Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate it | {Insert Appropriate Seasonal Greeting Here}

[Sentinel]

𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐫𝐚𝐰𝐝𝐚𝐝𝐬 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠 (2022). An OK flick about a girl that grew up and lives all by herself in a house on a swamp in North Carolina. A mix of romance and courtroom drama that is cute but strains all credibility. An alleged female Candid from the wilderness who doesn’t have a proverbial pot to piss in has beautiful dresses, immaculate face and hair, and carries herself with grace that would make Audrey Hepburn (post-Professor Higgins treatment) proud! She also has a lifetime supply of gasoline for her boat, a natural eye for natural beauty, and some serious artistic abilities. Needless to say, boys trip over themselves to fall for her (once – from a great height). She is perpetually wronged by the world, from her terrible parents to the said boys, and the only people who do not hurt her in some way are the black local haberdashery owners. One of the said boys ends up dead, and she is accused of murder (even though the case against her is paper thin and would probably be thrown out without a trial). Another “strong and independent woman against the world of men” but with enough romance to please both sexes. Not a total waste of time if you have nothing else to do with your SO but not the best usage of your remote control either. Critics rating – 35%. Audience rating – 96%. Make of it what you want. 6/10

=====
𝐁𝐚𝐛𝐲𝐥𝐨𝐧 (2022). Excess and depravity of 1920s Hollywood are portrayed with excessive depravity. The first half of this movie is gross, the second half is boring. With two bona fide superstars (Brad Pitt and Margot Robbie), it was truly a Herculean task to make a film so indigestible and lame, and these two legends must still be wondering how did they end up in this mess. Director Damienne Chazelle tries hard to be Frederico Fellini, Baz Luhrmann, and Quentin Tarantino all at once but lacks Luhrmann’s coherence and vision, Tarantino’s storytelling and cleverness, and Fellini’s talent. Defecation, vomiting, golden showers – this movie has it all… in the beginning, until the director actually remembers that he has a movie to make. And then he makes it dull. Horrible dialogue completes the picture (“You don’t become a star, baby! You’re born a star!”). Given that Chazelle has two exceptional films in his filmography – 𝐋𝐚 𝐋𝐚 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐝 and 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐡 – this catastrophe is pretty inexplicable. I guess he was due for a dud. 2/10

=====
𝐒𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐋𝐨𝐰𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 (1999). Another overlooked late 90s Woody Allen movie but, unlike 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐲 and 𝐂𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, it’s best stayed overlooked. Not often Woody Allen protagonists are as utterly unlikeable and downright detestable as the self-proclaimed “world’s second best guitarist” Emmet Ray (luckily, not played by Allen, but by Sean Penn). There is literally nothing about him I could admire or even relate to. Even the villains in 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐏𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭 and 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐨𝐩 are more attractive and sympathetic than this obnoxious jerk, and even Penn, a master of portraying complex personalities, cannot redeem him. His final epiphany about his wasted life left me completely cold. In fact, the only sympathetic character here is his first real love, a mute laundry girl Hattie (Samantha Morton, who is so adorable here, no wonder Steven Spielberg noticed her and cast her as another oddity in 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭). Allen’s mandatory psychoanalysis takes the shape of Uma Thurman in her prime but she is categorically miscast. But the worst sin of all: this movie is boring. Aside from a couple of cute vignettes (mainly – the gas station holdup), there is nothing remarkable here, and, frankly, I couldn’t wait for it to end. 4/10

 

[Sentinel]

Stop Making Sense. Got to see the re-release in IMAX. Hard to imagine I'm going to have a better time in a theater this year. Great picture. Stellar sound. What really sets this apart from so many other concert movies is the fact that it's truly a movie. Conceived and executed as such. Not in a verite "let's set up the camera and see what we get" way as so many others are (or seem to be), but in a controlled, precise experience. This isn't a movie of accidents and capturing off-the-cuff moments. It's a movie of control. The actual audience is barely a factor (mostly unseen until the final song) because YOU'RE the audience. This was made for you. It's not a snapshot of someone else's experience. This is your experience. Very cool. Great music to boot.

So what band is it about?

 

[Sleemans]

So what band is it about?

Talking Heads

 

[Sentinel]

Talking Heads

Ah, I'll pass then.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Charley Varrick (1973) - 7/10

Deecnt 70s film which starts with a heist and spends the rest of the runtime with the robbers trying to get away with the heist. There's a predictability in casting Walter Matthau because you know his smart-aleck character is gonna outwise everyone and get away with it but it's still decently entertaining, minus is implied sex scene.....ew.

Happy Together (1997) - 6.5/10

Wong Kar-Wai films look great, he uses colour really well, but the chaotic time-jumps never work for me, and this one is hard to engage with till the second half as a result. Would've liked to see the Argentine scenery, a country not used much for known films but he likes to set a lot of scenes indoors with character close-ups and the usual emotional performances are there.

The Invisible Man (1933) - 7.5/10

Book has a better set-up, this has a better climax. In its short run-time, it introduces the sympathetic lead villain efficiently and keeps things moving nicely with some really over-the-top hysterical acting thrown in to give it its B-movie feel.

Chan Is Missing (1982) - 6.5/10

Decent American low-budget indie with good b/w photography focusing on a group of Chinese-Americans. The strength is the hangout movie aspect of this which delivers a good first half but when the film turns its attention into the mystery of focusing on the missing person a bit more, it deteriorates a bit into something more empty. American films from this era generally cannot deliver a good mystery so the actual plot progression tends to be their weakest aspect.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) - 7/10

I liked the original way more. This has some good stuff going in terms of adding that paranoia-70s thriller feeling at times but as a whole it's not as captivating especially in the first half which feels like it's all set-up whereas the original was maybe a bit more direct, and surprisingly less cheesy with the aliens. This one had more interesting and expansive set locations going though. Jeff Goldbloom's acting choices are weird as usual.

 

[Ceremony]

12 Monkeys (1995) Bruce Willis lives in 2036 where some horrible thing happened, killed five billion people and left the earth uninhabitable. Only the humans live underground, animals rule the ruined earth and humans... have the technology to send Bruce back in time to 1996 but not do anything about their current situation. Classic time travel paradox caper, only extremely surreal because Terry Gilliam directed it and the whole thing feels like a dream. The only problem is I'd seen it before I remembered halfway through how it ended.

The King of Comedy (1982) Robert De Niro really, really wants to be on TV. I found this really engrossing in a way I wasn't expecting and I think it's because there was an ironic timelessness to it. The idea of someone stalking a TV host to try and get on TV seems almost quaint now, given the things people do for attention and the ease with which the internet facilitates this. The level of notoriety can feel absolute nowadays, yet at the same time can be utterly fleeting. Anyway, good performances all round and a Scorsese picture which should be more renowned than it is because it remains so relevant.

American Psycho (2000) Yuppie Batman starts absentmindedly doodling in his diary while listening to some fantastic music. Along the way he lives the dream of many by killing Jared Leto with an axe. I tuned out a bit towards the end because it hadn't been that long since I'd seen it and I knew how it ended, but I instead focused on just how detached Bale is from all of it. It's a masterful performance in its complete emptiness. One day I'll read the book.

Detective Pikachu (2019) About five minutes into this I went online and read the original Nuzlocke webcomic. In 40-odd pages I saw a Pokemon story which was more creative, engaging, human, entertaining and funny than this CGI ridden horrorshow. I could go into great length about things I didn't like about this but it would genuinely just be a list of bulletpoints. By far the worst thing was the design of the Pokemon themselves. This is a film from 2019 and Jurassic Park was more realistic looking than this. Absolutely hideous in every way. I hate Ryan Reynolds and he was by far the least irritating thing in the film.

Manhunter (1986) In part due to how quickly mass media moves nowadays I don't think you can broadly describe decades in the way you could in the past. If I say "the 80s" or "the 60s" relating to pretty much any aspect of western life, you'd have a general understanding of the sort of mindset and existence I was referring to. Can you do that for the 2020s? The 2010s? Is it just me unable to do this, because I'm old and don't understand the young? I'm not sure. Either way, this is the most 80s film you've ever seen and it slightly spoils things for me. The visuals and the music all seem to be well thought of now compared to when it was released, but for me there was too much going on at times. Brian Cox as Hannibal Lecktor is fantastic.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

12 Monkeys (1995) [...] The only problem is I'd seen it before I remembered halfway through how it ended.

It's also the remake of a much better film.

 

[kihei]

Talking Heads

I saw this tour for real at Canada's Wonderland of all places (saw Eurythmics the next week). The Stop Making Sense tour was great, probably in or close to my top ten concerts all time.

 

[Chili]

Boyhood-2014

Growing up for a boy and his family from age six through to graduating high school at eighteen. And incredibly filmed with the same cast over the twelve years. All the growing pains of dealing with divorced parents, the mother's struggle to raise her two children while advancing in her career, a stepdad after the mother remarries, the relationship with Dad. Hit all the right notes here, a real family drama that takes the time to tell a complete story in a creative way with solid performances. Great film.

Dodes'ka-den-1970 (subtitles)

Set in a shanty town in Japan in current times with many impoverished characters. The local ladies who gather around what might be the only source of water have plenty to talk about. Among others, the would be tram conductor, two close friends who drown their sorrows, their wives, a man who doesn't speak just stares ahead, another extremely lazy man living with his niece, a young boy who begs for food for himself and his father who live in an old car. The father is meticuously describing the building of a fantasy house, maybe he was an architect before hard times? A lot of characters in this film, stories which are mostly sad and felt incomplete. Read that the length was 244 minutes at one point (watched a 138 minute print). Women are not treated well in this film, don't know what Akira Kurosawa was trying to say. Dark and interesting, maybe tried to combine too many stories into one film.

Murder at the Vanities-1934

A pre-code musical which means lots of pretty girls in skimpy costumes backed by the Duke Ellington Orchestra. And an actual murder mystery to go with it. Jack Oakie as the promoter of the show was a fun dude. He's a nice complement here to the larger then life police detective played by Victor McLaglen. Didn't notice her but Lucille Ball is supposed to be one of the girls. There was a real similar Broadway revue which advertised Through these portals pass the most beautiful girls in the world. Entertaining, one of the last gasps of the pre-coders.

The Adventures of Marco Polo-1938

The famous 13th century trip east by Marco Polo of Venice (played by Gary Cooper). Was disappointed the first time I watched this years ago, was probably expecting more of the real story. Pretty tough to condense a 24 year round trip journey into a 100 minute film or even a mini series. So dramatic license is taken and a romantic subplot added. From a book I have by Laurence Bergreen (Marco Polo: From Venice to Xanadu) there are a number of facts within the film though including real people such as Chinese Emperor Kublai Khan and his attempt to invade Japan. A close advisor was Ahmed, a schemer deftly portrayed by Basil Rathbone. Kaidu, a foe of Kublai Khan, was a real historical figure as well. Don't know about any accuracy of his portrayal here though, could be mostly fiction. Marco did know the Princess Kököchin (Marco's love interest in the film).The film implies that Marco tastes spaghetti for the first time but it had been invented in Italy well before his journey. Pretty much a fantasy romp with some history mixed in, I did enjoy it more this time. May have to check out the 1982 mini series made on the journey, apparently questionable historically but filmed on location in several countries with an impressive cast and well rated.

Good Night and Good Luck-2005

Led by Edward R. Murrow (David Strathairn), CBS makes the bold move to call out the Senate committee hearings into communist leanings in the US in the 1950's. The film uses a lot of actual archival footage of the hearings, all scenes are shown in black and white. The main part of the story is the indirect confrontation between Murrow and Senator McCarthy. Great jazz score, strong cast, cool to see footage of a young Liberace. Like All the President's Men journalism taking on government. Very well done film.

 

[Nakatomi]

It's also the remake of a much better film.

Here is the original, with English subs, for those who have not seen it.

 

[shadow1]

Saw 3D: The Final Chapter (2010) - 4/10

A self-help guru finds himself caught in a Jigsaw game.

Sean Patrick Flanery stars as a Bobby, a Jigsaw survivor who has achieved fame by writing a book about his tale of survival. Bobby is abducted and has to go through a series of trials in order to save his management team and wife Joyce (Gina Holden). Meanwhile, Jigsaw's (Tobin Bell) wife Jill (Betsy Russell) seeks immunity from internal affairs detective Matt Gibson (Chad Donella) in exchange for her inside knowledge. Gibson races against the clock to stop the latest Jigsaw game...

Saw 3D was directed by Saw VI's Kevin Greutert, with Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton returning as writers for the fourth consecutive film. Originally intended as two films, Saw VII's story was condensed down to one movie following the box office underperformance of Saw VI. Additionally, Saw V director David Hackl was originally supposed to helm he project, but was abruptly fired two weeks before production. Greutert was quickly summoned and did a significant rewrite of the already frankensteined storyline. With all of that said, does Saw: The Final Chapter live up to its name?

In the immortal words of Ron Burgundy: Boy, that escalated quickly. After what was a strong sequel in Saw VI, Saw 3D features little of what made that movie work so well, while also being a greatest hits of the weakest points of the series. That starts with the hectic writing process being on full display in how underdeveloped the new characters are. Bobby is generic and unlikable, while Jill can only be described as a victim, chained to a trap for the entire movie with absolutely nothing to do. And was it just me, or did Gibson have a southern accent in the first scene that progressively went away? (I'm not watching again to confirm).

As for the story, the Saw franchise saved the worst for last. I need to again stress how vague I continue to be in order to not spoil every movie dating back to Saw III, but my efforts are partially in vain as Saw 3D is another entry which contains more retcon BS. That comment pertains specifically to the film's twist, which while I think it works on some levels, it also feels like a major disservice to the rest of the films in the series. As for the "trap" storyline with Bobby, the pacing is so rushed that it doesn't properly build tension. Many of the traps only have 30 second timers, and it feels like this movie has its foot on the gas - in one case, literally - just to power through them so the audience can watch the predictable conclusions.

I did enjoy one section of the movie which worked as a slasher, though. It was pretty satisfying, and with no other characters to get invested in, I found myself rooting for one particular antagonist. As for the gore? Saw 3D is the most intentionally gory film the series, with lots of blood and guts. However, some of the gore is gratuitous, serving neither the plot nor building tension, and much of it looks very fake due to pinkish hued blood. I assume this bubblegum colored blood is related to the 3D effects (which from what I can tell seem fun), but does detract from the effectiveness of the violence. Because there is so much of it though, the gore ranks near the top for me (3, 5, 3D, 6, 4, 2, 1), and I've seen many fans cite it as the overall goriest Saw film.

Last but not least, the presentation of this movie is very poor. I'm sorry if this review is dragging, but I have to dedicate some space to how poor Saw 3D looks visually. I complained about Saw IV looking direct-to-DVD at times, but Saw: The Final Chapter has a non-theatrical look for practically the entire runtime. The lighting looks too bright and artificial, far more reminiscent of a TV episode than a marquee horror franchise. It is very hard for me to believe the same filmmakers who made the somewhat stylish Saw VI were behind this film.

Overall, Saw 3D ends the original series run with a dud. This film concluded an impressive seven year string of Saw films coming out theatrically, and while I've been impressed with the consistently decent outputs of the franchise, in my opinion Saw: The Final Chapter is the clear worst of the bunch. It was a return to form commercially however, earning $136M (doubling Saw VI) against a series high $20M budget. Despite these strong financial returns - and the movie ending on a damn cliffhanger! - fans would need to wait seven years for the next entry in the franchise.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Gran Turismo(2023) - 6.5/10

I like racing movies, I like Neil Blomkamp, I like the Gran Turismo video game, and I liked this racing movie directed by Neil Blomkamp based on the video game Gran Turismo. I can't think of many racing movies I actively disliked, Ford vs Ferrari, Driven, Senna, and Rush all quality films IMO. I don't know that I would quite put this up with them but it's not too far behind either.

Gran Turismo tells the incredible true story of Jann Mardenborough, a Gran Turismo Playstation gamer that wins a contest Nissan puts on to sponsor a simulation driver in a real race. The actor that plays Jann does a good enough job, maybe a little paint by numbers safe with it but he was likeable and sympathetic. He is supported by Orlando Bloom, the marketing whiz that dreams up the contest idea, and David Harbour, the grizzled gruff ex-driver who takes him under his wing as manager. I don't know if it's just me but I find that Harbour manages to be everyman relatable in basically every role he's in. Could be that his ascension to A lister happened a little later in life but he seems to lack the smugness a lot of other actors can exhibit after a while. I enjoyed him in this movie and I would say I usually enjoy him in whatever I see him in.

There's just something about a formal car race that works really well in film. I think it's mostly that the tension is built in, I can't think of many situations that are more tense than 30 high performance driving machines flying around a track at 200mph. So in that way making a racing movie is a bit of a layup. Hard to f*** up, just fill the rest of it with competent movie stuff like characters and conflict and such. That's mostly what Blomkamp does with Gran Turismo, and while some of the drama does seem overly contrived it's still believable and gives you enough to be invested in the main lead. It's a story worth telling and I feel like they did a good job of it here. The racing sequences are very well done and definitely the main attraction, but the rest of the film is strong enough to keep your attention and give you the needed insight to the motivations of the characters. Well edited, well shot, well acted, they're not pushing new horizons here or anything but something to be said about polished and properly executed. As far as movies about video games go, this is one of the better ones I've watched definitely.

 

[OzzyFan]

To start off Halloween/Horror October, I decided to binge the original Omen trilogy. I disregarded #4 and the remake because both are essentially reboots/retellings, even if #4 is supposedly chronologically in the same universe. Overall it was a fun horror journey about the creation and growth of “an Anti-Christ” figure.



The Omen (1976)
3.20 out of 4stars

"American diplomat Robert (Gregory Peck) adopts Damien when his wife delivers a stillborn child. After Damien's first nanny hangs herself, Father Brennan warns Robert that Damien may not be the harmless child he appears to be."
A great supernatural horror classic that excels in both its story building and scares. The Jerry Goldsmith Oscar winning score is intense and amps up the terror to 11, especially the latin chant pieces alongside prominent strings, horns, and other orchestral instruments (Goldsmith would also score the next 2 films in the trilogy). Full of “ominous” happenings ( ;-) ), a consumingly dreadful atmosphere is created. Noted for some iconic scenes, shocking deaths, and apocalyptic potential. The most infamous iconic scene being the tricycle balcony sequence. Metaphorically the film feels as if it can be an example of humanity’s hopelessness and fear of the unpredictable and unknown, where seemingly random tragic and evil events in the world can occur at any time with no evident meaning or explanation. The film earns the gravity of its proposed apocalyptic situation alongside its diabolic phenomena in excellent fashion. Kudos to turning a 5year old child into possibly the most frightening person on the planet. I applaud this movie and all involved for what it accomplishes, because the margin of error for this material turning into something silly, unbelievable, or over the top was huge, yet successfully avoided. Fun facts, the film was almost called “The Birthmark '' and Damien almost named Domlin. Of note, this was one of those films with real-life production scares/horrors happening, if anyone is curious about those things.

Damien: Omen 2 (1978)
2.70 out of 4stars

“Richard and Ann Thorn have taken their 12-year-old nephew, Damien, into their home following the death of Richard's brother seven years earlier. The Thorns love the child, whom they are sending to military school along with their own son. Yet odd deaths occur and curiosity around the boy’s character begins to arise. ”
A good supernatural horror that is a solid progression of the original’s story while delivering the thrills. Some good ideas throughout that are mostly undercooked, the film essentially feels like a quality middle portion of a trilogy ironically, which I am not sure was the plan from the get go. The story touches on unethical capitalist practices while Damien has an awakening on his destiny with people attempting to aid and hinder him. A slasher level murder count follows, which are well varied and done mostly in a good creeping manner that the film bestows. The murders are not only satisfactory, but they continue the mood from the first film in a “nobody is safe/anything can happen” fashion and the lengths Damien must and will go to fulfill the prophecy. Damien’s mythos and potential abilities are progressed well enough too. A fun, thoroughly enjoyable, and entertaining sequel, albeit so much of this film feels like a bridge segment that doesn’t introduce or conclude much, which the foreshadowing ending coincides with too.

Omen 3: The Final Conflict (1981)
2.50 out of 4stars

“Damien the Antichrist (Sam Neil), now 32years old and successful, plots to prevent the second coming of Jesus Christ and prepares for his Earthly reign while a group of monks plot to stop him.”
A good enough supernatural horror that’s a mixed bag, but decisively an underwhelming conclusion and the weakest film of the trilogy. There are some highs, some odd lows, and a finale that is disappointing. More good material that is underexplored but also a bit of filler. Adult Damien is exactly what he should be, successful professionally, in fellowship, and politically growing with sights on Earthly dominance. The back and forth “good vs evil” stuff is there but not quite in full force. For notable positives in the film, Damien has 2 great monologues, a number of well done deaths including some shocks, and Sam Neil does a great job with his given material. For the laughably bad, you have a group of monastery monks seemingly overnight turned into covert spy soldiers tactically attempting to murder Damien with the infamous 7 daggars/knives. I don’t know how much it would have taken writing wise for me to accept them becoming capable organized infiltrative assassins, but it wasn’t close. You get past that and nothing else here is too far fetched within the Biblical/supernatural realm. As for the ending, without spoiling anything there is no real showdown or grand battle, maybe a minute or so of mediocre hostility with an all too easy defeat. Which is an unforgivable sin, if you will.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

To start off Halloween/Horror October, I decided to binge the original Omen trilogy. I disregarded #4 and the remake because both are essentially reboots/retellings, even if #4 is supposedly chronologically in the same universe. Overall it was a fun horror journey about the creation and growth of “an Anti-Christ” figure.



The Omen (1976)
3.20 out of 4stars

"American diplomat Robert (Gregory Peck) adopts Damien when his wife delivers a stillborn child. After Damien's first nanny hangs herself, Father Brennan warns Robert that Damien may not be the harmless child he appears to be."
A great supernatural horror classic that excels in both its story building and scares. The Jerry Goldsmith Oscar winning score is intense and amps up the terror to 11, especially the latin chant pieces alongside prominent strings, horns, and other orchestral instruments (Goldsmith would also score the next 2 films in the trilogy). Full of “ominous” happenings ( ;-) ), a consumingly dreadful atmosphere is created. Noted for some iconic scenes, shocking deaths, and apocalyptic potential. The most infamous iconic scene being the tricycle balcony sequence. Metaphorically the film feels as if it can be an example of humanity’s hopelessness and fear of the unpredictable and unknown, where seemingly random tragic and evil events in the world can occur at any time with no evident meaning or explanation. The film earns the gravity of its proposed apocalyptic situation alongside its diabolic phenomena in excellent fashion. Kudos to turning a 5year old child into possibly the most frightening person on the planet. I applaud this movie and all involved for what it accomplishes, because the margin of error for this material turning into something silly, unbelievable, or over the top was huge, yet successfully avoided. Fun facts, the film was almost called “The Birthmark '' and Damien almost named Domlin. Of note, this was one of those films with real-life production scares/horrors happening, if anyone is curious about those things.

Damien: Omen 2 (1978)
2.70 out of 4stars

“Richard and Ann Thorn have taken their 12-year-old nephew, Damien, into their home following the death of Richard's brother seven years earlier. The Thorns love the child, whom they are sending to military school along with their own son. Yet odd deaths occur and curiosity around the boy’s character begins to arise. ”
A good supernatural horror that is a solid progression of the original’s story while delivering the thrills. Some good ideas throughout that are mostly undercooked, the film essentially feels like a quality middle portion of a trilogy ironically, which I am not sure was the plan from the get go. The story touches on unethical capitalist practices while Damien has an awakening on his destiny with people attempting to aid and hinder him. A slasher level murder count follows, which are well varied and done mostly in a good creeping manner that the film bestows. The murders are not only satisfactory, but they continue the mood from the first film in a “nobody is safe/anything can happen” fashion and the lengths Damien must and will go to fulfill the prophecy. Damien’s mythos and potential abilities are progressed well enough too. A fun, thoroughly enjoyable, and entertaining sequel, albeit so much of this film feels like a bridge segment that doesn’t introduce or conclude much, which the foreshadowing ending coincides with too.

Omen 3: The Final Conflict (1981)
2.50 out of 4stars

“Damien the Antichrist (Sam Neil), now 32years old and successful, plots to prevent the second coming of Jesus Christ and prepares for his Earthly reign while a group of monks plot to stop him.”
A good enough supernatural horror that’s a mixed bag, but decisively an underwhelming conclusion and the weakest film of the trilogy. There are some highs, some odd lows, and a finale that is disappointing. More good material that is underexplored but also a bit of filler. Adult Damien is exactly what he should be, successful professionally, in fellowship, and politically growing with sights on Earthly dominance. The back and forth “good vs evil” stuff is there but not quite in full force. For notable positives in the film, Damien has 2 great monologues, a number of well done deaths including some shocks, and Sam Neil does a great job with his given material. For the laughably bad, you have a group of monastery monks seemingly overnight turned into covert spy soldiers tactically attempting to murder Damien with the infamous 7 daggars/knives. I don’t know how much it would have taken writing wise for me to accept them becoming capable organized infiltrative assassins, but it wasn’t close. You get past that and nothing else here is too far fetched within the Biblical/supernatural realm. As for the ending, without spoiling anything there is no real showdown or grand battle, maybe a minute or so of mediocre hostility with an all too easy defeat. Which is an unforgivable sin, if you will.

I didn't want to give you the "laughing like", but your take on the third film is hilarious - "but it wasn't close" and "mediocre hostility" = gold!

I never was much of a fan of these, even though I understand the respect the original one gets. It does have one of my favorite death of any film (the nanny, really a chilling scene).

 

[PK Cronin]

Hell House LLC (2015)
2.65 out of 4stars

“Five years after an unexplained malfunction causes the death of 15 tour-goers and staff on the opening night of a Halloween haunted house tour, a documentary crew travels back to the scene of the tragedy to find out what really happened.”
A good “documentary style” found-footage horror that is a cut above the norm. By giving a slightly fresher competent twist on tropes of the subgenre, an effectively creepy atmosphere is created with spooky chills and reactions. Points for decent acting in a film like this and kudos to the concept as well, a behind the scenes/creation of a Halloween haunted house with a haunted origin story is delightful meta-ness for fans. I wish it had a better than adequate ending though.

I checked this out after your review. An interesting concept but it didn't land for me because the pacing was just too slow. There was a lot of build up, that didn't necessarily bring any tensions, and then kind of wrapped up quickly without much happening.

I gave it a 5/10 because it was at least an interesting take, just not well executed in my opinion.

 

[End of Line]

Wrong Turn (2021): 3/10, much preferred the original from 2003 with Eliza Dushku

 

[Unholy Diver]

Paw Patrol Mighty Movie - 6.5/10

The movie adds a villain mad scientist voiced by Taraji P Henson, that is non-canon to the series that pushes the regular series bad guy Mayor Humdinger (my personal favorite) into a secondary role, also the good natured but flaky Mayor Goodway and her pet Chickaletta were relegated to cameos. A Meteor crashes into Adventure City containing crystals that give the holder super or "Mighty" powers, which start out by turning the pups into a super group of heroes before falling into the hands of mad scientist Victoria Vance and Humdinger, leading to chaos. The first PP movie was probably a little better overall , but this did have the poignant backstory of Skye overcoming her difficulties first as the runt of the litter and smallest of the Paw Patrol to fulfill her destiny and prove the Paw Patrol's motto of "No job is too big and no pup is too small" is more than just hollow words.

 

[kihei]

The Equalizer 3 (2023) Directed by Antoine Fuqua 4B

In general, it is always a good idea to be suspicious about any movie that comes with a "3" at the end of its title, especially if the franchise has not been previously known for its flair or imagination. The Equalizer 3 is a sleepy thriller with sleepy performances and fairly sleepy action. The star of the film (and director Anthony Fuqua seems to think so, too) is its setting, the Amalfi Coast of Italy. While the movie is a paint-by-numbers, predictable every step of the way non-thriller, The Equalizer 3 makes for a great travelogue. I've been to the Amalfi Coast and it is incredibly beautiful, about as photogenic as any inhabited place on earth, and, yes, the people are friendly. But not as friendly as the Italians in this movie. Robert McCall (a not terribly in shape Denzell Washington) starts the movie by taking out a nest of bad guys which as usual goes like clockwork, very brief clockwork. But then he let's his guard down and by so doing, allows a young teenage boy to shoot him in the back. though not too seriously. He retires to the stunning coast where a kindly doctor cares for him out of the goodness of his heart, and all the villagers take to him immediately like he is the Pied Piper or something. Ah, but then there are these nasty, snarly, surly Mafia types who are out to harm his new found friends and Robert doesn't like that. Not one bit. So, he decides to take on the local Mafia. Guess what happens next. Because unless you are drunk or stoned, you can easily guess the rest of the movie. A useless, confusing and totally unnecessary subplot involving Dakota Fanning (she's sleepy, too) as a CIA operative is there to fill out a plot with way too little going on. All this happens in a kind of torpor interspersed by gorgeous shots of the aforementioned beautiful setting which come at regular intervals. Although Washington is always at least a little interesting even when he is essentially phoning in his performance. he is getting too old for this game, and it looks like he knows it.

 

[Unholy Diver]

The Equalizer 3 (2023) Directed by Antoine Fuqua 4B

In general, it is always a good idea to be suspicious about any movie that comes with a "3" at the end of its title, especially if the franchise has not been previously known for its flair or imagination. The Equalizer 3 is a sleepy thriller with sleepy performances and fairly sleepy action. The star of the film (and director Anthony Fuqua seems to think so, too) is its setting, the Amalfi Coast of Italy. While the movie is a paint-by-numbers, predictable every step of the way non-thriller, The Equalizer 3 makes for a great travelogue. I've been to the Amalfi Coast and it is incredibly beautiful, about as photogenic as any inhabited place on earth, and, yes, the people are friendly. But not as friendly as the Italians in this movie. Robert McCall (a not terribly in shape Denzell Washington) starts the movie by taking out a nest of bad guys which as usual goes like clockwork, very brief clockwork. But then he let's his guard down and by so doing, allows a young teenage boy to shoot him in the back. though not too seriously. He retires to the stunning coast where a kindly doctor cares for him out of the goodness of his heart, and all the villagers take to him immediately like he is the Pied Piper or something. Ah, but then there are these nasty, snarly, surly Mafia types who are out to harm his new found friends and Robert doesn't like that. Not one bit. So, he decides to take on the local Mafia. Guess what happens next. Because unless you are drunk or stoned, you can easily guess the rest of the movie. A useless, confusing and totally unnecessary subplot involving Dakota Fanning (she's sleepy, too) as a CIA operative is there to fill out a plot with way too little going on. All this happens in a kind of torpor interspersed by gorgeous shots of the aforementioned beautiful setting which come at regular intervals. Although Washington is always at least a little interesting even when he is essentially phoning in his performance. he is getting too old for this game, and it looks like he knows it.

This was clearly a missed opportunity for the title to have been Equaliz3r or 3qualizer

 

[shadow1]

Jigsaw (2017) - 4/10

A decade after the Jigsaw games, five people with checkered pasts are abducted and put through a new series of trials.

This ensemble cast features five people who awaken inside a barn tethered to chains. The group is told by Jigsaw (Tobin Bell) that they can survive the game if they confess to their sins. Meanwhile, as bodies matching Jigsaw's MO begin appearing all over the city, two detectives (Cle Bennett, Callum Keith Rennie) and two pathologists (Hannah Emily Anderson, Matt Passmore) race to locate the Jigsaw game...

Jigsaw was directed by The Spierig Brothers, and written by Peter Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg. Following a seven year hiatus for the Saw franchise, Jigsaw serves as a soft reboot, telling its own story with nods to the original continuity. Does Jigsaw manage to breathe life into the dormant franchise?

Sadly no. Jigsaw tries to go back to the franchise roots, with less emphasis on shock value and more emphasis on tension, but fails hard in the latter category. One of the reasons for that is clunky writing, with underdeveloped characters who are hard to relate to (and in one case, a character so annoying I was actively rooting for their death). The film also has a heavy emphasis on mystery, but drops to ball here too. Characters come to extreme conclusions based on only breadcrumbs of evidence, and the film beats you over the head so hard with one red herring that it makes the eventual revelations flat out uninteresting.

Another reason the film struggles with tension is the traps, which are comfortably the least creative of the series. The film features a lot of poorly rendered CGI, and there was one trap in particular which I couldn't even tell what the threat was (blades? heat?) until I saw the inevitable conclusion. There was also one pretty big "idiot plot" moment involving a syringe trap, which took me out of the movie. Jigsaw is one of the tamest (3, 5, 3D, 6, 4, 2, JS, 1) Saw movies, with most of the gore coming from autopsy scenes. If this movie dialed back the gore by maybe 25%, it could've been an episode of CSI.

I mention CSI specifically because this movie really does feel like an episode of television, or a direct-to-DVD movie. That's an accusation I've lobbed at this series more than once, but it's clear I was premature with that comment after watching Jigsaw. I'm in somewhat disbelief this film was released theatrically, with visuals are so cheap looking and harshly lit that you never believe for a second what you're seeing is real.

Add it all up, and what you get is a boring movie - something a Saw film should never be. Even in the weaker efforts of the series, there were moments which had tension and unease, but we don't get enough of that here. I also have to criticize the film's biggest twist, a gimmick which was used already used in a previous series entry and you could pretty much see coming from a mile away. The only thing I can really say in Jigsaw's favor is you don't need to see the previous movies to understand what's going on.

Overall, Jigsaw is a dull entry in the franchise. While I commend the film for attempting to go back to the series roots, poor execution in several areas leave it as nothing more than a mediocre attempt. However, despite what I think about it, Jigsaw was another hit for the franchise, earning $102M against a $10M budget. (I'd argue that figure is bigger proof of the power of the franchise's name rather than the quality of this film, but I digress...).

 

[Unholy Diver]

Expendables 4 - 6/10

Well of the 4 movies in the Expendables series, this was certainly one of them. The weakest of the series, this one was missing the endless cavalcade of action stars, or at least muscleheads of the previous movies and just stuck with Statham, Lundgren, Couture, 50 Cent, Megan Fox, and two other people I didn't know, along with a brief showing from Stallone. Tony Jaa and Andy Garcia were also around for small roles, the movie was OK, I am glad I saw it as I do enjoy mindless action and mainly see family fare with the kid, so it was nice to see Statham and the gang shoot and stab dozens and dozens of nameless bad guys for a change.

 

[CDJ]

Saw X may have been the best entry since Saw. It’s the most John Kramer we get by far, it features perhaps the most evil antagonist ever, and it still has plenty of the blood and gore associated with the franchise.

Not to mention there is an actual story. As somebody who has seen each film of the franchise I will give this an 8.5/10. Good movie, worth the price of admission if you like this kinda stuff


Edit- If I had to rank I think I go:

Saw
Saw X
Saw 2
Saw 6
[Saw 3
Saw 4 ——-> 3-5 is all basically the same movie
Saw 5]
Spiral (not a good movie whatsoever but I liked the change of pace relative to the two below it)
Saw 3D (7) (movie written by people who must hate women, just bad!)
Jigsaw (like stated previously in here it was basically a long, bad tv episode)

 

[OzzyFan]

I checked this out after your review. An interesting concept but it didn't land for me because the pacing was just too slow. There was a lot of build up, that didn't necessarily bring any tensions, and then kind of wrapped up quickly without much happening.

I gave it a 5/10 because it was at least an interesting take, just not well executed in my opinion.

Understandable. The concept alone makes it interesting and it seems to have some underground/cult fandom. As I've explained, there were a couple things that let me down on the film, but otherwise enjoyable.

On that note, since I won't be watching/reviewing anything besides horror this month, it appears I will use Osprey's bumped horror thread instead of posting in this thread for the month or double posting here. Makes the most sense on analysis.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Summer/The Green Ray (1986) - 6/10

There's something very selfish and hedonistic about the characters in a Rohmer film. I've honestly gotten to the point of just listening to them blabbing on about themselves makes me feel pissed and there is a lot of blabbing since the script is partially improvised. I'd like to think I'm an empathetic person generally but the protagonist is really pathetic here as she constantly breaks down in tears while she has a bunch of friends offering her advice or willing to lend their villas for her to stay in. I do like how the film is shot but this film is made for self-loathing people on Tumblr/Letterboxd to say "she's just like me OMG this film was made for me".

The Big Clock (1948) - 6.5/10

Good premise but the tone is really one-note flat in terms of how the lines are delivered and how the characters move and jump around. Charles Laughton is really villainous as usual but the rest of the film feels a bit like an overly long chase sequence, bit tiring to watch.

Germany Year Zero (1948) - 7/10

A bleak depiction of post-war Germany mostly while following around a child through the lens of an Italian neorealist director. The film is really rough around the edges, certainly not the polished look of Hollywood stuff from the late-40s and sometimes this works and at other times it leads to some really weird choices like in the music or pacing towards the end. It's a solid watch but I can't help but think how non-Germans and non-Italians who saw this would feel immediately after the war, can't imagine there would be too much sympathy.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

You have to be very talented to pull off the "bad movie on purpose" trick. I think of things like Black Dynamite or Planet Terror which are made and acted by people who not only get what they're doing, but they know how to do it. You have to be a good actor to play a bad actor (like Michael Jai White in Black Dynamite) and you have to be a skilled writer/director/etc to intentionally make a film with gags like dropped scenes, obvious stunt men, bad editing, etc.

There's a really slim margin for error between doing this well and outright failure. At least to me there is.

Where ever that line is, between funny and awful, She Kills is about as far away from it as a movie conceivably could be. I felt embarrassed watching it. I'd say I felt bad for everyone in, it but they're all so clearly proud to be in on the joke. Congrats for making a movie, I guess? It is intentionally bad, but that decision only underlines how genuinely bad every thing about it is. Storylines meant to shock and appall (rape, incest, all manner of gnarly physical violence). It's mostly a riff on 70s grimy rape revenge movies (but, you know, in a funny way!). Exaggerated acting that sails past amusing and lands squarely on pathetic. When you're a bad actor, you're not playing bad acting, you're just doing bad acting. There's a defensive sadness to this whole thing — YOU CAN'T CALL THIS BAD BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S BAD!

It can't even commit to the faux-grindhouse asethtic it's going for. Clear, clean scenes cut to generic "damaged" film look and back.

There is a brief scene that seems to reference The Manitou that I chuckled at, if that reference is even intentional, which is a benefit of the doubt they defintely don't earn. (By the way ... seek out The Manitou for a genuinely bizzare and entertaining time.)

I didn't even mention a truly pointless interlude where it turns into a bad kung-fu movie for about 15 minutes complete with bad dubbing (hahahahahaha!!!! SO FUNNY) and a white actor in slant-eye makeup. This was made in 2016.

The last movies I dragged like this were Terrifier and Terrifier 2, both of which I hated but to their credit show skill in some areas and at the very least deliver on their promise of extreme gore and shock. You can cringe at the masturbatory mission there — and I still do — but you can also argue that the mission is at least accomplished in those movies. She Kills can't even achieve that, just an utter failure on every conceivable front.

But hey, they did it on purpose!