pienpouwels

I liked the concept of this series, a world of ghost infestations with specially trained adolescents doing all the dirty work? Sign me up. It leaves no doubt in my mind that the books are worth a read. That being said, the series stirred no real emotions in me.

The CGI was low-budget by the looks of it, but the acting was pretty good! The dialogue did tend to get a little too cliché and despite ending with a cliff hanger, I'm not bursting at the seams to find out what happens next. Which should tell you enough. But perhaps I'm judging too harshly. It was entertaining for sure! Just a bit of a no-brainer.

I went into watching this movie with no expectations whatsoever and while I still cringed and laughed aloud out of ridiculousness on multiple occasions, The Next 365 Days wasn't actually 3-star bad (what I rated 365 Days: This Day). I know it's the bare minimum but I was pleasantly surprised to discover there was an actual storyline in this one. Unlike the second instalment. There weren't as many pointless scenes and there were a couple 3-minute windows in which the acting was actually passable. And some of the dialogue-bits were.......not that bad......keyword being 'some'. The movie in its entirety was still garbage, but it didn't smell as rotten as I was expecting?

How this movie has an average of 5.3 but the disgracefully botched 2022 version of Persuasion, a 5.6, is beyond me. Yes, Mr. Malcolm's List is Austen-esque and predictable, but at least the script captured the zeitgeist of the early 1800s. Its preview (which is on YouTube) actually came out early 2019, so I'm guessing Bridgerton took a leaf out of their book in regard to a diverse cast.

The two leads don't have much chemistry but the cast in general is excellent. I particularly enjoyed Oliver Jackson-Cohen's Lord Cassidy and although Julia Thistlewaite's character is downright unpleasant, Zawe Ashton embodied her brilliantly. I'm glad she replaced Gemma Chan, whose performance in the preview I thought a bit spiritless.

All in all, not an arthouse film experience but definitely worth the watch if you're into period pieces. I watched it for the second time today and didn't enjoy it any less than I did the first time.

If you separate this adaptation from the book, it is a sufficient watch. However, considering what masterpiece it is based on, I'm sure Jane Austen is turning in her grave.

The story isn't anything like the Persuasion we know and love, it is trying too hard to be like Bridgerton, to be relevant and have modern touches. Some of the most beloved and iconic lines have been downgraded to weak decoctions. There is hardly any character development. In fact, the only character that I thought wasn't utterly flat was Mary. The cast is excellent but the script is beyond words... and not in the positive sense. For Anne to constantly be breaking the fourth wall was an excruciatingly bad decision. All in all, a painful adaptation that can surely only be enjoyed by viewers who aren't familiar with the work of Jane Austen.

I was very excited about starting this show, I love the concept, but it has left me feeling disappointed after a couple of episodes. The play rooms are basic and frankly, tacky. Distasteful to the point where I hope her clients didn't actually have to pay for them because they could have probably done it better themselves. How this woman has been a successful designer for 15 years is beyond me. If not for the sex toys, the rooms could have easily been a teenage girl/boy's bedroom or a guest bedroom that doesn't know what it wants. There is no sensual aesthetic whatsoever. No sexual appeal.

Melanie Rose seemed like a sweet lady at first but occasionally made me feel uncomfortable by excessively touching her clients, even holding their hands for longer periods of time. I get that she creates play rooms but that doesn't mean you have to touch everybody all the time. People have boundaries. She also clearly crossed the line with her married contractor on multiple occassions (even in front of his son who looked extremely uncomfortable and even commented on 'how his mom wouldn't like it'). And pressuring your contractor into flogging you or testing out restraints, is not a cute look.

Lastly, this lady is framed as an expert while she clearly hasn't got the foggiest idea what she's doing, judging by the toys she picks out and her general behaviour. Very superficial knowledge. Which is quite problematic. After Fifty Shades of Grey, this is just what the BDSM community needed: another horrible representation.

I'm sure it's an entertaining watch if you don't know anything about BDSM though, just know it's an inaccurate portrayal.

I had a blast watching these two gallivanter around good ol' Alba. Their chemistry is off the charts. The three episodes are a lovely mix of Scottish culture, nature, activities and personal stories. Together, Miriam and Alan are the pinnacle of iconic, queer energy that anyone would undoubtedly love to see more of in the future.

As someone who can't concentrate on anything unless there's animal visuals on in the background, I have seen more than a hundred nature documentaries. The cinematography of Our Great National Parks is absolutely breathtaking, but that's the case for many other docs as well. What makes this one unique is that it zooms in on lesser known facts about animals, facts that even I --as a self-proclaimed connoisseur-- was flabbergasted by. On multiple occasions during each episode, the documentary tackled the animal protagonists from angles that I have never seen before. Plus, despite loving the big five, it's nice watching something that's not constantly about them, but about less common critters as well.

Sir David Attenborough is and will always remain the ultimate nature doc narrator but Barack Obama has made a solid impression and I'm eager for more.

I don't understand why Our Great National Parks has such a low rating but don't let it fool you. It's an absolute must watch. I've rated it 9 stars, the same rating I gave to Planet Earth I & II, Chasing Coral and Blue Planet I & II.

I find myself coming back to this documentary every couple of months, I'm awed by how it managed to express such emotion and respect, while still remaining informative and interesting to watch --all in 22 minutes! Especially during Ichiyo's part I had a hard time reining in the waterworks. If everyone had a bit of Ichiyo in them, the world would be a much brighter place. I can genuinely say I'm proud and honoured to have witnessed Chris Broad blossom into such an exemplary filmmaker. Of whom I'm sure we'll see many more great things in the future as he continues to grow. His way of storytelling is unique, an absolute gem among stones --or the mess of quantity over quality that YouTube unfortunately occasionally identifies as. A wonderful mini-doc that deserves a lot more recognition. The only reason I didn't rate it a 10 is because I would have loved for it to hit the 45-minute mark.

Let's just put it this way: I have seen worse movies --so while there's an element of truth in the terrible reviews, they're also overdramatised. The movie was lacking in many departments, the script, the occasionally illogical camera angles, the plot holes. The B-movie energy it carried was made all the greater due to the below average acting of two greats: Pacino and Urban --which is probably where the horrid reviews stem from. Disappointed fans. During some scenes I caught myself holding my breath in anticipation and the last scene in particular did make me feel an overwhelming sense of discomfort (it didn't make any sense and was probably added in for its shock-factor but that's another story). The Hangman is an adequate watch if you're doing work and need some background noise or if you're someone with zero expectations.