thekarmicnomad

I think we all remember the aircraft disappearing and how unusual this was.

This delves into the mystery - except it doesn't.

There are large sections on the families and how much they missed their love ones. This is very sad and I feel bad for them but I don't consider other peoples grief entertainment.

Then we have the conspiracy theories.

Some muppets come forward with complex and imaginative theories based on a white splodge on a photo or the surname of a passenger.

Then the (normally quite bonkers theory) is dramatised - normally adding some very questionable details.

The thing that drives this forward is that the people in the documentary cannot handle that a plane could ever go missing.

Again and again they lament that a plane "can't simply disappear".

To put this in context, in1942 (admittedly the technology was more basic) the entire Imperial Japanese navy couldn't spot a battle group consisting of aircraft carriers and cruisers steaming towards them.

The oceans are very, very, very big places and constantly moving; and for a lot of the search no one was even sure which ocean to look in.

It is not beyond comprehension that the wreckage of a plane (largely made of aluminium and plastic, crashing into the sea at hundreds of miles an hour) doesn't leave a visible trace the air for years to follow.

Throughout history ships, huge ships, have been lost and never found.

This starts of how you imagine, and it was quite entertaining.

But then some contestants realise that rather than Outlasting the other teams you can just attack them.

Two female contestants raided another survivors camp and started stealing and destroying his things.

He asked them to leave, they refused.

They told him to quit or they would destroy his camp the second he leaves.

He complained this was against the rules but she pointed out there were no rules and no one disagreed with her.

The male contestant didn't want to be violent (especially to a woman) so could do nothing.

The women split up and destroyed his camp piggy-in-the-middle style.

This is just awful.

How the produces stood by and watch this unfold (assuming it is real) is just beyond me.

Is this really what they dreamed of creating?

We had to switch off around episode 5 as it was just nasty.

I am up for freedom of creative expression but this made me feel sick.

I worry for the people who enjoyed this.

Although there are lots of things I dislike on Netflix, nothing has ever made me consider cancelling my subscription as much as this..

Two people's lives intersect when one of them runs over a dog.

They are very different people and the injured dog seems to be the only thing they have in common.

The characters are suitably broken and struggling in their own ways.

This is sharp and very witty - there are some great characters and some excellent writing.

This is very grounded with a typical Ozzy roughness to it.

The situations are a little silly but never stray into ridiculous and everything makes sense.

A lot of the humour is based on the differences between the main characters (age, ambition, family) and they have great chemistry.

I hope this gets a second season - but if not the first one stands on its own.

There are no big themes in this - it is honest good fun.

Two young women get trapped atop a very tall tower - there you go.

The characters are well set up and well-acted.

The two actresses are very easy on the eye - which is good as they are going to be taking up most of the screen most of time.

The direction and effects mange to turn my stomach a few times and you get that real sense of danger.

The location restricts the potential for story telling quite a bit but the writers pull a few tricks to start some drama atop the pole.

I can't fault anything technical about this film - I think it is pretty much as good as this type of film can get.

But after all that praise, I didn't really enjoy this much.

The movie was fine and I like disaster movies but having a limited cast really breaks the tension for me.

I had the same issues with "Gravity" and "Buried" A lot of what happens feels prescribed and is only some stuff that has to happen until we can get to the end and we see who makes it out.

If intimate-disaster movies are your thing then I would highly recommend this - but just not for me.

I assumed this would be a family movie (it is PG13) but it is really a goofy caper aimed at young children.

This starts off quite well.

A family move into a haunted house. The son sees the ghost as a desperate soul in need of help but dad sees only a cash-cow.

The main family are great and the ghost is entertaining enough.

The social media aspect isn't really that big a deal - it is always in the background but is really only a device to instigate a silly chase scene - and there are a lot or silly chase scenes.

The worst part of this film by a long stretch is Joy.

Her first words are about racism - is this important to her character? Nope.

I assume it is just so the writers can enjoy a high-five about how great they are at dismantling racisit stereotypes.

Well at least they are not going to push the narrative that all Asian girls are super tech-savvy and have overbearing fathers that force them to study.

Whoops!

Joy has such nuggets like '"being quiet in a library! Since when did noise make you stupid?" or "Why can't I go into the boys' toilet and watch you pee - screw your gender norms!" I feel sorry for the actress that got lumbered with this creepy, idiot of a character.

This film is mostly about chasing which is unfortunate for Joy as she doesn't seem to be able to run or jump without some heavy editing.

People charge around, fall over, drop stuff, scream: pretty much like on any early morning children's TV show.

The chases are punctuated by some emotional scenes but they are pretty on-the-nose stuff about dad's and loneliness.

Young children might get a kick out of it but I found little value in it.

I am obviously not the audience for this and it suffers my low score mostly due to unscrupulous marketing by Netflix.

The film opens showing how girls are conditioned to project their desires on men, chasing a fairytale ending.

As a man who apprecites a good romcom -and has fawned over girls who obviosuly had no interest in me - it was nice to see this explored from the male side too.

The premise is a set of loosley connected individuals playing at (and mostly failing) the dating game.

This is not hillarious but has some funny moments and is played quite straight-laced.

It does have an overall positive feel and a good pace.

My big problem wih moden Romcoms is that the characters are so squeaky clean and capable that I never feel for them.

Here the character's really pull you in. There are a couple of scenes that are really gut wretching and others that bring you to the edge of your seat.

Sure,everyone is super attractive and articulate but this is Hollywood RomCom standard fair.

It's clear that not everyone here is going to get their happy-ending but I found myself willing them on anyway.

Great actors and perfomances, expertly written and filmed.

I am a big fan of 27 Dresses so I was excited when this popped up.

Unfortunately, this film is pretty drab.

Plot: As a Brit I have always wondered about the difference between smug, self-righteous L. A buttholes and smug, self-righteous buttholes from New York.

Luckily, this film is basically a side-by-side comparison,so now I know.

There are some side plots about an exam, a book and an asthmatic kid - but they are mostly irrelevant.

Script: The painfully stilted dialogue sways between cringy adlib and hostage proof-of-life video.

Everybody reels out exactly what they think and feel in a jarringly unnatural way.

Comedy: There are so many zingers to choose from like: the recurring joke that Debbie's suitcase only has two wheels, or someone shows their bum-crack and then referencing it later, or how Peter calls a kid weasel face. Very, very, very funny stuff.

Tig Notaro and Steve Zahn: I am not going to say anything bad about these two as I assume the only reason they keep getting booked is they have strong mafia ties.

Bloat: Have you ever fantasied about opening an Air-BNB, fitting it with hidden cameras and renting it to Reece Wetherspoon so you could voyeuristically watch her wander around the house opening cupboards, reading, sitting about in her nightie? If so then you can save yourself the trouble and just watch this.

There is so much in this film that is just irrelevant filler.

Chemistry: There is none

Camera work: Whoever shot this loves widescreen and pulls way, way back so you can get big slices of empty scenery.

Sometimes it felt like I was watching this on a neighbours T. V through binoculars.

Fun: This takes itself much too seriously to be any fun.

Everyone is so self-conscious and so pleased with themselves for adding in little highbrow nods and winks about how aware and clever they are about modern culture that any sense of fun is lost.

Modern romcoms are plagued by characters that are so super-duper-awesome and so capable that you really can't care about them.

Whatever happens everyone will be just fine and I never cared if they got together or not.

So, Dave takes on the evil world of banking.

Enter Hugh, a lawyer sent to disuade Dave from his suicidal charge at the finaincial in industry

What follows is a sappy tour of Dave's home town where we see what can be achieved when communities pull together, opening Hugh's eyes to life beyond the coporate climate of London.

As Dave gets traction the banks retailate in sinister and underhand ways.

This is a typical Brit-flick: big on character with little in the way of bells and whistles.

Things esclate and the finalie is satisfyingly silly.

The acting and production is fair and the story is simplistic - you are never in any doubt of who the bad guys are.

This is inoffensive, feel-good fodder that will make you smile.

This is not a memorable movie and is quickly lost amongst the likes of Brassed Off, Kinky Boots, or The Fully Monty.

But that is not a bad thing - there is a place for this inexpensive yarn and I am happy projects like this go ahead.

J-lo is getting married but there is the normal sitcom wedding stuff going on - when some pirates turn up (the kind with AK47's not the eye-patch type)

What follows is action and jokes and all kinds of shenanigans.

No opportunity to blow something up, have wedding guest fight or for Ms Lopez to get down to her pants is missed.

This all makes the film a bit chaotic and the slapstick nature makes it feel a bit like a cartoon.

At this point I would like to point out that this is an Action Rom-com that have always been a bit silly; even going all the way back to Romancing the Stone.

This is fast paced, full of action and quips, easy to watch and J-lo looks amazing.

Some of the acting is a bit hammy and some of the jokes are a bit base but this was never designed to win any Oscars.

This was an easy fun watch.

Very silly but bright and breezy fodder.

A load of bizarre assassins and general bad guys find themselves on a train speeding its way across Japan.

The characters range from quirky to goofy and everyone has a violent origin story.

This plays out like a comic book with lots of bright colours and fast action sandwiched between clever, pithy dialogue.

This is very well made with great acting, sets and frantic camera work.

The story is nonsense - but you kind of get that by from the first scene.

I really thought I would love this but I found it a bit tiresome - perhaps I am just getting too old for this sort of thing.

The main issue is that the world is too fluid.

When someone can chop down ten bad guys in a flash it is hard to care if another ten show up.

When the lethality of bullets and samurai swords is so unpredictable - it is hard to get excited when someone draws their weapon.

This is a really fun ride but it felt too long.

It felt like there were a few too many silly backstories about how bad-ass #5 killed twenty nameless dudes, and too many tears spilt over fallen heroes who weren't quite dead.

I think there is a lot to like here.

But it feels like a fairground ride that you have to ride for over two hours - it is fun at first but after a bit you just want to sit down.

There are two kinds of jump scares: those that work and those that don't.

This film has an awful lot of the former and I was (pleasantly) surprised, even a veteran horror fan, at how many times I jumped or felt the hairs on my arms stand up.

Right from the start there is something not quite right with our lead character (Rose) she looks strange, ill and pasty, almost skeletal (sorry Sosie Bacon - I am sure it was the makeup) Lots of little details pile up to give this film an unsettling aura.

Like most horror movies when it starts to run out of steam it flounders pretty quicky - but this has the good sense to cut and run sharpish.

I greatly enjoyed this but near the end I was overcome by a sense of inevitability that never left me.

A very good effort.

I was expecting this to be realistic and authentic - a hard hitting anti-war film. It really isn't.

From small things, like the unrealistically high level of motorisation to major things like magic gas that kills troops instantly and tanks that appear out of nowhere and apparently rumble around for fun, thereis very ittle authentic about this film.

Also there is a serious lack of humanity in this film.

A lot of the areas are all but deserted of people, often the main characters are the only inhabitants.

Most people when shot roll into a neat little bundle and lie still. Nobody gets hit in the hand or the head or the stomach - it might as well be a shooting gallery of dummies.

I found the characters to be bland and underdeveloped - one liked girls, one guy worse glasses and one was a bit dippy.

Most of their dialogue is pointing things out like "that sound is a gun" or "that thing is deadly" or "these guys all died"

The depiction of artillery, gas, tanks, flamethrowers, grenades and machine guns was incredibly inaccurate and played out for show.

It follows the tired troupe that World War One was a crazy mess with no planning or structure and everyone ran around bludgeoning each other with shovels.

This movie was sold as something special but compared to other anti-war movies like Das Boot, Cross of Iron, Platoon or the original All Quiet this is just a particularly gory action move.

There are plenty of set pieces with planes swooping, tanks crashing, flames whooshing and people jumping with an explosion in the background.

This is a light horror movie based on the robotic Over-Logical-Prime-Directive syndrome.

You, know?

Tell your robot to make sure the cat doesn't run in to traffic and when you get home the robot has snapped its legs off, just to make sure.

This handles that impeccably.

It manages to shift between sad and scary with very little effort and has great pacing.

The action scenes are exciting without being overly dramatic, but most of all they are interesting, people trip or fumble in unpredictable ways.

M3gan looks good (most of the time) and the way her voice modulates at certain times is very creepy.

On top of all this, the movie has a really witty streak running through it.

There is the normal "too much technology makes Jack a dull boy" affair but it is honest and done with a wry grin.

Like, yes we could take the tablet off our child but then she will be really needy and annoying.

This is well written, well cast, well shot, well directed with good effects - just don't expect to pee your pants with fear.

The documentary opens with a black woman showing how her computer doesn't recognise her face until she covers it with a white mask.

Does this prove that the coding is racist?

No, it demonstrates that it recognises a mask that is coloured white much more effectively than her face. If the mask was sprayed brown, would it still be an issue?

We don't know.

It is suggested that she has done extensive research into this but none is shown - so let's take that on blind faith for the moment.

The documentary is very casual with terminology especially with "Recognised" and "Identified" a lot of the times it is unclear if the issue is correctly matching the face with its owner or recognising it is a face at all.

We are told that the facial recognition software employed by Governments is powerful and we shouldn't take its application in blind faith. OK

Lines of dubious logic are followed such as: 1. Men are recognised easier than women 2. Men wrote the code Conclusion: The code is biased against women

This is a biased view - the "blame the patriarchy path" is so well trodden the council have paved it and put in parking restrictions.

If we apply the same logic with different variables we can come to some vastly different outcomes.

1. Men are recognised easier than women 2. White people are recognised easier than black people 3. U. K law enforcement invest greatly in the software 4. There are many more incarcerated white men than black women Conclusion: The system is set to allow black women to get away with crime.

Obviously, this is nonsense but is demonstrates how easy it is to introduce bias.

There are lots of reasons why male faces could be easier to identify: men are less likely to wear makeup, have piercings, colour their hair or generally change their appearance as often as women.

As well as a myriad of other variables: the programmer in the first scene has the largest pair of hexagonal spectacles I have ever seen.

Is their bias in programming and structures?

Undoubtably.

If I was to "Sophie's Choice" I would pick the girl child every time as I have a bias to value female life over male. It is not morally right and it is complex as to why I think like that - but I do.

This documentary is well paced and easy to watch but doesn't really offer much up and is very obviously (and ironically) hampered by its own biases.

It doesn't offer any counter point, for instance: If a large percentage of smokers reject transplanted organs and one ethnic group smokes more than others - wouldn't you want an AI system to have a bias against them for transplant lists?

I am sure the police have lots of clips of their system catching murderers and rapists that they would rather show instead of the clip the documentary chose of a black child being stopped and searched.

Also it is worth noting that you don't need an A. I to make biased judgments or to assign labels to people.

There are some interesting points here and there is definitely food for thought, but this is far too simplistic and agenda driven.

This starts of as really interesting, dramatic Sci-Fi where some ordinary people are sucked into a desolate version of their home city where they have to compete in devilish and dangerous games.

The first season takes a tone shift about half way through that really ramps the action up.

The second season lands quite badly.

The main issue is a cultural one, the pace of Eastern films tends to be slower (Akira Kurosawa had no issue of long scenes of people eating their dinner in the rain) and I am normally down with that.

It makes a great change to the rushed Hollywood movies.

Here though it is just too slow for me.

The amount of walking, posturing and lamenting sent me reaching for the fast-forward button.

Then after an hour of nothing but sobbing and navel-gazing it is time for another game - but no this time the game is time lapsed out.

There is also some sloppy film-making here.

A bad guy shows up shooting people left and right.

The enormous body count this guy clocks up only highlights the thickness of the main characters' plot armour and he is only an issue when the plot needs him to be.

He is also a bit silly, it feels like the randoms could survive him if they just stopped running wildly up and down the middle of the street.

All that being said, this is really well made and acted, there is a lot to like and I enjoyed how different this movie is, and the story is really intriguing.

The problem for me is it is wrapped in layers and layers or emotional baggage that often didn't really go anywhere.

I would love this to be condensed into a movie or two.

I wanted to like this more than I did.

The people behind this movie obviously put a lot of heart into it and had fun doing it.

The build up is very tentative allowing you to get a good feel for the characters.

I generally appreciate this approach and it works well here and although you have to be patient and sit quietly whilst some pretty mundane stuff goes on it does build up some tension.

As with a lot of horror movies when the action starts there is a big flash of excitement followed by some running around waving hands in the air.

The action section just doesn't feel like it justified the extended build up.

The horror element is kind of goofy, not really scary and is over in a flash.

If you remove the fluff regarding the main characters then this film is very short.

If you are into your horror films then this is a solid enough and there is fun to have but I wasn't particularly impressed.

As a Brit my favourite Christmas Carol is the T. V version with Patrick Stewart - it is (a bit like Britain) gritty, grey, grim and totally endearing.

Spirited is not!

This is unapologetically Hollywood.

It is big and brash and bold, with scores of dancers high-kicking their way across the screen as the scenery explodes in the background.

And it works!

This is a lot of fun!

I should be bothered that this film disregards the message of the original story and substitutes its own.

But it is self aware enough to know this, has a joke at its own expense, and has zero F's to give anyway.

This allows the story to go off-piste and even after seeing hundreds of versions of a Christmas Carole I was surprised and entertained.

This is well cast, everyone seems to be having fun and the effects are ramped up to 11.

The only issue I have is with the ending.

Without spoiling anything -it feels cheap to say that your actions have to have consequence to matter - then removes all consequences.

That aside this is a true fun spectacle that will get added to my Christmas roster.

Some attractive young women find themselves trapped in an isolated house with a bloody body on the floor and thunder and lighting crashing outside.

The killer must still be in the house....

This is slotted firmly into its genre and you really shouldn't expect anything more.

The setup is quick and elegant (hinting at the cracks in the friendships that are sure to fracture later on) but doesn't get bogged down.

A lot of the characters are very headstrong and you get that "Mean girls" feel where a character will do something really awful and then be all "Jeeze! I was only kidding!"

These bottle-movies tend to be tense rather than scary.

This gets really tense as the characters dally between what is socially acceptable and what is needed to survive.

I found it really funny when the girls, their nerves frazzled, try to apply online solutions to real world problems.

There is just something amusing about someone calling the person who has a blade to their throat toxic.

This film pops in, has a slurp of tea, tells its story then gets the hell out.

I appreciate that.

I know some people found this boring and wanted more scares or depth, but this is not what these movies are about.

This is a lean, clean, 94 minute ride that is a little silly a, little funny and deliciously tense - exactly what these films should be.

This is a very well made, perfectly balanced film.

It has enough confidence to take its time laying down the background and characters - yet doesn't drag.

The set pieces are imaginative and well rendered - younger children will be enthralled.

The production and acting is great! The cast is lean and all the characters are interesting and serve a purpose.

The writers used great skill replicating a dreamlike state by bending the rules of reality in fun ways - but managed not to take things too far and lose all sense of tension.

This is a remarkably well made film that is fun, exciting and touching.

It has amazing affects and great character moments.

First off, for better or worse, this has nothing to do with Toy Story - absolutely nothing.

That out the way this is a well made animated movie about Buzz trying to get home.

There are some really clever ideas here - the main aspect here is that Buzz experiences time dilation every time he attempts a test flight - flinging him into the future.

There are some nice characters and some touching moments as Buzz lives his life outside time.

For the first third of this film I was really engaged and settled down to enjoy this.

Unfortunately, outside of the time dilation, this film is very empty.

The characters run around waving their hands in the air screaming, not really doing much.

When it all comes to the crunch the ending is predictable (I can forgive that) but makes no sense - on any level really.

All that running around is revealed as even more pointless than it first appeared.

This is fine.

You can stick it on and watch it with the kids. There are a few jokes that land and the cat is cute. But in a months time you will probably struggle to remember if you watched this.

This has a great cast and some really good ideas that should be really funny - but just aren't

Sitcoms often use stereotypes to save time but here the characters are so dull and lazily written.

"Hey, Timmy, want a hotdog? Can you believe I got divorced and had to take the job I worked at high school with the boy who had a crush on me, now I'm a single parent? Pass the mustard."

The actors (most of who I like in other things) act as if the show is being filmed in front of a live studio audience - that is armed and hostile.

Every line is jilted and everyone looks awkward and uncomfortable 100% of the time.

I didn't think I would like SuperStore as it looked stupid, but the characters had enough depth and presence to keep things interesting - this doesn't.

Here people have scant motivation or personality they do stupid things just because the writers need to relieve the tedium.

The goofy character says something goofy, so snarky character can say snarky thing, so dumb character can say "hell-no!" - repeat until the clock runs down.

Often characters reference films but the writers don't have enough confidence in themselves or their audience to let it land - so another character has to say "oh, was that from film X?" - every time.

I did like the concept and some of the setups (like Eliza's daughter hating her) but the end product is tedious and not funny - sorry.

Millie Bobby Brown has cemented Enola as her own. She does a fantastic job injecting the character with an irrepressible vitality.

The character of Enola is elegantly written making her fun and vivacious. She is the hero of this piece but she has flaws and doubts that makes her feel more human.

In a female led Sherlock Holmes movie it would have been tempting to build up Enola at the expense of her brother - but the film has avoided this and Sherlock (although he has his own issues Enola has to help him with) is still the incredible detective he is famed to be.

Although this is a female empowerment movie at heart some effort has been made to smooth off the feminism message that can feel so brutal in similar movies.

The acting (especially Millie Bobby Brown), action and production are great.

The world is a version of Victorian England - anyone who takes issue with race or gender is clearly starring past how beautiful and healthy people are.

It made me chuckle to see the "barbaric" factory the girls laboured in which was much, much, much, much nicer than actually factories I worked in during the 1990's.

This is great fun, it gleefully bounces along doing it's own thing.

You are unlikely to see this on Netflix - for one there isn't room on the screen for all the trigger warnings needed.

In the first three minutes you get breast feeding, domestic violence, child cruelty, animal cruelty, underage drinking, bare knuckle boxing and a severed pig's head.

If your child can handle that (and the tortiously long credit sequence that has the charm and pomp of a death march to a gulag) they will need to be patient for another 30 minutes before they get some cartoon.

The animation is quaint and simple - or, if you like, just plain bad. The acting is quite hammy too.

The songs are the stars of the show (and the leads hilarious cockney voice over) High-Cockylorum is especially catchy and gets the blood pumping.

The story is very basic but fun enough and effort is made to match cartoon to live action.

I watched this as a child in the 80s and I was enthralled by this - the songs still linger with me.

Watching it again in 2022 was probably a mistake.

It has an 80s charm about it that modern audiences might find fascinating for a short period, but the pacing is too slow (Tom's chase scene goes on for so long I expected him to traverse deserts and tundra - I think he at least made it to Scotland) and is so nonsensical (it even rains under water)

With such huge catalogues of cartoons on offer now it may be best to leave this one sink in to the depths.

After keeping the secret safe for 30 odd years I finally let it slip to my fiancée that I hadn't seen this.

So that ended up being my Sunday afternoon.

I am pleased to say that this is actually pretty good.

In some ways not an awful lot happens in this (like a lot of 90's movies) but the characters are engaging and the story is lean and holds it all together without getting too complicated.

I was surprised that there was some action, Kevin does a few roly-poly's through windows and there are some fisty-cuffs but this is mostly romance with a dash of suspense.

It is strange seeing something for the first time that is firmly ingrained into pop-culture.

After seeing poor old Whitney dragged out for public appearances in the last stages of her life it was startling to see her in her full, magnificent glory.

The "I will always love you" moment was ever-present in my mind like a shark circling a life raft.

But when it came it was still pretty impactful.

This has three special effects in it and two of them are really bad by todays standard - but mostly I was really surprised at how much I enjoyed this and I think it stands up.

The premise of the show is that some unfortunates become stranded in the wilderness.

Often it will start like "we thought we would hike into Alaska after lunch without telling anyone. We came across some angry ducks that wouldn't leave us alone until we gave them all our food, and we threw our shoes and mobile phones at them. Then we realised we were lost...."

Then the little sign pops up on screen that we have all been waiting for: "Day 1" Now we know these guys are going to be stuck here for ages.

The stories are interspersed with segments from a resident "survival expert" (Stewart) - who offers precious nuggets like "caving is like hiking... but underground"

It soon becomes clear that Stewart's credentials aren't quite as great as he makes out -he is however, really, really good at weaving.

Trapped in a desert surrounded by lions?

Why not fashion a wicker chair from reeds to fend them off?

Stuck in a cave?

Why not cut up your rope and backpack to fashion a hanging basket to improve morale?

When there is no conceivable way that weaving can possibly be the solution then Stewart's alternative advice is just as implausible.

If you are cold why not build a survival suit?

Perhaps you find an old mixing bow, a chunk of insulation and a discarded sail - spend a few hours lashing these together with the hundred feet of vine you harvested earlier and you will warm up in no time - saving precious energy.

Yes it is mean spirited to laugh at these peoples misfortune and the host's eccentricity - but it is also really good fun.