Reviews (1,674)

  • Warning: Spoilers
    Like my first thought with regards to this film is that it's Frankenstein, but in another way it isn't. Like, Frankenstein's monster is a hideous beast, but the version of the monster in this film is anything but. In fact, she is a very attractive woman, and I suspect there is a very good reason for this. When I think about it, you could say that this film is the opposite of Frankenstein, namely because while both are exploring the world, in the book, the monster is rejected, but in this film the monster is actually accepted. No doubt this is because the monster is actually a beautiful woman.

    The story is that we have this scientist, but it turns out that his father had been experimenting on him (and it is actually possible, though never said, that he could be Frankenstein's monster). Anyway, he brings in an apprentice to take notes on an experiment that he had been conducting. Once you enter his home you discover that he has been performing lots of experiments, and it appears that this one could actually be his greatest. We quickly find out that what he has done is that he has taken the brain of a baby and implanted it into the body of its mother. As such, it turns out that we have a child in the body of a fully grown woman, and of course this leads to some rather interesting, and sometimes quite humorous, events.

    The film has a very fantasy feel about it, but that is because we are actually seeing the world through the mind of a child, in all of the child's innocent. At first, the professor is doing his best not to corrupt the child, but it reaches a point where they have no choice but to let her go. The ironic thing is that this innocence leads a trail of destruction everywhere she goes.

    Well, moreso there are people that try to control her, but not only do they inevitably fail, they destroy themselves in the process. The difference between the protagonist and most women of this era is that grown women have been conditioned to understand that in Victorian England they are property. However, she has not have this conditioning, and as such she reveals in her freedom, and fights back whenever anybody attempts to control her. In fact you could say that the main antagonist of the film is literally driven insane trying to make her his.

    This is a great movie, one that reminds me of a lot of other great films in the past, and great directors. In fact it felt a lot like a Wes Anderson film, though the characters were no where near as stilted as his characters can be. It's certainly worth seeing, and Emma Stone has already won one award for such an outstanding performance.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This is another one of those films that I've basically got to sit down and write about how bad it really is. Honestly, I just didn't find it at all funny, though I guess my humour has changed quite a bit since I first watched this film back when I was a teenager. Yeah, this was one of those films that was replayed on television, though a number of scenes I suspect were cut, namely because there was quite a bit of nudity in it (which, ironically, isn't all that much in vogue any more).

    Basically, it is a sketch show, but has been extended to the length of a film. It seems to be linked together by a news report, though there doesn't seem to be all that much of a reference to it in the title. There is a larger segment in the middle, which is basically a mock kungfu movie. Actually, there are a few mock sketches based upon what was popular at the time (included Blaxploitation).

    Still, as I said, this is a pretty bad film, and honestly, I wouldn't try finding it on the internet because it seems as if nobody really wants to touch it. The only reason I watched it was because it was on the list of cult films.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, it's an action movie and it stars Jason Statham, so that should probably say everything about this film that you need to know. Actually, I should probably just say that this film stars Jason Statham which should pretty much tell you everything you need to know about this film. Like, he is this guy that is basically invincible, and he is on a quest to revenge some wrong done to a friend of him, and they send thousands of people up against him and they all lose.

    Yeah, it's a typical Jason Statham film, but honestly, that is pretty much what I go and see his films for. Apparently, in these films he can't even get beaten up because apparently that is in his contract (I believe the Rock has a similar clause in his contracts as well). So, he's like this beekeeper and has been helping out this old lady. However, some scammers manage to steal all of her money, and all of a fund that she manages as well, so she kills herself.

    Well, it turns out that this beekeeper like happens to be a highly skilled agent, though he has retired, and he's pretty upset, so he tracks down the outfit (which happens to be in the United States) and burns it to the ground. This upsets a few people, and they go out of their way to attempt to deal with him, until they work out that he is not the type of guy that you want to deal with. In fact if he is on your tail, well, you better run away really, really fast.

    Mind you, when I noticed that it was about scammers, all I thought was that it didn't make sense because all of these outfits are in India, that is until you realise that there is a lot more behind this outfit than meets the eyes. The other thing is that it always surprises me how pigheaded people happen to be, but that is actually quite realistic. A lot of people, especially security guards, simply use their uniform, and their authority, to fulfil their duties, and it usually works - until it doesn't. Mind you, with a lot of these films you either see some bad guy security guard who you cheer when he gets beaten up, or the good guy security guard pleading for his life. Sometimes it will be nice to see some security guards (and bad guys) who have a lot of sense knocked into them, as opposed to simply being killed. Yeah, despite my beliefs, having bad guy killed just doesn't seem to do it for me.

    Yeah, it's a pretty cool film, a fun action movie to watch to kill the time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Sometimes the story of the person that gets frozen in time and wakes up years in the future can be somewhat interesting. I'm not sure if I can consider this to be one of those films, but in a way it is fun. Actually, half the reason that I watched it was because it was a Seth Rogan film, though sadly it doesn't seem as if it is like some of his older ones, the ones that have become cult films.

    Anyway, it is about this Jewish immigrant to the United States. He and his wife come over due to the village in which they live constantly being ransacked by Cossacks. So, he gets a job at a pickle factory, and one night falls in and is pickled. Years later, in the modern day, some kids break into the abandoned factory and open the vat to discovered the pickled man. This causes quite a stir, and after a while they find his one and only descendant, who happens to be an app writer.

    The film really has a lot to do with the really conservative guy from the past attempting to come to terms with the modern world. Actually, it seems to more have to do with the great-grand son and his pickled relative coming to terms with who each other are, and their relationships. Like, it is as if they guy is thrown into his life, and is so conservative they end up rubbing up against each other.

    Ironically, he ends up being quite a good businessman, but also cuts lots and lots of corners. His grandson, jealous of his success, looks for ways to continue to undermine him, and it gets to the point where he is literally about to be thrown out of the country. However, as I mentioned, it really is about getting to know oneself, and ones heritage, and as such, they end up making peace, and have a happy ending.

    Like, it wasn't a bad film, and yes, it was funny in spots, but it is still a trope that has been done many, many times before (like Rip van Winkle), so yeah, it really isn't anything new.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The thing is that when it comes to Clint Eastwood movies a part of me really doesn't want to necessarily write them off as flag waving patriotic show pieces. Then again, people seem to think that the song 'Born in the USA' is America's unofficial national anthem when it is actually anything but. Sure, this film does explore the life, and the tragic death, of an Iraq War veteran who has notched up the most confirmed kills of any US soldier. Mind you, there are some questions regarding the accuracy of the source material, and of course the film, like a lot of films based on real people, also is a bit liberal with the material as well.

    However, I didn't actually think it was all that bad. In part, it sort of reminded me of Blackhawk Down, but to be honest, Blackhawk Down was much more of a feel good film than this one, though I do feel that it may have held Chris Kyle up in a much better light. Still, the reality is that, like similar films (such as The Hurt Locker) there is a idea that war is an addiction. There is also this idea that war has a habit of sucking you in to looking at the world in a very black and white way. That, sadly, is unavoidable.

    The main motivation we see of Chris Kyle is his overarching desire to protect people. That is certainly a noble motivation for going to war. However, I believe that when you happen to be in the military, you really don't have much of a choice, though there does seem to be this suggestion that you don't necessarily need to do four tours in Iraq in the same way that Chris did. The funny thing is that even when he returns home, he simply wants to get back there, as if he has unfinished business. Even after he decides that he has had enough, he still wants to return - as I have mentioned, war in an addiction.

    The problem with some biopics though is that they don't necessarily have a plot, however some film makers do weave one into it. Like this one, where a conflict is set up between two snipers, and it comes down to attempting to best the other. Apparently this wasn't actually the case, but it does make for good cinema. Sure, it might not be anywhere near as good as 'The Hurt Locker' but I still liked it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    As I was watching this film I could almost picture that it was no doubt based on an earlier work, and quite possibly a play. It turns out that is was, but it was also a rather obscure Hungarian Play, whose title was translated to 'The Shop Around the Corner'. Actually, that is probably being a little bit harsh because, as it turns out, it was actually quite a popular play to the point that it was turned into a major Hollywood movie. Mind you, in the original story, the medium of communication was by letter. So yes, this was just a modern remake, using modern technology, of a story that had been around for a long time.

    Anyway, the story goes that a couple meet online, but they have no idea who the other is. In fact, they make a pledge that they will be as anonymous as possible. Mind you, in a city the size of New York that shouldn't actually be all that difficult - in fact that is one of the main reasons I moved to Melbourne, and that is because a larger size means a greater amount of anonymity. Anyway it turns out that they do know each other, it is just that they are in competition with each other - she owns a small, independent children's bookshop, and he is the son of a family that owns a corporate chain.

    As you can imagine, which is the case with a lot of these romantic comedies, it is all about how they get together. Mind you, he works out who she is before the other way around, but that is sort of how things panned out at first (they were meeting up, and she was supposed to have the signal). Mind you, after a bit of pushing from friends, he ends up having to, not so much as to get into her heart enough that when the big reveal comes about, she is relieved as opposed to being put off.

    Like, I have to admit that I really am not a particularly big fan of romantic comedies, but the thing is that this is almost as if it is done in an old style element. There isn't even the fact that they end up having affairs namely because the partners that they are with at the beginning of the film end up disappearing as the film progresses. I have to admit that this is actually quite a sweet film, and I'm not surprised that Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks came back together after Sleepless in Seattle (not that I've actually seen it, but I'm sort of inclined to).
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I wasn't really sure about this film at first, though I watched it because it was one of those films that had been on repeat when I was young, but that is no doubt because it was really popular. Anyway, I decided to actually give it a go one evening, and at first it just seemed to be way too confusing, but the bait and switch at the end turned out to be really good, and everything actually fell into place.

    I suspect that they did that on purpose, making you wonder how this con was going to play out, and what the actual sting was going to be. You see, this film is about a couple of con men. They don't necessarily run small time cons, but one of them happens to make a habit of getting caught out in rigged gambling games (and of course the other turns out to be easily able to turn the tables on the others).

    Anyway, when one of the mentors is killed, he is sent to Chicago to meet up with another con-man, and while there they plan one big con. Mind you, it is pretty difficult to work out how it is going to play out, and of course there are a couple of side plots going on, such as a hitman being sent to kill him, and him having to avoid him.

    Yeah, in the end though, it turns out that this pretty elaborate con turned out to actually be a pretty good con. It's definitely a movie worth watching, and I have to be honest that it is a shame that they don't make films like this anymore.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, as it turns out, this will be the last of the DCEU films, and while I didn't think they were all that bad, it seems that people just really aren't wanting to spend money to go to the movies anymore. Mind you, I suspect that it has more to do with Marvel simply flooding the market with super-hero films and DC was just trying to play catch up, but doing it just that little too fast and thus ruining everything.

    Or it could be that Zack Snyder had to leave Justice League, and as such his version of the film, and the direction that the DCEU was heading sort of ended up going all over the place. Oh, and they were also spending too much time just copying Marvel, and thus people just, well, saw it as a more disjointed Marvel offering. Well, that and probably they are just getting sick of super-hero films.

    As for me, well, I have to say that I did enjoy it. Mind you, it was one of those films with a message, and that that is global warming is really bad, and for both the surface and the undersea realms. Anyway, I won't go into here but rather look at the film. Except, as a message, it is a good one to remind us of, but the reality is that we spend too much time wanting other people to solve it than to actually give up the goodies that we have (like our cars - but we do need public transport).

    Anyway, one of the bad guys from the last movie, who has a personal grudge against Aquaman, gets his hand on an ancient trident that reveals to him oricalcum (which is a real substance, just not as sexy as the movies make it out to be) and he starts using this, and it causes the world to heat up much faster. As such, Aquaman, and his brother, whom he makes amends with, have to go and stop him.

    Hey, I enjoyed it, so I'll give it that, but as I have said previously, I suspect people are just starting to get a little sick of super-hero films.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    You know, after watching the first film a part of me really wanted to watch the next film to see what actually happens (and whether they actually stick with the continuity). Well, it turns out that they do, and at first it sort of appears that maybe the kids won't play as big as role, but of course, like with a lot of films, one shouldn't make too many assumptions. Anyway, this film ends up having the kids playing a significant role.

    However, where the first film was about Gru becoming a father, this film is about him becoming a husband. You sort of work this out pretty quickly, especially since at the beginning, where he is throwing a birthday party for the kids, there is an insinuation that maybe he should look at hooking up with somebody. I do actually appreciate this with Gru because, well, as it turns out during the film, hooking up with randos generally does not work. Actually, having people play matchmaker is certainly a lot like that.

    Still, it was a enjoyable film, and yeah, it does maintain the pretty same standard that the original film did. Mind you, we have Gru being recruited by some agency that is set up to fight villains, and of course there is a suggestion that Gru is a bumbling idiot. Well, okay, maybe he is, and the way that he tracks down the villain is dubious at best. However, it also raises questions about the agency who, well, falls for the fact that somebody has actually been set up, and that Gru is on the right track.

    Yeah, it's fun, and it's also cool how we get to see Gru's further adventures, as a villain and as a father.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, I finally got around to actually watching this film, despite the fact that it has been around for quite a while, and it is hard not to actually see Minions, well, everywhere. Like, it is sort of like Megamind, in that we have a supervillain who turns good, but it is somewhat different to that. Actually, the main reason I wanted to watch it was because they had a short before another movie I saw, and I decided that I would watch it to see what is about.

    Anyway, the film starts off with somebody stealing one of the Pyramids. Everybody thinks that Gru did it, but it turns out that he didn't. Anyway, he wants to go one better and steal the moon. It turns out that there is another, younger, villain named Vector who also wants to steal it as well, so the boss of the Bank of Evil decides that Gru is too old and gives the money to Vector instead.

    It also turns out that Vector's hideaway is impenetrable, except that he has a love of cookies, so he adopts some girls to sneak some robot cookies in there. Well, that is where all the fun begins because Gru, a super-villain who only has a horde of minions as his companions (as well as an old , evil doctor) suddenly must learn to become a father. Well, okay, he doesn't want to learn to become a father, but having the girls hanging around him starts to transform him.

    I guess the idea of the film is that children have an ability to make hard people become much softer. Mind you, I don't buy it, but it's one of the feel good films, one where as the film progresses we actually discover more and more about Gru. Like, he always wanted to go to the moon, but his mother told him that he couldn't do it. That is certainly something I, and I suspect many others, can relate to. Namely we want to do something, somebody (usually in a respected position) tells us we can't, so we go out to prove them wrong. In the end it was something else we were looking for, and in Gru's case, all he wanted was to be loved.

    Yeah, it's a pretty sweet film, and I can certainly see what it was so popular. Sadly, reality is much different, but I won't go down that road. Instead, I'll say that sometimes we need to actually dig to try and find out what we really want, and sometimes going to the moon just isn't it.

    Oh, and another interesting thing is how orphanages are portrayed as being pretty horrid places. Actually, I really wouldn't be surprised, especially considering that children that land up there are considered to be unwanted and forgotten children. Like, there were some horror stories that came out of orphanages in other countries, yet here in the western world, they are still portrayed as being pretty nasty places. It is almost as if they are one of those necessities that nobody really wants. Sure, I have known people who have gone out of their way to adopt children, but the reality is, especially those who scream the loudest on the pro-life side, are probably the ones that aren't wanting to provide a strong and stable family life for these children.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The main reason I went to see this movie was because my brother wanted to see it, and the reason he wanted to see it was because it was about birds. Well, to be specific it is about a family of Mallards (ducks) who are happy in their pond, but the kids bug the father to go on a trip (no doubt because his girlfriend has decided to migrate to Jamaica for the winter). It turns out that they are heading in the wrong direction and find themselves in New York City.

    Basically the movie is a kids movie, but it is fun. It's really an adventure where some ducks get caught up into a whole heap of trouble, including having to rescue a parrot from his cage, as well as being chased by a celebrity duck chef. Mind you, I did like the definition of a chef, namely a predator who kills birds for lazier predators to eat.

    It is an interesting movie, though I suspect that it is getting more difficult to come out with new things. Actually, the interesting thing is that it opens with a short clip which explores what happened to the bad guy at the end is Despicable Me. That actually made me get off my butt and actually go and watch that film because, well, the Minions seem to be so ubiquitous these days that it is impossible to actually get around without seeing them, so of course I wanted to find out about their origin as well, or at least the first film in which they appeared.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Apparently this film is based on a party that actually happened here in Australia, and the thing was that it was released something like two years after the event. Mind you, I'm actually not sure of how much truth is in this statement because it isn't the first movie about a big party, and it certainly isn't going to be the last either. Honestly, these extreme parties really seem to be nothing new in Hollywood.

    Ironically, though people have apparently tried to replicate it, and with the alleged party that this film was based on, the guy simply announced it on Facebook not realising that posts like these could easily go viral. In fact, at the time, people didn't really understand the reach of sites like Facebook (it was actually Myspace that he posted it on) and how fast things could spread.

    The thing about the movie is that it is about a kid whose parents are going away for their anniversary, and that it also happens to be his 17th Birthday. Well, his friends want to break into the cool club at highschool, and the plan is to host a huge party. Interestingly a lot of films have the underaged kids attempting to get beer from the liquor store, when in reality, especially when they are the hosts, they pretty much just let other people bring it along.

    Yeah, you could say it is a coming of age film, but it is also a party film. The interesting thing is that a lot of these party films seem to have the party occur at a very specific time and place, in which a very important event happens. Sure, he gets together with his girl at the end, but we also know that that was always going to happen. Sadly, though, the police and authorities are all over these events now, so it is a lot more difficult to organise them.

    Oh, and as can be expected, the house gets trashed.

    Did I also mention that it is a found footage film. Yeah, it is, but the fact that I mentioned it as an afterthought sort of indicates how, well, unimportant it is.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This is another one of those films that seem to be on those 'highly worth watching' lists that you see throughout the internet (especially if they pop up to distract you from work). It's actually based on a Harold Pinter play called the Dumb Waiter, and it is about two hitmen who are sent to Bruges to await further instructions from the boss. Like, it is actually pretty funny, in the way that you would expect from a British black comedy.

    Look, I actually don't want to say all that much about it, namely because I really don't want to give away all that many spoilers, which is a shame because there are some interesting ideas that arise. Like, for instance, the nature of hell, and what happened at the end. Well, we know what happened at the end, but it still leaves us wondering, because honestly, for somebody to take that many bullets to the chest, he has to be dead, but they sort of leave it up in the air, particularly with some of the comments.

    Like, as I mentioned, the idea of hell, and this is explored though, well Bruges. One of them thinks that it is a lovely city, and spends his time doing touristy stuff. The other thinks it is a boring hell hole, and while his opinion of the city doesn't change, events in the film do soften his resolve somehow. Yet, like hell, there doesn't seem to be any escape from Bruges. Even if you try to escape, the city literally flips you around and sends you back. However, it is also interesting that we see that everything happens in the film has a point. Like, for instance, the Americans in the restaurant, or the actor that he keeps on running into. Doing it that way actually makes the entire film, and moreso the entire story, to be very compact, concise, and that nothing happens without a reason.

    As I mentioned, it is certainly worth watching, and it's quite funny as well, having that rather dry British wit that I love so much.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I was going to suggest that if you had seen Asteroid City then you will probably understand this film better, but the thing is that this film came out first, and Asteroid City was done in a very similar style to this film. Basically it is a story being told by a writer about his encounter at a hotel with the eccentric owner, who then tells the story of when he started at the hotel as a bell hop. To further distance the audience from the action, the film enters with a woman laying a wreath at the grave of the author.

    It is interesting how Andersen distances the audience from the actual events of the film, and this has certainly been done in cinema previously, and throughout history. In a way it creates a much more magical, and fantastic feel to the story. Personally, I feel that Anderson did an incredible job with this film, and in fact it turned out to be much better, and funnier, than I initially expected.

    The main action is set in the hotel during the first world war, and is about the owner who happens to be quite a womaniser. He has had an affair with a wealthy heiress, who then dies, and he is given a priceless painting as an inheritance. A lot of the film involves getting this painting, and the owner of the hotel is quite a well loved, and well respected, person, so he manages to get out of issues that many others will fall over, particularly in what appears to be a dictatorship. Oh, he also ends up in gaol.

    The focus is the painting, and the antagonist of the film, Dmitri, is not so much trying to get their hands on the painting, but rather accusing the concierge as being the murderer. I won't go into too much detail with that because there are a series of twists and turns, and it is actually a pretty cool movie to go into without actually knowing anything about it (as was the case with me). However, what I can say is that Anderson's use of colour is magnificent, and the idea of telling the story through multiple layers gives us a sense of nostalgia of a time gone by, but also of the fact that with the lovely memories, were also many painful ones as well.

    It's a great movie, and definitely worth a watch.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, what can I say other than the fact that this is another one of those Ridley Scott historical dramas. Sure, the main reason I saw it was because of Scott, and because of Phoenix (who I discovered is actually River's brother, but that is beside the point). Well, that and the fact that I have always found that Napoleon is one of those quite enigmatic individuals that was never the boogie man that the English have made him out to be. In fact, it wasn't until I actually studied the French revolution that I discovered that Napoleon actually wasn't a boogie man.

    The one thing that I found interesting with this film is the focus on Napoleon's quest for peace. This is certainly something that one would not expect from a guy that conquered all of Europe. Mind you it was more than that, though his prominent battles were portrayed in the film, such as the battle of Asterlitz and the battle of Waterloo (though the over dramatised the idea that Napoleon won the battle by forcing the enemy onto a frozen lake). However, there was a focus on his use of artillery in winning his battles, as well as the fact that unlike many generals he actually fought with his troops.

    Like a lot of historical epics, there are inconsistencies, which while to be expected, does have the habit of creating an inaccurate view of history. I guess that is one of the reasons my history lecturer didn't want to show us Platoon (and anyway, if we wanted to watch it we could have easily got it from the video store - it just would have been better watching it in the classroom with others). Mind you, there is also Phoenix's distinct American accent, which I honestly found odd because I actually expected a lot better from him, and it does seem odd at times, especially when the good actors are able to cover up their accents effectively. Mind you, Napoleon no doubt spoke French, and the only reason it wasn't in French was because it was directed at English audiences.

    Anyway, I have to admit that yeah., the movie actually wasn't that bad. I guess a lot of the exploration was with regards to Napoleon's rise, and of course his fall from grace. However, it is also interesting that we were seeing his attempts at establishing a dynasty. It seems that case that despite the revolution, France quickly slipped back into autocracy. However, it seemed more to do with who the autocrat was as opposed to there being autocrats. Like, they overthrew the restored monarchy in 1848, but shortly after installed Napoleon's nephew as emperor. I suspect, like a lot of us, the French simply didn't appreciate the entitled attitude of the Bourbons.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The funny thing is that I developed a fascination with the idea of mixtapes, and discovered that there was a film about them, which is no doubt why I wanted to watch it. The thing is that I grew up in the 80s, during the era of mix tapes when we would sit in front of the radio waiting for our favourite songs to come of so as to record them. The funny thing is that Hollywood seems to think that mixtapes were shared when in reality we simply kept them for ourselves (with a couple of exceptions - one being that a friend would give them to other friends to get them to listen to different types of music).

    Anyway, this film is about a young orphan who lives with her grandmother. He parents died in a car accident and she wants to learn more about them. Well, she finds a mixtape made by them and decides to listen to it, but it gets eaten by the walkman, so she goes on a quest to find all of the songs. During the quest she makes new friends, and also has to fight with her grandmother who is scared of losing her in the same way that she lost her daughter, and the grubby world of pub rock in which her parents were involved.

    It's basically one of those feel good films. In fact, I have to admit that it was quite enjoyable. Sure, being the age I am I probably relate more to the parents, who we never actually meet, with the exception of their voices on the tape. Actually, this is one of the good things about the film, namely that we never get to meet the parents - there are no flashbacks, so all we know about them is what the hero of the piece are told, so of course we are left guessing, in the same way that she is left guessing, as to who they are and what actually happened.

    Yeah, it was fun, and it certainly was a feel good film. Oh, and it also had a decent amount of music, which you would certainly expect from a film about a mixtape.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I'm not really sure why I insist on watching some of these films, but then again it was on my Netflix to-watch list so I thought that it might be an idea to sort of give it a go. Look, I will admit that there are some good parts to the film, particularly where Buddy is sent down to the mail room and gets everybody dancing. However, in the end it is really just another Christmas film where a childlike adult comes along and teaches everybody that they have to be childlike.

    So, it is about Buddy, a human that fell into Santa's sack as a baby and was taken to the North Pole where he was raised among the elves. However, he discovers that he is human and decides to travel to the human lands to meet up with his father. The catch is that his father is on Santa's naughty list.

    Yeah, so it is basically one of those films where one of the characters, namely the father, is so obsessed with his work that he finds it difficult to find time with his family. Mind you, this was a while ago, and the sad thing is that while back then managers seemed to be the ones who worked ridiculous hours, it is pretty much getting to the point that all employees are expected to work pretty much all the time. This is especially the case where American's really don't get holidays like we do, and moreso these are the ones with stable, full time jobs.

    Like, sure, these films certainly do have a good message, but in reality they simply do not understand the situation that many people in the US face. The scary thing is that they actually don't know what it is like in the rest of the world, and as such just assume that this is the case everywhere (which no doubt is also why education is regularly being cut).

    As I said, the film had some charm about it, but I honestly can't say that it is really one of the greatest that I have seen.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, I guess someone was right when they said that one of the big problems with this film was that you had to like watch 8 other films and 3 series to sort of understand what was going on. Mind you, I have actually done just that, but even then with the amount of time that had passed since I watched the other things it was still a little tricky understanding what was happening.

    Mind you, I did actually quite like the film. Like the scenes where they were switching places whenever they used their powers together, and also the big bad in the film, that was in part trying to save her people, but also attempting to punish Captain Marvel for what she had done to her people. Yeah, as it turned out, when she destroyed the great intelligence it sent the Kree into a massive civil war which basically destroyed their planet.

    So, if you had seen Miss Marvel, you will know that she has a thing for Captain Marvel, and of course it was always going to be a thing that she was eventually going to be involved in a team up. Also, there were some hints at the end that suggested that there was going to be another team-up film, though apparently that will still be some way off (and the problem will be that, no doubt, when they get around to it, all of them will be too old to be members of a possible Young Avengers - kids do grow up a little too fast).

    Yeah, I thought that this film was pretty good, though I have to agree that the problem is that you do need to catch up to speed to understand what is going on. Oh, it also seemed that it felt that it was a bit over the place, no doubt because they wanted to make the film shorter than a lot of the others. Still, it's good, especially if you are up to date on the films.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I guess all I can really say about this film is that it is pretty much a generic action film. Actually, compared to a lot of action films that you get this one seems to be much more level headed, though I'm not really all that sure if the plane could have ended up being all that flyable at the end. However, it's short, it's sharp, and it is entertaining.

    Yeah, basically it is about this pilot who is flying back to the US on what could be considered a budget airline. The airline isn't particularly packed, but there is a storm brewing but he is ordered to fly straight through it. What ends up happening is that the plane is hit by lightning and is forced to land. It turns out that the island is an island ruled by separatists.

    So, basically they have to get a message out, but the separatists decide to take all the passengers and remaining crew prisoner, so they have to free them. Oh, and some mercenaries rocks up to help them escape (and as it turns out the prisoner that turned up in the plane was some foreign legion guy as well).

    Look, it isn't anything particularly great, but it works, even if to tune out for a hour or two. I personally didn't mind it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I'm not sure why I actually wanted to see this film. Probably because it starred Russel Crowe, and that it was based on a true story. Mind you, I suspect that when they say that it is based on a true story, it is using the term in probably the loosest way imaginable. However, there are some things in relation to this film that do stand out, even if you could pretty much say that it is just another of the many remakes of The Exorcist (which I have to admit I haven't seen it, and I probably should make a decent effort to rectify that).

    Anyway, the movie is about a real person upon whose diaries, that were published, were an inspiration. Probably the only two truths about the film is that there was a chief exorcist for the Pope with that name, and that a lot of the things that he does comes down to determining whether it is a real demon or just mental illness. I suspect the main part of the film, particularly with the diabolical plan to take over the world, and that Russell Crowe is the only one who and stop it, is mostly fabricated.

    Look, I'm one of those people that do believe in a spiritual reality, and that there is a significant connection between metal illness and demon possession. Mind you, I wouldn't be encouraging people to use an exorcist to go around curing mental illness, in the same way that I wouldn't be writing off demon possession as simply mental illness. My issue though is that mental illness is a catch all thing that people seem to over diagnose, or use to attempt to extract sympathy for them.

    In the end though I can't really say whether this is a great film or not. I guess it is okay, but it isn't something that I'm really going to be raving about. Mind you, I personally cannot claim to be an expert in demon possession (and I would certainly be treating anybody who claims to be with an incredible amount of suspicion), but I suspect a bulk of the things in this film are Hollywood dramatisation. Personally, I certainly wouldn't be using this as a guide - especially considering a specific scene in Acts.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Well, this is an Australian film, though the director did a pretty good job of making it appear to be set in the United States. It is a shame that the marketing wasn't all that great because there does seem to be a lot of complaints that Australian cinema doesn't seem to get the press that it should, and ends up getting drowned out by the overseas releases. Anyway, I have to say that as a film this was pretty good.

    It's basically about a driver who has been tasked to bring some guy to meet the big boss. They had recently been involved in a robbery where they stole a lot of money from a very influential fence. However, I won't necessarily say that it is an action film, rather it is a crime thriller, and to be honest, compared to a lot of films that I have seen I thought it was pretty good.

    The thing is that most of the action is set in the car and focuses on the relationship is that built between the driver and the guy that he is driving. In fact, the way the relationship is built you end up getting a pretty decent attachment to them, which is why the ending is so shocking.

    I guess what the film does is that it gives character, and life, to what end up being thugs that would have no voice and no personality in your typical film. This is where I think it works, and works quite well. You develop an attachment to the characters, and even though there is a twist at the end, and a pretty good one at that, I still quite liked the characters.

    In a way what it is doing is making crooks human, which sadly is something that our society doesn't really do. It is not just that they don't have a voice, it is that we immediately write them off as bad guys. What this film does is that it points out that there are complicated reasons as to why these characters end up where they are. Whether it be struggling with addiction, or whether it be trying to provide for a family.

    Yet there are also shattered dreams. In a way it seams that this world is a world of shattered dreams. It isn't just that you build a rapport with the characters, it is that you also want to see their dreams on true, only to have them torn away at the end. This seems to be a film that will fly under the radar, but I have to admit that it is pretty good.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This is another one of those films that I have seen a number of times from the 80s, and I believe that it was also one of those films that would regularly reappear on network television. Mind you, I'm not really all that sure why because I have to admit that it isn't one of the greatest films out there. Mind you, I suspect that it had something to do with John Candy and Dan Akryod. In fact, watching this film made me realise again what a great loss John Candy was. Sure, the film may not have been the greatest, but Candy's star power, along with Akyrod's, does pull it up from the doldrums.

    It's basically a film about a family man who decides to bring his family out to a cabin in the woods for a holiday. However, when he arrives it turns out that his brother-in-law, a stock broker, and a guy that he really doesn't like, decides to turn up as well. As such, what was supposed to be a great family vacation turns out to be a nightmare. Well, sort of because it turns out that there is a pretty good reason why his brother in law decides to turn up.

    I guess this film did resonate with us back in the day. The good old family vacation, which as kids was actually a magical time. As kids it was wonderful, but as adults, I assume, it was a nightmare. We wanted our kids to have fun, but there are a lot of pressures on us in the world of adulting. Mind you, Candy's family is clearly middle class, and I do wonder if such things are all possible in the modern age.

    Mind you, we have the holiday romance, which seems to be a fixture of these vacations (and I was way to shy to form any romantic relationship, even though I did sort of have some opportunities back when I was teenagering). Then there is also this idea that one wrong thing can result in one's family getting into a lot of trouble. Oh, and there is also the story of the bear, which turns out of be true, and in the end ends up getting shaved on another part of its body.

    As I mentioned, I can't say that this is all that great a film. It does bring back memories, but honestly, in the end it isn't one of the greatest films that was produced in the 80s.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I reckon I saw this film in the cinema when it first came out. It was basically when I was hanging around with some older uni-students who would go to the movies every so often, and I decided that I would go with them. Anyway, I really don't know how many times I have seen this film, but it sure does take me back to a younger age, even if it wasn't all that innocent.

    So, the film is about this kid who is supposed to get his driver's license. Well, he goes and sits the test, but fails. However, he kicks the computer and all the information is lost (though they later managed to get it, and proceed to fail him). However, since he doesn't want to be labelled a failure (and the fact that the US is a car-centric hell hole) he decides to lie and tell everybody that he passed. Mind you, his parents quickly find out, and of course he is grounded. The catch is that the girl he likes calls him up, so he does what every good teenager does, and steals the car.

    Yeah, the film is pretty much about the wild night out, and honestly, as a teenager I really did connect to this film. Like, okay, in Adelaide we did have decent public transport, but back in those days we really did see the car as some sort of freedom. Like, take the scene at Archies - it was that legendary place that you could only get to if you have a car.

    Mind you, it is also the instance that the car comes back scratched, and ends up completely trashed (namely because they have to rush the mother to the hospital, and the only person who can drive is basically the kid without a license - and I'm pretty surprised that he managed to get all the way to hospital, speeding, in the wrong direction, without getting pulled over by the cops).

    Mind you, it does, probably not intentionally, highlight the nature of cars in the United States, but that is honestly another discussion for another time. Instead let us just remember it for a time when I was young, and it was a film that I really did relate to.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I have to say that this film reminded my a lot of The Big Short, but I suspect that that was intentional. Mind you, what the Big Short managed to do was to demonstrate that you could make a movie about the stock market that was interesting, and this film has managed, successfully mind you, to follow in its footsteps.

    This film is about something that occurred rather recently, and in the middle of the Covid Lockdown as well (and I really did appreciate how they went out of their way to remind us of when this film occurred - though it wasn't all that long ago so it is still very much in our minds). Anyway, it is about an incident when a youtuber and redditor had decided that the stock for Gamestop was woefully undervalued and bought a whole heap of it. The catch was that a lot of big time investors had shorted the stock, namely they were betting on it going down even further.

    This film revealed a reality that in the modern world Wall Street doesn't actually rule the world. What Youtube, Reddit, and apps that allow retail investors to purchase stock, demonstrated was that as a collective force they can actually beat the Wall Street bulls. In fact, at the end of the film there was a comment that the entire incident forced the big wig investors to never underestimate the retail investors again.

    Basically what happened was that as a collective, a whole heap of young people bought into Gamestop forcing the price to go up considerably. This meant that all of the hedge funds that had shorted the stock were forced into the red. The problem with shorting stocks is that if they go up then you owe money, and while buying stocks traditionally the worst that can happen to you is that you lose what you invested, because you are borrowing stocks to short them, if they go the wrong way you can find yourself in the situation where you owe much, much more - and the problem here is that you need to find the money to buy it back.

    Sure, this film may not have been dealing with the economy wide crash that was 2008, it was still pretty good, especially since the modern world of retail investing involved memes and such. It was interesting, and demonstrated that we really cannot ignore the retail investors as a force.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    You know, you could replace the main actor with Adam Sandler and, well, this would basically be an Adam Sandler film. Actually, I'm sort of surprised that it isn't considering that Netflix and Adam Sandler have an agreement for him to make a number of films for them. Mind you, Netflix seems to actually be attempting to push out a lot of stuff, and not surprisingly a lot of this stuff ends up being sub-par at best. Well, come to think of it, at least it is better than the stuff that lands up on platforms like Tubi (namely that the acting is half decent).

    This is a movie about three guys who you could say have to come into the modern world. The film focuses around this guy who always wanted to be a father (have I seen something similar before - oh yes, Horrible Bosses) but he is guy from a different generation. His wife convinces him to send his kid to a private school, and to afford this, they sell the equity in their rather successful company. It turns out that the company ends up getting purchased by some tech-bro and introduces all of these modern ideas that the old dads don't really like. It then turns out that they are kicked out of the company because they were recording a road trip they were taking to sign a deal with a recluse.

    Yeah, to be honest, there is nothing new with regards to this movie. Like, the whole idea of the class of generations has been redone and rehashed since the 60s. It is really just a more modern version of it, and to be honest, I have even seen better modern ones. Well, okay, maybe the idea is to appeal to gen Xers who are probably the same age as the men in this film, though interestingly the gen X generation seem have a broad range of opinions, from those who tend to be rather lefty and woke, to the ones who are much more conservative (like these guys).

    Anyway, yeah, this film really isn't all that great, so I'd probably pass on it.
An error has occured. Please try again.