caramia2002 Reviews

House of the Dragon (2022– )

Watch The Tudors Instead

[1/10 · 5 September 2022]

After the horrible ep 3, I had to go start watching GOT again to wash my brain out. Starts at the Wall, one of the many non-human, mostly mysterious characters which made it so good, that HOTD doesn't have, not one. Winter, White Walkers, dragons (unseen for so long), the Wildlings. And the Houses, oh the Houses, each one a little series in itself with wonderful characters. And Sean Bean to open (great chemistry with King Robert). The producers gave the actors what they needed to craft amazing characters. Plus they were amazing actors. Each scene was rich and full of people. HOTD seems like one small soap opera scene to another. Lonely. And mostly terrible acting. The poor little princess rich girl thing has been done, and better. If I hear about "his heir" one more time... Just lazy writing and we get it, already!

In GOT, the women, the brown, and the downtrodden just took their power, no messing around. And the diverse characters were some of the best, because they had the richest stories. Not just handsome blond princes and princesses. While there were some cringey medieval moments, it was, after all... medieval. The Black lord of HOTD is one of the few good actors and compelling characters in the series so far. I guess people who complain about diversity can't hear how awful they sound. And who justify such bigoted complaints with "source material". If we stuck faithfully to "source material", we'd still be watching 1950s shows.

Anyway, I don't think there's any way to elevate HOTD, things are set, at least for the 1st season. Even the last miserable season of GOT was better. But people so want to relive GOT that they elevate this POS, but just remember that HOTD is to GOT as The Hobbit movies were to LOTR. A pale imitation. Speaking of LOTR, we have the exact same situation as HOTD going on as I write... With predictable results.

Black Death (2010)

Pandemic Prescient but Misses Mark

[4/10 · 1 July 2022]

I think I mostly watched the whole thing because it was so prescient, released in 2010, about how people act in pandemics, whether the 14th century or 21st. Humans are, after all, humans, superstitious and predictable. Sad that we have so much in common with a time during which they had no idea what caused disease or how it was spread. The other reason was Sean Bean (Eddie Redmayne being the other icing).

Given that, there was nothing else to watch when chilling on a rainy summer Saturday or I wouldn't have made it past the 1st act.

One thing I've noticed about Sean Bean films and series... If there's no "brotherhood" or he doesn't have a cast he can really work with or a director who doesn't foster the ensemble, it's basically just a job. So his default Medieval hero was capable but not convincing here, as I've been a fan of his best, going back to Sharpe.

So, great cast but it almost seems as if they did their parts at different times, or very non-contiguous, and without any real passion or character creation. Redmayne, incandescent as always, leans a bit on the horror melodrama crutch. To be fair, the twist and ending of the film was radically changed 2 days before filming those scenes. And it shows. Plus, well, a very middling script to overcome.

But the worst thing about this film is that not only doesn't Sean Bean feel it as the leader of his merry band, it's not a convincing group. No real bond or relationships or anything you'd care about. Begs the question, "Why are you making a guy mission movie?" The ensemble are certainly very good actors, so all blame falls on the director.

The other downfall is the narration by one of the troupe, er, gang, at the beginning and the end, plus the needless exposition by several characters, particularly "The Red Woman" (same actress, same role as GOT, a few years later). The beauty of a twist is that it's a twist, and the viewer can think on it and talk about it. Again, the twist was changed from the original script right before shooting, to a much more obvious one. Perhaps they were already committed on film to that one in other acts, thus the choppiness and lack of identity (horror, Medieval action, fantasy, historical, heroic guy journey, romance?).

Halftime (2022)

Infomercial and Too Late for Oscar Hustle

[1/10 · 15 June 2022]

But aren't the 2020 Oscars over by 2022, so I'm confused, unless it's a story of how she got a nomination. I don't follow the Oscars anymore, so IDK. Yes, we really needed yet another film about strippers. Like Striptease, that other one (even worse), and Coyote Ugly weren't enough? They always are an excuse to be scantily clad and dance, like, well, a stripper. That she says she did it for the sex workers? Please. I imagine they rather she hadn't.

I really thought I might be getting a real documentary, silly me, but this is basically a JLo infomercial, justification for doing the beleaguered Super Bowl in 2020 and the standard politically correct things celebs say for fame and acceptance.

I really respect her as an actress, her singing is not my cup of tea (and she wants to show it off by lip-synching in the Super Bowl?), but I was hoping for a real, objective, view into her life. And I got nothing but an infomerical for her acting, singing, and political reasoning, which is flawed. If she wasn't political, then maybe she should have kept quiet or, gasp. Not perform for the NFL during the worst of Trump's treatment of immigrants and NFL players of color.

I'm all for social justice, but not when it's used for self-promotion by celebs.

Her Smell (2018)

Worth Watching

[7/10 · 28 May 2022]

Can't say the acting wasn't good, like it isn't in most indie films. Stellar cast and everyone brought it. And even performed the music. Can't say the script isn't witty and tried to convey cliche subject matter even slightly differently. Can't say Amber Heard isn't wonderful (all that mess has escaped me, and I haven't really seen her in much, so didn't recognize her, but she has rock star charisma and played it to the hilt). Can't say it didn't show music biz excess in a realistic and somewhat depressing way (and I've been there). Can't say it's just drug porn, esp with Moss' lead, and for once I think it could have used more. I even came to wonder exactly what her problem was as we weren't shown anything but a few sips of beer, which didn't explain her behavior. Heroin? Booze? Pills? Combo of some? Mental illness? It only became slightly unfogged near the end. Interesting choice of, uh, props? Or lack thereof.

Can say that it could have used better songs (they couldn't license some L7, Breeders, or even Hole songs for this????). Good songs would have sold it much better. Can say that we didn't need to hear every single note of said mediocre songs. The best song was Moss singing Bryan Adam's Heaven to her daughter, which was odd as this is a film NOT about 80s pop music. Can say the film could have used tighter editing as it was too long (see songs). Not a big quibble, as I like films which dig deep into their subject matter and give us some conclusions, but it did get draggy. Can say that Moss' mom was a bad casting as she's as old as Moss or even younger. I wish that would stop in films. Can say that the lighting was "acne scar" unflattering. If that was to punctuate the vibe, well, it was mostly gross when used on those who didn't need it.

Overall, I'd say it's better than many of the punk retro biopics or fictions I've seen lately. I have to wonder if this had been about a guy band, if the reviews would have been less, um, eviscerating? Or maybe the anti-Heard campaign hurt its ratings. It's not an 8*, but certainly not a 5.8*. If the music was better, I'd watch it again, and maybe again, due to the acting.

The Staircase (2022)

Not Worth Your Time

[3/10 · 21 May 2022]

I watched this true crime drama series before I watched the docu-series of the same name. While this is well-acted, it's just a waste of time. Good acting, with Colin Firth and all the others. And people really look like their real life counterparts, but that where it stops. The added over the top drama, probably made up scenes (all fictionalized true stories do), the disorganization of the script and storyline, the lack of really tying up the long case, and the uneven attention given to certain people and stories make it almost unwatchable by the end.

Much of the 2nd half is consumed with the relationship that develops between Peterson and a docu-series producer (the one woman) and talking about that series, how it developed and so forth; almost a "making of" doc. Very odd. But why? And they are catty about the exact nature of that relationship, so why did they even bring it up? Are they promoting that series? Are they trying to excuse the relationship and bias that it may add?

By the last two episodes, this becomes a confusing, coasting, lost story. It seems to abruptly end without covering many aspects. I wish I hadn't wasted my time and just started watching the other Staircase (NF) docu-series. Even with its problems, it's far superior and follows the story all the way to the end. A lot of very important developments happen after this series decides to drop the viewers off a cliff at the end.

The Staircase (2004–2018)

Great Look Inside America's Justice System

[8/10 · 21 May 2022]

This review is tainted by the fact that I watched HBO's drama series of the same name. The filmmakers of this film became part of that story, which was just odd. I guess a relationship developed b/t Peterson and a woman producer of this series, before the end of filming, as the case dragged on and on and on. These filmmakers, as portrayed in the drama series, kept saying how balanced they were going to be in making this documentary.

Tldr: It's long, repetitious at times (but not overly), but it's a 15yr story. If you don't like in-depth things, or you need a big resolution, it's not for you. It illustrates the American justice system's huge flaws in an excellent and detailed way. We get to know the Peterson family and friends, as well as Peterson, very well and most people involved in this case make good film, maddening or not. Southern homophobia and judgement is on terrible display here. The vitriol of some relatives is oh, so familiar to me, for they remind me of my incredibly homophobic dad. He sounds like the demon in the Exorcist when talking about gay people. If you added murder to it, OMG, he would be like these people. That kind of hate/anger will ruin your life, or kill you. You have to get over it and move on at some point. End of tldr.

But this series IS biased toward the defendant. The French filmmakers originally (again referencing the drama series) set out to document American justice, and they happened to settle on this case. They do cover the other side quite a bit, and, granted, the prosecution, and others, need no help showing that there's an agenda, and how, well, just horrible and biased they are. I think that filmmakers had little bias at first, but as the trial wore on, sided more and more with Peterson, which becomes very understandable as bombshell misconduct comes to light (but also, TBF, the defense made huge mistakes). Plus, they had much more access to Peterson than the other side, although a surprising amount of access to the prosecution, judge, prison, and media.

There are several things that are not mentioned in this series. Peterson's Vietnam medal controversy, the the Owl Theory (and subsequent use of it by the defense), the lawsuit filed against Peterson by a family member, and some others. They are no worse than the other things that came to light, so I don't think it's bias. Perhaps more trying to keep the focus tight, which they managed to do. Most of these other things weren't very material. Or sloppy research.

In the end, it's a story of family, which overrides the legal drama, as it should. I feel like I know Peterson and the family as well as you can from a documentary series. I don't think any one of us would like our lives torn apart and every single stumble judged and used to bolster a murder case against us, and that the media feeds on those salacious tidbits is no mystery. I've done things, esp which some juries, in some parts of the country, would definitely be swayed by. Not horrible things, but imagine your friends and co-workers being put on the stand and telling things you said to them in confidence, or 40yrs ago. But do all these things make you a murderer? Of course not. But they can be prejudicial to a jury, and too many are allowed here. So the prosecution gets to beat up Peterson like we used to beat up rape victims in court for being sexually active or what they were wearing.

This series effectively shows the American justice system's flaws, and from the different perspective of a wealthy white man (so if you are less than, forget it, for the most part). It's chilling, but certainly not new news. This series highlights how trials have become little about the truth and all about a game of arcane legalese and bias by people who aren't supposed to have any. I watch a lot of trials and see this over and over. It's just a big game. Trials also become a show to promote the agendas (personal or professional) of attorneys, prosecutors, judges, experts, and forensics. Then there's the media, which is just unforgivable here, but it's small town North Carolina. However, I'm now seeing the same thing in the Johnny Depp defamation trial, as in the OJ Simpson trial (when all this nonsense began). So the media lies and now social media blatant, made up, outrageous lies (I'm mainly talking about the trials themselves, I guess because they don't figure people are watching every minute, like I do). Sensationalism, and hate are not new. And these things become part of the trial and influence the outcome. Why live streamed cameras are allowed in courtrooms has always been a mystery to me or that juries aren't sequestered in big trials. Both of those things are very prejudicial to the defendant, usually.

I was very entertained, if that is the word, but there's some repetition, although not much, and it's very long, but it's a long story, spanning 15yrs! I'd rather the filmmakers take longer to tell an in-depth story, than gloss over details. Peterson's main attorney, is one of the highlights, as he's very articulate and down to Earth. Peterson's children are another. Peterson himself is a bit odd, but I see why he has the family loyalty he does. He's a writer, and all that goes with being in a creative profession. That is almost used against him when some people dig up lines from his books which they think indicate something about him, since they talk about killing. But there's no context and he's talking about the mindset of war and killing. Like any author, it doesn't mean he's like that or doing anything other than examining a difficult subject.

And no, we don't find out who did it or what really happened, primarily because the police and investigators completely screwed up the crime scene and evidence. There's a big reveal about that later in the series. They clearly didn't want anyone else but Mike Peterson to be a suspect.

The Mystery of Marilyn Monroe: The Unheard Tapes (2022)

Move along...Nothing new to see here.

[1/10 · 30 April 2022]

What a huge waste of time. This "investigation" is little more than the sound of cassettes stopping, starting, and rewinding. Very little information about Marilyn, certainly nothing new. Kept waiting for it to really begin. Too few snippets of phone calls and he comes to the same conclusions that have already been concluded, both in 1962, and when the investigation was re-opened by the LAPD in 1982. You should know this before you waste your time.

If you are new to Marilyn, this is NOT the place to learn about her. Not a good or complete bio on her life. Just another scam artist, trying to make money from Marilyn, after it's all been known for decades. Shame on you, NF, for adding to this.

I think it's a huge disservice that she is always talked about or referenced only by the men in her life, or even the Kennedys using her as a sex toy to bolster their egos. But of course it's usually men doing the writing or docs or news stories, from a titillating point of view. She was a multi-faceted human being, and deserves better. This film is just more of the same.

Inventing Anna (2022)

Started Fine But Ate Itself

[1/10 · 23 February 2022]

EDIT: Just re-watched the ABC News 20/20 feature on this case (Hulu, Season 43 ep 1) and I wish I had before wasting time on this series, which made this the creation of it seem totally unnecessary. Know that Anna was the one behind this series deal, SHE'S the one who profited from it, to the amount of $300,000 (minus $224,000 in restitution, so she left prison, early, $76,000 richer than before). So a few of Anna's crimes or "sins" got moved onto Rachel here. Explains a lot of the murky excuses or justifications for what Anna did, as Anna was running this series. Just despicable. Changing rating from 5* to 1*.

So 12+hrs of a series to tell 45min of a news feature. So, of course it's slow and plodding. Muddy and murky. Messages and justifications that it's just our society and since powerful people don't go to jail, why is poor, poor Anna. Yes, let's not fix the system, but excuse all crimes because the system is not equal. In many cases, that has some merit, but not here, not for someone so horrible and outright GUILTY. Anna used her thefts, odd baby looks and "charm" (or bullying), with a certain privilege, to get away with this as long as she did and as far as she got.

This series was badly written, with a horrible story arc, as it essentially wrapped up in ep 7 and the story arc pointed that way, but Shonda Rhimes began a whole new season when she continued into the legal battle. Also, trying to show what in Anna's past caused her to do these things was very muddled, slow, and never justified her behavior or made me feel anything for her, beyond contempt. So ep 8 and 9, and most of 7 were very hard to get through, as I felt it was done to death and wrapped up already.

Acting was fairly ok, except for the Vivian and defense lawyer being over the top melodramatic rather than relying on their skills. The actress who played Anna had a striking resemblance to the real Anna, and was very effective, but in that, also had NO redeeming qualities or reasons why she did what she did (but quite a lot of screen time was spent on trying to find out, which feel flat). By the end, many of the characters were so unlikable and frustrating that it wasn't worth it.

Hard to believe that Shonda Rhimes was behind this. It had none of the wonderful wit of Bridgerton (granted, that was the best of most of her filmography that I have seen, so...this was 90% expected, now that I think about it). And certainly had none of the production values of Bridgerton. The plot also relied on tired stereotypes like "reporter's boss doesn't want girl reporter to do this story", and reporter has to fight, sneak, and convince him bla bla bla. Rhimes should have hired better writers or forced rewrites of this laziness.

Lot of messages here. I thought the "males and females who screw up are treated differently" message was good and one that I have certainly lived, which gets little attention in the media that other inequalities, but it could have been handled much better. I guess all the messages could have, then they would have been palatable, instead of turned off the very people who were supposed to nod their heads, like me, not to mention the other "side", who are no doubt still raging over them.

This was supposed to come off very tongue in cheek and funny at times, like Bridgerton, but it just fell flat, and the actors couldn't pull it off. I'm getting weary of NF's original content that almost reaches a high enough bar, but never actually delivers, dragging the viewer though needless jell-o, and charging us more for it now. Save yourself about 12hrs and just go watch the 20/20 feature about Anna. Nothing else to see here.

Just Go with It (2011)

Typical Adam Sandler But Worse

[1/10 · 14 January 2022]

Can't believe I even started watching this on NF. I thought Jennifer Aniston and Nicole Kidman (why I watched it at all) looked better than ever, weirdly, but now realize that the movie is 10yrs old! Thanks for using my subscription money wisely, NF, with the latest of releases!

This film is offensive to everyone but straight, white middle aged men. Really degrading to women and that's only the start. Nothing is off base for Sandler, even his own heritage. But Sandler has never had enough imagination to be creative in the least when sending up cultures, and there IS a way to do that without being offensive, yet actually being funny, which this is not.

The acting (if you could call it that) is really uneven, and sometimes Sandler suddenly realizes he is in a movie. The surprise performance is from Nick Swardson, esp the sheep bit, at around 50:00 (yes, takes that long to get to any humor). Even Aniston is less than her usual self, although she outdoes Brooklyn Decker in a bikini (because Aniston has a personality, talent, substance, AND is gorgeous).

If you like films where *every* man onscreen is a total creep and liar who uses and objectifies women without any filter at all, then this film is for you. If you like films about middle aged men chasing girls half their age (hey, the Seventeen mag prop was not my idea...and of course Brooklyn is older, but really cringeworthy). If you like films which make jokes at the expense of minorities of all sorts, this is for you. If you never tire of poop (tons and tons of them, 9yr old boys will love this), d*ck, and bathroom jokes, this film is for you. If the latter is preferable to actual humor, then this is for you. I'm ashamed I watched as long as I did, but I was doing something else, in my defense.

Why do The Police songs sound like covers? Like someone ran them through a weird effect or remixed them. Badly. The music is generally awful and just a cash grab, usually have little to do with what's going on. Love using Roxanne for Aniston's sexy song, but then again, she really did prostitute herself for this POS.

Kitchen Confidential (2005–2006)

Bad, Worse, and Offensive

[1/10 · 31 December 2021]

I can't believe that this was taken from the book of the same name, by Anthony Bourdain. He would never say lines like this. I guess it was originally an attempt to make a film of it starring Brad Pitt (no wonder he declined, although, of course, could have been a scheduling conflict). It should have stayed dead.

Watching in 2021 and the jokes are very low brow, racial jokes (or any jokes) and stereotypes not funny in the least, bimbos and dumb blondes. And did I say really bad jokes (think a worse Beverly Hillbillies, the series). Bradley Cooper is amazingly not very good, kind of manic and none of the charisma and attitude of Boudain. It's, in other words, a typical Fox TV comedy. Kind of cross between Family Guy and Sex in the City (films, esp latest horror) but falls flat on both counts. And the music is really irritating. I swear the opening notes were copied from Sex in the City. It's all like that, but not near as effective as SITC.

Music Box: Juice WRLD: Into The Abyss (2021) Season 1, Episode 6

Don't Do This at Home, Kiddies

[5/10 · 18 December 2021]

This is not a true documentary on Jarad Higgins' life. It's a lot of cinema verite (just camera) shot on stage and in between. You do get an idea of his fame from it, and the song sales listed after every song. But I wanted to know what made him tick, why was he such an addict? Why was he on the road to it, you know, other than he was, like so many, given speed as a kid, for ADHD. With, seemingly a vlog rolling at all times, surely more answers were in there or someone could have asked or not treated these situations as normal. Speak UP, kids.

Hard to watch. Just like the documentary, Amy, about Amy Winehouse, but not near as good, just sad to watch her 'people' suck as much money out of her as they can on the way to her death. Due to the money and fame, no one stops the fatal plunge. I have seen this from inside the biz more than once and it's got to stop; label execs have got to take accountability, managers have to, promoters, assistants, friends, family have to. Oh, but the money! Don't stop the great money train and your access to fame!

Higgins is obviously, more obviously than most, messed up on drugs from the start of this journey. And no one says a word, even the camera guy takes the offered pain pills, even as Higgins is on the heavy nod while snorting more (he was on that road long before the fatal flight). Sounds like his g/f, Ally, tried to give him limits, but she often looked just as messed up, and the crew supplied him behind her back (but she's still giving him an "allowance").

Then someone smuggles 70lbs of weed on the plane, internationally? That's heavy trafficking and all the entourage are so stoned that one guy says, "Oh, he's rich, we'd all get out quick." That's serious smuggling weight, so WTF? Plus, I just read where he was already under suspicion for a previous flight. So you reach amazing success, then somebody thinks this is a good idea to help things along?? Hey, let's make 100th of what you just made last week, and smuggle a lot of dope, while the Feds are watching, that could land us in jail forever!

I am old so yeah, I don't get it (but, I was in the music biz, with drugs, and young once). But why, if he wanted to help his fans and kids reach their potential, is he singing SO MUCH about drugs, taking drugs, which drugs, dying, guns, crime, misogyny? It's just rap subjects per normal. The music will live much longer than he did, and influence longer, alas. Money, money, money. Be a star, get money. Do drugs, do more drugs, get money, hate and use women. I get the rap fads, emo, and all that, but how can you couch that stuff as "helping people"? Some fans will relate to that kind of life, but really, anymore? 'Cause most people don't have all those things, so rap is no longer protest music that speaks to conditions in the community and why it talks about drugs, guns, gangs. It's just silly bragging about all you have now that you've made it. Just normalizing nonsense and trying to be 'legit', have 'creds'. Riiight.. There are always masses of drugs around fame and money. Bad people come around. We thought cocaine was cool and harmless, but that was 50yrs ago. Those naive days are over, we KNOW what hard drugs do, so no excuse. But I get that he was self-medicating, and was on drugs, by a doctor, when young, and perhaps he grew up around the culture of lean (the film doesn't talk about his youth, in any way).

So a barely 21yr old young man dies for nothing, at the height of his success. Then gets a doc which shows him continually way messed up, shows cringeworthy performing in the studio, due to same. "Oh, it's fire!". Yeah, until it isn't. This film fails on every level to address even the slightest issue. I hope all involved realize their part in this tragic death of a talented young man. I see nothing fire about a completely, hopelessly wasted and addicted musician creating (being too high to play guitar is the pinnacle of the cringe). Again, there isn't enough in the film to address the why of what got him there.

Ultimately it was up to Higgins, but someone was supplying all those bottles of lean and the percs, with seeming prescriptions on them, right? Like, true chronic pain patients or sick people can't even get that stuff anymore, and the DEA is always watching. Maybe Higgins did some of his own dr scamming and/or buying from dealers, but come on, he had people to do everything. I understand being young and partying with cool people in the biz, but at some point, you either face the music or end up like this, or one of the numbers in the terrible opiate crisis we are facing more than ever. We didn't have scientific info and statistics on drugs like there are now, just rumor and govvy propaganda. But now you know, if you want to. And you know what to do, or just google it, dang.

Higgins had lots of answers, like being open about mental health and how hard talking about it is in his community (hey, back in the day, it was unheard of to talk about it, period, in any community, and so it continues), but having that money and access, did he ever do anything about his own mental health other than mere talk and swallowing opiates, etc? We don't know, but this doc seems to say "no". He preached about achieving your dreams, but to school kids, just said, "I did the thing that came easiest to me." As if every kid has that kind of talent just sitting around, or should reach for the least difficult path. Yes, you should go for your dreams, but we aren't all Jay-Z. Some of us have to pound the nails and stuff, you know? But we can still reach for the best of ourselves and go for a full and successful life. And I hope that's what Higgins' message becomes, rather than all the usual platitudes of "great humanitarian", "wonderful human being", "inspirational". The truth is, like Kurt Cobain, and the others of the 27, now much earlier, Club, most were end stage addicts or alcoholics and not able to give much useful advice to anyone. You can love their music, and I do, but don't conflate it with how they lived their lives.

Heck, more than enough people of color are being killed on the streets. Why are we adding to that by the slow death by addiction? You can't rise up and fix what's wrong by being high all the time and ignoring the problem. There are a lot of evil people who are counting on that. Counting on people of color doing themselves in for them. Don't fall for it, make a change. This film certainly doesn't add to that dialog, or the positive stuff that can come out, and in that, completely fails Jarad Higgins' legacy, which a sad, sad thing indeed, as it seems like it was made just for the streaming money and to sell his catalogue.

The Unforgivable (2021)

NOT a Great Holiday Film

[6/10 · 16 December 2021]

I'm not having a good holiday period, related to sister issues (so like WHY did I decide to watch it???). Nothing very uplifting about this film. Not that there has to be, but if you are having holiday challenges, save it for later. It did give me good food for thought, though, thus it worked on some unconscious level, I guess, thus the extra * rating.

It seems like an indie film, but just low budget, and not the hoped for creativity and outside view of the good ones. The director (and producers) really failed in almost all the departments of this film, if not completely, then in consistency. The cinematography is really bad. I've seen better lit YouTube vlogs.

Good to see Bullock in a real role, although she is way too old for it. Ages should have shifted by the writers. There are lots of these cock-ups in the film. She did a good job, though, as an ex-con who has learned to keep her head down and say little. Her expressions are effective, although I kept waiting for her to string more than a couple words, like to have that moment of *speech*. I guess she does a bit, but not in a very satisfying way.

The acting is inconsistent. I watched it as I'm a Vincent d'Onofrio fan, but he has little more than a cameo, and unlike most of the cast, keeps the melodrama under wraps. The dimwit brothers are terrible, as are some of the bit players. The adoptive parents and young women are good, as is Viola Davis, except that she has one of the worst written parts and plot twists. Like after the fact quick script additions to justify her casting or continued participation. She is always compelling when on screen, though. Love to see this film with her in the lead role.

The film is very emotional and has its moments, perhaps more as a story of life as an ex-con, not to mention, cop killer (although some things seemed a bit unreal) than the story about finding her sister, although the full length of it is about sister bonds, but fails in its execution. It's hugely predictable. I thought it was going to do right, but then went sideways in the last act, and I only continued watching it in hopes it wouldn't suffer the same fate as most Hollywood films. All in all, it's a traumatic film about a traumatic event and not easy watching.

The Alpinist (2021)

Great Tribute to an Inspiring Human

[10/10 · 10 December 2021]

He is little known, but deserves this film, a great tribute to a great climber. I'm an armchair climber (but real life mountain freak) and this is a great journey I'm glad I got to go on. Great climbing footage and real life adventures (many!) rivaling, if not surpassing, Free Solo, Dawn Wall, and Meru (my personal fav, but it's a different thing). The faces he climbs in this made me quake to my toes, just incredible, but oh the rewards! His achievements, just in this film, are many and mind-boggling. This isn't about just one fantastic ascent, but many (and some firsts).

All the things people say about people like this and the risks they take, or fates with which they flirt, are just BS. We ALL take risks everyday. Driving on a freeway can be just as swift and life changing as free soloing or any mountaineering, and neither is any more or less tragic. Risky is risky, but at least he does it in such breathtaking places, and gets to challenge himself in unique ways. The beauty is that he's so positive and seems to live in the now, with such enthusiasm. If you don't learn from these things and don't recognize that it's the journey, you are just a fool on a rock face, which Mark-Andre is not. Is the punter who "climbs" Everest any more wise for the ego gratifying stunt? Usually not and the risks are pretty dire even for that.

I was thinking of my inspirations and goals while watching this, and I realized that, in my own way, I went for it, too. Very different from Mark-Andre, yet not pulling back from anything. So thanks to Mark-Andre as I often am so hard on myself. It's also very inspiring, no matter your situation, to keep going on and not stop now. Or what are we alive for? Above and beyond, always.

A very emotional journey, and maybe the best thing is that, by the end, you really, really care about Mark-Andre and feel something genuine, so hats off to the filmmakers for that. And hats off to Mark-Andre for finally letting them film him, so that we can enjoy a fraction of what he enjoys and learn who he is. And just huge props to a once in a generation climber. May you find that perfect summit, that perfect sunrise, Mark-Andre!

What Happened, Brittany Murphy? (2021)

Tabloidy, Overly Long, and Short on Conclusions

[1/10 · 20 November 2021]

TLDR: Nothing to see here, folks, in this terrible, clickbait "doc". It tells less than what you can find online and there is no big revelation here. Just photo after photo of skeletal Brittany.

I have always respected HBO docs, but this is a real tabloid "doc" (the Max part?). The only redeeming factor is that it interviews many of those close to her (except the mother). But there are way too many YouTube floggers to count and they are all speculation and promoting baseless conspiracy theories, and talking about her death while doing makeup tutorials, which is the worst bad taste I can think of.

Not to mention the inclusion of that parasite, Perez Hilton. He is very complicit in her demise, and has had a negative effect on other celebs as well. He seems to be contrite and that could be a whole other doc but this one doesn't delve into his so-called regrets at all. His justifications are just tasteless.

The ONE question the doc never, ever asks is why her mother didn't do something, get her to a doctor, protect her daughter? How can a crush on a con man trump the welfare of your only child? She was living in the house the whole time this developed. Why the doc doesn't investigate this is bizarre. They are hyper focused on the husband's role. I guess easier to speculate about the dead than the living for the filmmakers. Of course Simon, the husband, picked his marks well. Two naive women at a weak time in their lives who were dying for a strong man to protect them and take charge. But that doesn't excuse the mother or anyone else who didn't at least call the city and ask for a welfare check. Esp when she was pretty much a prisoner. How can you call those people "friends"? I will think twice before putting money into their pockets anytime soon.

So strange that the coroners they interview gloss over the drugs of abuse in her, and her husband's, toxicology reports. 2 kinds of Vicodin (hydrocodone, a popular opiate), amphetamines, benzos, and much more, saying that they were "prescription". Yeah, no one ever abused or OD'd from those... Just Vicodin and benzos are enough to stop you breathing; it's why drs can't prescribe both now in most states. Perhaps there weren't enough of these drugs for cause of death but her Wiki says that they were definitely a factor. Yet the doc omits this important information, so they can clickbait viewers to keep watching. Even after the investigator said it appeared that the couple had been doctor shopping and using an alias for Brittany so she could evade detection. Inexcusable reporting.

It never fails to amaze me how time after time, death after death, no one does anything about obviously sick or troubled celebs. The sad thing is that it's often the people closest to them (Amy Winehouse's father, etc) who are culpable. But I've seen it close up. People are so enamored with a celeb that, you know, anything is excused and they are given more of whatever is killing them. Or there is too much money to be made to take any action. Even at the highest levels of a huge record label producer or film producers and directors. It's the sad truth of the music and film biz since their inception, over 100yrs now.

One thing that is striking, and I don't trust the "doc", but this seems to be so, is that there was no big usual investigation into Brittany's death, yet there was into the husband's, Simon. Police are usually extremely suspicious of spouses, and bring them in for questioning or even arrest them, but none of that here. What made the con man, n'er do well husband worthy of a serious investigation and talented, famous Brittany not? There are many of these questions the film might have tried to answer, but doesn't.

Passing (I) (2021)

Much to Like, 2nd Half Much Better

[8/10 · 13 November 2021]

I was drawn into this by the beautiful cinematography and stayed for the acting. All are very good but the chemistry and abilities of the 2 women elevate the script, which is at times trite and cliched.

I did not know that Rebecca Hall directed, until I finished the film, and I really don't know that much about her. But now it makes sense that it's her first attempt. I love B&W film and all the better this is filmed in it, if not a bit obvious, but a good point in the colorlessness of it, at any rate. At first, I wasn't sure how I felt about a white women directing a movie about things she couldn't know, but I just realized that of course this movie is about "passing", even for a director (I don't think she's Black, but the concept ironically works). And you don't have to be a doctor or lawyer to direct a film about them. Someday, hopefully racism and the Black experience is well enough understood and empathized with that none of this makes a difference, but sadly, we are not there yet.

Stick with this film, if not for anything but the acting and gorgeous photography, particularly the close framing on Tessa Thompson's gorgeous, expressive face. I was about to turn it off about midway, when it suddenly picked up and my "small, indie film" voice said, "stick with it". This has more of an indie film art house flavor, so not for everyone. It's a wonderfully languid film, but some will call it "too slow". It's strangely relaxing, esp given the subject matter, and perhaps that in itself is brilliant.

I'm not sure about the ending, although it ties up my emotions nicely (my angst over Claire's parasitic behavior), but it launches the plot into a whole new direction. But it's the end! Films today have problems ending, so it's not unusual in that way and is indeed a very unexpected twist and payoff, although I would have loved to have seen what was teased throughout the film: how WOULD Claire deal with her husband finding out? Perhaps better to do a mini series and address the many issues here.

Finch (2021)

Wanted to Hate it But Not So Bad Except Science

[6/10 · 7 November 2021]

So robot cuteness was only cute and new in the first 3 Star Wars. Dogs that seem to understand all human speech and "sigh" on cue not so much. I hate movies that needlessly rely on pets. Or robots/aliens. This robot ("Jeff", for some inexplicable reason) is iffy at best, esp realism wise. Robot emotions, hugging in the near future? Eh? Is this a kids' movie? Anyway, another copycat film in a world of mostly copycat films. This film proves there are only 8 true drama plots, or something like that.

However, I did watch the entire film and was mildly entertained, even got emotional with "Jeff" (and now I hate myself). BUT, and this is a big one - how does solar radiation make the human Finch so sick but not the dog? Dogs are much smaller than humans, ergo, stuff like that affects them more. And not so sure about the "swiss cheese" model of the ozone layer nor the area which was still normal Earth. Not to mention that the Earth's magnetic field would probably recover after a CME, just as it did after the Carrington Event in the 1860s (teaching moment for your kiddies).

Hanks is better here than in that dumb Saudi film I don't remember the name of, but that plot and script are snoozy, though he's not as effective here as he is in Greyhound. Iconic journeyman actor, needs better scripts for his millions. Watch if you have really young kids who have heard a few 4 letter words and don't understand the difference b/t reality and make believe, or if you just can't find anything better to watch.

Paradox (II) (2018)

Should Have Been Concert Video

[1/10 · 16 October 2021]

With some of the gorgeous, but badly shot, Colorado mountains and wildlife. The band's live performances are pretty good but too, too much amateur film around it. The non-band soundtrack, which is mostly Young and his electric guitar, pales next to his classic guitar soundtracks, like the Malick film, Dead Man. Plus a bunch of nothing blues licks/songs. FYI, Willie is only in this for 5sec.

This throwback film makes me feel old as I am. I guess Young and Hannah still cling to the circa 1970 fad of being in a "cool" cowboy film with pop music, ala Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Kids will think they are watching an old folks film.

If you have a message to get across, please don't make it "only for insiders" and those who "understand" Young's films. That's stupid. If you want to make an environmental statement that's effective, then do it right. Ditto mountain music video or live concert.

Pretty good jam in the middle, based on Cowgirl in the Sand. But left me wishing the actual song was in there somewhere. Nice version of Pocahontas, but underwhelming Peace Trail. Interesting version of Angel Flying Too Close to the Ground, by Willie's imitative son, Lukas, except it sounds too studio, but the players are often in the campfire's smoke lol. Hats off to them for sticking it out.

I figure the best thing is to mark the performance spots and ignore the rest, but why? Just go to YT and see all you want without bad acting, bad cinematography, bad direction, and all the cluelessness you don't want.

American Crime Story: Man Handled (2021) Season 3, Episode 6

Sick of This, But Engrossed

[8/10 · 13 October 2021]

The Versace season was what you'd expect from network TV. Melodramatic, padded, etc. But the Impeachment season, so far (Ep 6 just aired) is a huge improvement. Everything is better, from the direction to the casting to the writing. Except for the dark grading or poor lighting direction. And I watched in HD.

Ep 6 made me very emotional. I lived through this mess and was very informed, even read much of Ken Starr's report. And even though I was very sick to death of this whole mess, I find this season engaging. I was disgusted with Clinton, although being a fan then, at least of his epic campaign and political skills. But I was more disgusted with Ken Starr's report and his obsession to "get" Clinton. When he couldn't prosecute Whitewater, he just kept going to the lowest common denominator. Making blow jobs, etc, something the country now freely talks about, that little kids heard all over TV. That tells me that Ken Starr's office and the GOP operatives didn't give a cold damn about this country, or their so-called "family values", but only their ambitions. Just like Trump, Clinton was a known philanderer WAY before he was elected. Many women came out during the campaign, but no one cared. A scathing book by Anonymous came out, with damning accusations, but no one cared and he was elected anyway. Just like Trump. MeToo didn't phase Trump or his faction of the party, like it wouldn't have phased Clinton now. Trump is probably too smart to use someone like Monica, et al, or we would have had the same deal. And too smart for the quid pro quo.

As far as the lying part goes, that he and Monica never had "sex", well, in my personal definition, just like Clinton's, they didn't. In the early 70s, as a teen and young woman, I claimed to be a Christian virgin, as did many (and do now, I know some), but I think my fiance and I put Bill and Monica to shame as to our activities. "Anything but..." But we NEVER had sex during that time lol.

They ALL destroyed a young woman's life, at least in the shorter term. Glad that she's come out somewhat on top by now, but I'm sure she would rather have had a normal life, able to date freely, work freely, socialize freely, just BE free. They took all of that from her. Who was going to hire her, date her, marry her, befriend her? Clinton used her, as many men use women, young and naive or not, to get sexual favors. Not really news. It happened to me many times, and from slicker than Bill. It's always been the norm! I thought at the time that Linda Tripp was the lowest form of life on the planet and still do. She is portrayed so well here, just as I remember her.

IF this was a coup attempt, as the Anne Coulter character says (I never heard that then, not sure about it), then there are few depths some in the GOP won't sink to to take lawful power from the elected.

Anyway, the characters are all exactly as I remember, although some of them may be a media stereotype. But I'm trusting Monica as a producer, to approve of the characterizations. Plus I heard about many of these exchanges and characterizations, later if not sooner (everyone wrote a book or talked to Diane Sawyer!). And Paula Jones *was* a dumb redneck, another naive woman Clinton used, then was used by the other side, styled, coached, and put under the knife to be more credible/hot (why does attractive mean more credible?).

Anne Coulter really is this reprehensible (just watch the innumerable clips of her), another butt skirted, bleach blonde bimbo operative of the GOP. Like she never went under a desk in her rise to pundit and presidential advisor/excuser? And, esp at the time of this scandal, congress was still considering female staffers free game. How many of those hypocrites who voted to impeach or backed Starr, had done the same or worse, in government offices, on govvy planes, in govvy hotel rooms, on govvy confabs on exotic islands?

The Bill Clinton portrayal is not so good, but so far, he's not in it much. I don't see the wisdom in Clive Owen as Clinton. I think Monica truly was a very, very sheltered, lonely, naive young woman (perfect prey for Clinton), used and abused by everyone (bears saying again). But Clinton, bright as he was, didn't count on the power of a crush/love of such a girl and she didn't have strong female attorneys backing her up like the other high profile accusers. I have always figured that the FBI and Starr abused her worse than Clinton EVER did (after all, Monica thought they were expressing love). I would normally not say that, being someone who had too many MeToo moments (and much worse than this), but this is exactly why women (including me) don't like to report rape, sexual assault or harassment. No one believes you, it's too public, and the cost is too high. At that time, we hadn't progressed beyond that. Not so sure we have improved much now, even with MeToo.

This series, just like the real life scandal, shows some of the very worst of our country and the dark levels it has failed up to. It is not hard to see a path from this to our own times and division. Talk about division! I remember my office, when Starr's report came out, and how polarized everyone was. Most against Clinton and Monica ("stupid bimbo"), esp men. I was thoroughly disgusted by Clinton, but at the same time saw it all as one giant hypocrisy whose time had passed before the election. I sadly admit that I voted for Clinton, even in the face of everything that was known (and also his re-election), but I'm more sad that he turned out to be a damaging, deregulating, overly centrist Democrat than I am that he had a consensual happy ending in the Oval Office and was the 4 billionth man in history to string a woman/girl along for sex or abuse his position for sex. If people put as much time into actual politics and activism as they did into Monica, we'd have a much better country today. And I hope that's the lesson taken from this and the OJ story. But I doubt it, as people continue to watch the Jenner/Kardashians' latest reality show, and cling on their every insipid word in social media...

The Father (I) (2020)

Living This Film

[10/10 · 6 October 2021]

I usually won't watch films about this subject, due to real life. Our family has had to deal with a lot of dementia, genetically, and early onset. So I have avoided the subject for 60yrs.

But quality films like this one are extremely difficult to find these days, and I figured Anthony Hopkins would be good for it (didn't know he won an Oscar for it, as I don't keep up with the mostly corrupt awards industry), so I had to give it a go. I was on the edge of my seat from the beginning, and stayed there until the very end. It is the most realistic portrayal of dementia I have ever seen. My dad is stuck on me being 35 (I am 68), so he's in a time machine not in his control. This film brought it very close, and helped me understand my dad's mind.

I rarely give a film 10*, but this one is close to being perfect in every way.

My favorite Hopkins film/performance is Remains of the Day. But this may be a new one, although much more difficult to re-watch. Hopkins is masterful here, as ever, but he's calling on all of his acting experience to deliver an effortless (seemingly!) performance. Nothing over the top, no melodrama, just one of the best crafted characters I've seen. He has help from a great script, direction, editing, sets, and co-stars, but the focus is Anthony. His character is as broad as it is deep, but so skilled is Hopkins that it seems effortless. I'm very grateful that Hopkins agreed to do this very difficult role, at his age. He could just sit on his laurels now.

My age and health, as well as family members, begs many questions about aging and quality of life, which this film inherently, but without stating, highlights. I hope we can find ways for the mind to keep up with the longevity of our bodies, or provide for an acceptable alternative to warehousing our endless last days of confusion.

Our Brand Is Crisis (2015)

Offensive, Boring, Slow

[1/10 · 4 October 2021]

What century is this? Entertainment using people Americans think corrupt and backward (stereotypes) as the butt of jokes is a sad, elitist commentary on us. Wow, Sandra Bullock is a producer of this movie, so lot to answer for here. George Clooney also produced (but is not in it). Clooney helmed the political thriller, Syriana, so he gets some pass for that. Bullock, not so much. I hope Clooney just wasn't paying attention here. You won't find his usual wit and depth influencing this film, so don't come looking for it.

Bolivia and other South American countries (esp neighboring) have endured centuries of exploitation, genocide, and cultural denial, much as Native Americans have, so there is nothing funny about corrupt politicians fighting for an election to keep doing the same, just so American politicos can stroke their egos. Even if you do think this is funny, there is barely anything comedic here. The funniest lines are at the expense of the "poor, backward" citizens of Bolivia. If you run out of ideas, just throw in some racist/clueless jokes. The pace is glacial, the script is boring, and characters unlikable.

What were Bullock and Billy Bob Thornton (well, Bad Santa, so never mind) thinking? Payday? Bullock has been looking for a comeback since forever, but this won't do it. Her script choices have been some of the worst ever for a former star. This one is just insulting and I won't ever look at her the same way again.

Scenes from a Marriage (2021)

Improved as it Went, But Less Than 1973 Series

[8/10 · 30 September 2021]

Edit after Ep 5 (final): The series got better for me in episodes 4 and 5, and there are twists, with the two characters more dimensional. Episode 5 is a tour de force and I'm sad it's over. JC is more relatable, although perhaps her coldness in the early episodes was part of her conflict and unhappiness. There is a distinct and searing pain of being the one who leaves, but is rarely recognized in society or on film, but if it's here, it's just too subtle. I also haven't been re-watching the 1973 series along with this, which may have helped. I have to say that JC and Isaac do fantastic sex scenes. Not just erotic, but warmly emotional, very real, not p*rn. I'm not a big fan of requisite sex scenes (HBO is famous for them, esp those that don't further the plot) but these add to the drama, although they aren't necessary to it. I still stand by my previous review, below, esp re Liv Ullman, but glad this series improved as it went, rather than the other way around. I am raising my rating from a 7 (6.5) to an 8 (7.5), however.

Original review after Ep 3: I've been re-watching the original along with the new, and this is based on the first 3 HBO episodes. What can you say about Liv Ullman (an It Girl of her time)? She was spectacular in the original (and in so many other things; just complete mastery of her craft), as was her co-star. Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain are competent here (perhaps Isaac more so) as JC lacks the subtlety and physical mastery of Ullman. JC relies on her time worn faces and pregnant pauses while Ullman relies on...acting (with no botox).

Perhaps a comparison to the 1973 Swedish series is a bit unfair, but inevitable. It's an iconic series, by an iconic director and star, with the same plot (if gender switched and modernized), so a comparison IS fair. Poor JC, though, to be compared to one of the best actors of all time! JC Mira is even more cold than usual here and not a likeable character in any way. It's too bad Isaac is the amazing good guy and she is the villain. The original was more even, more believable, as they both were to blame for their marital problems. Ullman's Mira comes off a bit better, as the 'victim', but Isaac is downright holy in the new version. Uncomfortable to say the least.

It's also hard to really understand this without the context of 1973. Women's Lib was going full steam, wives were still often trapped in the roles of the 1950s. It was the Me Decade and people were suddenly expecting more. More romance, more sex, more happiness for me, me, me. And that is all lost here, even with the surface modernizing.

I was married when this came out, and we suffered from the same illness, and I have again, yet I couldn't really grab onto the remake or relate to it. Perhaps because JC's character and lines are so extreme and inexplicable. Not very real compared to what I went through (I played the JC role). But the original was very easy to get my head around and relate to. The current writers didn't keep the part of the script they should have and went off the rails a bit with her part. I've rarely been so unable to relate to a character.

I would have given this a 6.5, if possible, and that may be generous, but you don't see this kind of TV anymore. I wish there would be more shows with deep character development with time to explore motifs. And you must engage your brain. It's brave, it's slow, and if you are a teen or young adult, you won't get it and be bored out of your mind. Unless you've been married a while, at least. And it's not much fun, but like a car wreck, you have to watch.

Edit re multiracial couples: As always, I am dismayed to see people complaining about this. What century is this? How clueless of people to complain about non-white characters ("modernizing", "woke") while, in many cases, not even realizing they are racist, who shrink in horror at the KKK and other groups, while speaking the very party lines of said organizations.

Nine Perfect Strangers (2021)

Boring, Nothing, Irresponsible Series

[1/10 · 24 September 2021]

So mad at myself for watching the whole 1st season. I mean, I knew it was probably horrible a few episodes back, but I kept thinking the promise of the 1st episode would pan out. It didn't.

Nicole Kidman's worst role, ever. Terrible fake Russian accent and just one dimensional. I usually like her, but in this role she couldn't take the leap. Mealy mouthed controlling guru person. Ewwwww.

Way too, too much time spent on the grieving family. Episode after episode, same ol' stuff. None of that was ever resolved. Just bor-ring. The interesting InstaGirl and her husband could have been used more and had a good story line. Like do therapy on a social media addict!

Ironic that Kidman would act in such a blatant condemnation of "Western psychology" after being married to Tom Cruise, who lectures about his Scientology beliefs that all psychiatry is bad. I just am shocked. Not to mention, it's incredibly irresponsible to even suggest that dosing people with mushrooms, LSD, Ecstasy, etc is even a good or therapeutic idea. I'm a psychonaut from the 60s, and still use mushrooms, but you have to take care, esp with LSD, etc. And what she did to them, leaving them, taking it herself, and all for a self-serving reason, is nothing a show should give an unclear message about. Esp a show dealing with suicide (not one, but TWO). Not to mention the way Carmel was treated. I realize that psychiatry is imperfect, but for the mentally ill (esp violent), you need something besides hallucinogens and vague, New Age mantras and silliness. I agree that psychedelics should be allowed to be researched and the laws relaxed, and they can help, in certain circumstances (NOT the truly mentally ill) to facilitate therapy, but this show was just WAY, way out there, and never did come down to Earth. Like a bunch of dumb 14yr olds making a show. In responsible hands (NOT Masha's), they can do good, but this is not it and just adds to the stigma it is seemingly trying to end.

I don't know how to take this show. Is it a parody of amateur New Age gurus? Or is it being serious (with the lukewarm "twist" at the end)? Plea for greater acceptance of psychedelics? Or kind of horror? Or just trying to be edgy? I can't get a read on it at all and it's frustrating. I'm going to go take huge doses of magic mushrooms, LSD, Ecstasy, and DMT and think about it as I experience ego death with my guru... Seriously, I lost a sibling to suicide last Christmas, my best friend, and a parent to it some years ago, so it is just bizarre and troubling, suicide being the main thread through the episodes. How NOT to accept death that is already, by virtue of suicide, incredibly hard to grieve and accept. Obviously none of the series creators or writers have ever dealt with it themselves and if they have, then shame on them.

Dune (2021)

Rather Watch the 1984 Dune

[1/10 · 24 September 2021]

Which is no high praise for that version, but I'd watch it 10 times over this poor excuse for a Dune film (or any film). Don't believe the 10* shill reviews here (per usual, why doesn't IMDB do something about this; it's a huge problem), this is a real $165mil clunker. Yet another film in the current tradition of pure hype, throw money, have blockbuster, that Hollywood has become. This is such a disappointment. As someone who has read the books several times and a huge fan, uuuughhhh. It's really slow, been done before, and no real ending. I presume there will be sequels? I can see a lot of movie goers will be upset, esp after sitting through a terrible film, then no ending. And it's not always faithful to the books, in ways which don't add anything or move the film forward. And no Feyd!

For faithful fans, the gold standard is the 2000-2003 Sy-Fy miniseries, which covers the 3 books. The effects are done on a TV budget, but the worms, palaces, and other sets are top notch. It is very faithful to the books while being well paced and absorbing. I own this set and have watched it many times over the years. With William Hurt, Susan Sarandon, Saskia Reeves, Ian McNeice, and Alec Newman, it's a top notch cast and the acting is great. Wonderful character creation by all involved.

Conversely, the acting in this one is terrible and for some reason, a lot of yelling is involved. Timothée Chalamet is a very lackluster Paul Atreides and gives his usual childish performance. Oscar Isaac is not even effective as Duke Leto, and if Isaac is not good, then there are very deep problems with this film. Rebecca Ferguson rounds out the film as Lady Jessica, but she, too, is just so lackluster. These 3 have the bulk of the film, so the advertised actors are pretty much cameos, as the bait and switch by the studio.

The effects and sets are unimaginative and have nothing new to show. The ships are ho-hum and don't seem like what Herbert described, and I never really saw the worm (will take a lot to beat the worms in 1984 and 2000 versions). I did fall asleep towards the end, so maybe I didn't catch the full worm. Even the Freemen blue eyes are terrible, for which there is no excuse. They use some horrible gray digital grading that just sucks the little life that there is out of this college project (and not even good for that). The desert is NOT gray! Plus the outdoor scene of the Atreides green home planet is not green.

I can't believe that in 2021 they couldn't do a better job for a whopping budget of $165mil? This is a travesty of gigantic proportion! I doubt they will recover the budget and don't deserve to. Just no excuse. You have been warned. At least stay home and watch it on HBO, if you subscribe, rather than risk going to the theater and spending so much. Trust me, it's not worth it. This is the worst film of 2021 I have seen. Didn't help that I watched the gorgeous Foundation premiere right before...

Y: The Last Man (2021)

BAD Ripoff of Battlestar Galactical (2004 Reboot)

[1/10 · 22 September 2021]

I finally figured it out... same exact plot of BSG, when the Cylons come and bring the apocalypse. This show even mentions (homage?) the Sec of Education as next in line to succeed the president, but here it's a run of the mill congresswoman. At least BSG had Mary McDonnell as SOE turned president, who is an expressive, original multi-faceted actor. Here we have the most interesting character of Y as president, which isn't saying much because she's not, really (and tied with Agent 355 for that honor).

Instead of Battlestar Gallactica and the Fleet, we have the Pentagon as the lifeboat of government. The Pentagon can't make faster than light jumps, which is a shame. There's nothing here that is engaging, tense, or interesting. Like the writers were on "just put out a middling series, that hits as many target demos as possible"). Sadly, there are no wise seniors, like BSG's Commander Adama and his Exec, Colonel Saul Tigh. We would need our elders, who have the experience and sometimes vision to lead us through or at least as a calming force.

For BSG's Starbuck we have Agent 355, but with no personality and she's humorless. We don't get the swagger, intensity, and completely loose cannon that makes Starbuck captivating, nor do we have her important relationships which add great depth and interest.

For BSG's Baltar we get the Last Man, again, devoid of humor or the wit which made the hated Baltar not only tolerable but welcome (imagining what James Callis would do with the part of the Last Man; certainly not chasing monkeys around! (he'd be after a tactical nuke lol). The Last Man is a juvenile grown man, who doesn't have a lick of sense before the "event" and certainly is just irritating and more lacking in common sense after. Why is he even in the show? To make us not want to watch. And I hate shows which have to resort to cliche animals, esp monkeys, to make up for lack of plot/direction/writing/acting.

For the Cylons, we have Karens lol. Imagine, a world left with most of the Karens and conspiracy theory girls surviving. The only thing this show gets right is that if we did suffer such a fate, we wouldn't bond together as we would have in years past, to focus on the survival/rebuilding tasks at hand. Sad. Hopefully the giggles of the fun of conspiracy theories and personality cults would quickly fade as the realities of surviving kicked in and a constant diet of those websites and news channels was replaced by finding safety, firewood, food, water, shelter. Ditto the fashion liberals that us real libs love to hate.

A big issue this series doesn't show is the fact that woman still only comprise a fraction of the professional jobs that men do which are sorely needed after this sort of event (engineers, scientists, etc). Or even jobs like power plant operator, etc. It's better than it once was, but still, without men, it would be twice (or more) as hard to staff up the important jobs of rebuilding and science, medicine, etc. Not through any fault of the women and women are just as capable in these jobs, it's just that our society prioritizes men in STEM over women. The huge problem would be IT, because women are still so unwelcome and such a minority. I speak from experience.

Back to the BSG comparison. BSG had some of the best ensemble acting in any series, ever. Such a well crafted series bible, superb writing and direction, and the freedom to run with it. So I would suggest just finding BSG instead of this lousy rerun of unoriginal ideas. Plus you get 5 seasons and films to binge. No waiting around for the next episode or season.

Clickbait (2021)

Clickbait Script/Characters Ruin Good Prod Values

[5/10 · 25 August 2021]

I had high hopes for this into the 1st episode, but then the extremely unlikable characters started piling up (the almost likeable ones are so weak that I can't stand them, either). The acting is full B horror movie. And things don't make sense with plot dead ends, or unexplained. Lot of cliches. Typical bad network TV fare, which NF should not try to emulate.

I'm in the 3rd episode but only because I'm doing other things. Probably won't finish the season because my main reaction is wishing all the characters would get done in. Esp the cra cra sister, who is a good example of why you shouldn't overact. Did anyone notice that they cast this with some of the most odd looking actors? They have amazing/interesting faces, but when unlikable characters pull all the overacting faces pulled here, just uber B horror movie reactions. If this was an arty/edgy series, they would fit (and hopefully better acting), but it's just...clickbait.