sanjin_9632

Heart of Stone (2023)

another generic netflix spy action flick

I don't know why films like this are even made anymore. They're unoriginal and very boring because it's always the same stuff, the same kind of special effects even the same dialogue..

why do the same thing over and over again without adding anything new to the mix?

It's basically a female james bond with hacking capabilities battling a terrorist group determined to shift the balance of power in the world .. pretty much like every bond film in history.

Why, netflix, why? Just awful .. 2.6/10 just for gadot, even though i don't find her that good looking .. i think she could use a change of genre..

Hypnotic (2023)

What happened to Robert Rodriguez?

Robert Rodriguez used to be an amazing director.

What happened?

This movie is quite bad. It could've been great because it does have good components. The theme is actually not that bad. It certainly isn't anything we haven't seen before, countless times. BUT, it had promise.

Anyway.. it still managed to disappoint because it definitely seems to me that it could've been so much better. The characters aren't relatable at all. I don't feel anything for Affleck or the female lead (forgot her name). I think Affleck was the wrong choice here.

The acting in general isn't that great.

Fichtner as the bad guy really works, but the music is weird. It kinda ruins the parts of the movie where there's no real action. It manages to hold the viewers attention for the most part which is okay, but other than that it fails to amaze, which is, of course, dull.

Pretty average imo 4.4/10 90's Rodriguez would've made this into a masterpiece. But we all get old and our imagination gets lost in the process.

Scream VI (2023)

another pointless sequel

I normally don't review horror movies that much because they're all the same for the most part. It's true, even more so for horror franchises. The first two movies are probably good and everything that comes after that is just recycled trash.

I'm writing this review not because of the movie and its many flaws, but because of Hayden Panettiere.

She obviously had some stuff done in her face.

Her nose looks completely different plus she had some lifting and botox on the cheeks and around the eyes.

She's definitely coming after Courtney Cox there a little. That lady had a lot of surgery over the years.

She looks like a scarecrow now.

Also, Samara Weaving sounds different with the Australian accent. Even her voice sounds different.

How bizarre..

Anyways.. 3.6/10 for some entertaining moments but otherwise this movie isn't recommendable at all. It was so predictable that I actually guessed two of the killers in the first 10 minutes.

Mrs. Davis (2023)

Love Betty G.!

Betty Gilpin has been one of my personal favourites in recent years. From GLOW to The Hunt. From Nurse Jackie to Masters Of Sex. She's been funny and vulnerable in almost everything.. plus she can play a bad ass, which is very refreshing because most actors really cannot. They think they can BUT THEY CANNOT. Not the way she can.

This miniseries is probably a perfect vehicle for her.

A Holy Grail story mixed with some all controlling AI algorithm seeking world domination or something like that .. it's as much as could gather from the first episode.

It doesn't really matter because most stories have already been done countless times. The way it is presented to the viewer is important.. and this series doesn't disappoint so far. Peacock has been doing good work lately in the series department and I hope they continue to do so..

Most series bore me most of the time, but this actually manages to hold my attention throughout so far.

Let's see what happens.. maybe I'm wrong. I hope I'm not. 7.4/10.

Night Court (2023)

ugh.. what a waste of everything

Boring, predictable and unfunny are three specific words that come to mind when i think about this show.

I really thought it would pick up so I gave it several episodes and i might still watch the first season until the end, but this revival of a once entertaining sitcom definitely does not deserve a second season. It didn't even deserve the first one. The show from the 80s actually wasn't all that bad. It had its moments. I can remember some, but not much, since I was a kid back then.

I don't mind the canned laughter but with this show it's just annoying because the show itself isn't funny at all.

My advice: Rewatch 'Rules Of Engagement' instead if you want something funny.

NBC really screwed the pooch on this one. What a waste of talent, time and resources. I'll give it a 1.5/10 for John LaRoquette, but even he cannot save this mess.

Edmond (2018)

imo it's better than shakespeare in love

Honestly, this is the first time i even heard the name Edmond Rostand in relation to his epic theatre piece Cyrano de Bergerac.

Nonetheless, I can say with certainty that i've learned something new about Cyrano, his maker and the fact that french cinema can be funny too at times, because most of the time it is NOT.

The French sense of humour is very much unfunny most of the time.

I still think the French associate a 'good mood' with humour or comedy, instead of laughs, gags or situational comedy.

Anyway, this movie was pretty good. I liked its pace, costumes and music. One has to compare it to Shakespeare In Love because the story is pretty much the same.

The main difference for me was that I didn't find the main actors annoying in any way, whereas in SIL I pretty much found everyone to be annoying - for example Paltrow, Fiennes, Affleck just to name a few.

6.8/10 still not a masterpiece but very watchable.

The Scarlet Letter (1995)

did joffé read the book at all?

I mean .. how badly can someone even interpret an original? It's as if he really didn't read it beforehand or maybe he just read a high school report on the book.

Imo Demi Moore isn't a very good actress.. her movies are mostly terrible because of that. There is a reason she won 2 Razzies (could've easily won more). The tone of her voice is kinda annoying. I don't know why but I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

What I don't understand is how she managed to land high profile roles during her career. Must've had a very good agent.. can't explain it any other way.

Anyways.. back to the movie. The script is not good at all. The actors don't have anything to work with.

They could have used the narration a little more in certain moments to give depth to the characters.

Instead, 15mins of the movie have passed and the pastor already professes his love to the mistress after seeing her for the 4th time within days. The plot moves rather quickly in this one without real character development.

The music is off. The same theme plays over and over, which seems rather annoying.

It all seems rather dramatic, but somehow I find it difficult so sympathise with the main characters.

The settings are very natural and even beautiful at times is one good thing I can say about it.

Everything the movie is trying to (and probably wants to) convey somehow gets lost in translation on its way to the audience. For a romance of biblical proportions (which is what it wants to be) it simply falls flat in so many ways.

Could've been way better .. instead its rather average.

The length is okay for this kind of topic, but the director and the writers could've worked better together to make these 2h seem more exciting and engaging.

5.0/10 is my rating. In the same way unfulfilling as the movie.

Une histoire de fou (2015)

not engaging enough..

I couldn't really decide if i liked it or not because it doesn't really speak to me directly because i'm not turkish or armenian.

Seems like a movie for armenians depicting a particular agenda concerning the *ongoing* armenian-turkish conflict about the genocide 100 years ago. I guess i have seen similar movie concerning different nationalities before and if i compare my experiences i might be able to say that it's rather good. It plainly delivers on an anti-war, anti-conflict message while at the same time showing injustice and blindness out of anger and despair.

This is the 2nd film by Guediguian i watched after *the last mitterand* and it's slightly more interesting and therefore better.

I kinda like his approach to contentious topics and characters even if his movies never really manage to pull me in completely (so far).

It is obvious he is working through some personal stuff in all of his work like most directors with traumatic familial backgrounds related to war or simply similar experiences.

I specifically liked Abkarian and Ascaride as the parents in this.

6.4/10 for the approach and the actors.. but not engaging enough for me.

You People (2023)

this could've been better

So many good actors wasted .. because barris couldn't help himself pushing the same stuff he's been pushing for years.. as a human being i don't understand why the discussion always has to be about race .. the two love each other and the parents should be understanding no matter what the background.. the arguments are mostly stupid and poorly written in this. I don't like jonah hill but i liked him in this, which kinda surprised me because he seemed to be the only likable character somehow (what?!).. even eddie murphy got on my nerves which says a lot since i like most of his stuff. Dreyfus and duchovny and nia long kinda did their job, but there was still something missing.. 4.4/10 because of an obviously missed opportunity to make a truly funny movie with a poignant message.

Monsters (2022)

mostly fiction based on real life

First and foremost .. peters is great but there is something missing in his performance or to be more exact he wasn't given much to go with probably because the script kinda seems weak most of the time..

they stretched it over 10 episodes which are way too many.. this is a problem with most tv shows nowadays.

Trying to squeeze what is essentially a movie plot into 6 to 10 episodes which sometimes just kills what would have been some otherwise more entertaining content.

For the most part the series is well made. Some stuff is accurate. Most isn't. I read that the real JD was a different kind of character from people who watched some interviews from way back when, but who knows what he was really like..

BTW this is nowhere near the quality of Mindhunter as some here are suggesting .. it's rather mediocre due to the already mentioned flaws. All in all somewhat entertaining but mostly average 5.0/10.

Copenhagen Cowboy (2022)

pretty much what i expected..

I really liked some stuff he did years ago.. almost everyone likes Drive or Valhalla Rising.

BUT recently he's been doing the same stuff over and over again and it's getting boring.

Now that he's made a name for himself he's really selling out. Hence netflix series which also promotes his new production company conveniently called *by nwr*, which is as unoriginal as the series.

What i liked about the series so far..

• the serbian/gypsy/albanian/chinese element.. language.

• some of the actors did a good job
• some scenes were visually striking (most weren't)

all in all pretty much mediocre. He could've done much better. 5.4/10 for lack of effort.

Jack Ryan (2018)

entertaining but flawed af

I'm currently watching Season 3 and I have to say..

I'm kinda biased when it comes to the character of Dr. Jack Ryan, CIA-analyst turned spy. Mostly due to Ford's portrayal of the character in the movies, specifically the second one. I liked it because the character is uncovering a conspiracy within his own government structure.

The things I definitely hated about this particular version of the material:

• everyone spoke english, even the Russians in Russia which is bull, they should've invested in Russian courses and/or Russian-speaking actors as in The Americans, which was mostly authentic and amazing language-wise

• i like Krasinski, but he seems a little too superior/sovereign in this .. and most of the stuff he does/happens to him is kinda convenient and on the nose

i mean .. what to expect from a series created by Carlton Cuse and executive produced by Michael Bay?

Nothing but empty (and very patriotic) entertainment is the answer.. 5/10 because i'm in a generally good mood .. otherwise it is trash .. first season was okay.

The 100 (2014)

Really?! 7.7 overall rating? Are you serious? Are you serious? Really?!

First of all, hell no! This series doesn't deserve a rating higher than 4 (and i'm not exaggerating). I only watched like two episodes and that IS enough to characterise this show entirely. This should have been cancelled a long time ago, like most shows from CW. The whole premise is a copy of some other story, but in a different setting. The acting is definitely not good enough for any show, especially not a "serious" one. The effects are not good enough. The action sequences are not good either. It's not even mediocre. CW shows are in general sub par. There is not one show in the history of the CW channel that deserves a higher rating than 6, because they all suck in a broader sense. 3.5/10 because there is a flicker of a storyline, but nothing anyone hasn't seen before.

In the Dark (2019)

Starts off well, but..

This series is actually quite surprising at first since its characters (predominantly its lead) are more human/vulnerable (not those candy cane characters we usually see on CW) than other fictional personas created by the popcorn machine that is CW.

BUT, as the season progresses its main character shows signs of stupidity and irrational behaviour way too often which leads to bad decisions. She is previously portrayed as being intelligent and a no-bull**** blind woman with no illusions and no aspiration for any prospect whatsoever. I get that bad decisions can be a consequence to such a character, but this kind of bad decisions are not coherent with an emotionally intelligent person (maybe i'm wrong here, maybe she's exactly the opposite).

The more its storyline progresses the more it complicates itself just to remain interesting, inadvertently mimicking every other plot outline already known to the viewer from any other show, which in effect should ultimately bore the hell out of anyone.

Had the potential of being the best show on CW ever. 5.9/10 for the idea and some of the casting.

The Current War (2017)

Hmm.. makes you think

I wanted to watch this for a while now and after doing so I guess I'm a little surprised because I expected it to be much more pro-Edison than it actually was. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Edison as a figure at all. Imo, he didn't invent anything except for maybe the lightbulb, only after acquiring all the necessary patents to do so. He was a patent collector and self-proclaimed inventor. Not even close to Tesla's genius. Let me put it this way: If Edison were to be the Moon, Tesla would be the Sun.

Back to this particular film: Performances are good (because the cast is good), the movie's all-around quality is decent and doesn't really leave the viewer unsatisfied as much as it maybe wakes one's interest for the history of the development of electric current, which is fine.

A couple of flaws: It concentrates too much on the 'feud' between Westinghouse and Edison, while leaving out the much more interesting 'third wheel' - Nikola Tesla. Also, in the end Edison is practically calling himself the inventor of cinematography/cinema or the camera (*moving pictures*)!? Really?! Everyone knows (or at least I think they do) that two brothers from France are responsible for that. I'll let you figure out their last name..

A little history lesson here and a couple of questions to make an end to a review I never wanted to write: Tesla built it, Westinghouse sold it, but interestingly Edison's name is somehow still attached to it. Why?

I'll tell you why: Because back then one of the (if not the) most powerful men (man) in America, J.P. Morgan, decided for the merger of two companies into one (Edison Electric & another I cannot recall the name of) to form GE (still existing today and being THE electric company in the US). So nowadays GE is among the most powerful conglomerates in the world while Westinghouse (or what became of it) is mainly in nuclear power. Ask yourself: How does that happen?

Some inventions or discoveries like AC being far better than DC obviously couldn't be stopped even if people like Edison tried to just because they were dismissive of other ideas than their own (Tesla's).

Nikola Tesla wanted free electricity for all. I'm pretty sure Edison and Morgan didn't.

7.5/10 because I was pleasantly surprised by some historical accuracy and the film's quality in general. A film about Tesla's TRUTHFUL life story would be much more worth watching.. to me and many others out there.. pretty sure. I honestly doubt that it's going to happen any time soon.

Last Christmas (2019)

Emma Thompson is a treasure!

This film is an obvious attempt at delivering another *Love Actually* around Christmas.. the only problem is: It's not Love Actually.. it doesn't have the parade of famous actors.. the humour and dialogue is not as good (why do they use the word 'dissimilar' so much? - at least 2 or 3 times on different occasions).

Since i'm originally from the Balkans, i very much liked the refugee angle.. I like how they chose Yugoslavia as the country of origin for the main character, but i'm a little disappointed she didn't put in as much effort as Mrs. Thompson language-wise. Apart from the lullaby, Thompson pretty much nailed everything .. from the pronunciation to the portrayal of the mother (reminded me of my mom, in lots of ways). I have always (since the early 90s) been impressed by her talent and acting ability. I'd go as far as saying that she's pretty much in the same league as Streep and other actresses who enjoy seniority (Dench etc.).

Michelle Yeoh as Santa was a surprise.. i very much like her in the role.. very versatile actress as well.

Other than that i cannot really say too many good (or great) things about the film. It's another rom-com with an undeniable Christmas theme.. it's very enjoyable.. no doubt about that.. i would give it a clean 6 out of 10 if it weren't for Thompson and Yeoh.. their performances/appearances kick it to a 6.8 for me.. that's how good i thought they were..

Messiah (2020)

Not a bad idea .. but definitely not worth a 10 star rating judging on the idea alone..

The genre mix is definitely something kinda new. Religious espionage thriller i would call it. But as most new Netflix series it is too long at times and the viewer (me) loses interest. Some of the scenes are well done, some of the performances are good, but most of it is pretty boring. The chain of events is somewhat weird because most of the things happening would never occur in the same way in the real world.

When I first saw the trailer for the series I was intrigued even though I kinda already had a specific idea about where the story was going to go, because it's rather evident if you ask me.. i'm on episode 8 now .. let's see how this season ends .. not expecting much. 5.4/10

Loudermilk (2017)

Authentic.. and genuinely funny.

I'm 4 episodes in and I have to admit it's great. Haven't seen something like this in a while. It has the same feel as Casual and/or Californication (without all the sex and nudity).

I always liked Livingston. Too bad he mostly doesn't get the credit he deserves. The girl playing Claire is a small revelation. I guess it's a little predictable, but who cares as long as it embodies whit and grit, right?

One of the better comedic efforts in recent years. 7.5/10

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)

I'll admit.. it's a good one.. but far from perfect

This movie would be perfect .. WITHOUT TOM CRUISE. As much as I can enjoy some of his movies, I just cannot condone his real life persona and the people he's associated with.

Furthermore, this movie is far from perfect. Some people here don't understand that an action flick like this cannot be perfect. It can be great or close to exceptional, but NEVER PERFECT.

Also, some people here were talking about Tom Cruise doing the stunts all by himself. Pretty sure that's not the case. He might be fit and running a lot, also doing some less dangerous scenes, but he's probably doing none of them. The level on hypocrisy with this guy is immense. He sends body doubles to press appointments. Did you know that? Some mentioned him flying the helicopter or taking lessons. That might be true, but the scenes are all shot in front of a green screen (idiots).

I liked Superman as the bad guy.. although I could spot that one from a mile away. People who couldn't are obviously chumps. After watching the 5 previous instalments, one should realise that it's always the same plot.

Nonetheless, this movie was very well made (as were all of them). The one that kinda sticks out for me tho' is John Woo's version, because visually, it just does. I don't know if I'm the only one thinking like this.. I don't really care if I am.

All in all, a good addition to the series. Doesn't make me NOT LIKE TOM CRUISE less. 7.0/10

Counterpart (2017)

Quite good.. but let's not get ahead of ourselves here..

Everything about this show screams quality.. why? Not because of J.K. Simmons. He's great, but not that great. It's actually everyone & everything else .. the sheer variety of British, German, Dutch, Danish; in other words, European actors.

The whole idea is very interesting.. BUT even before watching the first episode it reminded me of another show from not too long ago = Fringe. I admit, Fringe is much.. much.. much.. worse than this.

We already know that the show is good or better than most.. combining a spy-thriller with a supernatural element, while including very good acting performances, settings and ideas.

The only problem I have with this is: Where does it lead to? Will it get a full run? Will we see an ending? Will it be a good one? Because if there's no ending = no fulfilment (South Park LOL). I'm not very optimistic about the network not cancelling the show before it can fully develop its story. And.. compared to the network's other big show (Outlander), Counterpart doesn't enjoy the same level of popularity among viewers. It may be the better choice intellectually, but as so often, the intellectual choice is rarely the popular one. Popular shows get renewed, smart ones rarely do, at least not 'til the end.

I give it an 8.4/10 because a 9 would be too much. It's very good but nowhere near a 9 out of ten.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald (2018)

Better than the Harry Potter movies ..

First and foremost, I never liked the Harry Potter franchise, but since I watch so many movies, I did watch it nonetheless. Still wasn't convinced.. Never read any of the books either.. not into hypes at all. I'm also not that impressed by the GOT craze. Those fantasy serials (books/films/series) are big cash-cows for the studios. A lot of imagination, but story wise they're not that original. Most of the stories have been told in one way or another (I don't care to explain, but I guess people who read this will understand anyways). Also, didn't like Radcliffe & Watson (the ginger was my fav) the CGI sucked most of the time (referring to Harry Potter).

Where HP fails, FB succeeds. A more stylish make-up. Seems more grown-up. And COG was genuinely funnier than all HP movies combined. Better CGI. Story's not that exceptional either, but at least better-looking. There are certainly more babes in this: Zoe Kravitz, Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol, Carmen Ejogo and the French girl, are only a couple.

I give it a 7.4/10 so I can round it down to 7, because it's still nowhere near an 8 or a 9.

Tidelands (2018)

A lot of eye-candy.. mediocre at best.

After watching the 1st episode:

What I did like about it:

• a lot of crazy good-looking people in it, especially Mrs. Chris Hemsworth (Elsa Pataky). oh yeah, there's also a lot of nudity.
• the filming locations (Queensland) .. just shows how beautiful Australia can be.

What I didn't like:

• the whole thing kinda feels like a soap opera with a supernatural mermaid/siren twist (the first time i saw the guy with the eye-patch i had to laugh).
• as hot as the *actors* are (see what i did there), their acting skills leave a lot to be desired.
• the storyline isn't original at all. it all seems relatively predictable.
• what this show is absolutely missing = character.

Just because it's Netflix, doesn't mean it's good. Most of the show's on Netflix are crap anyway. 4.6/10 and that's being generous. The points are mostly for Queensland and Pataky.

I don't think I'll watch this 'til the end, unless there's a graphic sex-scene between a *tidelander* and a human along the way.

Nightflyers (2018)

Just okay..

This is nowhere near The Expanse.. but the two cannot be compared only because they're shown on the same network and are part of the same genre. The Expanse could go on forever story-wise. This show doesn't posses that quality.

I actually vaguely remember watching the 80s movie. I would've described it as space-trash, even then. Just because something was written by Martin decades ago that doesn't mean it's necessarily good. I'm not a big fan by GOT either by the way. I'm probably not nerdy enough for his work.

I'm kinda missing the horror here. There should be way more of it. I wonder if anyone agrees with me. Maybe I'm desensitised by all the horror films I've seen so far. They should've changed a couple of things about the storyline. One example - complications start almost immediately when the ship is about to leave Earth, which is idiotic. I also read of people complaining about the logic and feasibility of the whole thing. This is science fiction people with the emphasis on FICTION. It could be totally absurd for all I care, but what it cannot be is dumb.

The cast is okay.. nothing extraordinary there.. Jodi Turner-Smith is really hot. Too bad she's a bad actress (at least in this).

I would've preferred it to be even more gory and bloody. Every episode should keep the viewer nailed to the screen in either disgust or pure and simple horror or thrill. There were a couple of interesting scenes, but not enough.

All in all 5.4/10.. pretty average in my opinion. Could've been way better..

American Sniper (2014)

I would give it negative 1000 stars if I could

I watched this sorry excuse for a film only to see how much crappy propaganda Eastwood was able to incorporate. As a kid I used to adore Eastwood and his overly *masculine* (judge, jury and executioner) personas in movies. That is not the case anymore. Eastwood has always been a political hard-liner.. on (Firefox) and off the screen. Taking political views into consideration, C. Eastwood and Ch. Heston could've been brothers. I don't know why, but in recent years (and projects) Eastwood has been focusing more than ever on one-sided portrayals of Americans being the heroes. In my humble opinion CHRIS KYLE IS NOT AND NEVER WILL BE A HERO. A person with so many kills on his belt is A KILLER PURE AND SIMPLE, NOT A HERO. Also, don't let me get started on B. Cooper. Personally, I think the guy has a terrible vibe. To me he seems incredibly ignorant, arrogant, selfish etc. All in all, just a horrible human being. One of the most unsympathetic people I've ever seen on screen. Enough about Cooper.. he doesn't deserve more of my attention.

Let's have a look at CE's last 5 movies..

J. Edgar = probably a good portrayal of Hoover, since the guy must've been a complete psychopath. Still one of Eastwood's worst movies. Jersey Boys = the exception here .. not bad, but not great either Sully = boring boring boring boring .. only for U.S. audiences. A pilot did his job and landed a plane. Wow. How mesmerising. 15:17 to Paris = one isolated incident turned into something epic .. propaganda in its purest form .. some of it may actually be factual. I'm pretty sure there's been a similar (or even better) story somewhere in history not involving U.S. soldier's on a train. Why not tell that?

..and this pile of crap.

A couple of questions regarding Hollywood movies/blockbusters:

• When there's an alien invasion or attack of any kind,

why do these events always happen in the U.S. ?

• Why is the U.S. always portrayed as the world leader and/or hero in such situations?

Furthermore, something to think about:

• Americans (U.S. citizens especially) are among the dumbest, least educated nations in the world. They may have some of the best schools/universities in the world, but only a small number of the world's population is actually allowed to attend, rendering their over-priced existence insignificant. The *normal* school system over there is horrible. Designed to manipulate more than educate.

Nuff said..

The Punisher (2017)

Better. But still not violent enough.

First of all, this should've been 8 episodes. 10 tops.

Second.. Admittedly, this was way better than any of its predecessors on Netflix.

Third.. More violent than the other Marvel series. BUT, IT SHOULD'VE BEEN EVEN MORE VIOLENT THROUGHOUT!!! The Punisher is violent!!! All the time!!! The story is there, BUT with The Punisher THE VIOLENCE COMES FIRST!! This is a mediocre job. It could've been so much better.

Here's an idea: Why not include a mini-side story for every episode ending with a brutal altercation between Castle and some criminal scum element? The writing was better than before, but still not good enough. More dynamic, but still not dynamic enough.

The overall average rating is way too high.. 9.3?! Really?! People just throw around big ratings like its masterpieces all over the place. 6.5/10 and I'm being generous.