i saw le doulos not even a month ago and thought it was kinda bad.
this is no different which im still shocked i find both to be weak since i really liked melville's other film, le cercle rouge.i like that one because its big and stealthy, both those others films are more interested in the after math of the crime rather then the build up to the crime(le cercle rouge is more then that but still) and thats fine but the way they go about it feel lackluster and even tho they are directed extremely well with great cinematography and performances, it all still feels rather empty. it doesn't help that this one, un flic has a transgender character....in 1972 so you can imagine how well it handles the treatment of that character.
(watch my new film, vacation intruder: https://boxd.it/fTRFOd )
Recently Reviewed
Laugh but there is something so atmospheric and interesting about it.
Sure, the animation isn't good but its style allows for a surreal vibe and the voice acting is fine. I think its first two acts are actually pretty fun about a family. Its third act is where it loses me a bit but its decent.
Its better then half of the new releases this year.
(Watch my filmography: https://boxd.it/2A45h )
Suprised at how divisive this one is and i've read some reviews of various people i follow and while i find some of those very ignorant and rather strange since the film is so heavy handed in its themes and ideas.
To be fair its all about perspective and we can't all see or witness the same things even on the first go. Mostly what im trying to say is im both suprised by the divisiveness of this project but i also understand.Schoenbrun is indulgent in their style and televised aesthetic but to me it works because this and their last two films don't really glorify it or at least not intentionally. Im 17 and i love films so it resonates to me very well in losing yourself in the screens and programming. To ignore reality and seek deep in works of fiction.
Obviously i hope i never go that deep.To be fair, schoenbrun's aesthetic and style does speak to me very deeply because its a realm of both the televised but also the ones who can be trapped in there.
Im not for animal violence or abuse but I laughted everytime someone was unhappy with a cat or dog being in danger or killed.
I can't stress enough how im not for animal abuse but the only people who care that much about a fictional dog are exactly the type of people who would live in a suburban neighbourhood.
(Watch my new film, <a href="https://boxd.it/fTmWFv">vacation intruder </a>)
If I took a shot of alcohol for every film thats about violence against woman partially or mainly and the main female character is a 1 dimensional tool to get raped and for the male protagonist to have sex with then I'd think i wouldn't even go to hell or heaven, i would just get so drunk i receive superpowers like six-pack.
(Watch my new film <a href="https://boxd.it/fTmWFv">vacation intruder ) </a>
maybe shouldn't watch something of this element in the mental state i've been in the last few days.
maybe its because of that mental state, i can recognize its strengths.
love is dead or at least, death can be turned into love and vice versa.
its been weird, for me its the worse option but its not in an instance, its slow, torturous and empty.(watch my new film vacation intruder: https://boxd.it/fTRFOd )
For a debute, the cinematography is excellent and a lot of these shots are fantastic while the actors give good performances.
What bugs me tho is i didn't fully connect with a lot of elements. I dig the vibe of the performance and also the enviroment, the gusts of wind but it all feels rather uninteresting from a thematic and character standpoint. Not to say they are terrible but they are as agnes varda films go, doable and just fine.
(Watch my film <a href="https://boxd.it/fTmWFv">vacation intruder ) </a>
not as good as the first film but still excellent in all things.
the fight choreography, the comedy..its there it just doesn't hit the same because the thematic depth just isn't there.(watch my new film vacation intruder: https://boxd.it/fTRFOd )
while the first is the most entertaining and i would even say it is a lot tighter and time efficent, spider man is still nothing to scoff at arguably as a lot more layers to it. for example, mj and peter's relationship in the first film is really good but this one allows them to flip and flop inbetween scenes and its excellent.
only minus is that i didn't notice any chairman mao on a mug like the first film.(watch my new film, vacation intruder: https://boxd.it/fTRFOd )
feels like its trying to be kiyoshi kurosawa's cure from both an aesthetic and ideas. i do think its still trying its own thing but its also stuck into repeating a lot of things from the first film and also just leave a lot of the cool things out of it like sadako calling people before they die.
its shot pretty well and i think it has a great atmosphere but thats all it really has.(watch my new film: https://boxd.it/fTRFOd )
David F. Sandberg is not interested in doing anything suprising at all. If anything, his style works best in a shorter form because he's really saying nothing at all and this movie kinda reminded me why I stopped watching these types of films. No matter the mastery of horror (which they rarely have) its always in service of nothing, despite horror being one of the most political and interesting genres to be conceived.
(Watgh my new film <a href="https://boxd.it/fTmWFv">vacation intruder</a> )
The script is as tight as spider man's ass, the cinematography and directed as big as the misogynistic hatred for mj from spider man fans and as goofy as Richard nixon's evil.
Sam raimi's spider man swings from scene to scene but leaves nothing behind but an excellent parallel story about a hero and villain.
Do we need origin stories? Maybe, to know someone and to understand someone you'd have to go to the beginning. While there is obviously some nostalgia poisoning in terms of marvel movies in the 2000s like daredevil and other mediocrity, films like ang Lee's hulk and sam raimi's spider man films prove that statement wrong by being just great films.While the quipps of the mcu don't bug me, they often feel targeted towards millennial watchers but thats not inherently the problem. What is the problem is that the way most of the directors inside the mcu direct them LIKE jokes and I think raimi knows quips and certain elements about superheroes are goofy but like any good comic, it takes them seriously.
I don't think any other spider man film has an issue with taking itself seriously but the lack of different tones and styles downplay them.Tobey maguire himself as an actor is the most polarizing thing in this trilogy but I think his weird and off beat line deliver serves the goofy nature of a lot of the scenes which is juxtaposition with the score and directed which creates this perfect mixture of big fun superhero action and goofiness.
(Watch my filmography: <a href="https://boxd.it/2A45h">boxd.it/2A45h</a> )
