Raptorclaw155

I came across this on Amazon Prime Japan and became curious since I was aware of Asuka Kirara and the single she put out in promotion for this film.

I'm not at all familiar enough with Japanese tokusatsu film or television to give an adequate comparison or barometer of what one might come to expect from a film like this but if I could attempt a brief description: it's a 90 minute action drama starring a very attractive girl fighting goons and other very attractive girls in a style indicative of tokusatsu.

The quality of the acting is all over the place. The biggest issue I have with the acting is that, being so inconsistent, the acting had me wondering if this was an action film or some kind of comedy. Tonally, because of the mixed performances it's a bit scatterbrained for the first few minutes.

The storyline, I would suspect, is one that would probably be considered average or below-average for a tokusatsu action film but, as far as stories go in general it's kind of a means to an end. The story exists to motivate the characters into the next action sequence.

The reason to watch this film isn't for the story, or the performances, or the cheesy special effects, and not even for the couple shots of the two lead female actresses topless, but it's for the action scenes. The sword fights are really well choreographed and the slow-motion wirework stunts are awesome. It's the kind of action that just straddles the line of schlock but stays within the range of acceptability that makes them really cool. The only complaint I have about the fight scenes is that they could be longer but I think that's more of a compliment to the quality of the action sequences and the stunt work.

Overall, it's not bad and I'd watch it again. There are worse ways to spend 90 minutes.

When I saw that Celebrity Sex Tape was released by The Asylum, and after reading the first few sentences of the plot synopsis, I became very curious to see just what was in store for me in this film.

A lot of reviews of this film that I've seen have offered critiques about the acting, saying that there is a lot of over acting in particular. For what I saw, I think the opposite is true. There is a lot of under acting in this film as, with a comedy film like this, over acting, for better or worse, is the feature, not the bug. As a result there are some unintentionally funny moments involving actors making some kind of exclamation but having no facial expression or body language to back it up, so it looks like something out of a satire. That said, I will say that there were parts of Ross' big monologue at the end which I found a bit funny as far as the performance goes and I think it captured the film's intent as an absurdist comedy the best.

This is not a very good film, of course, but before I got into explaining why, I do have to compliment the film on one aspect, at least. I could easily see a situation where a Hollywood production would produce a film with a similar premise and have similar marketing including the obnoxious promotional images, but when it comes to what the film actually shows, it would pull punches so it could get an R rating so it can be shown in as many theaters it can be. This film, could have easily done something like that, even if it wasn't rated, and yet it didn't and it doesn't pull punches and, coming from an American film production that isn't pornographic, I was genuinely surprised but also had to pay some respect to the film because of that.It doesn't make the film good, but it does, in fact, deliver what it promises and that has to count for something.

The film still isn't very good though. There are a lot of issues with it, especially when it comes to the style of humor it has. Maybe among high school boys back in 2012 it would have been funny, but its low bar shock humor has long since curdled like year old spoiled milk left out in the sun for a year. The really bad Asian portrayal, the fat jokes, the homophobic jokes, etc. are all products of a bygone age where it would have been considered acceptable and funny. I almost felt like there could have been some kind of commentary going on about sexism in nerd culture with the way the main characters obsess over losing their virginity before graduating college as if it's a necessity and how women are only portrayed as objects that can serve as a means to that end and that is where their value is derived from. But as I saw the film play this portrayal straight, where the moral ended up being the equivalent of "bros before hoes" in tone I realized that that was just what the film was - a nerd fantasy - if you will.

Celebrity Sex Tape is a shock comedy that is a rung trashier than the trashiest major production studios in Hollywood can put out. This film pulls out all the stops and takes no prisoners, for better or for worse, and while it does, indeed, flaunt its being unrated as its promotional images suggest, there is very little substance here that is really worth seeing unless you on't mind watching stupid, offensive-for-the-sake-of-it shock humor schlock. You aren't missing anything if you don't see this.

I can't help but to compare this film with The Notebook not only because it stars Ryan Gosling but also because it also takes a different interpretation of what fighting for one's love and relationship for someone else that exists - albeit in passing - in The Notebook.

This film goes into the gritty realities of what relationships are really like in contrast with many other films under the romance banner which are more idealistic and have more of a place in fantasy than in reality. Blue Valentine paints an incredibly interesting picture of the relationship that exists between the two leading characters. Both of them love each other, but come to that end in completely different ways that don't go communicated. There is a line Gosling's character says in one of the flashback sequences which sort of foreshadows the later events of the film and ultimately the fate of their relationship.

Blue Valentine relies heavily on interlacing present day events with past events through seamlessly integrated flashback sequences. They are so seamlessly switched between that, if you're not paying attention, you might find it a little confusing and slightly difficult to follow, however, it is easy to catch on to and the confusion is - at least should be - momentary. I didn't have much of an issue with them, myself.

Blue Valentine is probably among the most believable romance films ever made, but it should not be something you go in expecting to be feel-good. This is not lighthearted date night window dressing you put on while on a date to help set any particular mood unless its one of introspection and reconsideration - which will probably kill your whole night. Unless you are interested in film, I would recommend seeing this film outside the context of a date unless you're ready to have the kind of discussion this film tries to get out of you.

Helter Skelter offers a scathing commentary on the state of the culture of celebrity in modern Japan and the commodification of beauty, particularly of youth.

Helter Skelter's commentary is extremely clear from its outset. The main character, Lilico, has peaked in her popularity and is now facing replacement by models who are younger than her. The film follows her journey, particularly her decline, as she becomes more acutely aware of her disposability in the industry that had created her.

Helter Skelter's commentary, while potent, has the issue of being a bit on the explicit side. There are some points where dialogue seems to exist solely to explain what happened or what already happened, particularly at the end with the two police investigators. Rather than relying on implication and visuals along, which are, themselves, fine, the film has the tendency to fall back on dialogue explanations which kill the pacing and make the experience feel like the viewer is being spoon fed information that we were just previously shown.

I felt that this film went on for too long. The problem stems mostly from scenes of expository dialogue that reiterate what we can already see. The police investigators are the biggest source for this. Their scenes, along with a few others, feel like the point of the film is being painfully reiterated over and over and in the final part of the film, every potential end scene is followed by another, almost as if the film doesn't want to end. In a way, it starts to dilute its own meaning with its lack of brevity.

The performances and cinematography in this film are great. The psychotic, sadistic nature of the main character is played in the same manic way a lot of Japanese films like this are played and it translates here well. The special effects are sparse, but when used, help add to the increasing surreal experiences of the main characters.

Overall Helter Skelter is a film that feels like it is on the verge of being much more than it ends up being. I feel like the film would have greatly improved from some tightening up in the editing phase and, were it cut down to under 2 hours, I think would be more impactful than it is in its current state. As a piece of modern Japanese cinema, it isn't bad and I'd recommend it to anyone who might find this film's premise interesting.

What happens when you take a former Hello! Project trainee, a former member of Momoiro Clover Z, and a bunch of members of PASSPO and make a film about them? Well, here you go! This is a very interesting lineup but I think it's oddly appropriate in some inexplicable way.

The main thing to mention here is, of the central cast of 11, Hayami Akari is the only actress of them. Given that this film was produced, at least in part, by Universal Music, I'd say this mish-mash of idol/former-idol talent has something to do with that. Despite this, however, the acting isn't as wonky or amateur as one might expect. While I first came to this film, years ago, for Akari because her performances are usually great no matter what she's in, I also stayed for You Kikkawa. Kikkawa surprised me with her acting in this film as she has had little to no documented experience acting, that I can find, either prior to the making of this film, or since. It's pretty incredible what she manages to pull off in this starring role. The way she interacts with Akari on screen, as well, make for some of the most charming scenes any film of this kind can offer.

Cheerfu11y, once again, is a film that follows the popular kind of story where a loose group of friends/constituents are forced into a situation where they have to work together to achieve a common goal. In Cheerfu11y's case, that is winning a cheer dancing competition to pay for a statue that they all broke during a contested and gridlocked discussion about the allocation of school funding to their respective clubs.

Upon revisiting this film after years of having left it alone, I've managed to deduce Cheerfu11y's strongest points down to two things: The family dynamic and the relationship between You Kikkawa and Hayami Akari's characters. Kikkawa's character's family is dysfunctional and only gets more complicated as the film goes on and all of the scenes between herself, her sister and their mother are all exceptionally written, blocked, shot, edited, and acted. They add a lot of tension to the film and, if the film's focus was moved away from the competition and training aspect of the story and was more about this girl's home life, I think it would be a much more interesting film. Where those family scenes add tension to the story, Akari's character comes in to lighten the mood. She's not comic relief in the traditional sense, but her interactions with Kikkawa's character are so lighthearted and cute that it helps serve as a nice relief.

The weakest part of Cheerfu11y has to be the actual training and competition aspect of the story - what's supposed to be the focal point. The buildup is fine, and even the beginning of training starts out well enough, but the film ends up going through so many different subplots that it starts to cannibalize time that would have otherwise been spent on developing the 9 other girls in the group and their interpersonal dynamics within the group. There are a couple of stronger personalities but we don't see them often enough to really remember what they are like. Some supporting characters seem to be introduced and insisted to be important only to dissolve into the background with the rest of the girls soon later, never to really be heard from again, save for the ending, which I will get to. By its midsection, Cheerfu11y seems to lose focus and relegates the training, hard work, and teamwork to a montage so it can finally get to its conclusion.

One of the tings about this film that I'm not too keen on either is its reliance on narration. The narration is told by Akari's character which makes sense, considering that she's the one drawing the manga based on this story. The problem is that the narration is very prevalent in the first act of the film and then disappears entirely for the rest of the film until the very end. I understand what the point of it was, but it seemed a bit odd at the same time. The way the film is framed in the beginning, it's made out to almost be like Akari's character is the main character and we get a lot of the first act told in her narration from her perspective - even hearing her own thoughts in some cases. But then the film, not so much shifts, but almost treats Akari's character as a red herring of sorts where she really isn't the main character, and as she becomes almost as equally background dressing as the other supporting cast, the narration and the knowledge of what she's thinking also disappear. They don't disappear entirely, but they are never as prominent again in the rest of the film as they are in the first act. I also felt that the narration was used as a tool to justify organically establishing all 11 girls in the group by assigning them certain specific skills, interests and personality archetypes. Something tells me that, perhaps that was something of an 11th hour decision made after the film was finished, but that's speculation.

Another issue with this film is at the end where all 11 girls, essentially, tell the audience what their character arc in this story was, despite knowing very little about them and what, specifically about this experience helped them grow or change. One-by-one they give a short speech about how great an experience it was to work to this point with the rest and how it transformed them, but we don't really see that, save for a couple of characters.having a single moment or two with another character, but in the end it does not feel earned. More could have been done with this ensemble cast but it seems that it was decided that they weren't going to do that.

Cheerfu11y is complicated for me. It was among the first Japanese films I've ever seen and there is a lot of nostalgia behind it. I was surprised just how much more receptive I was to the family scenes than I was when I first saw it years ago, and now I believe that those scenes are the best parts of the film, coupled with the scenes that have You Kikkawa and Hayami Akari interacting. But at the same time, the film suffers because so much emphasis is put on those strong aspects at the expense of the whole point of the film, so it's a bit of a paradox. I still enjoy this film and I would recommend it to anyone who might find this, lesser-Swing Girls with cheer dancing concept interesting. It's nothing offensive and it isn't boring, but it's unfocused and could have been polished a bit more before shooting.

Skin of Roses is a fascinating piece of Japanese cinema. When looking at what Pinku Eiga and , more specifically, Roman Porno, are, one might go in to a film like this not expecting much. Indeed, this film exists to serve a very specific purpose, and that is to have as many as-graphic-as-the-censors-would-allow sex scenes possible within a 72 minute run time.

Getting this out of the way first and foremost, because this is a work of Pinku Eiga from Japan in 1978, that means that there is censorship. Scenes including such things as "hair nude" wouldn't even be allowed to be shown until the 80s, so there is a bit of censorship in this film. Some of the censorship relies on cleverly placed objects or placement of the camera, and other types of censorship are a large blur on the screen. This may turn people away, so I thought I'd get that settled first. My favorite bit of censorship has to do with the placement of a fish bowl as I thought that that served as a bit of an interesting framing of the scene as, not only can you see the scene happening as it would normally be shown, but there is also a duplication of that scene, albeit much smaller, within the fish bowl. This may or may not have been a deliberate decision by the director, but it adds a level of depth to the scene and the characters when taking into consideration the context of what's already happened thus far. I don't want to give away any spoilers but I liked that bit of censorship.

For a film that is supposed to have a low budget and strict shooting deadlines, Skin of Roses is extremely cinematic. It's visually beautiful to look at. In the framing of certain images in the beginning, the way the film manages to juxtapose the erotic and the violent based on the movement of the camera and the composition of the shots, it's all very well crafted.

The story this film tells doesn't have too much going on in it, but this is Pinku Eiga, which is sort of an intellectual exercise unto itself, and the story manages to be concise, yet comprehensive, and manages to connect all of the sex scenes together in a way that makes sense which is not the easiest feat. This film feels organized and never tries to step outside of what is necessary to convey its story. Is there filler? Sure, but it never feels out-of-place and, in the end, is very logical.

I did notice some technical errors with this film. Seconds after a sex scene begins, there is a hiccup in the image which, I'm sure, is probably some kind of marker so that they knew where to pay attention for whatever necessary censorship. But it does distract, albeit momentarily, from the scene and whatever significance it may or may not have. I also noticed some obvious overdubbing which felt a bit silly, and the audio quality itself is not so great, even for 1978 standards.

Some of the things that take place in this film reminded me a little bit of the first two 50 Shades films, except this is executed in a much more enjoyable way. Even if you might not be in to SM or anything like that, this film manages to pull a lot of similar tricks as the 50 Shades films but execute it in a way where the eroticism is much, much more prevalent than in thos films, which is surprising. But then again, Hollywood can only go so far, and while Japanese censors do limit what can and can't be shown in any work of film consisting of nudity, this is not constrained with the need to generate profits and, thus, artistic vision is better preserved and we get better shot, acted, and edited scenes than the comparable ones in the 50 Shades films. I found the parallels fascinating.

Looking at the score for this film, I thought that it would be straight bad or so bad, it's funny or something of the sort. While it isn't anything Earth-shattering, it is actually a well-made film with a sense of direction and style in mind. I think it is executed well and I think serves as a good example of a non-satirical work of Pinku Eiga. I would recommend it to anyone who might not have already seen this film yet and have an interest in sexploitation or Pinku Eiga.

It's no secret that the Vietnam War is one of the most embarrassing points in US history, and the media produced about it highlight that, with satirical and cynical pieces being produced about it for the next couple decades after it ended. In a way, satirical depictions of the Vietnam War became a bit of a cliche. Now enter We Were Soldiers - one of the few Vietnam War films that plays its depiction of the war straight. There seem to be mixed reactions about this film, many praising its accuracy in the depiction of the battle it shows and many criticizing it for glorifying American involvement in the war.

This film is clear in that it is not glorifying the US deciding to become involved in Vietnam. It's surprising that people came away from this film not realizing that since We Were Soldiers has a number of scenes which frame American Cold War arrogance in a critical way, and illustrating how useless the coming American efforts will be. The NVA is humanized and is meant to be felt sympathetic towards, they aren't a fanatical mindless mob of villains. Sure, it doesn't go as in-depth with them as it tries to with the American soldiers, but aside from Mel Gibson's character, most of his men he fights alongside with are forgettable to the point where the only way they can be identified after they die is when their wives find out.

It's needless to say that We Were Soldiers excels at depicting, as accurately as possible, the first battle between the NVA and the US military. Its weakest point comes from the scenes of the soldiers' wives. Those scenes seem to only serve as padding as they add very little except to inform the audience that one of the characters we were supposed to care about died. The worst scene takes place near the beginning where the film clumsily attempts to acknowledge the issue of civil rights at the time in the most frustrating, misguided, pandering way possible. These scenes do this film a disservice.

We Were Soldiers doesn't really take much time to establish its characters which wouldn't be a big deal if their deaths weren't treated as semi-large events. Luckily, the film doesn't dwell too much on that aspect and continues doing what it does best, which is showing the battle.

The depiction of the battle itself is, not only well-done, but also conveys a really good idea of where everything is happening. The sense of location where everything is happening is shown organically and comprehensively to such a degree that I feel it might have been done as well as a film like Gettysburg.

Most of the visual effects were done extraordinarily well. The only real issue I had with the effects was with the initial flight of the helicopters where the computer generated helicopters are starting to look a bit dated, but it isn't intrusive and doesn't take away from the experience and atmosphere of the film.

We Were Soldiers is not pro-American propaganda regarding the Vietnam War and there is nothing to suggest that it is that way. It captures a moment in time when the US was arrogant and naive enough to believe the things the characters in this film believe and seeing that this was at the beginning of the conflict-proper, US opinion was a world different from what it was years after the events of this film took place. Yet, this film is still critical, with more subtle irony and no satire. It is unfortunately hindered by its half-baked homefront scenes and lack of character development aside from Mel Gibson's character, but as a film which uses the accurate depiction of the first major battle between NVA and US soldiers as its centerpiece, it does exceptionally well.

In a world where modern hand-drawn animation relies more heavily on visual spectacle to impress audiences, Perfect Blue is a refreshing contrast to that.

That isn't to say that this is a bad looking film, in fact its strongest asset is the way it tells its story visually, but Perfect Blue's visual language seems more akin to that of a conventional film than an animated one. As a result, you start to forget that it's an animated film. I might say that Perfect Blue is the most live-action adaptation-friendly Japanese animated film, but that comes with an asterisk, that being, it needs to have its visual language preserved. The way this film is shot and edited feels like a work of art cinema and as a result, it keeps you guessing about what's actually happening.

Perfect Blue is an exceptional piece of Japanese cinema, animated or not. It's a film that, while animated and therefore branded as anime, does not fall for the same tropes and stereotypes that so many other films that have since been released fall for. It's no wonder that this film is recommend to people as a first experience for those who are new to anime because this is the least-anime anime film I think I've ever seen. I can't recommend this film enough. In an age where explicit explanation of things that are happening are a standard in popular, modern films, it's nice to see one that focuses on sharing its story in the way film was originally intended to.

I cannot begin to describe how much I appreciated the way Gettysburg portrayed its titular battle. Gettysburg is very long and there is no intermission breaking it up, but I'd be lying if it wasn't an incredibly immersive and genuinely impressive film.

A lot of war films since Saving Private Ryan rely a lot about depicting battles in the most gruesome- albeit realistic- way possible, but this film came before that became the thing to do. Gettysburg, instead, relies and utilizing professional Civil War reenactors to play the role of the soldiers and using real equipment and authentic gear on the actual location of the battle.

This has to be the most comprehensive depiction of the Battle of Gettysburg possible, as the scale of the various battlegrounds and the forces that met there are easy to see and understand. One of the best parts of this film are the long periods of time spent outside of the skirmishes. This is probably why Gettysburg gets so many complaints for its length, but I think that's part of the genius of it. It was a serving Civil War soldier who wrote that "fighting for his country" consisted of weeks of sitting around and not doing much of anything, punctuated by short bursts of violence and terror. The Battle of Gettysburg was a 3 day affair, but it wasn't 72 hours of continuous brawling. A lot of that time, and probably most of it, was spent moving regiments around and camping out, either preparing to do something or waiting for something to happen. The fact of the matter is that, the scenes that many- especially modern moviegoers- would call boring are what the majority of war, especially these types of slow moving pre-modern wars, were like. It's that particular accuracy of capturing that long period of inactivity and anticipation that I liked the most about this film. I felt like I was one of the soldiers under Chamberlain, wondering if we're really going to stick here and defend to the last man, or being a Confederate soldier and wondering if a charge really is going to be ordered while watching the generals talk among each other.

I cannot compliment this film enough. On a technical level, the fact that so much of this film is live, without the aide of computer generated effects or any of the sort is amazing. Sure, it looks a bit dated, and it seems that some of the same footage is recycled a few times, but I can't complain when so much was done to recreate a battle of this scale with such accuracy. This is a really great film and I would recommend it to anyone who likes history and isn't phased by its exceptionally long run time.

Love is kind of an exhausting film to watch, but based on how the film is shot and edited, I understand that that's probably its intention.

I came out of this film feeling that Love is not the idealistic thing it is made out to be. It's visceral, primal, disgusting, and somewhat like an illness. So much of this film is shot and edited so starkly that the sex scenes, especially, are exceptionally uncomfortable and bordering on repulsive to watch.

Coming away from this film, it was very clear to me that this is offering criticism of the quality of millennial relationships. As youth are bound to be, this film shows how sex-obssessed young people can be but juxtaposes it with the failure of experimentation with polyamory which I found really added color and an interesting dynamic to its commentary. There's this obsession with sex and being open to the same kind of free love that existed in the hippie counter culture of the American 1960s, but millennials aren't hippies and still idealize monogamous relationships - making the celebration of free expression of sexuality to be incredibly difficult, if not, impossible.

Love had me thinking but it's not a film I would recommend to the casual moviegoer or for those who aren't into the more artistic, independent side of film making.

I respect this film for what it has to say as there is more to this film than what I mentioned, which gives it great thematic depth, but I can't say I want to see it again any time soon.

The Patriot is a film that I've always had mixed feelings about. After seeing it again recently, I think I have a more coherent idea of how I feel about this film.

To sum this film up neatly, it is a retelling of the story we know in Braveheart, with some alterations and being slightly worse.

From a historical standpoint, The Patriot is about as historically accurate as Braveheart - that meaning that it really isn't. By now, many have already meticulously picked apart its inaccuracies so I won't really dwell on it too much. But as a piece of popular cinema, I don't think this film's intention is to be historically accurate anyway.

The Patriot is an impressive looking film, I believe. The action sequences are exciting to watch and the scale of the battles are appropriate enough where there aren't noticeable CGI people also partaking in the fight.

Speaking of the CG effects, they are looking a bit dated now. Some of the computer generated blue screen backgrounds don't look very convincing, especially when they go to Charles Town at the beginning of the film. But since the shots don't dwell too much on them, it's not too bi a deal, I believe.

The acting performances aren't bad at all. Mel Gibson found his niche after Braveheart and went with it and his performance here translates incredibly well. The actors that portray the various British officers in this film do put on a bit of a James Bond villain performance and it does get a little distracting, but there is some complexity in the writing at times that makes up for that in those moments.

It's also to be noted that the soundtrack for this film is amazing. Of course, this is the work of John Williams and it goes extraordinarily well when paired with this film. It is the shining aspect of this film and I cannot compliment it enough. It has to be one of the more underrated works John Williams has done.

Where this film ultimately loses me is when it comes to the issue of slavery. I understand this is among the myriad of other historical inaccuracies with this film, but it's this particular aspect of American history that really hurts it the most. The most obvious example of this is when the workers on Martin's farm say that they work his land but are not slaves. It is also framed in this film that the British army offering freedom to any slave who serves with them is a bad thing, but later when the American army announces something similar, suddenly it's righteous. This, of course, wasn't the case and it's very misleading. There's a scene in the film where Gabriel makes a promise that once the British are defeated, the old world will be pushed out and a new world can be built; one where all people are free. This is so obviously untrue but the film ignores it. As a result, it feels like the one slave character shown in the whole film is duped into serving with the continentals just to be enslaved again once the eventual government decides, through inaction, that slavery is necessary. I get images of the American Civil War in my mind every time I see that scene, and it's that scene that really hurts this film the most- but ironically enough, maybe the most accurate part of it...

The Patriot is interesting. I feel it's a bit long. Granted, I'm just coming from seeing the extended cut but I do think this film could have gone without some things. Not horrible if you're looking for a fictional story that takes place in a real time in history. Just don't use it as an educational tool unless you're going to talk about the uniforms and clothing of that period.

Gone with the Wind, it must be understood, is a cultural relic of its time. That isn't to say criticism shouldn't be levied against it with regards to its racist depictions and its unabashed romanticization of the Confederate States of America and the Lost Cause myth, but it does come from a cultural background where those things were more widely accepted as the American Civil War became more long in the memory in the collective psyche of Americans of the time.

Despite that, I do believe that Gone with the Wind is hindered by its stance on the Confederacy and race as it's something that can't be gotten past as American society continues its painfully slow progress forward.

As an aesthetic work, looking at it in a vacuum, it's still a well-made film. I think some of the negative criticisms this film receives outside of its political backwardness are a bit misunderstanding of what I think this film is trying to present. Scarlet is kind of unlikable in some ways, but I think that was the intention of the film. There isn't a traditional protagonist-antagonist story happening here, but instead, we are experiencing a piece of the main character's life and how she experienced the events happening around her. We follow the decisions she makes and follow her, long character arc to its eventual conclusion at the end of the film. I don't want to give too much about this film away, but structurally it kind of reminded me of the film Barry Lyndon.

Not all of the characters get this treatment, but the main characters in this film are so well-developed that they seem to mimic the complicated nature of people. The two main characters feel extremely believable and for their era even more so. As far as character goes, this is a very rare instance of a film managing to show just how frustrating and complicated people can really be. This aspect of the film was something I found the most immersive.

The romance in this film is also a strong aspect for me. It's, again, framed in a type of realism that is difficult to explain. While, of course, real life isn't so dramatic, the mutual sense of insecurity, resentment, and distrust feel incredibly real in their depiction and I have to commend it. These two characters are so mutually insufferable that nobody else deserves them but each other. They are so toxic to each other, yet they are perfect for each other because of it. It's difficult to explain but I found this to be a strong aspect of the film as well.

There's been a lot said about this film already, but I believe that Gone with the Wind is still a really well-made film. As an aesthetic piece of storytelling, I believe it holds up- but is held back from being even better by the ball and chain it's married to - that being its commitment to Confederate apologetics.

The Devil's Honey is really not that bad of a film. It was originally going to be a point of contention I had with it, but looking back, I think I've gotten to appreciate what it was going for. Its narrative structure is a little unconventional and I was a little worried that the film would end up being unfocused and disorganized. But once things came together, it made a lot more sense.

The other thing I like about this film, in retrospect, is that it is surprisingly visual. I say surprisingly because I don't really expect very much from low budget sexploitation film, but the visual aspect of this film was actually quite strong.

This film isn't without its flaws, however. Its weakest point is the acting.Not all of the performances are bad, but the ones that are are so much so that they make certain dramatic points in the film unintentionally funny. The scene that instantly comes to mind for me is when the main character's boyfriend collapses in the recording studio while recording his tenor sax part for a song on his album he's recording. Its obvious that the actor is pretending to play and not pretending very well when his character is having a good day, so when he plays poorly and collapses, it looked hilarious and I did laugh out loud when I saw that happen.

Devil's Honey is a film that excels when it focuses on its visuals. The dialogue isn't necessarily bad but it kind of feels redundant and unnecessary at times. Luckily it isn't very dialogue heavy and even though some of it is hokey I think the visuals of this film are so strong that you could probably watch it on mute and understand everything that's going on.

I'm surprised by how well this film took out. I had to wait a bit after watching it to go over my thoughts on the film because I really wasn't sure what to think about it, but I figure that if it's a film that leaves you thinking about it, then perhaps it has something going for it. I thought it could have had a better ending, but I don't think it ended poorly the way it is. I think it's an interesting film and I think it's worth checking out.

The excuse "It's a Lifetime movie, what do you expect?" is not good enough. My biggest critique of the 1980 film was that it held back a lot despite seeming to want to be edgier. This film has that even worse.

Blue Lagoon: The Awakening? What exactly is being awoken in this film? A title like that would be more appropriate for the 1980 film than this one since there's no real character arc for either of the two main characters. They aren't transformed by their experience being stranded on an island for months. Once they go back to their old lives, it's like nothing ever happened.

The acting is bad. The line delivery on the lifeboat, especially, was so unnatural it felt more like a play being put on by inexperienced school kids than an actual film. It was almost like they filmed too little of that sequence and had lines dubbed over after the fact and it feels incredibly sloppy. The reactions of the parents after the two come back from being rescued are extremely subdued and unrealistic. Underacting at its finest, it seems. Your kids are presumed dead and have been for months and then you find out they're actually still alive and have been rescued and the best you can react is as if they are coming from year long study abroad program in Europe or something?

All of the meaningful social commentary present, even in passing, in the 1980 film are completely absent from this one, replaced by the concerns of high school social politics and worries of social implications of certain decisions, most notably, who you end up dating. It's incredibly shallow and either operates on a fundamental lack of understanding on what the original story was trying to say, or was purposefully watered down so that it could conform to the conventional Hollywood drama with all the fixings of a young adult fiction.

The drama and tension are all manufactured nonsense. There don't seem to be any real stakes in this film and any possibility of conflict or tension in the film is passed up in favor of something ridiculous, unrelated, and out of the blue. There is a question of whether or not Emma was pregnant but I believe the film when Emma says "Nope." We can't have underage teen pregnancy, what would the audience think? Any possible tension that sort of issue would imply is instantaneously evaporated in favor of putting in a ridiculous chase scene involving a panther on an island..?

One of the positive aspects of the 1980 adaptation that I complimented was that it did have nice visuals, especially with the swimming sequences. This film tries to do the same thing but can't quite recreate it and ends up looking like a cheap knockoff.

This adaptation of Blue Lagoon relies too much on its soundtrack to heighten any sense of drama or tension and the soundtrack, itself, relies too much on indie pop tunes to convey any emotion. Since there really isn't any chemistry between the two leads, the film makers seemed to decide on forcing emotion with a cheap soundtrack. At any standard, this film's soundtrack feels like an afterthought and more of a supplemental tool than anything else.

Blue Lagoon: The Awakening is bad. If Lifetime really had reservations about the original story enough to change it so dramatically, then maybe they shouldn't have made it in the first place. This film is an intensely watered down truncated vision of the story tainted with all the worst elements of the most cliche teen/young adult fiction tropes one can imagine. I cannot recommend this to anyone. The 1980 version is no masterpiece, but this is straight junk.

The long and the short of it is this: if you like RedLetterMedia content like Half in the Bag, Best of the Worst, re:View, or the Mister Plinkett reviews, this will probably be an enjoyable experience for you, albeit, maybe a little more-of-the-same.

Having familiarized myself with a lot of RedLetterMedia's backlog of content going back to their Plinkett shorts and The Grabowskis, it's interesting how the advent of the Plinkett reviews and the Half in the Bag skits have seen their humor evolve. However, I can't help but feel like that this sense of humor and these characters make this film feel more like a really long Half in the Bag skit than a standalone film, which is ultimately my biggest critique of this.

That's not to say the humor is bad, on the contrary, I laughed at a lot of the jokes in this film, especially when I saw a reference to The Grabowskis included in one of the scenes. The cheesy one-liners Space Cop says are also great. My problem lies in that the characters portrayed by Mike, Jay and Rich all feel like characters we've already seen before and feels like more of the same as one of their YouTube videos except with higher production values. Coming into this film after seeing all 5 seasons of The Grabowskis and having watched The Cleaning Lady for the umpteenth time, maybe I was expecting something a little grittier and more of that vein of bizarre humor than this. There are some moments in this film where I felt the joke was included to satisfy a checklist, like Rich Evans yelling "OHHH NO" despite it feeling a bit out of character for Space Cop. I still laughed at that joke but, I couldn't help but feel like characters were being reprised in this film, either for the sake of catering to their YouTube audience who know them for those sorts of jokes on their various review series,or because it's being done somewhat on autopilot- or maybe a little of both.

There are some people who have reviewed Space Cop and have called it disappointing by pointing out technical flaws in the way it was made, but it's obvious this film wasn't made on a very robust budget which is probably why they went for a science fiction schlock comedy film instead of trying to make something more profound.

I just wish Space Cop had an identity of its own but as it is, it's still a fun experience and one that I think many RedLetterMedia fans will enjoy.

I was not expecting much from this film as its premise alone sounds like it has the potential to be a really bad film. Despite this, Blood Games turned out to be one of the most enjoyable stupid movies I've ever had the pleasure of seeing.

By no means is this a "good" film by conventional standards, but rather this is Best-of-the-Worst material. This is the kind of thing you put on when you're with your friends who also enjoy stupid, low-budget, late-80s, action schlock. There are so many great, hilarious moments in this film and it has all the hallmarks of what makes films like these so enjoyable: nudity for the sake of it, car chases, guns, crossbows, a wooded location, bludgeoning, shooting, technical errors, questionable acting, etc.

Reading the description will be enough to inform you about whether or not this is a film you should watch, but if you enjoy really stupid, Best of the Worst-tier action movies, look no further.

To put it simply, it's a zany Nickelodeon teen romantic comedy. That said, this film is bizarre. I remember seeing part of this when it was new but I never finished it and after rewatching it, I think I understand why.

First off, this film isn't horrible, but there are a lot of questionable writing decisions. The pacing is extremely skewed and I think it's because this film covers so much material and its runtime does makes covering all those bases equally very difficult. This probably could have had a runtime well over two hours with the amount of storytelling material it has but at its current runtime the ending ramps up very quickly and it seems to expedite the process of getting to the credits. But despite this issue, I'm glad it didn't go on for so long.

I understand that this film has a specific target demographic, and there's nothing wrong with that, but I couldn't help but wonder if this is really what the target demographic for this film were really in to. This being a lightly subversive film, I understand that the depiction of teen relationships is more raw and less idealized than they traditionally are, and I understand the importance of that kind of depiction for that target demographic (so this is a matter of personal taste). There was one scene in particular towards the beginning of the film that I distinctly remember seeing as a kid which was what promptly led me to stop watching it that involved a so-called "snogging" teacher and drool. I was trying to enjoy some nice banana hot cakes when this happened and I almost lost them. Most of the kissing scenes in this film - if not all - are disgusting in their depiction, and the exaggerated sound only makes it worse. I'm guessing that it's part of the gross-out humor of the film, but it wasn't funny for me, I'm sorry to say.

Personal gripes aside, the biggest, glaring issue in this film is Georgia's redemption arc. Of course, this film follows the cliche that the main character ends up betraying their friends and they are all alone for a brief period of time, but this film digs itself in such a massive hole with its character that, the ending- in order to give the best possible one- becomes entirely unbelievable. Every conflict in the film is resolved in the final scene and it ends up coming across that, no matter how horrible you are to your friends, and no matter how selfish you are, there are no long-reaching consequences of that because, in the end, you'll be forgiven like it never happened, and you'll get everything you wanted anyway. It's so unrealistic that it's complete fantasy, and for a film which, I presume, is trying to make a more grounded story and show a more realistic depiction of teen romance, this completely deviates from that. Georgia doesn't need to change herself, everyone will accommodate her and her wishes no matter how poorly she treats them. The more I think about it, the worse it gets and it's surprising to me that it received awards.

Alas, that's young adult fiction, I guess. I'm not sure if I'd recommend this film broadly since I'm not sure how relevant it would be to the youth of today but as a relic of my teen years, I felt compelled to visit it properly for that reason. So, I guess if you're in a similar position, you can do the same?

Strangely, of the two theatrical Frozen films, I'm more familiar with the sequel than this one. That said, Frozen will probably be - for the foreseeable future - THE film that I think of when I think of Disney.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but this film stands head and shoulders above the films (that I've seen) which are referred to as "Disney Classics." I understand that some of the misdirection of certain character tropes is a bit on-the-nose most of the time, and the story maybe isn't the most airtight ever imagined, but what this film lacks in certain areas of writing, it makes up for in the characters and the soundtrack.

The characters are extremely likable in their own way. I remember many reviews of this film when this was new saying that Olaf either had the potential to be annoying or was annoying, but I found him to be fine. His voice acting makes him to be a more unique character as far as side characters in these types of films go and I think it was well executed.

The humor in this film is quite good. I didn't laugh at all of the jokes but the ones I did I thought were genuinely funny. The strongest joke in this film, for me, (not to give away any spoilers) has to do with a sled.

The soundtrack for Frozen is superb. A lot of the same motifs are brought back again, and again, but every time that happens, it's recontextualized by the imagery in the film and does not feel repetitive as a result. The songs are like listening to an album where every song is Top 10 material while also being substantial in their own individual ways. The first 35 minutes or so of this film are hit after hit and it just keeps going. I cannot compliment the quality of this film's soundtrack enough, and this aspect alone is what sets in apart as superior to the vast majority of the classic Disney films.

As someone virtually untouched by the insane popularity Frozen received in the year after its release, I'm able to experience this film from a fairly neutral perspective and as a result, I can say that this film raises the bar for what makes a modern Disney classic. I think this will stand the test of time and I reckon those who experienced this film as children will probably have the same attachment to Frozen as older generations did with films like Cinderella or Beauty and the Beast.

I can't recommend it enough.

Upon recommendation of a friend I decided to see this film and I'm not quite sure what to make of it, now, having finished it.

I'm unsure whether I should call this version of Alice in Wonderland so bad, it's good, or call it secretly a work of genius. I don't mean the latter ironically either. There are certain exchanges of dialogue that say things indicative of the political times it came out in, but in a way so offhand and so nonchalantly that it comes off as a film that isn't trying to share anything profound but does so anyway. By its delivery it isn't something that is done by accident, which leaves me to believe that, perhaps, there may be something more to this film.

The comedy aspect of this version of Alice in Wonderland is also a bit bizarre, but again, in a good way. The film feels like it shares a lot in common in a comedic sense with Monty Python's Flying Circus, especially at the end of the film, starting with the court scene. Most of the comedy from the first half of the film didn't move me very much, but the second half was so absurd and the jokes so frequent that it was actually quite funny.

If my memory serves me correctly there are seven explicit scenes in this film and, strangely enough, despite their being the reason people visit this film (I assume) they were the weakest aspect. Maybe it's just me, but I felt that those scenes went on for too long and hurt the pacing of the film. They are shot exactly the way you would expect a film from the 70s calling itself X-Rated to be shot and I'm sure many people would appreciate that, but I didn't really feel like it was necessary for them to go on for as long as they did.

As far as the musical numbers go, they are mediocre. Some of the editing negatively impacts the timing of the musical numbers and they sometimes feel like they are patched together with certain segments of the songs completely missing. That isn't to say that the musical numbers would necessarily benefit from that since they aren't really very special sounding. The music is average 70s movie musical stuff and I wouldn't be surprised if the scores they got for this film were rejected drafts of songs for other movie musicals and reworked to fit this film.

Alice in Wonderland: An X-Rated Musical Fantasy is something to behold. It's a clever take on the original story despite the kind of industry known for making X-Rated films are known for their terrible parodies of popular films, this one seems to actually have something to say and it says it genuinely, yet with still a sense of self-awareness and a lack of self-seriousness that it left me very confused over whether this film is brilliant or a happy accident. I'd recommend it for anyone who is curious about what this film is.

The Jimmy Neutron TV show that this film spawned kind of lost its marbles towards the end of its run, from what I can remember, but this film is a genuinely solid comedy film for kids and adults alike.

The visual aesthetic of the film, at the beginning, gives it the feeling of a 1950s, cheesy scifi film which, I felt, was a great match for this. There is also a discreet (possible) Star Wars reference which I noticed when I was a kid that I'm still convinced is there.

The animation, I was a bit surprised about. Being a CG animated film from 2001 that wasn't coming from Pixar or Dreamworks, you don't expect animation quality to be very high, yet seeing this film again, I'm impressed with how good it still looks today.

The voice acting is right where it needs to be for a film of this sort. The villain and his henchmen are funny and over-the-top, Judy is a sensible parent, Hugh is her comic foil, and all the kids sound the way they should for a film like this. The interactions sound like all the actors were simultaneously present while they recorded their lines and it is all very cohesive and tonally appropriate.

The writing is surprisingly good. I enjoyed the film well enough as a kid, but all these years later I have only managed to find it more enjoyable- not in the meta, meme sense, but on the film's own terms. Many of the jokes I didn't catch as a kid land for me now, and the ones that did land for me as a kid, have only gotten better. The premise is pretty creative and the execution very efficient. There are some plot cliches in this film that aren't played up for laughs, but they are forgivable. The film's pacing is perfect. There's never a scene that feels like it drags, or scenes that come and go for no reason. Only the necessary things are ever shown and things move along swiftly and steadily, which is great for a kids' film, I think.

Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius is a well-crafted film. It's not necessarily groundbreaking but it is a fun, solid film that is deserving of repeated viewings.

Shin Godzilla is a film that is so dense and complicated as a work of cinema, it's difficult choosing where to start.

It's very clear from the outset of the film that it will be heavy in political commentary, and thus, a myriad of relevant modern day political topics are brought into the forefront. Questions are raised with regards to the post-war agreement made between the US and Japan, the particularly hot-button topic of expanding the role of the Japanese Self Defense Force, suggestive criticism of the use of nuclear energy, as well as commentary on the way the Japanese government operates in times of natural disaster.

Shin Godzilla invokes imagery from the 3/11 earthquake and tsunami and the resulting radioactive fallout from the meltdown of the nuclear reactors in Fukushima. In this way, I couldn't help but see Shin Godzilla as somewhat of a Japanese cinematic equivalent to Steven Spielberg's invocation of 9/11 imagery in War of the Worlds. Both films are similar in that, as the tripods are in War of the Worlds, Godzilla cannot be destroyed despite all offensive and defensive military efforts. The emphasis of the horror aspect of Godzilla is also, not only similar to War of the Worlds, but also the original 1954 Godzilla film. Indeed, a lot of effort was put in to this design of Godzilla as it is horrifying when fully in frame.

This film has a lot going for it as far as thematic depth is concerned. But it is heavily hindered by certain aspects of the writing, editing, cinematography, etc. that recur increasingly frequently as the film progresses that it can't be ignored.

This film is incredibly dialogue heavy where jargon is thrown about here and there constantly. In the beginning of the film, it's fine because that's part of the political satire of the way the Japanese government operates. But it's when things start going into the "scientific" jargon that it starts to become a bit much. The problem when you invent a creature like Godzilla that has the potential for unlimited power and is virtually unstoppable is that you write yourself into a corner. All of the scenes where the team of characters work to figure out a way to stop Godzilla feels more like the writers trying to squirm out of the corner they wrote themselves into by the creature's premise alone. We have many long sequences where we have characters speaking paragraphs-long explanations of scientific jargon related to Godzilla's biological principles or how to stop him and it gets very tiring to listen to. At points it feels like it dips into the realm of science fiction B-movie, not only with the writing, but also the acting and the technical aspects of how those scenes are shot.

The acting is alright for the most part, though it does get a little over-the-top when the science team quickly deliberate their mumbo jumbo amongst each other. Their line delivery gives off the impression that it's supposed to be funny, as I'm pretty sure there are a number of sequences like those in the Japanese comedy film Virgin Psychics. There is one scene that is probably between 1-2 seconds long that is shot in such a campy, B-movie way of one of the characters saying something like"What!?" and it honestly brought the film to level of B-movie schlock I'd expect from a director like Lewis Schoenbrun.

The editing for Shin Godzilla is another mixed bag. The editing is very fast-paced. It is hectic through the majority of the film's runtime and, in the beginning, it works. There are a lot of cuts and short shots of people deliberating policy and it works to serve as a satirical take on the way the Japanese government operates. But it maintains the frantic style, which wouldn't be an inherently bad thing if it wasn't for the fact that so much of this film is spent writing itself out of a hole. It goes from looking like a clever political satire to an unintentional satire of itself.

The special effects are about as scattershot in quality as a splatter painting. The effects look their best when CG assets are looked at with wide angle shots from far away. Unfortunately, however, those good looking shots are the exception, not the rule. There are so many closeups of CG elements in this film which looked like something out of an film by The Asylum. The effects used in the initial attack by Godzilla looked unfinished and incredibly fake. It seems like there was a little too much ambition for what the budget would allow but they went through with it anyway. For a film with an, otherwise, less-is-more mentality when it comes to the destruction and battle scenes, it seems that they really wanted to show little Godzilla running around before he became the big, imposing monster. It looks silly and not in an aged sort of way, but even when it was new.

There are a number of audio issues in this film as well. I understand that they wanted to use the original recorded Godzilla theme for this film but its 1954 recording fidelity results in the track being buried by the modern sound design, completely neutering its effect. There are also a number of scenes where there are explosions from either bombs or rockets or cannons being fired that sound awfully low fidelity that, again clash with the other recorded audio from the film. It's baffling how scooped the explosion sound effects are and, once again, it takes away from the experience. It sounds like a low budget affair B-movie.

Shin Godzilla is a film that has a lot of potential to be an amazing film. And while it does have a certain thematic depth to it that is undeniable, unfortunately it is diluted by a number of issues that, while small, happen very frequently and repeatedly. I reckon, however, that fans of this character and franchise might find some enjoyment in those aspects of this film since a lot of people go into such depth about how powerful each incarnation of Godzilla is relative to each other and other characters from different universes, but as a standalone work of film, aside from fans of this genre or people who are curious about it, I can't say I feel a very strong recommendation here. It's alright, though in a disappointing way.

This film is a bit confusing regarding the direction it wants to take. The Blue Lagoon feels like a film that has certain ambitions that are irreconcilable that it is trying to make a compromise between and it suffers as a result.

Some of the cinematography suggests that it wants to be a more explicit film but the editing blatantly contradicts that. This has especially to do with the series of love scenes that take place around half way into the film or so. I don't see the point in showing them if they are just going to be implied most of the time anyway. It seems that the short shots of these scenes that involve the two characters that do exist are there to drum up controversy. The short of it is, those scenes are best left not shown.

There are some visually jarring moments in this film. Most particularly, there is a scene where Richard watches Emmeline swim at night and the water has blue animated accents applied to it, which gives the scene a comparatively jarring visual style compared to the rest of the film.

There are many swimming sequences in The Blue Lagoon, and while the look of these sequences is very rich, a lot of the time it was used felt like it was being treated as stock footage to transition to another scene.

One of the other issues I had with this was the plot point of the people making the drum beat. There is never any real conflict that arises from this, yet we are still led to believe that it is supposed to be some point of tension despite it being dropped from the film once the truth behind it is revealed. Maybe it was too far to go into greater depth with it, and by no means did there need to be a big action sequence or anything, but everything involving the drum beat ends up feeling hollow when it is constantly forgotten about except for in cases where it is convenient to push things along.

As far as performances go, Shields' was fine, but Atkins' was not so much. Atkins wasn't bad, but there were moments where anger on his part was more akin to the anger displayed by Johnny at the end of The Room, very nonchalant and offhand. His delivery was also sometimes very monotone and made me wonder at points if he was trying to sabotage the film. His performance throughout the film, as a whole, isn't bad all the way through, but there are moments in this film that left me scratching my head wondering why there wasn't another take done of that line delivery.

It has already been complimented in various other reviews but it begs repeating that this soundtrack is excellent. What helps give the soundtrack life is the surprising attention to the audio engineering of it. It is very clear, and rich in a way that I haven't noticed in many other films. I think this film would sound amazing with a good audio setup and this aspect of the film is, by far, its strongest point.

The ending, I did not like very much and it was what brought my score down the most, probably. I don't want to spoil anything so I'll keepit vague by saying this, in my opinion, a film where its characters have a bleak outlook requires a bleak outcome. This film could have gone many directions but ultimately the one it decided to go in was disappointing and it's what makes this film feel as middling as it does.

This is no masterpiece, nor is it the worst film ever made. It's a film that shows it's only willing to go so far before it has to tone things down. This is part of the reason why I have to say that this film almost feels like a family film, even without the edits. There's never a real sense of tension or danger with the characters despite their predicament. I also felt that this film relied too much on expository dialogue to explain things that could have been communicated better if there was more emphasis on the visual aspect of storytelling- for example we don't need a line where Richard verbally questions why there are "funny hairs" appearing on him because it feels like it is trying to spoonfeed to the viewer how it wants them to understand it. It's too explicit in those ways and I think it could have benefited from the power of suggestion. As it stands, it feels like a potentially dark film adapted in a Hallmark-esque way and it's kind of hurt by that in the long run.

Like many films of its time, this is a slow buildup with a payoff that is as surprising as it is subvertive. Following two Geisha sisters in their struggle to find success in the tough and declining business of being a Geisha, each sister has a different method which are fundamentally different in philosophy from one another. Sisters of the Gion is masterful in its execution of this kind of story. Coming from this particular era in Japanese history, politically, it's surprising that this kind of film with the expression of its ideas was allowed to be distributed and survived the war - but it's good that it did.

Sisters of the Gion offers an excellent commentary on the idealized view the Geishas and the role they play in Japanese society and raising questions of their actual value in that society. Its ending is still quite potent even for being a film from 1936, and maybe even more potent because it's as old as it is.

The performances in this film help to enhance its themes as the performances feel very authentic and believable. There are few, if any, instances of overacting and all of the character interactions feel very genuine.

There is something to be said about a film that includes social commentary in it, but it takes a special kind of execution that really brings it into the next level. Maybe the film's ending is a bit neutered by having its commentary explicitly narrated to the audience by one of the characters but it still doesn't lose its impact, and for a film of its age, I think that aspect of the ending is forgivable. It's definitely a film I would recommend.

Yasujiro Ozu has a very distinctive style to his films that set him apart from his contemporaries. His films are known for their simplicity and this one is no exception. Ozu manages to revisit a lot of the same themes fairly frequently and yet manages to see them in a different light every time.

Equinox Flower is a film that displays all the hallmarks of Ozu's works - which exist with the end goal of capturing life as closely as possible. What we get, as a result, is a film that tries to immerse the viewer as much as possible and bring them in as part of the world it is creating. As such, the performances are about as true-to-life as possible and the cinematography and editing help make this world feel as immersive as they are.

of course this can be said about most of Ozu's filmography. What makes this particular film great is its integration of the themes related to parenthood within the context of the generational gap. In particular, there are a number of scenes where it is clear that the older generation is old enough to remember what life was like before the war and how they had very little and, in the post war society, worked hard to provide for their children the things they wished they had. Now that the children are coming of age, they are in a completely different cultural landscape than that of their parents and there having to be a reconciliation of those ideas in the most Ozu-way possible.

This film is understated and the drama and comedy match that completely but it works as a recreation of life in that time, especially. It's a slow film which is full of visual and narrative ellipses and finishes off in much the same way as most Ozu films do which makes it a very fulfilling and unique experience.

Needless to say, this is a film I highly recommend.

To put it simply, Swing Girls is a perfect representation of all of the best qualities of contemporary Japanese films of this sort. There are many films like this that are produced in Japan, but this one manages to ascend into the upper echelons of this genre of film.

Stories like this in contemporary Japanese cinema are a dime a dozen- some kind of problem arises and it's up to a rag-tag, poorly disciplined group of delinquents to work hard at something they have no experience with to prove themselves in some way. Swing Girls makes a couple of alterations to this formula, but still fits well within that general type of story. What makes this film special is, as with any other film, is its execution of this kind of story.

All of the acting performances are brilliantly executed. The interactions between students, teachers, siblings, family, etc. it's all very believable, and when things do get hammy, it's for comedic effect and it's done so just as well.

The comedy in this film is quite effective. There aren't too many comedy bits that are especially memorable but when you're along for the ride, the comedic moments hit just as they'd ought to.

Swing Girls manages to skirt around some plot cliches that, for any other film maker, would have been so easy to utilize to help heighten the drama. This, however, would have only served to dilute this film and instead ti goes its own way while still preserving certain dramatic elements that help to heighten the stakes.

The best element of this film is its charm. Swing Girls manages to deliver this story with a nearly-unmatchable charm. It made the characters and this world, which is already believable, out to be one that you don't want to leave. This film, although feeling like the perfect length, could probably have gone on for longer and I would not have noticed. This film, everyone in it, they are all memorable and charming. Despite having a relatively sizable cast, I could still manage to point out the guy from the supermarket, or the main character's little sister, etc. This film has such charming characters and its delivery so timeless, it's impossible to describe it in any other terms.

Sure, some might say that there wasn't really much of a character arc for most of the characters. Sure, they do evolve in the same way but there's nothing very obvious about the change in the characters. They are all the same personalities that they were at the beginning of the film but, again, those personalities helped to make this film likable. Some might argue that, perhaps, the characters are too archetypal, but having had experience in Japanese schools now, I can see that this film's portrayal isn't necessarily too far off, especially when dealing with strong personalities... which is part of the driving force of the film's premise to begin with.

Swing Girls is a great film and serves as a great example of modern Japanese cinema. My favorite character was Sekiguchi Kaori mostly because I'll always be partial to Trombone players, and seeing the prominence of the role she plays in the band as well as her character quirks, she is incredibly likeable. I cannot recommend this film enough. It is wholesome and, dare I say, it's one of the few films I reviewed here that can be enjoyed by the entire family. Definitely a must watch for anyone.