough here to be engaged by it.

3.3 stars

Dune: Part Two

Posted on by

I have heard so many glowing reviews about Dune Part Two that I went into this movie with high expectations. I re-watched the first Dune last weekend to review what happened. I still found it to be fine. I did not love the first one.

I did not find the second Dune to be as brilliant as it seems everyone else did, but I did like it more than the first one. It is clearly a beautiful, epic science fiction film with several amazing performances. I would not be honest if I said that I wasn’t confused about some of the things that were happening here.

Denis Villeneuve completed his second film, and the second film feels like a more complete story. One of the criticisms of the first film was that it ended suddenly and did not feel like a complete end. The second film had more completion to it.

The special effects are absolutely astounding and the shots of this world were breath-taking. It is one of the most visually impressive films I have seen in years.

Timothée Chalamet and Zendaya are wonderful together, with amazing chemistry and a powerful connection. This relationship is at the center of the movie and makes the ending of the film even more difficult.

The cast is excellent. Everybody bring their A-game to this film, including Dave Bautista, Rebecca Ferguson, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Florence Pugh, Christopher Walken, and Stellan Skarsgård. Special shout out to Austin Butler, who played the David Bowie role from the first film. Butler was sinister as Feyd-Rautha and he created an absolutely brilliant antagonist to Chalamet.

The fight choreography of this film was exciting and wonderful. Some of the one on one fights of this movie were dramatic and so beautifully put together. The battle scenes of the war are great and make the energy of the film elevated.

I have never really understood the world of Dune and that has been my biggest struggle of viewing the film. I wonder how much more confused I may have been had I not done the re-watch last weekend?

There are a ton of things about this movie that make it an amazing cinematic exercise, and my issues are not enough to derail this amazing piece of work.

4.5 stars

Twin Peaks S1 E1

Posted on by

Spoilers

“Pilot”

It was just a matter of time before I started in on the Twin Peaks re-watch. Today turned out to be the day!

I loved Twin Peaks. I would even consider myself a Peaks Freak. When I was in college, I went to a fan event at the Iowa City Memorial Union when it returned to ABC. Deputy Andy was there. Ironically, Killer Bob was supposed to be there too, but he was sick with the flu. I was obsessed with the show.

David Lynch was the creative force of the show. Lynch wrote it with Mark Frost. The first season was a short one with only 8 episodes. It became such a massive hit for the network, providing such a series people could talk about over the ‘water-cooler.’

Lynch has said before that he did not want to reveal the killer of Laura Palmer and let the show develop into a show about the town with the eccentric characters and their relationships taking the front. I can’t imagine setting up a series with this major murder mystery and planning on not solving it.

This episode does a fantastic job setting up this mystery. Having Pete Martell find Laura’s body “wrapped in plastic” as he says on the phone to the sheriff, is genius. Pete is a likable guy who you get an idea about with the few seconds we see him on screen. And that line delivery is iconic.

The pilot becomes special when Agent Dale Cooper shows up driving his car, speaking to Diane on a tape recorder, and raving about the beautiful trees (Douglas furs, by the way). Cooper is one of the most original characters that we have seen on television maybe ever. Kyle MacLachlan becomes this character and he is so good in this role. There is a reason why Cooper is as beloved as he was.

We get the beginning of one of the best bromances on TV. Cooper and Sheriff Harry S. Truman are the perfect team up. You can see the friendship forming. Truman starts out doubting Coop a bit, but you see the groundwork being laid.

I remember being a Donna Hayward fan when I watched the show in the 90s, but I found her fairly whiny here. I was much more of a fan of Audrey Horne this time than I was then.

The number of weird characters inhabiting the town including Dr. Jacoby, Log Lady, Nadine, Andy & Lucy, among others. Cooper’s line when he met Jacoby for the first time, “He’s a psychiatrist?” was hilarious.

This is one of the best pilots of all time. It absolutely grabs your attention, does an amazing job setting up the mystery and the setting. I love this show so much and I am excited about doing this re-watch.

I love donuts too.

Monty Python’s the Meaning of Life (1983)

Posted on by

And so we have reached the end of the 2024 Genre-ary DailyView: Musicals. After a full month of classical musicals or stage shows shot as a film, we wrap up this year’s Genre-ary with EYG Hall of Famers Monty Python and one of their funniest, if not chaotic films, Monty Python’s Meaning of Life. 

Monty Python consisted of six main individuals: Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin. 

This film stitched together a series of sketches featuring the immense talents of these six men. It was shocking at times. At times it was raunchy. At times it was offensive. Above all else, it was, at all times, really funny.

Admittedly, there was a scene including vomit jokes, which I have NEVER been a fan of, but this was about as funny as I will find these scenes. 

There are some absolutely brilliant songs involved too including “Every Sperm is Sacred,” “Penis Song (Not The Noël Coward Song),” “Galaxy Song,” “Christmas in Heaven,” and “Meaning of Life.” These are uproariously funny. I love “Every Sperm…” and “Penis Song.”

Some of the skits do not work as well as others, but there are so many outstanding moments that I really was pleased that I scheduled this to conclude the Genre-ary. 

Earth Girls are Easy (1989)

Posted on by

It’s late in the day and I needed a film for the Genre-ary DailyView. The scheduled film for the day was Earth Girls are Easy.

According to IMDB, “Three furry (and funny) aliens travel around the universe in a spaceship and receive a broadcast showing human females. They are fascinated by these shapely creatures and discover that the broadcast came from Southern California on Earth. Meanwhile, Valley girl Valerie Gail feels her cold fiancé Dr. Ted Gallagher is slipping away and decides to seduce him. Instead, she catches him cheating on her with a nurse, throws him out, smashes his things and refuses to see him again. The aliens’ spaceship crash lands in Valerie’s swimming pool – putting a decided damper on her future wedding plans in Las Vegas. She brings them into her home; and the aliens prove to be quick learners and absorb American popular culture and language through television“

The movie had a surprisingly great cast including Jeff Goldblum, Geena Davis, Michael McKeon, Jim Carrey, Damon Wayans, Charles Rocket, Larry Linville, Rick Overton, and Julie Brown.

Julie Brown was introduced to me from the Dr. Demento Show with her classically inappropriate song, “The Homecoming Queen’s Got a Gun.” Brown co-wrote this movie and performed several of the songs, the title track “Earth Girls are Easy,” “I Like ’em Big and Stupid,” and “Cause I’m A Blonde.”

This film is really simple and pretty stupid. It has some funny moments, but it is so crazy that it has a hard time keeping a consistent tone. 

This is harmless, but just really dumb. Jeff Goldblum is always great. Jim Carrey was great here. Otherwise, it is a basic B movie with some funny songs.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953)

Posted on by

A school delay has given me the chance to do the Genre-ary DailyView this morning and the scheduled film today was the 1953 classic Gentlemen Prefer Blondes starring Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell.

There were not as many songs as I thought there might be, but the most famous one is clearly “Diamonds are a Girl’s Best Friend,” as performed by Monroe.

The pairing of Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell really worked well in this movie, as the entire bit depended on the chemistry between the two of them as unlikely friends. Marilyn Monroe’s character, Lorelei, loves diamonds and Russell’s Dorothy has a sarcastic head on her shoulders. The duo are the backbone of the movie.

There are some funny moments in the film, as they played the situations into fancy. 

According to Rotten Tomatoes, “Lorelei Lee (Marilyn Monroe) is a beautiful showgirl engaged to be married to the wealthy Gus Esmond (Tommy Noonan), much to the disapproval of Gus’ rich father, Esmond Sr., who thinks that Lorelei is just after his money. When Lorelei goes on a cruise accompanied only by her best friend, Dorothy Shaw (Jane Russell), Esmond Sr. hires Ernie Malone (Elliott Reid), a private detective, to follow her and report any questionable behavior that would disqualify her from the marriage.“

Director Howard Hawks provides a lavish production that can just barely stand up to the power of its two leading women. Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell are so great together and they are absolutely the reason to see this movie.