Change Your Image
ameesha-green
Reviews
The Place Beyond the Pines (2012)
Moody, evocative, and shocking
It surprises me that "The Place Beyond the Pines" isn't more popular as it has the same kind of epic feeling as "The Departed", only if they'd had kids. It also has a dark, moody quality to it; the kind where you really feel the characters' pain. The cinematography and music create a really evocative "mood".
The film is split into three clear acts, and it follows four main characters. One of them is touring funfair motorbike rider Luke, played by Ryan Gosling, who discovers he has a baby at the start of the film. Another is good-guy-but-troubled cop Avery, played by Bradley Cooper, who has a son of the same age. Later, we meet their sons.
Technically, there isn't a huge amount of "plot" or action going on, and yet it always feels like something is happening as there's a huge amount of tension and a sense of things unravelling. You get the sense that some of the characters are trying to make the best of bad circumstances, while others manipulate the circumstances to get what they want.
The film plays with the notions of good vs. Bad, cop vs. Villain, rich vs. Poor, powerful vs. Powerless, and other dichotomies. The outcome is that you can't guess what is going to happen next and there are some truly shocking moments. I first saw this film at the cinema and when one of these moments occurred, there was an audible gasp across the cinema as nobody had seen it coming.
So, why did I give it a 9 and not a 10, you might wonder? Well, I am a big fan of this film, but the finale is a little too fast for me. I wanted five more minutes of wrapping up as Romina and AJ's threads feel hastily dealt with. But other than that, a stellar film.
Molly's Game (2017)
Constant narration ruins believability
The true story behind this film is pretty interesting so I don't know how they managed to make the film such a snoozefest. The main issue is the constant narration, which is completely flat and sounds like someone reading a script for the first time ever. Having not seen Jessica Chastain in anything else, I couldn't fathom whether she is a really wooden actor or whether it was a poor director decision to include the one-tone narration. Either way, it made a true story feel unbelievable because the viewer doesn't get the chance to just be immersed in the story without having it narrated to them. Aside from that, it's very slow. It's also quite difficult to have any sympathy for her character as there's very little that is redeemable about her.
Lady Macbeth (2016)
Sombre, unusual, and morally interesting
While the title of this film is misleading, not being about Lady Macbeth at all, it is still well worth a watch. With silent opening and closing credits, it is an unusual and sombre film.
The story follows Catherine, a young bride who is mistreated by her husband, having been bought as a gift by his father, who is equally unpleasant to her. While her husband is away, Catherine falls for a groomsman and begins a sexual relationship with him, until her husband returns and tries to kill her beloved, upon which she murders her husband. Quite Shakespearean, you might say.
There are more murders, but the film seems less about the murders per se and more about the double standards and lack of mortality displayed from any of the characters, none of whom are likeable. Catherine who stops her maid being gang-raped then blames the same maid for the murders and lets her be imprisoned. Sebastian ring-leads the imminent gang-rape and humiliation of the maid and helps Catherine cover up a murder and commit another murder yet is then disgusted by her and blames her for the majority of their joint actions. And so on.
I couldn't help but wonder what message it was trying to send: Nobody wins? Everybody is out for themselves?
Despite the moral vacuousness, it is an enjoyable watch and Pugh's performance is fantastic. There is a subtlety in her facial expressions that says a lot with very little. The darkness of the film makes it oddly compelling, sort of like picking off a scab.
Tiny Pretty Things (2020)
Sends an alarming message to teenagers
Considering this is a Netflix Original production, I expected this show to be as good as other Netflix Originals. Unfortunately, it misses the mark in so many ways.
The main issue seems to be its confusion over who it's aiming for. It was adapted from a YA novel and is clearly intended for teenagers based on the high school setting and plot, but the amount of sex and big issues in the TV version push it towards an older demographic. (Not helped by the fact that some of cast literally look like children and including so many sex scenes with them is horribly uncomfortable.)
If they were aiming for a teenage audience, then the show sends a worrying message. We're constantly reminded that they are underage kids, but the adults who are supposed to protect them instead have sex with them, sell them for other people to have sex with or rape them, threaten to destroy their career for coming clean, and so on. I don't think we need to name these arrestable offences to see how alarming this is.
Even the adults on the "good side" such as the police officer overstep the boundaries by stalking them, interviewing them without adults present, arresting people with little evidence, and so on.
That's not to mention the horrendous way these kids treat each other, constantly pushing each other aside to get to the top, sometimes with disastrous consequences, yet being best friends again a week later. What kind of message does all of this send to teenagers?
There are very few likeable characters in this show, and every kid has at least a few issues, meaning the show tries to pack too much in (bulimia, drug abuse, emancipation, relationships, race, religion, pushy parents, etc.) and so never really delves into any of these issues properly.
There are other problems - not limited to a poor script, a sometimes nonsensical plot, a predictable reveal, and horrible stereotyping.
There are a lot of criticisms of the acting, but I didn't expect the acting to be great considering the kids are dancers, and the dancing is obviously fantastic (though inexplicably switches from ballet to contemporary halfway through the series).
Saying that, if you liked Pretty Little Liars, you'll still probably enjoy this show despite its issues. There are plenty of twists and reveals, and it's fast-paced, and entertaining enough to be watchable.
Love Life (2020)
Started well, went downhill, cliched ending
I wouldn't normally watch a romantic drama TV show, but I'm a big Anna Kendrick fan so I gave it a go.
In some senses, I was very pleasantly surprised. The production is so well done that it feels like watching a film. The narrator makes it feel different to a standard romance and gives off "Pride and Prejudice" vibes. The dissection of past relationships idea is a solid concept and it works well to devote one episode to each of Darby's past relationships.
As Darby, Kendrick is funny as ever, and her facial expressions and sarcasm bring a rather flat script to life. Unfortunately, the writers dulled down the Kendrick effect by giving her a character who is inherently quite bland and has very little about her.
While the series starts really well, the more we see Darby through the lens of each relationship, the more we realise that she lacks an independent personality. I don't know whether this was poor writing or whether they were intentionally trying to make the point that Darby is always defined in terms of her relationships. I'm inclined to think the former based on the ending, which does nothing to subvert her lack of an independent personality. Either way, it didn't work and there is like to like about Darby.
She sails along on whatever life gives her, yet lands an incredible job without much effort. She has a difficult relationship with her mother, which isn't fully explained. She has issues that we don't really get. In short, we don't come to understand why Darby is the way she is, so the dissection trope is unrealised.
Now for the ending....
Disappointment #1: Of course, Darby can only experience "real love" when she has a baby, can only "find herself" by being a mother, can only repair her relationship with her own mother by becoming one. I wish the producers of these shows would think about the kind of message this sends to women, especially those who can't have or don't want children. Women's value is not defined in terms of motherhood, so please stop pushing this idea on us.
Disappointment #2: We get two episodes of Augie and two of awful Magnus, but we get hardly any of "the person" and learn almost nothing about him, so he fails to be a fully-formed character that we could believe Darby will spend the rest of her life with.
The ending, I guess, aims to subvert the notion that meeting the love of your life is all fireworks, but we are expected to believe that Darby meets her person while being rude to him, and that he keeps coming back despite her talking about nothing but herself and her baby and asking him one question about himself. Yes, romances are unrealistic, but we are given no reason to believe in their connection other than he thinks "it's cool that she's a mom". Again, the message is that Darby ceases to be her own person and is now defined in terms of her baby.
I really wanted the ending to be Darby taking control of her own life and learning to become an individual (like in Dakota Johnson's character in "How to Be Single"). Instead, we get the cliched, traditional ending where Darby does not become her own person but is instead defined in terms of her relationship with the three men in her life: her son, her son's father, and her person. Can't we offer anything new, anything more progressive or empowering than that?
Sharp Objects (2018)
Slow, drawn out, and nowhere near as good as the book
I'll caveat this review by saying that I love the book and feel that it is Flynn's best work (despite Gone Girl being more popular). As such, I was really exciting to watch the series, especially as Flynn was involved in its production.
Despite this, the series just felt a bit flat to me. I'm fully aware that the book is not a fast-paced murder mystery, but the series was painfully slow and almost nothing happened in each episode, with a lot of empty silences and an overuse of flashbacks that seemed to be filler to stretch out what should have been a much shorter series. What's more, the fillers lost their effectiveness because they were used so often.
On the whole, it felt like we were constantly about to reach the pinnacle of something only for it to fizzle into nothing. I couldn't help but feel that it would have been much improved if it had been trimmed to four episodes, cutting out the excessive flashbacks, trying-to-hard-to-be-poignant moments, and drawn-out silences.
What I did enjoy was the setting, as the atmosphere was conveyed brilliantly through the visual. Scanlon's Amma was excellent and absolutely convincing, while I found Adam's Camille hard to believe.
It's a shame because I really enjoyed the Big Little Lies series, which took a distinctly average book and made it into a poignant series, but Sharp Object was nowhere near as good as the book for me. On the whole, it was okay but overly drawn out.
21 Bridges (2019)
A solid cop drama with a great visual
This is a great classic cop film with a nostalgic feel to it. It doesn't try to do anything too complex but what it does, it does very well.
The visual is impressive - with a dark, slick look that reminded me of The Dark Knight and The Crow - the grubby, wet city lit up with neon lights and gunshots.
The acting is great, and the action comes thick and fast. The plot is pretty much solid. In short, there isn't much to not like.
If I had any complaints, it's that the chase scene through the abandoned building gets a bit ridiculous and is the only part of the film that feels particularly unrealistic.
I enjoyed the nods to other films, with the opening line mentioning "Avenger", Gambit's coin flick, and the "Collateral" subway scene.
On the whole, this is well worth a watch if you like fast-paced cop dramas.
The Judge (2014)
A difficult father-son relationship story well told
I wasn't initially sold on the idea of this film but found it surprisingly captivating. As usual, Downey Jr plays the hard-to-like, arrogant, intelligent guy. In this case, he's a hot-shot city lawyer who returns to his tiny hometown to defend his judge father (Duvall) who is accused of murder.
While the plot is centred around the murder trial, it's really about the troubled relationship between father and son (with the the court case and Duvall's making it hard for Downey Jr to defend him forming a parallel with the "I want to love you but you make it hard for me to do so" concept).
The family dynamic here makes for interesting viewing, with a cast of heavily flawed characters who are not particularly likeable but are certainly believable.
With the exploration of several relationships, it is slow-paced and packs in a lot but I didn't find it overly long. It's also beautifully shot, which helps to capture some poignant moments.
Fahrenheit 451 (2018)
Did they even read the book?
Like so many book-to-film adaptations these days, the producers seem to have a) failed to read the book or b) failed to understand the book. I cannot fathom the point of creating an adaptation that in no way sticks to the original book save the basic premise, and abandons key elements of the characters and plot, then adds random nonsense in its place. Why not just create a different, new film with a similar idea rather than ruining a beloved book?
Aside from the obvious fact that it bears almost no resemblance to the book, the film as a standalone is also pretty bad. The problem is an incredibly slow pace, a lot of silence as there's hardly any dialogue in some parts, and a dull visual. Everything looks washed out and there's overuse of a yellow or sepia filter. The score does nothing to create an atmosphere, and the script is as flat as a pancake. It's like they sucked the life not only out of the story but also out of the colours, script, sounds, and characters.
What's bizarre is that Jordan and Shannon are great actors and are fantastic in other films, yet they seem to have been given absolutely nothing to work with here.
I can't fathom what the producers were aiming for. It's neither a good adaptation nor a good film.
Spinning Out (2020)
Surprisingly enjoyable!
I started watching this as the trailer looked decent and ended up binge-watching all of the episodes in one day. It's really easy to watch yet also full of troubled characters and it's as much about mental illness as it is about figure skating. I know several people with BPD and (while I appreciate that some reviewers with BPD didn't experience the things depicted here) the people I know experienced mania in a very similar way. It's also fair to say that people experience mental illness differently as demonstrated by Kat and her mom Carol.
On the whole, my criticism is that the writers tried to pack too much plot into each episode and the series would have benefitted from being 15-20 episodes long, enabling them to go more in-depth about some of the issues raised such as racism, manipulation, and overbearing parents. That aside, I found January Jones' acting to be a bit questionable. Of all the characters, she didn't play Carol in a very believable way, though it didn't help that she's only 13 years older than Kaya, who was playing her daughter.
It was surprisingly enjoyable overall, and I really expected there to be a second series.
Two Weeks to Live (2020)
Classic British dark comedy with modern twists
On the whole, I found this show really amusing and a great example of British dark comedy. I could well imagine it making little sense or not appealing to people who don't get British dark comedy, but the script-writing is classic of this genre and it has some laugh out loud moments.
It has the classic conceits of protagonists who get themselves more and more embroiled in a mess, multiple antagonists who are essentially incompetent, and a mishmash of guns, comedic murders, and stolen cash. It also adds some modern twists and some character redemption.
The let-down of the show for me was Maisie's acting, which was so over-acted that it was distracting. I don't watch GoT because I find it extremely dull, so perhaps that's her style. Either way, I didn't find her character in any way believable and her private school posh accent made little sense considering she'd been brought up in a hut with her mom who has a regional accent.
Contrary to other reviews, I found the two brothers the best part of the show, especially Nicky, who has some of the best lines in the show. Unlike Maisie, they're far more believable because they have genuine British accents. For me, they carried the show and were the perfect example of British dark humour.
If you don't like British black comedy, this is definitely not the show for you.
The Girl on the Train (2016)
Location and setting all wrong!
"The Girl on the Train" novel was exciting, fast-paced, and kept you guessing. The film adaptation was slow, boring, and who cared what happened.
For me, the biggest issue was the setting. The setting is key to the book. It's about a woman who gets the train every day across London, and as anyone knows who has ever got a train in London (or another big UK city), the train tracks run along the back of people's houses, particularly the Victorian terraced houses, close enough to see inside. In these houses, you can hear your neighbours moving around, you live practically on top of each other. Because of this setting, Rachel is able to see into the lives of the people who live there.
In the film adaptation, Hollywood switching the setting to rural America. The train goes slowly (for no apparent reason) past huge houses with balconies, and she sees into their lives from there, which seems highly unlikely considering the distance from the train track to the house and the speed the trains would travel at in a rural location. It makes absolutely no sense for the film to be set in America and loses a key element of the book.
Continuing with the mess of the setting, they cast a British actress (Blunt) and a Swedish actress who sounds British (Ferguson). Blunt's Englishness is jarring and even her great acting can't save this film. If you're going to cast people who sound British in a book where the key setting was London, then why set the film in America? I can't fathom why they thought that was a good idea.
Somehow, the combination of the setting, the music, and the pace of the film means that what was an exciting book becomes slow and boring. It lacks tension, action, and drama. In essence, it just comes across a bit flat.
Wuthering Heights (2009)
A beautiful, dark adaptation of the novel
Being somewhat (!) obsessed with the novel, I've watched every adaption of it going and this is undoubtedly my favourite. It fully captures the darkness and moodiness of the novel and the almost painful love between Cathy and Heathcliff.
Tom Hardy and Charlotte Riley have incredible chemistry in their roles, which isn't surprising since they were falling for each other in real life (and unlike Cathy and Heathcliff, they are still together, yay!). Their emotion and passion for each other really comes through, and it makes their complicated love story so much more believable. We can truly see how they are better together, terrible apart.
Aside from the leads, the supporting cast are excellent - particularly Nelly, Edgar, and Hindley. The scenery is spectacular, showing the beautiful wild of the moors. The script is a much condensed but fairly faithful version of the novel. In short, I loved this adaptation the minute I watched it and having watched it 11 years after its release, I loved it just as much.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Horrible acting, cringey romance, basic plot
This trilogy came out when I was a child, and I must admit I found them fairly entertaining as a child, which I'll put down to 1) being a child and 2) Padme's impressive outfits that I wanted to own. As an adult watching them, this trio is absolutely cringe-worthy.
Hayden Christensen's acting is wooden at best, dreadful at worst. It's no wonder he no longer appears in Hollywood films. Portman's acting fared slightly better, but their dynamic was completely off, especially when Anakin was a child in the first film while she was a teenager. The whole thing feels a bit creepy. Plus, the fireside romantic scene with Padme is truly horrific to watch - not sure how parents sat through that with their kids.
Their dialogue is awkward, the actors clearly have no chemistry, and there seems to be no good reason why Padme still loves "Anni" and excuses his behaviour when he admits to murdering women and children in a fit of rage. Their relationship is in no way believable, which comes down to poor casting, poor script-writing, and poor acting.
Aside from that, there's barely any plot. To say it's basic is an overstatement. The only major plotline of this trilogy is "sweet Anni turns into a murderous dictator", which isn't much to sustain three entire films. There's nothing surprising and nothing standout.
On the plus side, there's less Jar Jar Binks than AotC and some beautiful scenery thanks to on-location filming in Seville and Lake Garda. Plus yoga is great fun! But that's honestly all I can say that's positive about this film.
Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)
Visually stunning but story gets lost
Overall, I found this film very enjoyable and would rate it much higher had it not been part of a series of films where it undermines most of the main concepts. Sandwiches between TFA and ROSW, it makes little sense that Johnson tried to take this film in a different direction and little sense that Disney let him. A saga this big and important needed consistency and coherence, so the same director should have created all three films.
That aside, to judge this film on its own merit, it's fun, exciting, and enjoyable for the most part. A few factors make it stand out - porgs being #1 on that list, and the #2 being the stunning visuals. The throne room, Crait, the split. So many of these scenes could be turned straight into posters - that's how visually spectacular they are.
However, Johnson seemed to sacrifice some substance for style. While the film looks incredible, the plot is a nonsensical at times. The jaunt to Canto Bight feels pointless, as does the Finn/Rose romance element and Rey's endless finger-clicking in a hole. Plus, splitting our trio - Rey, Poe, and Finn - takes away potential impact and rapport. Benicio del Toro's character feels improbably created simply to include the actor in the film, and his plotline is arguably the silliest.
If Johnson has invested more time in building a better plot and less on making the film look beautiful, more time on continuing what TFA started and less on taking it in his own direction, we'd have ended up with a much better result.
Did I still enjoy it? Yes. Will I watch it again? No doubt! But do I wish it had been done differently? Absolutely.
Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Thoroughly enjoyable, great end to the saga
Having thoroughly enjoyed "The Rise of Skywalker", I was really surprised by the negative reviews it's received. I had pretty much no complaints after watching the film... well one, but we'll get to that.
For me, this film wrapped the saga up really well while also introducing some great new characters (Babbu Frik anyone?) and undoing the errors of "The Last Jedi". It's fast-paced, exciting, and surprising - with fun cameos. I loved the dynamic between Rey and Ren, bought to life by brilliant acting by Driver. I enjoyed the humour, especially C3PO coming into his own. There were so many more things I enjoyed about this film and was so pleased with the way Abrams finished the series.
So, my complaint about this film isn't really about this film. It's about TLJ. Some of the content from this film would have been better set up in TLJ, but Johnson was clearly heading in a different direction (a visually spectacular but story-poor one). It would have been far better and more consistent and cohesive if Abrams had created all three movies and if someone (anyone!) had planned the plot in advance. For a saga this big and important, it makes no sense to have different directors taking it in different directions and having no clear story planned out from the start.
That said, I loved this film and I did really enjoy TLJ and TFA. I found these three episodes infinitely better than the dreadful prequels from when I was a kid (poor acting, very basic plot, Jar Jar Binks, lack of visual impact, cringey script... etc.) - I just wish there had been more consistency between these episodes.
Dracula (2020)
Have the producers even read the book?!
As a lover of the novel "Dracula", I was really excited to watch this adaptation. Unfortunately the word "adaptation" is very loose, since the plot bears almost no resemblance to the novel. It's an incredible novel, so why rewrite it?
This "version" is equal parts frightening, sensationalist, slapstick, and boring, which is a strange mix to achieve. Are we supposed to be laughing or hiding behind our fingers?
I can only assume that the people who made it either didn't read the book or hated the book. In short, it's absolutely terrible and an insult to the book. Bram Stoker is probably turning in his grave.
How I Live Now (2013)
Yet another book-to-film adaptation that re-writes the book
As a standalone film, I can understand why some people, and critics, might find this subject matter and the artistic portrayal of it impressive. However, like many people, if I've enjoyed a book - I tend to watch the film adaptation of it (since it's rare nowadays that a half-decent book doesn't get made into a film). I always leave the cinema feeling frustrated that the film changed the book, wasn't entirely true to the book, or missed the subtle nuances of the book.
With the film adaptation of 'How I Live Now - I struggled to even see its resemblance to the book. Not just because the plot includes completely fabricated parts, or that the order of events is entirely different, that the internal narration is difficult to understand, or that Daisy's attitude is too-attitudey and continues far too long into the film. What really got me was the irritating foreshadowing hints of the impending doom - part of the power of the book was the suddenness and unexpectedness of a mysterious force taking over the country. Second, the subtlety of Rosoff's treatment of war was completely abandoned in the film - instead the portrayal of the war is gratuitous.
Third - the focus of the film is entirely dissimilar. In the film, the focus is on the horror of the situation they are in, characterised by the dark, foreboding atmosphere and frequent running from danger. In the book, the focus is on Daisy overcoming her issues and learning to fend for herself, look after her cousin, and become a woman (thus YA literature). In the book, the war is almost secondary to the plot, not the driving force; it created the situation, but wasn't a constant looming black cloud. Most importantly, the tone of the book aimed to be life-affirming. The film was anything but!
I suppose my point is; if directors cannot stay true to the book - why bother making an adaptation of a book at all?!