Stars: 3.5/5 ⭐️ So, this movie is probably like a lot of others. It follows a criminal, Abe, played by Frank Grillo, and a nurse, Paul Booker, played by Anthony Mackie, as Paul's wife is taken from him, by Abe's brother so that Paul can free Abe from the hospital, and turn him back over. But it gets complicated, when the police get on their tail, especially because the police are corrupt, and are trying to kill Abe, as he has a file that will expose them for being crooked. Also, as a side note, Paul's wife is pregnant for the entire movie, as it happens over one day, and the climactic scene is Paul helping his wife give birth, and Abe confronting Lt. Regina Lewis, played by Marcia Gay Harden, who runs the crooked operation out of their precinct, even though she does say that it goes even higher than her. Most of this movie is about Abe and Paul on the run, which is kinda boring because it feels like it's back and forth Paul and Abe run, then they go try to kill people, then they run, and then try to kill people, then run, and then try to kill people. This is not to say it's bad, but the scenes themselves seem padded because this movie doesn't even crack 90 minutes. Which I believe it could, if it had some more depth, and possibly a little subplot, that ties into everything. The plot itself, in a sense, feels surface level, and with more time, I feel like we could have learned more about the characters, as there is a little flashback in the film, and they could have used it more. What was Paul's life like leading up to this, especially with a pregnant wife? Was it stressful? Scary? Happy? What about Abe? The only major thing we learn about him is that his dad was killed by his mom, who was sent away, so he has to raise his little brother. How did he get into a life of crime? How did he find out that the police are corrupt? How did he get into so much debt? There are so many questions that the film could have answered, which would have hit the 90 minutes, since they were three minutes away, as well as make the characters more solid, and three-dimensional. This movie kinda feels like it was made for older generations, like boomers, and late Gen X'ers. The soundtrack is older songs, and it feels kinda like a retro action-cop type movie, where the criminals are good, and the police are bad, so maybe that's why. Point Blank is actually an adaptation of a movie by the same name, which was released in 2010, as a French action thriller, which seems to follow the same plot. This movie did well according to critics and audience, so maybe adapting a 2000s French movie wasn't the best idea, especially since it seemed to have not made any changes, because the French film is actually shorter by five minutes. So, in all, Point Blank isn't that great of a movie, but it isn't horrible, it's just not probably going to be memorable.
0 Comments
Stars: 4.5/5 ⭐️ Okay, what the heck was that ending? I loved it. The twist came out of nowhere, and for the few seconds I thought about it, I couldn't think of any plot holes. Following John Hartley, played by Dwayne Johnson, Nolan Booth, played by Ryan Reynolds, and The Bishop, played by Gal Godot, it chronicles their fight against each other to secure three golden eggs, that were placed with Cleopatra when she died, that now retail at 300 million if the whole set is brought together. I'm just going to get the major twist out of the way, right now, so spoiler, John Hartley and The Bishop are a couple, and they've been working together, and they're both The Bishop, and they've been conning Nolan, cause he is the only one who knows where the third egg is. However, there are so many other parts of this movie that are great in an action-comedy. First, the way it's shown is awesome, with all these shots just moving fast through places, allowing the audience to see the scene quite quickly. The dialogue is funny, and you can tell all three of the actors are just having a ball with their dialogue, Gal especially. She just seems like she was having a blast any time you saw her on-screen. I think as well, all the fight scenes are great, because of the energy that the characters bring. Personally, I don't think any of the fight scenes are that special, but it's the actors that make it entertaining. Even the car chase scene, which I am never a fan of, was fun. It was quick, concise, and action-packed for sure. I think what makes this movie great is that you don't know what is going to happen, so you could even say that this movie is a mystery, because there is more than just one twist at the end, even though that is the most shocking twist. The movie also covers a lot of ground, and in other reviews, I've mentioned how some movies are fast, some are slow, and some are both? Well, Red Notice is a fast-paced movie, and what is really good is that it feels like there is little to no fat in this movie. Cause, it's an hour and 55 minutes, but this movie could have been way longer, and thankfully it wasn't. It's not like the movie dragged, but it did feel like there was a lull at the end of the second act, leading up to the Gal/Dwayne twist. And speaking of Gal and Dwayne, and Ryan, each other them have very different style movies, and you would think that they don't work all meshed together, but I would argue, and I think the fact that they're so different is what makes it better. Dwayne and Ryan's characters and comedy style are natural foils of each other, and for Gal, this feels like a breakout for her, because we haven't seen her really in a comedic role. So, in all, even though the critics do not seem to like Red Notice, I think that it's got a lot of the right parts to make this a memorable action movie. Stars: 5/5 ⭐️ No. It's not the restaurant, this is a movie. A hilarious movie, that I think still holds up even now, if you look at it as a satire, which I can't tell if it is, and even if it isn't it's still a really good movie. Following English teacher Howard, played by Kevin Kline, it's about him, being outed by one of his former students during their Oscar speech, even though, he's straight! But the real question is: Is he really? The answer is no! He's gay! And he only realizes this after kissing another man, the day before his wedding to his fiancé Emily, who I felt so sorry for, in the movie, but everything that happened to her was also so funny. And after he admits he's gay, I would say about 50 minutes into the film, that's where it takes a turn, (possibly unintentionally) satirizing this community of people. The high school kids don't want to change in front of him, he's threatened by the principal of his school, about possibly losing his job, cause he might be rubbing his gayness off on people, and the community wants his take on every single issue affecting gay people. Now that's where I think this movie is a satire, from the get-go, the way the people talk, it's abnormal, but also hilarious. We learn that Howard's fiancé has lost 70 pounds for their wedding day because she based her self-esteem on his willingness to marry her. The boys in high school way about talking about "in" holes, and "out" holes on the body, and they have no concept of anything they're talking about. Howard's former student's girlfriend, who is a model, has an aversion to food and hates the idea of eating it. As stated before, the town wants Howard's take on every gay issue, from marriage to the strangest of things that don't relate to sexuality at all. This movie does have stereotypes in it, and if it's a satire, I think it comments on the stereotyping of gay men, but if it is not, it's not horrifying stereotyping, like Howard is a sexual deviant or anything. And this I believe comes from the fact that the writer of the movie, Paul Rudnick is gay himself, and has a partner. With a gay man behind the conception of the idea, it makes sure that a gay man is telling a story about a gay man, and it's not straight people doing it for the accolades. Obviously, I don't know how much was changed from the original script, but the product, but I would say is great. The main character doesn't die (especially of AIDS) or doesn't have a tragic love ending, where one dies (again by AIDS) or gets shipped off or anything. In fact, he kinda gets a man at the end of the film, like it's not exactly clear if they're dating, but they seem to be friendly and moving in that direction. Also, for a movie about a small town of people, and especially for 1997, there wasn't that much homophobia on screen. Howard does sadly lose his job (he gets it back in the end though, and wins teacher of the year) because some parents are uncomfortable with a gay man teaching their kids, but it's never seen directly on the screen. On the contrary, it's usually people supporting Howard, and coming together behind him, with again for a small town of people, and especially for 1997, is amazing. Personally, I think In & Out still holds up, some might disagree, but I think this is a great movie, especially if you watch it as a satire (and I still truly do believe it is, even though there is nothing on the internet that talks about it) I think you will be laughing your ass off at the movie. Stars: 2/5 ⭐️ Okay, I'm just going to get it out of the way. The plot twist in this movie made no sense whatsoever. Like, so it's the white cisgender heterosexual guy who's killing everyone cause he's mad he has privilege? Like what? I can't even describe how stupid that is. Why would some 17-year-old start killing people? I don't know. Like his first kill, at the beginning of the movie, kinda makes sense, because he kills a footballer who has hazed a teammate (Possibly because they're gay, possibly cause the footballer is just mean) so that makes sense. And the second kill, which is a girl who spouts all this woke positivity stuff, but actually she's racists, and homophobic, so that also kinda makes sense. But then it starts to get weird. He tries to kill 3 of his friends, and he succeeds with one of them, which is just bonkers. The whole time I was thinking, and I think about this when the killer is trying to justify it (Not like You or Dexter, where it's obvious they're not good people, but like "I'm a good guy, and I'm helping the world") it just makes no sense. You are killing people. That's like the worst thing you can possibly do. There is no coming back from that, you are a bad person, these people may be troubled, but you are messed up. As people say: Violence is never the answer, so it just never makes sense to try to give the killer justification on why they're killing. Because it's either hilariously stupid or just so insane, where it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. There's Someone Inside Your House does have some good moments though. There is a footballer, as mentioned before, who is gay, and him being gay doesn't make his character any different really than any of the other characters, which was nice to see. Especially a footballer who is gay, because sports and homosexuality never seem to mix. There is also a nonbinary character, who, just like the gay footballer, is a character and not a caricature. Both I should say, aren't super important to the story, but there are really only three people who are important to the story. The main character, Makani Young (Sun-Woo) played by Sydney Park, the killer, who turns out to be her friend Zach Sandford, played by Dale Whibley, and Makani's kinda boyfriend, Oliver Larsson, played by Theodore Pellerin. I think the major flaw in these movies though, is the action. With the movies like Fear Street (1994, 1978, 1666) there was constant continuous action, where it was always heart-pounding, of the killer could kill these people at any time, and with There's Someone Inside Your House, you just don't feel that. It feels like there are designated times for when the killer will appear, so there really is no heart-pounding feeling from the audience. That is what movies need to keep the audience entertained. Where the objective of survival for the characters is always continuous, and that is where you can get your audience hooked. Stars: 4/5 ⭐️ This movie is interesting for sure. And I can see why the movie had so many heavy-hitting actors in it, because this movie came off the blacklist, and for those who don't know what that is, it is a place where writers can post their scripts. There they are given a number, and if high enough, producers, and managers, and agents, and production companies can look at it. So, Breaking News in Yuba County is about this woman, Sue Buttons, played by Allison Janney, who accidentally kills her husband, after giving him a heart attack, because she walked in on him having an affair, and then hides his body. From there, the movie gets interesting real quick, with Sue reporting him missing, because she wants a sliver of attention, and she's finally getting it, with all these twisting subplots that happen simultaneously, that all interact with each other, leading to interesting twists and turns that you don't see coming. There is a plotline with Jimmi Simpson and Wanda Sykes' characters, Petey and Rita, who think they're getting Sue's husband back if they pay twenty thousand dollars to this gang, which consist of Mina, played by Awkwafina, Ray, played by Clifton Collins Jr., and Mr. Kim, played by Keong Sim. But the gang is just trying to get their money back that Sue's husband had taken from them. And that's just one crazy one, with two other plot lines, besides the main plot. This is a dark comedy for sure, and it's very obvious, as many people die in this movie, and after watching the film, there are about 9 people who die in this movie. There is light comedy in the movie as well, so you will be laughing for sure at one point or another. The movie is also constantly fast which keeps the audience on their toes for what will happen next. It's also helpful for making all the plots equally interesting and engaging, as they're all forward-moving to this end goal of where is Sue's husband, and what will happen to Sue when he is found. And that does happen at the end, and the twist the comes with it is... interesting. The twist is, the detective, Detective Harris, played by Regina Hall (because as I said, there are a lot of famous people in this movie) finally tracks down where Sue's husband last was, at the same time Sue is there with Mr. Kim, who wants his money back. It turns into a shootout, where both Harris, her partner, and Mr. Kim all die, with Sue just standing there, freaking out, with a shovel, standing over her husband's rotting corpse. It flashes a year into the future, and Sue is thriving, with no one knowing that it was her who accidentally killed, and hid her husband, which I can't tell if that's an unsatisfactory ending, or if it's a hilariously dark ending. But in all, I'm sad that this movie didn't do well according to the critics, because the writer of this movie I think is amazing, and I hope they make more movies that are as unique as this. Stars: 4.5/5 ⭐️ Okay, let me start by saying, this is one of the best movies I have seen all year, and maybe of all time. Obviously, it can never compare to Mean Girls, but The Harder They Fall is spectacular, and it made me think of western movies in a different way, as I never really found them entertaining! Following Nat Love, played by Jonathan Majors, and his gang, which consist of Stagecoach Mary, played by Zazie Beetz, Jim Beckworth, played by RJ Cyler, Cuffee, played by Danielle Deadwyler, Bass Reeves, played by Delroy Lindo, and Bill Picket, played by Edi Gathegi who are out for revenge against Rufus Buck, and his gang, because Rufus killed Nat's mother and father when he was a kid. And Rufus' gang consist of Rufus, obviously, played by Idris Elba, Trudy Smith, played by Regina King, and Cherokee Bill, played by LaKeith Stanfield. Also, the music in this is amazing, and it's done by Jeymes Samuels, who also wrote the screenplay, directed the movie, and wrote the story that the screenplay is based on, so they were doing the most, and it paid off for sure. Also, for western movies, you usually don't think comedy, but I would say that is a big part of The Harder They Fall, which makes the movie extra fun, throwing in all these laughs. And I think the best is Maysville, which is referenced as a white town, which is it, literally and figuratively. The town has only white people, but also the whole town is painted white, which just makes it so funny. Also, what I think makes this movie intriguing, is that it is a slow build, building up how terrifying Rufus Buck is, and what his wrath entails. At the beginning of the movie, he's getting transported in a bank vault in a train getting transferred to another prison, with all these guards protecting him, so he must be powerful. And I think it's done well, as he doesn't do that much fighting in the movie, and lets his gang do it for him, but when he does, it gets violent quickly. There is a part where he brutally beats up the sheriff of a town, that Rufus actually owns because he is angry that the sheriff is selling the town without his permission. And it's kinda scary to watch, as there is a lot of blood that is shed. But other than that, Rufus doesn't do anything, which I think is well done. And since this is a western movie, the ending is a shoot out, which is done well, because one of Nat's gang members dies, showing that there will be stakes in this fight, because a few of his members do die, which sucks, but also made the movie feel real, and kept your attention, since they weren't shy with who they would and wouldn't kill. And the only reason I am giving this 4.5 out of 5 stars is that I am not sure how I feel about the ending where we learn that Nat and Rufus share the same dad. It makes sense why Rufus killed Nat's dad in the beginning, but I have never been a big fan of twist family relatives, cause it feels so cliche, however in this movie, it made sense to Rufus's motivation, but it felt weird. But, since there was a teaser for a possible second of The Harder They Fall, I can wholeheartedly tell you that I will be tuning in whenever that happens. Stars: 3.5/5 ⭐️ I'm not sure if I thought this movie was funny, or if it was covertly cringy. Like were the jokes actually funny, or were they funny because you're laughing at the movie? But let's take a step back. Mr. Right is about a girl, Martha, played by Anna Kendrick, who falls in love with this guy, Mr. Right, played by Sam Rockwell, who is a hit-man, and the whole joke for the first thirty minutes is that Martha thinks Mr. Right is joking about killing. When it turns out he's not, that is where the movie gets weird, because Mr. Right (because Martha doesn't learn his real name) has said all these horrible things that he's done, and now that Martha knows they're real, she should be freaking out. Now, this movie could be a satire, but if that is so, there weren't enough satire elements for someone to watch it, and understand it's a satire. Also, the plot feels small and quick, because after Martha realizes that Mr. Right is a killer, she's then captured by this gang who wants to kill Mr. Right, and then it's about Mr. Right killing all of them. There aren't any stakes in the movie either, because you know that Mr. Right isn't going to die, he literally takes a shotgun to the hand and continues fighting, so the only other stake is getting Martha, but that's not interesting, because Martha is kinda an unlikeable character. Not like she's unlikeable, but she's not likable either, besides the fact she's Anna Kendrick. We don't know that much about Martha, and the things that we do know about her don't make her interesting, or make her jump out as a character, and she's kinda written as a damsel in distress, who also has locked fighting abilities, which she unlocks at the end of the movie, which makes her character interesting, but right after that, the movie ends. The only characteristic that I surmised from Martha is that she's the crazy friend, and that's why Mr. Right works for her because he's also crazy, but for me, there weren't any characteristics or quirks either one had, that made me want to latch onto them, and root for them as characters. Also, with all the plots in the movie, and there are three major ones, a gang hunting Mr. Right, Mr. Right's former boss, Hopper, hunting him, and Mr. Right escaping with Martha. With only an hour and thirty-five minutes, it doesn't feel like any of the three major plots are expanded on to the degree that they should. I think if the movie was longer, say two hours, then I think it would have been better because then we could have expanded on Mr. Right and Martha as characters. We could have used the extra time to expand on the gang's motivations, and deepen Mr. Right's and Hopper's relationship to make people want to stay and see how everything resolves itself. My final point with the length of the movie is that it really doesn't set up Mr. Right needing to save Martha, and I thought it would be about the two trying to escape everyone, which I think would have been more entertaining as well. The movie isn't bad, but I wouldn't want to watch it again, just because this movie feels like it's similar to a lot of other movies. And with no stand-out features that would make me want to watch this movie compared to others. Stars: 3/5 ⭐️ This movie lives up to its name. Yet, I don't think many people know what "voyeur" means, which just means people who get sexual pleasure from watching other people have sex. But stepping back, The Voyeurs is about Pippa, played by Sydney Sweeney, and Thomas, played by Justice Smith, who move into this really nice apartment in Montreal, and to their surprise, they can see across the street into their neighbors' apartment. And the two start watching their neighbors, and get obsessed with them, which there isn't any clear reason why Pippa and Thomas watch the couple, Seb and Julia, as the only "special" thing about them is that they're hot. But anyways, Pippa and Thomas get so engrossed by Seb and Julia, to the point where they figure out how to listen in on the conversations in the apartment. And things get weird from there. From listening in on the couple's lives, Pippa and Thomas, but mostly Pippa, start to interact with the couple, in more ways than one. Pippa works in Ophthalmology, which is the study of eyes, (and I'll get to the blatant theme in a second), but there, she runs into Julia, and they start hanging out. And then Pippa starts using Julia's wireless printer to inform her of every wrongdoing that Seb is doing, and it's a lot because he's cheating a lot. So, it then takes a dark twist, where death starts happening, and lots of twists that happen, and it's kinda a whiplash moment. That's because there is a lot of slow build-up for about an hour and a half, and then for the next twenty minutes or so, the movie moves quickly. And there is nothing wrong with slow builds or fast movies, by themselves at least, but when put together, it feels disjointed, as most of the twists should have happened in the second act because after taking a look at the movie, there are a lot of plot holes and weird coincidence. But first, I need to explain the twist. the Twist is: Pippa and Thomas were watching Seb and Julia, who were watching Pippa and Thomas. Pippa and Thomas are an experiment for Seb and Julia pretty much, and there are all these photos of Pippa and Thomas staring at Julia and Seb. But now for the plot holes. There is a part where Julia "kills herself" after she finds out Seb is cheating, and that makes me wonder, did Seb really have sex with all the people he does? Or is it all an act? Also, since Julia didn't die, wouldn't it be obvious to Pippa and Thomas, because there were no ambulances, or police or anything. And that's because we didn't see a shot of Julia being taken away. Also, it seems Julia's "suicide" is integral to the plot, so how would Julia and Seb know that Pippa would interact with them through a wireless printer? Because through the wireless printer, Pippa informs Julia that Seb is cheating. Also, did Julia know that Seb had sex with Pippa? Because that happens, and that's obviously real. Was that all part of their scheme? Because if it was, people would think Seb and Julia were crazy to do so. But let's get back to the sight theme. It isn't bad to have a theme, all movies do, but it felt very much in your face. With all the shots of Pippa at work, looking at eyes, to shots of people's eyes as they stare, it felt a little too much. like they were clobbering you over the head with the sight theme. The shots of the eyes through the devices that Pippa uses were unique, but the aesthetic shots of the film don't save the plot holes and crazy coincidences of the movie. |
AuthorRyan Jones is an aspiring screenwriting, and an environmental enthusiast and activist. Archives
February 2022
Categories |