Sweet Square
ˈkämyənəst
Brutal, but true. It would take 2 hours to go 40 miles at best.
Although on the bright side American highways did give us the film Speed.
Brutal, but true. It would take 2 hours to go 40 miles at best.
And The Cannonball Run franchise
Although on the bright side American highways did give us the film Speed.
Thanks for this review. I promised myself years ago that I needed to catch this again. That's tonight sorted.Hoop Dreams (1994)
A pretty remarkable documentary about two high school basketball players and their dream of playing in the NBA. I am not a massive basketball fan, but the film is still excellent as it’s more about life and growing up than basketball really.
8.5/10
Do people ever wonder what drives their enjoyment? Movies are a subjective and personal experience.
I couldn’t finish uncut gems. It was exhausting to watch and i just wanted the streets to end for me and whoever the main character was. I may go back and Watch it and enjoy but first watch it didn’t work for me.
I get they aren’t exactly the same but I loved punch drunk love. On reflection , I would say a part of me identifys a lot with the main character. Surrounded by family smothering him and not letting him have a voice , while he struggles with rage (inability to express feelings and nobody listens) and loneliness.
Seeing sandler in possibly his first serious role , where he showed he’s actually a quality actor , was a part of it. I love when comedians (like Carey in Truman show) play serious roles and just nail them.
If a person were after a recommendation for a tense nail-biter thriller, I’d recommend Sorcerer and Uncut Gems. For Uncut Gems not having clear explosive stakes, it would be the one I’d recommend if someone didn’t want an action type of film. It’s certainly not for everybody. Maybe I’d also recommend Free Solo, which I found almost impossibly suspenseful. I had to stop it and google what happened to Alex Hannold before watching the second half. Most people don’t want that kind of icy terror, but when you do…Do people ever wonder what drives their enjoyment? Movies are a subjective and personal experience.
I couldn’t finish uncut gems. It was exhausting to watch and i just wanted the streets to end for me and whoever the main character was. I may go back and Watch it and enjoy but first watch it didn’t work for me.
I get they aren’t exactly the same but I loved punch drunk love. On reflection , I would say a part of me identifys a lot with the main character. Surrounded by family smothering him and not letting him have a voice , while he struggles with rage (inability to express feelings and nobody listens) and loneliness.
Seeing sandler in possibly his first serious role , where he showed he’s actually a quality actor , was a part of it. I love when comedians (like Carey in Truman show) play serious roles and just nail them.
Yeah, just "a bit"Watched Poor Things last night. Went in blind and thought it was great. I always enjoy films that are a bit outside the box. It was aesthetically very fun and some great performances as well.
Yeah, just "a bit"
The Beekeeper
Jason Statham, a former anonymous social ops member, comes out of retirement to take down a corrupt company who scam his elderly carer, who goes on to commit suicide. A dumb but fun action movie and Stath is great in the action scenes but whereas movies like John Wick are compelling because Keanu always feels like he is on the brink of defeat, this just had Statham use the infinite life cheat and blitzes through every obstacle 6/10
Thought the same. Think relief after even worse films played a part. Think it was very fan servicey which probably helped.Spiderman: No Way Home. The third Sony/Marvel Spiderman movie, from 2021. Spiderman's identity is outed, which messes things up for him and his friends in their private life, so he asks Dr. Strange for a spell to make people forget his identity. That goes wrong, the multiverse comes to visit, and chaos ensues. Ish.
A total bore and poor film. The stakes are as low as ever, and this time even extent to the trigger of the whole story (some silly mistake over something fairly small). Of course, 'multiverse' also just means previous Spiderman franchises, meaning that the multiverse chaos is really very limited in scope (maybe that still needs hiding). The action is uninteresting, and sometimes total visual gibberish, and the random destruction as off-putting as ever. (At least they mention that, but in a way that totally repeats the same plot point in earliet Avengers movies.) The plot also has far too many issues of convenience, and the film just isn't funny, which was at least what saved previous iterations (well, a little). I mean, I could see clearly where I was supposed to laugh and it tapped into a sense of humor I usually appreciated; but it was all just so lame and tame that it in most cases just wasn't actually funny.
A total waste of a bunch of pretty good actors, too. I can't believe this got reviewed so well: was that just the relief after apparently even worse Marvel films (which I haven't seen), fandom, or am I missing something here? 2/5
What did you expect from a Statham film?I couldn’t watch more than 20 minutes of it.
So fecking stupid, an internet scam and Statham goes to burn down an office, why the feck the scammers got an office better than Google is the other thing.
And what’s with him always using bees and hornets metaphors. Yeah I get it man you keep bees please shut up about it.
Felt like I was watching Bollywood.
I think this got a good reception upon release simply because there was a lot of nostalgia in there, and to be fair som of those parts were pretty good. It's not really a good film though, and much of it doesn't make much sense. I liked seeing Dafoe and Molina in their roles though.Spiderman: No Way Home. The third Sony/Marvel Spiderman movie, from 2021. Spiderman's identity is outed, which messes things up for him and his friends in their private life, so he asks Dr. Strange for a spell to make people forget his identity. That goes wrong, the multiverse comes to visit, and chaos ensues. Ish.
A total bore and poor film. The stakes are as low as ever, and this time even extent to the trigger of the whole story (some silly mistake over something fairly small). Of course, 'multiverse' also just means previous Spiderman franchises, meaning that the multiverse chaos is really very limited in scope (maybe that still needs hiding). The action is uninteresting, and sometimes total visual gibberish, and the random destruction as off-putting as ever. (At least they mention that, but in a way that totally repeats the same plot point from earlier Avengers movies.) The plot also has far too many issues of convenience, and the film just isn't funny, which was at least what saved previous iterations (well, a little). I mean, I could see clearly where I was supposed to laugh and it tapped into a sense of humor I usually like; but it was all just so lame and tame that it in most cases just wasn't actually funny.
A total waste of a bunch of pretty good actors, too. I can't believe this got reviewed so well: was that just the relief after apparently even worse Marvel films (which I haven't seen), fandom, or am I missing something here? 2/5
Yeah, someone like Dafoe is always great to see, but he's got almost nothing to work with here. It's like a tiny summary of his earlier role as The Green Goblin - without the character development.I think this got a good reception upon release simply because there was a lot of nostalgia in there, and to be fair som of those parts were pretty good. It's not really a good film though, and much of it doesn't make much sense. I liked seeing Dafoe and Molina in their roles though.
The part 2 that's in cinemas now, or did you watch part 2 and meant it needs a part 3?Dune
I struggled a lot with this at the start, but when I got into it, when I did it was decent, but I was not blown away with it.
At time I thought I was watching a Star Wars film, then I did some research, Star Wars took a lot from the original book apparently.
The acting was good over all, I am a huge fan of Rebecca Ferguson, the filming was amazing, the music was hit and miss, but yeah overall a decent watch.
Needs a solid part 2
7/10
I watched Part 1The part 2 that's in cinemas now, or did you watch part 2 and meant it needs a part 3?
Although I suppose the answer is Yes in both cases! (I.e., 1 and 2 are both incomplete without their sequels.)
I just could never believe Penelope Cruz as a Ferrari 125 S.Ferrari
Whilst this was well made and generally well acted, especially by Penelope Cruz (let's forget about the dodgy accents), the from just didn't win me over for some reason. There was a lack of engaging drama and I just wanted it to end by the third act. Felt let down by the return of Mann 6/10
Italy is just amazing. Everything about the place is world class.The Pope Exorcist
Friedkin both started and ended the serious the exorcist film. So Julius Avery decides 1980’s post punk Europe is the next best destination.
Watching Russell Crowe drive a Ferrari brand scooter to We Care A Lot by Faith No More is truly cinematic. In fact he drives that scooter all the way from the Vatican to Spain without stopping.
Importantly the film makes the correct choice of saying all Christian mysticism is true. We spend a total of 5 minutes in a hospital trying to use nerd science before it’s right back to good old catholic demon fighting.
The supporting does a very solid job but
Crowe as the former WW2 partisan turned priest really makes the film into something great. There’s a moment where the camera just holds on a 59 year old overweight Crowe floating in mid air and it’s a really unique sight.
For what the film is trying to do it doesn’t get much better than this. A great way to spend 2 hours. Oh and the books are good!
9/10
In general, Morgan Freeman's filmography is a lot more miss than hit.The Ritual Killer
A detective on the verge of retirement teams with a professor of African Studies to track down a serial killer who is performing the ancient black magic practice of Muti.
I was hoping this would be decent with Morgan Freeman being in it, but alas it was not to be.
The acting was poor at best even from Morgan, the story was decent just badly executed .
Sad when great actor and organ is a great actor, takes films like this, he cant need the money.
3/10
What did you expect from a Statham film?
I watched Part 1
Crowe establishes himself as Italian by telling the devil his greatest fear is France winning the world cup. The film reminded me of the first Blade movie but with priests.Italy is just amazing. Everything about the place is world class.
I think this got a good reception upon release simply because there was a lot of nostalgia in there, and to be fair som of those parts were pretty good. It's not really a good film though, and much of it doesn't make much sense. I liked seeing Dafoe and Molina in their roles though.
It’s so much fun to watch. It isn’t trying to be scary but instead give the audience a good time. It’s got enough self awareness and quality to make the balancing act between funny, goofy and “serious” work. The director describes it as almost buddy cop movie. I wouldn’t go that far but there is one scene which reminded me of Father Ted.The film sounds incredible
Yeh!! Such a good film. One of my QT favourites, along with Jackie Brown and Pulp Fiction. He makes such good hangout films.Once Upon A Time In Hollywood
Have to say, I really enjoyed this. Set in an alternate universe where Sharon Tate isn't murdered by the Manson Family, the film centres around Leonardo Dicaprio's character, Rick Dalton, a fading Hollywood star, and his erstwhile stunt double, Cliff, played by Brad Pitt. Rick happens to live next door to Tate and her husband, Roman Polanski (who isn't a certified nonce at this time) in the Hollywood Hills, but their paths rarely cross. The film flits between what's going on with Rick and his career (on the downward trajectory), and Tate's (who's a rising star). Tate seems really sweet and naive, whereas Rick is a bit more cynical, having been at the top of his profession at one point and having to do spaghetti westerns to keep his name out there and pay the bills.
The scenes are really well done, the pacing is excellent (nearly 3 hours long and I wasn't bored for a second), and all the characters are pretty likeable. Even the Manson cultists come across as parodies (if you've ever seen the Seinfeld episodes when Kramer tries to get his script taken up by someone in Hollywood, you'll remember the stoner in the truck) and you don't feel any hostility towards them.They are sort of in the background throughout the film, with Manson only making a very brief appearance, and their murderous intentions at the end of the film kind of come out of the blue. I certainly didn't feel like there was a build up of tension or anything.
The meta of Tarantino showing the inner workings of movie making by making a movie about a struggling actor, is very enjoyable. Students of film making will be studying his movies centuries from now and still finding Easter eggs and nods to other films, actors, directors, etc. However, despite all the hidden stuff that interests movie nerds, he never fails to address the number one reason we watch movies: we want to be entertained. And he hits the spot with this one.
9/10.