Movie reviews
Feb. 4th, 2018 09:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatBeen binge-watching movies on HBO. I decided to do a 7-day free trail of the HBO streaming service, which is the same price as HBO Now, but a heck of a lot better.
Outside of "Get Out", which was the best of the bunch.
1. Kong: Skull Island -- which I watched mainly for the cast, Tom Hiddleston, John Goodman, John C. Reilly, Brie Larson, Samuel L Jackson, and the lead from Longmire, who had a walk-on role.
It's not very good. Shame, had potential. Also the only Kong flick that veered away from the prevalent sexism and racism of the original ones. It's still slightly sexist, just not as bad as the original -- which admittedly wouldn't be hard.
Not much character development, and way too much emphasis on CJI monsters. But hey, monster movie.
The monsters weren't that bad, well except for the Giant Spider, that I fast-forwarded over. Because I don't do giant spiders.
Tom Hiddleston didn't have much to do. Wish someone would just cast him as Lymond in a television version of the Lymond Chronicles -- he's perfect for the role. Give the man stuff to do, please.
Thank you.
The emphasis of the film or theme was man vs. nature, and letting nature win. Or not interfering with stuff you don't understand. With King Kong as the hero, and Samuel L. Jackson and John Goodman as rather layered and sympathetic villains. Actually the real villians were skull-like lizards.
The only character who gets any development or follow-through is John C. Reilly's character -- it's actually his movie, which was interesting and bit innovative. He plays a WWII pilot who got trapped on the island with Japanese pilot at an early age. They find him, and the suspense is whether he'll make it off the island.
2. Split -- starring James McAvoy and Betty Buckley by M Night Shalaman. It's not very good.
I was bored during most of it. And the twist seemed a bit lame. Also, it's apparently supposed to be part of M Night Shamalan's Unbreakable movie verse. (Which made sense.)
I've admittedly only liked two M Night Shalaman films "Unbreakable" and "The Sixth Sense", which are the two films that featured Bruce Willis in a starring role. I own Unbreakable -- mainly because it is a brilliant commentary on superheroes and villians and how they create each other. Also, Samuel L Jackson is amazing in it.
This one is a thriller about a psychopath with a split personality (24 personalities) who kidnaps three teen girls and threatens to feed them to the beast (the 24th personality). Betty Buckely is the therapist treating him.
Another film that makes me want to strangle evil white men. McAvoy is good in it. So's Buckley. But other than that, the film drags, and its hard to care about the three girls, who aren't really developed that much, except for one girl -- who falls into the last girl standing trope in horror films.
Although Shalaman subverts the trope a bit, she survives because the bad guy realizes that she's torn and broken like him, therefore pure. (She'd been abused over time by her uncle and has marks on her body.)
3. Suicide Squad - by Zack Synder, starring Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Jared Leto and Viola Davis, among others. Like most Snyder films it's heavy on dark painted visuals. Also the action sequences aren't bad. But I found it busy and overly cheesy in places.
Robbie's Harley Quinn and Will Smith's Deadshot are by far the most developed of the characters. We get snippet back stories of the others. But most of the time is split between them, and with such a large cast -- this doesn't quite work. Also, considering the central love stories are Nick Flagg and Dr. June Moon (who is possessed by an ancient being called the Enchantress), Harley Quinn and the Joker, and Deadshot and his daughter...it doesn't quite work that we get little to no development of Flagg and Moon. I should have cared more about Moon and Flagg than I did. And the casting of both was lackluster.
They spent way too much time on the Joker and Harley Quinn. (It's worth noting that I've only appreciated two versions of the Joker, Mark Hamill's voice work of the cartoon version, and Heath Ledger's take on it in The Dark Knight. Everyone else goes a bit too far with the crazy and is just annoyingly silly as a result. Leto got on my nerves. I also have only liked three versions of Batman, Christian Bale, Micheal Keaton, and Kevin Conroy. Ben Affleck isn't bad -- he's better than Val Kilmer, Adam West, and George Clooney...but nowhere near the other three.)
Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn got on my nerves after a bit too -- which is a problem, because she's the heart of the film and its central focus outside of Smith's Deadshot. Smith almost saves the film as does Viola Davis, but not quite.
I can see why the critics hated it.
Shame, the idea had plenty of potential -- Deadshot, Doc Croc, Harley Quinn, Katana, Nick Flagg, some sort of burning death guy, Boomerang, all go off to save the world from the evil enchantress and her brother -- after Amanda Waller their handler underestimates the enchantress' ability to break her control over her.
I actually think "Arrow" did the Amanda Waller and the Suicide Squad storyline better in its second or third season. To date the DC verse has been better served by its television series than the movies. Maybe because the television series have to be more innovative, they can't rely on the standard Superman/Batman tropes -- which the movies own.
5. Now as a palate cleanser, sort of watching Australia again...the film starring Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman and a lot of Australian actors.
Outside of "Get Out", which was the best of the bunch.
1. Kong: Skull Island -- which I watched mainly for the cast, Tom Hiddleston, John Goodman, John C. Reilly, Brie Larson, Samuel L Jackson, and the lead from Longmire, who had a walk-on role.
It's not very good. Shame, had potential. Also the only Kong flick that veered away from the prevalent sexism and racism of the original ones. It's still slightly sexist, just not as bad as the original -- which admittedly wouldn't be hard.
Not much character development, and way too much emphasis on CJI monsters. But hey, monster movie.
The monsters weren't that bad, well except for the Giant Spider, that I fast-forwarded over. Because I don't do giant spiders.
Tom Hiddleston didn't have much to do. Wish someone would just cast him as Lymond in a television version of the Lymond Chronicles -- he's perfect for the role. Give the man stuff to do, please.
Thank you.
The emphasis of the film or theme was man vs. nature, and letting nature win. Or not interfering with stuff you don't understand. With King Kong as the hero, and Samuel L. Jackson and John Goodman as rather layered and sympathetic villains. Actually the real villians were skull-like lizards.
The only character who gets any development or follow-through is John C. Reilly's character -- it's actually his movie, which was interesting and bit innovative. He plays a WWII pilot who got trapped on the island with Japanese pilot at an early age. They find him, and the suspense is whether he'll make it off the island.
2. Split -- starring James McAvoy and Betty Buckley by M Night Shalaman. It's not very good.
I was bored during most of it. And the twist seemed a bit lame. Also, it's apparently supposed to be part of M Night Shamalan's Unbreakable movie verse. (Which made sense.)
I've admittedly only liked two M Night Shalaman films "Unbreakable" and "The Sixth Sense", which are the two films that featured Bruce Willis in a starring role. I own Unbreakable -- mainly because it is a brilliant commentary on superheroes and villians and how they create each other. Also, Samuel L Jackson is amazing in it.
This one is a thriller about a psychopath with a split personality (24 personalities) who kidnaps three teen girls and threatens to feed them to the beast (the 24th personality). Betty Buckely is the therapist treating him.
Another film that makes me want to strangle evil white men. McAvoy is good in it. So's Buckley. But other than that, the film drags, and its hard to care about the three girls, who aren't really developed that much, except for one girl -- who falls into the last girl standing trope in horror films.
Although Shalaman subverts the trope a bit, she survives because the bad guy realizes that she's torn and broken like him, therefore pure. (She'd been abused over time by her uncle and has marks on her body.)
3. Suicide Squad - by Zack Synder, starring Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Jared Leto and Viola Davis, among others. Like most Snyder films it's heavy on dark painted visuals. Also the action sequences aren't bad. But I found it busy and overly cheesy in places.
Robbie's Harley Quinn and Will Smith's Deadshot are by far the most developed of the characters. We get snippet back stories of the others. But most of the time is split between them, and with such a large cast -- this doesn't quite work. Also, considering the central love stories are Nick Flagg and Dr. June Moon (who is possessed by an ancient being called the Enchantress), Harley Quinn and the Joker, and Deadshot and his daughter...it doesn't quite work that we get little to no development of Flagg and Moon. I should have cared more about Moon and Flagg than I did. And the casting of both was lackluster.
They spent way too much time on the Joker and Harley Quinn. (It's worth noting that I've only appreciated two versions of the Joker, Mark Hamill's voice work of the cartoon version, and Heath Ledger's take on it in The Dark Knight. Everyone else goes a bit too far with the crazy and is just annoyingly silly as a result. Leto got on my nerves. I also have only liked three versions of Batman, Christian Bale, Micheal Keaton, and Kevin Conroy. Ben Affleck isn't bad -- he's better than Val Kilmer, Adam West, and George Clooney...but nowhere near the other three.)
Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn got on my nerves after a bit too -- which is a problem, because she's the heart of the film and its central focus outside of Smith's Deadshot. Smith almost saves the film as does Viola Davis, but not quite.
I can see why the critics hated it.
Shame, the idea had plenty of potential -- Deadshot, Doc Croc, Harley Quinn, Katana, Nick Flagg, some sort of burning death guy, Boomerang, all go off to save the world from the evil enchantress and her brother -- after Amanda Waller their handler underestimates the enchantress' ability to break her control over her.
I actually think "Arrow" did the Amanda Waller and the Suicide Squad storyline better in its second or third season. To date the DC verse has been better served by its television series than the movies. Maybe because the television series have to be more innovative, they can't rely on the standard Superman/Batman tropes -- which the movies own.
5. Now as a palate cleanser, sort of watching Australia again...the film starring Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman and a lot of Australian actors.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-05 11:16 pm (UTC)Also, it's apparently supposed to be part of M Night Shamalan's Unbreakable movie verse.
Speaking of movies we don't need, I find it amazing that anyone thought we needed more of this. How does this man continue getting funding chances? I know someone who also thought Unbreakable was a great film and in fact wrote a paper on it, but I was as bored by it as I was by Split (I watched most of the film on 2x speed where I can read the captions but it moves along faster).
I would have liked the story of the last girl more had it all not been so heavy handed (at least to me I saw it coming before it happened).
I've yet to see Suicide Squad since it was so panned. And apparently you'd agree with that :)
no subject
Date: 2018-02-06 02:50 am (UTC)I think you sort of have to be a comics fan (not a fan of the Marvel movies, but a die-hard fan of the noir comics of the 1980s -- such as Watchman, and Frank Miller's series) to get Unbreakable -- and the philosophy in it. If you weren't into reading the graphic novels, and don't know the comic history -- then about 98% of it will leap over your head.
It sort of comments on those books, and the whole idea of what a superhero and villain are -- and how they create each other. I find such things fascinating -- I'm fascinated by motivation, the psychology of heroism, and those painful emotions people don't want to explore -- which were in Unbreakable.
Well...and...it had Samuel L. Jackson in it. And I'd watch him reading the phone book. So there's that.
That said, I haven't seen it in over 10 years. So can't really defend it to anyone. Will state that I fast-forwarded through the film "Miss Sloan", which I found deathly boring and predictable. It's a great character study, I guess. But it didn't work for me. I'm using that as an example -- because I know you loved it. So I think it's just what pulls you in. And it's impossible to explain that to someone else -- they either get it or they don't. I just watched Rex Reed review the Oscar films -- and we don't see eye-to-eye on any of them. I was not overly impressed by Lady Bird, but blown away by Get Out and Shape of Water, while Reed hated Get Out (bored by it -- shame it was directed at people like him), and despised "Shape of Water" -- didn't understand it at all, but loved Lady Bird. And above? cjlasky and I disagree about Split -- he liked it, I was bored by it.
So...(shrugs).
2. That said, I agree with you in regards to "Split" but I'm willing to concede that I got burned out on the serial killer trope ten years ago and can't watch the things now. I think it's been over-done. To the point that there are more fictional stories out there about serial killers grabbing young girls then there are actual serial killers (or we'd all be dead). I find it to be an exploitative and irritating trope. As a result, the writer would have had to do something majorly subversive and different for me to like that film.
The only one I've seen that I thought was halfway interesting in that trope of late, was "Room", mainly because it focused on the child who'd been born out of that situation and how the child dealt with it and their eventual release. Which was different -- and I'd never seen done before.
"Split" -- I've seen done multiple times, yet better elsewhere. Heck television does that story constantly and from every angle imaginable. It's been done so many times, it's cliche. And McAvoy's performance disappointed me. I don't know how I would have responded to it, if I'd been more favorable towards the trope or less burned out on it. (shrugs)
3. M Night Shalaman? I have to say I agree with you on that as well. Why do we need more in this franchise? (Right now, I'm not interested in seeing Bruce Willis in anything...the man annoys me. He's in that group of actors that I just don't want to watch any longer - for various reasons.) And, I haven't liked anything M Night has done since well Unbreakable and Sixth Sense...so...not sure why they are funding his films and not others. But I feel that way about Michael Bay as well.
4. I don't recommend that you see "Suicide Squad". Unless you really enjoy Zack Snyder films and video games. It's a busy movie. Loud. And headache inducing. With lots of weird neon colors. The only thing I liked in it was Will Smith...and that's because well, he's Will Smith. But it's not enough to sell a movie.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-06 09:31 pm (UTC)That's true and it is a pretty interesting issue. My problem with Shyamalan's work is that it always promises something really interesting and then resolves the setup in a very half assed way. For example, even Sixth Sense, which I agree is the best of the bunch, was less interesting to me than the Nicole Kidman film that came out 2 years later called The Others.
Ah, pity about Ms Sloane. I saw it as a kind of lobbyist superhero story, except that it had a woman as the hero. Completely improbable but then so are superhero movies ;)
And yes, serial killer stories are very overdone. Of course Room was based on a book by a woman so that's probably a significant reason why it had a different focus. But it was also a kidnapping tale which probably had added currency since there have been a few cases in the past 5 years of long-term abduction and rape, in some cases of multiple women, revealed when they escaped.
Yes, well Michael Bay still makes them a lot of money though whereas my understanding is that Shyamalan's films have largely been flops. But certainly Bay and Snyder seem to produce unwatchable films.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 02:25 am (UTC)Felt the same way about "Unbreakable" -- it was just so different than what I'd seen previously, and it melded two genres that I loved together.
I think it gets back to what I was trying to say before? And this actually has always fascinated me...people like things or dislike things for intensely personal reasons that aren't necessarily clear to others.
For example? Some people love brussel sprouts. (Can't abide them myself, no one in my family likes them.) And I know people who don't like sugar but love salt, and vice versa.
Once online I was trying to examine why I despised the Buffy episode "Storyteller" and others adored it. Never figured it out.
I've no clue why Shalaman's films are flops -- they are rather clever actually in places, and visually stunning. While Bay just produces video games. I wouldn't say Snyder's films are unwatchable -- he is very good at fight scenes and visuals, and I actually think some of his fight scenes in Batman vs. Superman were far better than the Avengers, which was too busy. Whedon sucks at fight scenes, he's more of a smaller scale director - Much Ado About Nothing was a far better film than The Avengers, and he's almost better on the small screen, with more intimate scenes and dialogue. Snyder does wide-scale fight scenes really well and isn't good at dialogue. He's great at the big visual paintings.