jfgibson73

Here is a film that achieves so much in it's runtime that it's hard to believe it's only an hour and a half long. Strictly Confidential will surely take it's place along the great mystery/thrillers by masters such as Alfred Hitchcock and David Lynch. However, neither of those greats ever helmed an ensemble piece the likes of which writer/director David Hurley has assembled. He guides every actor and actress to an award-worthy performance, with the standouts being an intense Laura McQueen and a magnetic Llyrio Boateng as the enigmatic Sebastian. Does he know more than he is telling us? You will be guessing right up to the final shot. But even those stellar craftsmen must defer to the sparkling champagne fizz of the centerpiece: Liz Hurley as Lily. The pain of her loss--and the choices it leads her to make--is so palpable, ever viewer's heart will ache as they follow her journey. Clearly, the director earned everyone's trust and led a film shoot with no drama or disharmony. Special credit must go to 2nd 2nd assistant director (two 2nds--not an error) Danielle Browne. No doubt her contributions helped carry the production to that upper echelon that so few films reach. If you are tired of the repetitive, uninspired slop that floods the streaming services today, seek out Strictly Confidential. You will be in for a ride that will restore your faith in the power of film!

As soon as this movie began, I picked up on all the trademarks of a poorly made low budget effort: stilted performances, uninspired cinematography, insipid dialog, and an unremarkable score. I think the only thing that has changed recently in trash filmmaking is that now anyone can get a drone shot.

As the story unfolded, I was surprised at how quickly the first act was paced. It did not seem like the standard slasher formula was being used; things progressed much more quickly than typical. It still wasn't very good, but it wasn't the same old/same old. I guess it's really hard to edit a scene to play out with any kind of natural rhythm when you work in low budget filmmaking, because these movies always have odd timing to everything; it's no different with Followers. Someone will make a statement or ask a question, and there will be a weird pause with some kind of filler shot before the response comes. None of the actors have any kind of charisma or presence, or if they do, the filmmakers couldn't capture it. Another criticism I have is that I wasn't very interested in the story, and I was especially apathetic to how everything resolved. I am sure I will forget this movie so quickly that the next time I look over my list of reviews, I will have no memory of what this was. Hard pass.

I thought this movie was fun from start to finish. For me, it had a midnight movie feel--cheap trash just made to entertain. It's found footage, and it definitely uses low-res shots and shaky camera work. The story feels like someone saw The Taking Of Deborah Logan and decided to do a Spinal Tap-like parody of it. I don't actually know if the tone was meant to be comedic, but there were plenty of moments that they couldn't possibly have thought anyone would take it seriously. I also liked how everything builds to an off-the-wall climax where they just totally go for it. I couldn't take my eyes off of the screen. It was a sweet rush of low budget horror.

I admire this movie for its reach. They definitely tried to do something you don't see all the time. For much of the first act, I thought maybe they were going for a surrealist approach, because so many elements of the story were unconventional. Once the narrative got going, however, there weren't as many jarring surprises. There was still messed up stuff all the way through, but by the end, it had started to feel a lot more conventional. My personal opinion is that the performances were well done--probably enough to get some award attention--but that they didn't stand out as anything that will be remembered as all-time great acheivements. And I think that is true of the film overall.

The movie reminds me of The Saddest Music In The World in a lot of ways--although there were no glass legs filled with beer. It does create its own universe without feeling like a sci-fi story, and tells a dramatic story with a character worth following. I just didn't feel that Poor Things utilized this device as fully as it might have.

I thought this was a better-than-average comedy. It's pretty goofy, but it was my style of humor. The three male leads are the best part--they are given pretty good material almost all the way through. I did think things fell off at one point when the group stumbled onto a secret community, but most of the rest of the story delivered. Even though there were a few sequences where the shtick got a little tiresome, I thought it still averaged out to a lot of enjoyment overall. There is even narration by John Goodman that had some memorable lines (He reminds us he's been in The Big Lebowski--and a LOT of other stuff). I would give it a moderate recommendation, but it's not on that level of something great enough that I would try to get people to watch it with me.

Although I followed wrestling for over 40 years, I didn't know much about the Von Erich family. This movie told their story in an incredibly captivating way. It is exteremly well-written and well-filmed, but the performances are what really stand out. Every character gives you a reason to want to keep watching them; you won't necessarily like some of them, but they hold your attention. Zac Efron brings unbelievable gravity to his portrayal of Kevin Von Erich. In just a few short moments, he had me admiring this person completely. It's a very emotional story with a lot of difficult moments, but it didn't leave me depressed. In fact, I thought this movie had the most perfect, emotionally affecting ending since Toy Story 3. I would recommend this movie to anyone.

I thought this was a better-than-average movie. It looks great, has excellent performances, and a tight script that builds to a satisfying conclusion. I don't have any interest in the subject matter, but I imagine people who enjoy Vegas would rate this movie even higher, as it stands as one of the better films around the subject. Every scene has a purpose, and it all fits together in a way that makes sense. I didn't learn anything about myself or contemplate any deep truths about the human condition after watching, but I was thouroughly entertained for the entire run time. I would be comfortable recommending this movie to most people I know, as I believe it is a well-made crowd pleaser.

When I was very young, I told my parents that I thought my favorite animal was an octopus. My mom told me I should watch this movie. I did, and even though it featured NO octopi, it became one of my favorites that I continued to enjoy the rest of my life. This movie does many of the things that I love about classic Disney: the design of the sub is iconic, the story is well-paced with scene after scene of memorable action, and it features characters for the ages. Kirk Douglas brings to life one of my favorite movie heroes of all time, and James Mason--despite not being a Hindu--plays an unforgettable Captain Nemo. None of the other adaptions of this story come anywhere close, although I wouldn't mind if someone eventually does make another great movie based on it. I also really enjoy the scenes filmed underwater. The movie also inspired the greatest theme park attraction ever built (the ride at Disney World, now removed). Not perfect, but a special movie which I will always treasure.

I like Edgar Wright. His movies are always entertaining, with sharp humor and fast-paced action. I consider Baby Driver to be one of his better offerings. It's a straightforward story about a character trying to exit a life of crime. He works as a getaway driver, which gives Wright an excuse to film some of the most unquie car chase scenes ever. The main character doesn't just go fast; he has complete control of the automobile, slamming between gears effortlessly while making manuevers that don't seem physically possible. So those parts are fun. But we also get reasons to like the character and care about him succeeding. It might not be the most memorable story, but it's a fun, entertaining watch that doesn't ask too much of the viewer.

Soft Liquid Center is one of the more unsatisfying horror movies I've seen in a while. It is well-filmed, the performances are enjoyable, it has a great soundtrack, and it is pretty scenic much of the time. My main problem is the story. It isn't so much that it is a slow burn or that some things were slightly ambiguous; a movie can do that and still be enjoyable. But in this story, it felt like they had ideas for some cool things to film wihout taking the time to decide what it had to do with the plot. Rather than bother to think everything through and ensure it was all coherent, they chose to leave things open-ended. This will trick viewers into imagining that these filler scenes actually have meaning for them to interpret, and they will go on to label Soft Liquid Center as "intelligent." In fact, it is not scary or entertaining in any way.

This was pleasant. Most of the scenes are relaxing shots of small town locals in a very rural area of Arkansas, including very scenic swamps. They characters recall encounters with bigfoot. There is a lot of narration and voiceover, which normally would be grating. Here, however, it adds to the calming tone that most of the movie creates. Then, there are the attack scenes. You don't ever really see the bigfoot creature, but there are a couple sequences where he makes loud noises. It gets a little intense. Eventually, sightings of the creature seem to die off, and the movie ends. There are some seriously goofy songs, and it all has a very 70's low-budget feel. I would mind more like this.

I really can't score this movie any lower than a nine. Not only was it my style of humor, it was able to stay entertaining all the way to the end. No third act deflation! And on top of being funny for the entire runtime, I enjoyed the story. I actually thought it had a plot that drew me in and gave me a highly satisfying resolution. I appreciated the fact that there were so many ridiculous details that it was almost like this movie was set in an alternate universe. For me, it kept the balance exactly right. Wild, but with some grounded elements to keep me caring about the characters. I think this could become one of my favorite comedies of all time. I don't know how many other people I would show it to, because I think the humor was extremely subjective, but I treasured it.

It was fine overall. I didn't like anything about the first Captain Marvel movie, so I never expected to even watch this one. Eventually I saw some footage that got me interested, and I ended up liking some parts. I'll agree that the script never should have been approved with such an underwritten villain, and that the story was impossible to care about. The thing that carried it for me was that I was enjoying the three main characters together. Kamala was the key; without her, there was no reason for this movie whatsoever. I hope they can use her in something better eventually. At this point, however, I'll be fine if Marvel just holds off for a while.

All the praise this movie is getting is deserved. This isn't just the best Godzilla movie, or even the best movie of the year--this is one of the great movie experiences of a lifetime. I'm not sure I have been affected by a film this much since The Florida Project. Everything came together in that special way that only seems to happen every now and then with movies. Now, I could nitpick about some questionable moments, but when this much work has been put into delivering a well-thought out story, I just want to appreciate how much there is to enjoy. I thought there were great visuals as well, and a pretty awesome score. So, all around, very likely a timeless classic.

This was an icky story.

The movie follows a character named Oliver who spends a summer with an extremely wealthy family. Their home is closer to a castle than a mansion. The main hook is Oliver's interest in a university classmate, Felix. All sorts of unusual behaviors are on display in this film. I was interested in watching it because I heard it described as being a "messed-up masterpiece." I ended up feeling like it wasn't really messed-up enough. Even though there are some fairly outrageous sequences, I felt like the movie was still too restrained overall. I would have like for the filmmakers to have really gone absolutely bezerk and given us some truly jaw-dropping moments in the final scenes. Now, you might say the end of the movie is pretty wild, but I felt that it was too tidy. For a movie about obsession and going to extreme lengths to get what you want, things cooled off way too much in the last act. Consider that there is a 17-year time gap between the bulk of the story and the closing moments; that is way too long of a period of inaction. The story needed to ramp things up instead of letting all the momentum just fizzle out. It was still worth a watch, but I can't help but wish they had taken things a bit further.

I wish I hadn't watched this movie back-to-back with Saltburn; I would have liked more time between viewings before seeing so many similar character traits and situations. Eileen kept me interested throughout the runtime, mostly thanks to Thomasin McKenzie. A less interesting performer could have rendered this completely skippable. The movie spends a lot of time establishing what Eileen's life is like, and those details drew me in to the story. Then, Anne Hathaway's character is introduced, and the plot begins to take off. As the action continued to build, I really wanted to see where everything would end up. However, I was disappointed by the resolution; I felt like most of what we had learned about the characters became unimportant as a result of their final choices. It was hard not to feel like I had wasted my time when the credits came up because it was such an unsatisfying way to end things. It prevents me from being able to recommend this movie to anyone. I don't regret watching it, but I was definitely let down.

I knew this was going to be an awesome story before I ever watched it. The lead performances were off the charts! I had a feeling the actors and actress would enhance the experience with their talents, and I was right. Effects are very amazing, as is the cinematography. Groundbreaking camera work, breathtaking use of angles, picture-perfect shots in every scene. Everyone who worked on this production brought their A-game, that is clear. Their efforts pop off the screen. The people hired as key grips did top-notch work, and it pays off in every frame. The director certainly was able to induce everyone on the film to reach new heights of achievement because of his willingness to make each one of them feel valued. It is so refreshing to see such a well-made movie where everyone worked in harmony to produce something that will stand the test of time.

My impression of this film is that it could have been remembered as a horror classic with a little bit better execution. Storywise, there's almost enough there to be great, and some of the scenes end up being fairly effective, but there are too many wasted opportunities. A woman arrives in a strange town looking for her father. He's an artist, whose expansive home is filled with striking paintings. The town is eerie, and the people she meets are clearly off. So there is some pretty good atmosphere that is developed. However, clunky direction and lazy techniques, such as narration (which is delievered by MULTIPLE characters), take away from what could have been effective scares. There are scenes, such as the one in the theatre, that build very well, but there are also poor choices, such as taking jarring detours to follow around side characters that we haven't even gotten to know. There were even some moments that could have been fairly shocking, but by the time the movie got to them, the effect was already ruined. Not to mention the weak ending. Can not recommend, unless you just want to observe how not to make a memorable horror movie.

I enjoyed Scream 5 enough that I was willing to stick with the series a little longer. I was fine with the new characters, and there were some surprises to keep me interested. But I felt like Scream 6 didn't have a strong enough story to deserve getting made. My belief is that they just wanted to hurry something along to capitalize on the success of 5. I really disliked the reveal of who the killers were and their motivation was not just weak, it was painful to listen to. On top of that, the requisite confrontation at the end was so tiresome, I wished I had skipped this movie altogether. It was formulaic to the point that I couldn't possibly have an ounce of interest how it would turn out. Has there ever been a Scream movie that didn't end with the killers having the main characters cornered but waste time explaining their plan, then the heroes find a way to slip past them so that a chase begins, the good guys and the bad guys take turns getting the upper hand, then the villains get killed unconvincingly so that they can pop up for a jump scare??? Anyone who makes another one of these movies without seeing a top-tier script first is a terrible person.

I never cared about the characters or anything that happened at any point in this movie. These are not interesting people and this was not a situation worthy of a feature film. A woman and a man get double-booked in the same rental house and end up growing closer during the stay. The first several scenes made Katie Holmes' character pretty unlikeable and nothing she did in the rest of the movie really changed my opinion. The guy in the rental home was a goof. They somehow both manage to feel like the most generic stock characters possible. They begin to have conversations where they discuss their outlooks on various topics, and it is painful. Then they get montages of them doing things like riding bikes and singing kareoke. The main conflict is that the woman has a boyfriend, but they weren't really that into each other, so they break up and she stays with this new guy. The end. Also, the story takes place during a difficult period of the Covid outbreak, and part of the details are revealed through news reports. I did not care to be taken back to that period in history. It just put a focus on how dire the situation was at one point. There is nothing special about any aspect of this movie, including the performances. It just exists.

For my 1000th review on this site, I have chosen one of the best-known so-bad-it's-good movies. Unfortunately, I wasn't into it. I can't even recommend it to friends who enjoy unintentionally funny films, because I didn't really get any entertainment out of sitting through it. It does many of the goofy things that poorly made low budget movies do, and it even gets sleazier than most, but none of it was fun to watch. It's pointless to complain about problems like the pacing; lots of bad movies have scenes that go on too long, or sequences that are more boring than entertaining, but some of them still have redeeming value. For me, this one didn't. Maybe the first death scene was bearable, but the rest just felt like it was being repeated over and over. I would rate The Nail Gun Massacre as being totally skippable.

This movie had some laughs here and there, but didn't really deliver on its promise. After the opening scene, I was hoping I would be getting a raunchy, anti-pc, R-rated comedy on the level of a Wedding Crashers or The Hangover. Unfortunately, it did not reach those heights. Joy Ride felt too derivative, like a mash-up of two or three other comedies. The situations in this movie didn't seem very outrageous because they were too familar and predictable. There is a musical sequence that the writers probably thought would have the audiences' jaws on the floor, but it's just a reworking of the WAP song. As it is, there were still moments I enjoyed, and some genuine emotion involving a birth parents subplot, but it felt like it could have been so much more with a few extra rewrites.

I went into this movie not knowing anything about it. My first impression was that Kaitlyn Dever was miscast. She didn't seem like the right person to play such a withdrawn and acquiescent woman. Then, when I saw the design of the creatures, I thought they were poorly done. They seemed very outdated for 2023. I would have hoped for something more original, rather than the sort of thing that has been commonplace since the 1950s. However, I began to change my mind as the chase sequences began. Most of the movie consists of the lead character avoiding capture. It is told almost entirely without dialog, so the visuals become very important. This is where the movie impressed me. I thought the action was very inventive, and each sequence had something of interest to enjoy. It began to make more sense why Kaitlyn took this role--her character never gives up, despite insurmountable odds (unless you consider the resolution a form of giving in). I thought all the CGI came out great, but I still wished they had used a different look for the antagonists. I would say it's worth a watch.

I liked this movie. I thought it was a good story. There were some parts that I had questions about, but it did a good job of keeping me interested. It had a pretty interesting setup that didn't feel like something that had been done a lot of times before. I thought the performances were very good. Some of the cast even looked like they were young enough to really be in high school! Unfortunately, the lead actress looked way too old to me, even though she did a good job. My favorite scenes were the ones when the kids all got together to use the enchanted object. It felt like a realistic depiction of what kids would do in this situation. Recommended.

This movie stuck with me. It did not become one of my favorite horror films, but it absolutely left an impression. Both this movie and Midsommar somehow managed to make me feel as terrible as if something bad happened to a loved one. The emotions these movies stirred in me were so strong that I couldn't watch them back for long periods of time. Granted, I might be more empathetic than the average viewer, but so few movies can generate any actual emotion that I have to acknowledge Hereditary for being able to evoke something so visceral. I was less interested in the actual narrative, which I thought would have been better if it was a little more linear. Nevertheless, this was way better than average for its genre.