KFstudios2009

"Why making unnecessary sequels?" was my question. I don't know, it's for the moneys sake, but is it worth the audience? I don't think so. It reminds my of the Scream requel they did in 2022, besides that the requel was much better than the previous one, this one. The story tried to have that cool concept that Ghostface is making a "remake" of the original Scream movie, but as I mentioned, the 2022 film did that aspect much stronger, better and much more effective. Because the only thing that carried the film was the good moments of action, as well as the return of Sidney Prescott in Woodsboro, that I think was a nice thing, instead of replacing her with unnecessary characters. Recommending? Not at all, I think that you can even skip this one because it didn't change the story at all.

"Scream 3" is the weaker sequel that doesn't offer much new. I understood the idea of making a bigger space for Ghostface and move the characters to Hollywood, but this film just didn't land on my shelf. The new characters are just coming and going, and they just felt necessary just for the sake of Ghostface killing them. Yet "Scream 3" had some good points that carried some of my rating. First of all, how Sidney Prescott got an expanded life story and development, was great! Included concluding the "Trilogy" that was meant to be at the time, was made into an ok ending. The suspense wasn't that strong, but it had a few good moments. Still, I can't recommend it. Too weak, too much used material, and many points that were missing, unfortunately.

"Scream 2" is my personal favorite movie from the Scream franchise, and it entertains greatly, even though it isn't perfect, but it's good! The plot goes straight out from "Scream" continuing the story and introducing new characters. I think they did a great job at getting to know the characters, something I missed in the original. The new Ghostface is dangerous and thirsty for more "Scary movies" and his moments hit strongly in here. The music, scenography and camera filming was ok, but in here it was mostly about characters, and of course, Ghostface. My advice is to watch the first one before this one, but I can easily say this Scream is the best😱

"Jaws" was a good horror directed by Steven Spielberg, that was the right person to direct such movie. He directed "Jurassic Park" and I think he is just the guy to make Dino-monster movies. The plot goes simple, but the action is building up great. You get to know the characters fast, and they are very likable. Some moments in the film was very goofy and didn't have the great suspense, but after all it wasn't that bad. I mean, it was a very good production, and at that time having a shark like that on the screen, that was something! So I think if you search for a monster movie from the classics, this one is the right for you!

"Stage Fright" was one of the better Hitchcock movies I have seen. There is much good plot in here that makes us paying attention to the film all the time, good plot twist as well as great, deep character development. The camera filming was nice, with a few interesting shots. The acting is the best, Eve performed by Jane Wyman carried a big part of the film and she did her role very well. I didn't felt the time and it's entertaining. What could be possibly better was the ending, that felt too much served on the plate and too simple for Hitchcock standards. Yet it didn't ruin the experience, and I strongly recommend it!

I think this was a very decent film with good action and a nice atmosphere. Quentin Tarantino tried very hard to make it unique and it really was. The action sequences had a nice pace, dynamic, and the martial arts looked stunning on the screen. Yet I didn't like everything in "Kill Bill". Some effects felt totally unnecessary for this unique film, the opening credits were weird, very strange way of making them, and sometimes there were so random scenes like an anime phrase or jumping from color to black-and-white and then back to color again, I mean that's very weird stuff. I don't quite understand why he did that. But other positive sides like good camera filming, script and music made it a very good entertaining experience!

"Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire" is a very easy and rather say weak fourth installment in the Ghostbusters franchise. They tried to hard to make it like the first, adding their own touch to it, but it just didn't work. The pacing wasn't building or didn't have the suspense, and the action was pretty basic. It was so annoying how they had to put a joke in almost every scene, and that so called "humor" they tried to do failed. The visuals was a letdown, especially that over the time Ghostbusters did a good upgrade, not mentioning "Ghostbusters: Afterlife" that I think was one of the best ones, also from the visual side. But no, unfortunately, this was not my cup of tea. A disappointing sequel, and I think they should stop. If Ivan saw this...

First of all you need to know that "The Dragon Knight" Netflix show isn't connected to the sequel. So most importantly just watch the film trilogy. It's really damn good, and just the creation of a clumsy but at the same time badass kung-fu panda was just fantastic. So jumping to the film, I have to start of saying I was very skeptical. Based on the low reviews, and negative thoughts from the fans, I had my doubts. But no. This movie was just great. Fantastic. I can say it was the least good from the four movie franchise, but I don't say it was bad. Just my least favorite. Still, the returning of the Dragon Warrior (aka Po) couldn't have been better. He is a local hero in his valley, and ready for new adventures. When he spontaneously meets a fox thief called Zhen, he finds out about a new villain that is about to make some chaos, known as The Chameleon. So, as most heroes would do, he settles out for a new adventure, trusting his fate in the fox friend. So that's when the big action starts. From that moment, it was a growing excitement and absolutely great entertainment. The multiple storylines and character development was here, Po didn't have much development but at the same time we got to know most of his backstory in the trilogy. The new fox character (Zhen) was a surprisingly good character, I wished that the furious five could be here (Po's old friends, and this is not a spoiler!) but Zhen did just carrie the role greatly as Po's new fellow. She is very likable, and her backstory makes her a convincing character. I think the film did a great job at showing friendship and that everyone has its up and downs. I can mention the villain lastly, The Chameleon, that is a form-changing witch that seeks only that one thing: Power. Personally I don't know if I liked her a lot. She was ok for the film, her design looked very great, but as a villain it's the least interesting. She could have that one thing, one detail, that could make her a more rememberable character. Besides that, not too bad. The runtime for the film was perfect, there wasn't one moment I was bored, and the action, dialogues and animation makes it very stunning for a family cartoon. The action sequences were fast-paced and epic, and the transitions, fighting moves and cool drawn angles made it a great cinematic experience. The ending is good and closes the movie perfectly, including the Britney Spears song: "Baby one more time" but singed by Jack Black, the voice actor for Po. He gave the song a new, fresh look and I really liked it for the end credits. Summarizing, Kung Fu Panda 4 was a good family film, it still has the grip, I really liked the new character, as well as the action, music and animation. A worthy sequel to the beloved trilogy, and something you should definitely watch!

"Checkered Ninja 2" was an ok-but-still-mediocre sequel that was for me a little bit better than the first film. I didn't like the first one so much, and this one wasn't so good either, but this one did at least have some more action, and the jokes seemed more intelligent and better than from the original. I know that these movies tries to be controversial animated films with inappropriate sexual humor and violence, but for me, an animated film is an animated film, and try to keep topics like that in a live-action movie. But well, let's just talk about it overall. The story? Well, it have a good kick-off, Aske, the human friend of the magical Ninja doll is back, and he is going on vacation, because, of course! You know, have you noticed recently that animated sequels are always about some family trip? Yes, this one was something like that, traveling to Thailand meeting on dangerous people, new characters, and strip club ladies. The script was ok, I can't complain to much, it was written on the same scale level as the first one, so not much to say. The music was a good positive side of the film that I really appreciated. I liked the music in the first one to, and I like the similar score and great music for action! The animation is probably the reason why I'm not the biggest fan. You know, for me it looks like a video game. Very basic, looks probably like from some cheap low-budget cartoon on Cartoon Network or something. The action sequences saves it a little, and have some nice parts with ok slap stick. But if I have to conclude it all it was just basic, you know. It just came, and now it's gone, already forgotten about it. But if you like exaggerated comedies, this one may be something for you, but I personally didn't like it too much, still, ok for the one-time watch.

"Paterson" is an American drama movie directed by Jim Jarmusch, starring Adam Driver as a poetic and rather say bored bus driver, alongside his adventurous and creative wife, performed by Golshifteh Farahani. Both of the actors does an excellent job at performing their characters, as well as give them so light and charm to make them more interesting. Adam Driver did his role very natural and I can't really complain about any of it. Jarmusch is once again making a good movie, he does have his own style and it's very noticeable in the way he's making movies, in terms of camera filming, story and overall directing. Jarmusch did also show how a simple story can be so well developed and deep when you don't play with to many factors. The pace is slow, but effective, you get to know the characters better, the atmosphere is chilling, and yeah, in three word I can say this is a movie were you can chill, laugh and question. You can easily laugh of the humor that really spice up the dynamic. The story and plot doesn't have any big (or small) moments that would impress my a lot, so I would say average chilling atmosphere. The questioning part comes mostly on the ending, when I wonder why did it ended like that, and I don't know, was it complete? We got a lot to go from the simple story, but at the same time I wished more. More to continue, to have a more smooth end that could satisfy me even more. I think what they tried to do was to imagine your own ending, answer the questions yourself, imagine the way the story goes later on and so. Because I can say many things are missing, but at the same time I can say it was complete enough. So I don't know about that, it's a very weird thought to think about. But changing to other sides of the film, I can say the camera filming was great. Nice pictures (As I mentioned before, filmed very in Jarmusch style) and the music was quite nice, too. I noticed something in the film that could be a preference. Have you ever watched "Ghost Dog: The way of the Samurai"? Because "Ghost Dog" and "Paterson" have one similar scene were the main character meets a little girl that has many topics in common, as well as they read or write the same stuff. Coincidence? These scenes were so similar to each other that it was almost funny. It was a cool thing to see, and I think it was an important thing to mention. Anyways, if you like chilling movies with a slow pace, poetic dialogues and funny dogs, this may be a good movie for you. Not perfect, but still something worth watching.

"Checkered Ninja" is a danish animated comedy directed by Anders Matthesen that also stars the voice for the checkered ninja doll in the film. The story goes very simple, a boy discovers that his ninja doll he got for his birthday was alive, and that without the doll he can't help himself with the problems at his chaotic, crowded school. Together with his doll, they have to help each other, to keep things cool. And you know? I don't know about this, man. First of all things happened to fast. When they introduced the ninja doll, I expected a greater surprise, shock or terrify from the human character, Aske. He basically just sees that his doll can't talk, and he is like: "Ok, cool, then he talks" and it just seems so very unrealistic to me. Personally if I had a creepy ninja doll and it could talk, I would be shocked. But this guy: "Nah, I have bigger problems than that. To beat a bully... And talk with a girl... that gives a damn about me". After getting the doll, they're building together a great duo! Besides the unrealistic aspect of the movie, the ninja doll itself was a very great character. He was funny, cool, and probably the most creative doll I have seen in a movie so far, so I would say that 80 percent of the rating goes on that. I don't say it was a good movie, because, really, it was not. Aske dealing with his problems at school was made in the most generic way, his connection with the random girl didn't felt right to me, and he and the ninja doll trying to beat a bad guy later felt for me like a afterthought the director had. If they wanted to make it right, the bad guy had to be there from the start and make some importance in the story. I also noticed some really stereotypical aspects of the film, like a brown skinned guy eating kebab and selling drugs, as well as making fun out of asians and the kids that worked in a toy factory. I know it's about humor, but it wasn't fine, and for me it wasn't really funny either. I can also mention straight away that this is not a movie for kids. I can give some examples. Aske and the ninja doll is planning a battle plan and they are randomly finding a porn magazine on the way. There are also some sexual jokes in here that seems very innocent, but can be inappropriate for minors. So I kind of don't understand the concept of the film, because most teens or older like live-action movies, so maybe "Checkered Ninja" would be better if it was live-action, and not animation? Speaking of animation, I really didn't like it. The drawings, colors and overall graphic looked like a cheap video game made in the most low-budget way, the characters motions, as well as their emotions, looked very fake and it was really no passion in it at all. There is one technical aspect that I liked though, and that was the music. It was completely fine, the techno-ninja score they made was creative and average for the rather say weak and banal film. Should you watch Checkered Ninja? Hell no. Don't waste your time.

"Dune: Part Two" has all the elements to make the amazing cinema experience. When you watch this film, you can really dig into the world, feel it, almost touch it, could I say. It have all of the things we need, tragedy, action, and of course a little bit of humor from time to time. The first film (Dune: Part One) was definitely an overrated average film that I can't say I enjoyed to much. It didn't felt complete, had many lacks and unfinished details in the story, and the action was generally speaking really boring. Now the sequel, was on a way different level, and it's really rare to say that a sequel is better than the original, but in this case it is true. The plot goes straight after the first one, continuing the battle for the injustice of this dark and cruel world. New characters, enemies, secrets to be revealed, and everything has to end with one word: War. I can start to say how much this film feels like reality. In Dune, the people dealing with the problems on their planets, feels exactly how the wars, revolutions and aspects humanity had over centuries. This film couldn't show it any better. Including some real prophecy stuff involved here, I almost felt Timothée Chalamet was the walking Jesus talking for the good, besides that Jesus didn't master martial arts or any fighting technics of some sort🙂 The character development was also a strong part of the plot, and the characters felt much more important to me that before. The first hour of "Dune: Part Two" were Paul Atreides was teached the way of being a Fremen (The Desert People) felt almost to me like "Avatar: The Way of Water" when the forest people had to learn from the water people to survive in the new place. I felt the reference was strong here, but not if it was a bad thing, of course. Now jumping over to the technicals and camera, that I think carried a big part of the film, really the atmosphere. The camera filming, usage of the shadows and light, as well as the very interesting angles, smooth montage, and epic editing with the amazing music score, couldn't have made it more of a cinematic experience. They had some very interesting ideas of showing things, for example a baby inside a mother's stomach, and such graphic illusion of that I have never seen before. The runtime was good, and I didn't really felt bored, I was entertained all the time, and I can't wait to see the sequel: "Dune: Part Three", that will debut after some years. So concluding, yes, you should watch this, it was much better than the first one, and it is an experience you are going to remember!

Going through the classic from hell "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" that I personally really liked, now it was time to watch the direct Netflix reboot-sequel. I know how so many people says it was so bad and it isn't like the original, but personally I got to say I really enjoyed it. It reminded my on many reboots we got that time, like for example Halloween (2018) and Scream (2022) were new and old characters are here to meet the antagonist again. And you know I just had that exciting feeling: "Yes, a new fight with Leatherface" and I also wondered how the character was going to change over so many years, so many changes, how will Leatherface exactly be? And the result was even greater than I expected, mostly because how dangerous he had become. In the first film, Leatherface was a chaotic, psychopathic killer searching for people to cut with the chainsaw, but in here, in here, he was literally a killing machine straight out of hell. This Leatherface was angry, fast, and brutal. His madness was showed greatly in here, and he carried most of the film, can I safely say. While this was a great action-packed slasher, it had some cons (and pros of course). First of the beginning, that I felt started to random and should have had a better sparkle to start the film, yet later it got much better, and the film was on the right track. The actors performing the protagonists weren't the best, but good enough to play their roles. The two main heroes, Melody and Lila, had a light development that told a little bit about their twisted backstory. Wasn't necessary to include that part, but it was fine. Also bringing back an original character, Sally Hardesty, back for the reboot/sequel, unfortunately played by a different actress, was great! It made the story much better, and I really got the reboot vibes of Halloween and Scream. After half an hour into the film the action, suspense and scare starts, from that moment, I was entertained, I was totally on, gripped into the action, and the jump-scares, yes, the jump-scares were absolutely phenomenal. It had been a while since I got so scared by jump-scares. The atmosphere gets dark and creepy in the final act, the final battle arrives, and I have kind of mixed feelings about that. I think it had good moments were I literally panicked for the heroes lives and wondered what happened next, but at the same time some moments felt to exaggerated, and some things that happened was so unrealistic that it was almost funny, or should I say, pathetic. Not only that, sometimes the characters did so many dumb decisions, but I guess it is for the sake of the suspense and action. From the technical side, ok camera filming, terrifying practical effects (But in a good way) and the music was tense and frightening. The end credits with the Texas Chainsaw theme ended it all with a good experience. My conclusion is, if you are a fan of the first movie, you will like this one. And if you haven't watched the original, but like horrors, this will probably be a good time for you. Enjoy!

This series goes by many names, so I will easily just say "17" as it was the name of the first original season that debuted almost six years ago. I decided to finish the series and after watching all of the four seasons I can say that Nrk (Norwegian Broadcast Corporation) had made a little franchise. This one is one of the better Norwegian hood shows I have seen, including that it is so clever and well developed with everything. In every season there is a new main character, in the first we have a guy called Abdi, season two Emrah, season three Ibo and season four Aisha. And it's not like some random story with new characters that just come for the sake of a new season, no. All of the four characters are connected in the same story, same timeline, but every season uses its time to explore each other and look at different persons perspectives. Personally I think it was a very good idea, it was very smart and a good way to show multiculturalism in Norway, no matter of color, culture or country you and your family comes from. The series does also show perfectly the society in a Norwegian place called Stovner (You live in Norway Oslo then you know) and how many people are judging this place because of a higher criminal level and the high amount of foreigners that many people do not like. It shows that even if there is criminality, it isn't always like that all the time. It shows that Stovner can be something much more, and not only as people might think from reading the news. Back to the other things, I think the acting was very good, mostly teenagers, but on a very high class of acting for such age and I don't know, everyone was good at expressing themselves and performing their roles well. The script and dialogues are very solid for a low budget production that is made for the age group for teenagers, and other factors like music, fast paced editing and build-up suspense, was things that made the series very watchable. Each episode last from 5-20 minutes, and those kind of short episodes are fast to go through, you don't get bored, and the story does really carrie on most of the way. There are some boring moments from time to time that I would personally thought could be much more interestingly made, but in the end, this series is very clever and can teach us a lot about teenage growing up, prejudices, and how hard it can be to be different. I do recommend it, but mostly the first two seasons (The last two are good to but the first two are the absolute best).

Just watched "Dune: Part One", and as I walked out of the theatre I got the review title already: "Average and Overrated" that personally for me is the best description of the film. It tried very hard to stick out as an outstanding movie, as a movie we supposedly haven't seen before, something that would shock us! Well, I didn't get that feeling at all. Why? First of the story. It told about conflicts we have seen before, like battle with good and evil, battle for the highest power, and the part of being in a society and fighting each other for survival. We have all seen it before, and unfortunately, the film did have a huge problem with building up the excitement. I just didn't felt the story, the characters, they weren't gripping (As well as the story) and I don't know, it was that small parts and details that could have been changed to make the film much more enjoyable. I got to mention the ending to, that I unfortunately didn't like either, you know how movies ends with a cliffhanger and you want to see the second part right away? I didn't get the feeling here. The epicness was missing, as well as the action and the music they picked for the ending just wasn't it. Fortunately, many good sides saves the rating a lot, and I can mention them now right away, as the cons are taken. What was really good about this film that saved its skin was the scenography and overall camera filming. Stunning angles, as well as good usage of shadow and light. The scenography looked very real and it was clearly that it was a high budget going on here. The acting was fine, and the music soundtrack did fit the atmosphere of the place and I overall really appreciated it. Now now, Dune had good moments, but mostly small action sequences that carried two stars of the rating. In the end, Dune: Part One was average, and is definitely a good enough popcorn entertainment. Should you watch it? Not really. But if you look at movies only from the scenography side, then this is just for you!

"The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" is one of the most unique slasher horrors I have seen, that made me excited, scared and terrified all at once. Usually movies like that goes in a very predictable, American style, but here, the action and the suspense goes slower, and does have a more interesting building action. The plot goes very simple, a group of teenagers (As always) are going out on a chilling weekend to an old house, but nothing is safe when they are out, alone. And let me say this: Yes, the plot is very simple. But! Here was about the atmosphere. The terrific atmosphere of the unsureness, when is the killer going to attack? Why is it so nice and quiet? Everything was holding, and I can safely say that this horror movie really made effect on me, compared to other slasher-like films like Scream, Halloween and so. The teenage characters were very convincing as some innocent kids looking for fun. The antagonists were terrific, the barbaric things they did (And how they did it) was very intense, and very, very disturbing. The psychopathic mindset of the antagonists was showed on the highest level, and the actors were very great even if they aren't like the most stunning actors I have seen. The suspense was building up greatly, especially with the great music, and sound effects. The sound effects were something I noticed in particular. Sometimes when it was a very disturbing sound repeating to a very suspenseful scene, I felt unsure and anxious. The killings were also something I really remembered, the panic of the people, the music, and the intense camera angles are totally unforgettable. I have to mention also the fantastic atmosphere they did of Texas, I almost felt like I lived there, and the areas and territory's they picked for the film, as well as the camera filming itself and scenography, I can almost say it was a perfect background for the film. The last scene (That I won't spoil of course) is probably the one you are going to remember most. This movie is a perfect example of what you can do with a very low budget, Tobe Hooper (The Director) did an excellent job and he did the perfect modern horror classic that everyone knows about today. Recommending a lot, if you love high adrenaline, or just want to explore more of the cinema history, this is for you. Also a good movie to watch with your friends on a sleepover.

Mean Girls, directed by Tina Fey, the actress in the original Mean Girls and now back to direct and play in the remake, isn't a good movie at all. It had small details that I appreciated a lot and that's why I was so kind and gave it a higher rating. Tina Fey is probably an ok actress, she has played in a bunch of movies that you have probably heard of, but I don't know how she got the idea to direct this. What was she thinking? What was Paramount thinking in producing this crap? Let's mention the cast first. Angourie Rice in the main role as Cady Heron tried to be as funny and convincing as possible to be the shy, innocent girl that moves into the new, crowded school, yet she is so plastic (And I mean literally plastic) that she just destroyed the atmosphere. By an hour or so you get used to her and forget about it, yet it is still a big problem. The supporting roles does something, but not much. At least they did a good job with showing the different groups and separations, and how hard it can be to try to fit in, and that message was very strong here, and I think maybe two of my stars goes to the moral. Now let's mention our truly beloved director Tina that makes the movie. Her idea of it, in terms of camera angles, music and set-up, felt very unprofessional. The camera filming was hilarious. There was that one angle when someone runned and was holding the camera, so 90 percent of the face came on the screen. And the montage, cuts, didn't have that smooth flow. Sometimes they tried to make a transition through one scene to another, but as I mentioned, it didn't have that smooth movement. But I mentioned small details I liked, so I can say it right away. About when it's a Halloween party someplace in the film, two friends are watching a horror movie, and they decided to put in a scene from Friday the 13th: Part II, that I really appreciated. Small details like that makes the movie a little bit more watchable, and also, Friday the 13th is one of my favorite horror franchises, also coming from Paramount Pictures. Now there is the last thing I didn't mention, probably the most important part of the musical, the songs! Of course, the songs, what about them? Nothing. It was really nothing, garbage, didn't have the beat, probably written by Ai or something, and I think the authors wrote the songs like that on purpose. You know, to annoy the audience. So ok, should you watch Mean Girls the musical remake? No. A waste of time, nothing worth your energy, and now you have been warned.

"Chinatown" directed by the French-Polish director Roman Polanski (Rosemary's Baby) and (The Pianist) is a very good crime-thriller about detective Jake Gittes that starts a new case that doesn't seem so complicated at first, but after several weird situations, a bigger case is beginning, were murder, lies and more lies gets involved. Jake Gittes goes through the twisted crime and it isn't that easy. Polanski knew exactly how to make great suspense. With the thrilling music, great sound effects and building up action, nothing could have been better. Some things could have been better though, but more about that later. Jack Nicholson is very good at adapting Gittes, he puts in the thinking mind of a detective, as well as the great personality he develops. Gittes mysterious past isn't touched to much in the film, and that was my first argue. I could understand he had a complicated backstory, but at least it could tell more about it, get something more that could make the plot even more interesting. Secondly I just think the film is a little overrated. Because there is the case (That is very good) and the building suspense, as well as very good action sequences to make it more interesting, but it missed that little something. Perhaps something about the ending. You know, I really liked the last dialogue: "Forget it Jake. It's Chinatown" as they walk away from the crime scene and the screen fades out, but still, the case didn't felt totally complete (I won't spoil so I won't tell) and I think that was the thing that let the rating down a little. And then comes the technicals. The montage and camera filming was ok, and the costume designs were great! It gave me really the detective film atmosphere, and that is something I have to boast about. So summarizing, Chinatown was a good crime-thriller, some parts could be better than others, but the positives are very dominating here, and I think 7/10 will be the best rating I can give.

"Dream Scenario" about a man that people gets constantly dreams about, and then he being accused for attacking the society with him entering their dreams and traumatize with terrifying acts, was a very good supernatural drama film! The man (aka Paul Matthews) had to deal with a problem he couldn't solve in any way, and that was greatly showed! Throughout the film we try to understand why he is randomly entering their dreams, and the best part is that he isn't doing it with bad intentions. He can't do anything to not let people dream about him, and the great problem that continues through the whole film is very interesting and the concept felt very original. Later on the dreams are getting evolved to something more, but I won't tell to much because I won't spoil it for you. Paul Matthews performed by Nicolas Cage was a very interesting and well evolved character, his feelings and personality meant a lot for the story later on, and it's on some way or other connected to the dreams. Cage did a good job with putting in the humor, charm and anonymity that Paul really liked to keep. He carried the film mostly, and the supporting roles did a good job to build up his story. The directing was very good, many good ideas in terms of montage, effects and visuals, the script and dialogues was written very well, and the suspense was very well and kept the entertainment in place. I liked how the story started to turn a little psychological, it gave more depth to the story. So actually, most of the film was fantastic, but the ending scene was a little bit confusing and empty, and I wished something better that could close the story better. Besides that, very good, I do recommend it. Another great work from a24!

"Miller's Girl" was a good film that I didn't have much complains about. Jenna Ortega and Martin Freeman worked out very well in the film, the duo performing their characters didn't disappoint, everything felt organic and real. I did also like a lot how the two main heroes were so much connected, and the problem of "student and teacher love relationships" was showed on the highest shelf. Jenna Ortega as Cairo Sweet did deliver many good qualities, she was good at giving her character a dark tone and she did also show greatly the fantasies of a girl teen. Jonathan Miller performed by Martin Freeman as the teacher that falls in love with the student, was convincing enough. I have seen Freeman in better roles but I didn't really argue too much about it. He delivered what he needed to deliver, and I liked his development. The story was a good version of the Plot Summary on IMDb, just in a longer version. The story works very well until the ending comes. And yeah, then it comes. Did I watch the first part, and have to wait for a sequel, or this is it? Because after so many dramas, dilemmas and new courses of action, the ending came. And I obviously didn't expect it to be so short. It's rare that I say movies are to short, and this one is probably one of my rarest exceptions. So to say things short, I was just very confused. Yet many elements of this film were good to make the runtime acceptable. The camera work, as well as the scenography with beautiful landscapes and plants, did work. The camera angles and montages were nicely composed. The dialogues and script was surprisingly very original, yet sometimes they tried to hard to make it like poetry. Sometimes it failed, sometimes it fitted the scene. The music was ok, I guess, nothing I noticed in particular. I don't think it's much left to talk about. Ok film, I think it has mostly good sides, but it shouldn't have ended so fast.

"Bullitt" is first of all a movie were the action and atmosphere counts, (As in most of the action movies) and the way Peter Yates made it, all of the details, montage and action sequences, made it an absolute masterpiece. Steve McQueen as Frank Bullitt did an absolutely stunning performance as the badass police cop that has to make up some unfinished problems. He had the calmness and the cold stare, and he was very convincing in his role. Many action stars are fifty-fifty mostly because they only play good in action, and when they have to do something else, they are pretty weak. Steve McQueen is good from every side. He does his job right, and isn't shy or nervous to cross the line. The supporting roles were good, too, but everyone knows that the film was dedicated for McQueen. When the action came, I felt the film was a hundred percent, very complete, I haven't much to complain about. The atmosphere of Bullitt driving in San Francisco, as well as the fantastic camerawork included, doesn't disappoint. The angles were natural and creative, and the montage did have a good flow, the scenes were composed very smoothly. The music by Lalo Shifrin (That also wrote the music for Mission: Impossible) did make the scenes much better, and the score was generally speaking very original. The sound effects that came in and out to make some tense feeling into the action was very fun and gave the scenes a little sparkle of fire. I have to admit, almost everything works. I think the plot did sometimes have confusing turns of action, the plot twist did felt a little bit weird, but afterwards I didn't have much complains about it. I think Bullitt is a very good action movie every fan of cinema should watch, if you wonder how great movies like James Bond, Mission: Impossible and so came, this is a great start.

"Jigsaw" is probably the most confusing and twisted Saw movie from the ten film franchise, but I don't mean it as a bad thing. Of course, after the very confusing ending that I lightly understood, I got to watch some YouTube video "Jigsaw Ending Explained" but after understanding everything I don't think the movie did a big problem. It's twisted, fun, and have some very good values for the Saw legacy. The story goes ten years after John Kramer's (Jigsaw's) death and after so many games in the past people thinks the chaos is finally over. But then the games starts off again. A new investigation, new characters, new suspects, and here we go again! I think this was a worthy movie for the seven year gap between Jigsaw and Saw 3D (That was supposed to be the final chapter) and I think the new concept they did here was great, mixing the movie so the action goes in the past, and in the present. What made the film very good was all of the references to Jigsaw's life, all of the easter eggs and locations that meant a lot for him, bringing in new characters we never knew we needed. His motive is as strong as in the previous movies, and I think his message is always as bright as before. I have mixed feelings on the new traps though. There were two or three amazingly well-done traps, original and creative, and the rest were generic and basic, that really made my rating go down a little. I still don't say that it's a bad film! I can tell about one of the traps, that I think meant a lot for the story, and that was the cycle trap, that looked like some sort of hole with a big saw spiral that could cut you any time. They told it was one of the first designed traps by Kramer, and that was another great reference, but I think also it was very great made. It felt fresh, and something I have never seen before. Lastly I can mention the acting. Mostly great, I mean, not everyone was banger in their roles but overall average for the standards of a Saw movie. Should you watch this? Only if you're a fan, because for a person that have never seen the Saw movies before, it can be pretty much meaningless. So so, reader, make your choice.

Madame Web, the Sony Spider-Man Spin-off, about Cassandra (Or Cassie) Webb that discovers the abilities to see the future. After many visions, she has to save three girls that on some way or other is connected to her. Everything is connected somehow in the film, and the poster tagline "Her Web Connects them All" gives a lot of sense for me now. For the story, I can safely say that this was a very ok spin-off to a great universe, it doesn't show that big connection to the spider-verse here, but if this film gets a sequel, then I can call it a fair start. Nothing that's amazing, just ok, good enough story, Madame Web introduced as a character performed by Dakota Johnson was nice, she was carrying her role good, and her performance? Well, it had good parts, but she was very decent, I can't really say much about her. The three girls she meets afterwards, Julie, Mattie and Anya had a very important meaning for the story, and that was very cool, yet as characters I think they were very goofy and weird and I'm not sure if I liked them or not. Something about the trio was strange, I felt like they missed the coolness, something missed you know. But them co-operating with Madame Web was showed greatly, the friendship and so. The main villain dressed up in a Spider-Man like costume was ok. He isn't that rememberable, but I liked how they showed the figure of Spider-Man as something evil, I think it was needed for the film. The ending of the film felt to moralising, too much talk like: "Fight for what you love" or "Never give up your dreams" and all this damn moral that felt too pushed in wasn't that good. If they didn't have that and could have a better structured ending after the epic final fight, then I think a star higher could be added to my rating. The action went very fine, the final fight did hit really great, as well as the previous fights that came along on the way. I watched it in 4Dx and personally it was a bit overwhelming, not all of the features and effects did hit the spots on the film, but that is not the film's fault. The editing and dynamic camera angles was very good and carried a big part of the film. The motage was very fast-paced and cool, as well as all of the cuts and transitions. The music score was ok, introducing on the way Britney Spears song "Toxic" that fit one of the action scenes. After all, Madame Web was an ok film, it entertained, some things could be better, but this should probably be a fun way to spend your time.

"Saw 3D" the final chapter, the final cut, in three-dimensional perspective! How good can it possibly be? Don't ask me. I watched it normally with no special effects, just how you are supposed to watch movies. And in that kind of situations like this movie I wonder if it only works if you have some extra gadgets included. Because I don't think it worked that good on its own. Of course it had some good elements to build up the "final" chapter, yet it was flawed with many negative sides. Let's go over the plot first. The action goes straight after the events of Saw VI, and Jigsaw's long-running legacy is coming to an end. While the protagonist Mark Hoffman is after revenge, a new game he organized is starting. Let me just say that I'm not so satisfied with this games compared to the previous movies. The previous ones had that great holding suspense, full of action, epicness and absolutely terrifying scenes. This one was full of that sort of scenes, too, but the action wasn't that gripping. It felt very unoriginal, and the traps the victims were forces to do were ok, I guess. Nothing I got really proud over, there is that one trap scene I was really into, but besides that, like I said, zero. The new characters in this film felt really pushed in, it expended the story so much that it's almost funny. It tried to put more events in Jigsaw's life to make sense to the plot here, but it only made me get confused on the chronology to the story. Yet I understand that Jigsaw had a long life, he met many people, and probably he wanted to "reborn" many of them, but for the audience it can be overwhelming with so many new characters, side stories and even more flashbacks from Jigsaw. Anyways, even if they really failed that elements, I have to admit I liked the final act, the ending for the "final" chapter. It had a really great plot twist, something I never expected, and at the same time bringing up characters from the previous movies. The grand final was very epic, they did that great with good music, fast transitions, and fast paced action that kept going. It was great, but the last scene felt confusing, I don't know if it should have ended like that. I won't say what happened, but what I can say is that it only made confusion, and that's when I decided to remove one star from the rating. Coming over other things, the acting was decent, Saw movie average, they did their job as they were supposed to do, and I can't really complain. The main antagonist Mark Hoffman performed by Costas Mandylor was probably the greatest part, along with Tobin Bell as Jigsaw from the flashbacks. They both are great in their evil roles, and their philosophy and thinking comes very brightly in, I think the both actors did a good job getting deeper into their roles. Summarizing, Saw 3D was supposed to be the final chapter, but it's actually the seventh film in a ten movie franchise. This was supposed to be the grand final, but because it actually wasn't, it didn't felt that great. Many parts of the film were bad, too, but the rating was saved by some good parts and a good final act, yet confusing last scene. I don't think you should watch it, but if you have watched all the previous, I think you should watch this one just to go over it and finish all the films.

Since this is an all-time classic, and rated on the top ten best movies in the whole world, I just had too watch it. After seeing this, I could understand why people loved it so much. Personally I'm not a big fan, but it had that good moments were I felt the action was banger! The film goes very slow, something that isn't so popular in movies these days. Well, personally, I didn't like it so much. I can watch movies were the action has a slow built-up, but this crossed the line. I can understand if a few scenes could have the slow movements and music, but that kind of scenes went almost throughout the whole film. Like every ten minutes we got something like that. A few of this slow scenes were interesting, in terms of making the dynamic and atmosphere of space. Kubrick thought smart to mute the sound in space, because in reality, there isn't any sound in space. So yeah, that gave sense. The music soundtrack was good to and did fit most of the time. When we got into action (That personally wasn't that original, yet holding) then it was more interesting. A crew is on a journey to Jupiter, while they discover that their artificial intelligence on the ship can't be trusted. This showed greatly how robots and Ai can betray us if something goes wrong, that we can never be sure, never have the full trust. Hal (The Ai on the ship) was a good part of the film that made the characters and the story more interesting, compared to other boring parts of the film. The human characters (like for example the guy called Dave) were good enough to hold the story in one place, and the acting was decent. I can mention right away the opening scene with the monkeys, when the story focused on the pre-historic part of earth, when humans weren't evolved yet. That felt like som BBC David Attenborough special and didn't felt that cinematic. Something I noticed was a reference, though. I watched the Barbie movie some months ago and I saw that they copied the scene from the Space Odyssey. Watch the both movies and then you will see, I don't want to spoil too much. The technical parts were interesting, the scenography was probably one of the best parts of the film, yet I have seen much better in other science fiction movies. As I mentioned, the music was nice, the sound was good, too, but if I conclude everything, I can still say that this wasn't my movie. Many good parts, but I wasn't that impressed. Some people may like it much more than me, and well, good for them. I definitely prefer other movies from the science fiction genre.