Reviews (2,077)

  • First of all, the idea sounds fun. Second, the execution sadly is not - although an episode just runs around 30 minutes per episode I felt quite bored sometimes. The reason for this state of boredom is easy to detect: too much of personal/family drama (and very mediocre dialogues) and the demon hunting felt sometimes just like background noise. Anyway, The Bondsman is okay if you are in need for some horror comedy, it got its moments. Last note: Ash vs. Evil Dead (some reviewer compare those shows) is the way way better show in all aspects (cast, action, gore, comedy, production etc.), so if you think you get something of the same level, you will be most certainly disappointed. Verdict: mediocre with some good moments here and there.
  • Mickey 17 in short: a decent production value struggling against weak executed comedy. The tone of humor or elements of comedy did not work at all for me - I was just bored, and the introduction of our hero with all his redundant babble (to explain what should have been introduced by story-telling) is the best example. All the characters, including Mickey are caricatures and never gave me the impression this is a glimpse in a possible future. Anyway, I did not expect something dark like Blade Runner but Mickey 17 is another example or proof that comedy is no easy business. How to do it the right way? The Fifth Element is a fine example. What else? Mickey 17 is not totally crashing but something you could stream while you answer some emails or do something else, you won't miss much. Background noise, so to say. All in all a rather disappointing affair.
  • American Primeval is for sure one of the best TV-shows on Netflix lately - a dark and gritty tale in the West with a fine production and a solid working cast. The story got a similar (or same) tone like Mark. L. Smith's well known The Revenant (starring Leonardo DiCaprio) - so, if you liked that one this show is made for you, if not, don't bother. What you get is a lot of riding and running and killing too, the story itself is rather a simple one. Anyway, I dare to recommend the show to all lost souls who like movies and shows like The Terror, Taboo, The North Water, Bone Tomahawk, and The Revenant, of course. Decent stuff.
  • Like re-imagining Homer's Odyssey or Shakespeare's Hamlet, or maybe trying to invent something important like the wheel, the path to failure is easy - not everyone is a Shakespeare or a Homer, and very few people really change the course of history with the inventions of their mind.

    This new Snow White lacks much-no soul, no vision, just the hollow echoes of zeitgeist-driven whims. But to be fair, rewriting and retelling old fairy tales is nothing new. The original stories are often far too dark and cruel for children, at least for the modern era. Many of the tales we know today are softened versions of the originals collected and recorded by the Brothers Grimm. In that sense, most of Disney's and Hollywood's adaptations have never been entirely faithful to their source material.

    That said, this latest disneyfied version is particularly cringe-worthy in its forced "zeitgeist improvements" and, in my opinion (I like to repeat myself here), lacks any real soul - just like so many productions these days. In short: bad to mediocre storytelling and character-development, too much agenda (at least for my taste).

    The pro? The production quality is solid, but the best part? Gal Gadot as the Queen. The magic mirror must be blind. ;)
  • The Electric State reminds me a lot of of Borderland - a fun idea, some well done visuals, but, well that's it about it - the action is boring, the dialogues bad, the humor mostly cheesy, and the whole story gets more and more redundant and predictable as it moves on. No doubt, I would die in boredom writing that story/script. I really don't what kind of people think and decide that it is a good idea to spend more than 300 million dollars for such kind of, well, mediocrity. Like Borderland, The Electric State is one of those contemporary movies that will be forgotten fast and fall in that void too many movies these days belong. Final verdict: just boring.

    Last note: I didn't read the book (author: Simon Stålenhag), so I have no clue if the original story is that boring or just the movie adaptation failed big time.
  • The initial idea is fun but the movie runs really quickly out of steam and the longer the running time the more it gets boring. Last but not least, the movie may be financed and supported by a conglomerate of drug dealers - carpe diem seems to be reduced to, well, taking drugs before you die ;) Anyway, this is no new Cheech & Chong or The Big Lebowski - the level of comedy and humor is simply to mediocre like the rest of the "story" and all the pseudo-clever blabla of our heroin. Anyway, as many raving reviews indicate, some people seem to like this one. So, if you really got nothing better to do, you may try Spontaneous and make up your mind yourself.
  • 20 February 2025
    Companion is a fun little movie weakened - at least for me - by the included elements/scenes of comedy. Those scenes are at best mediocre and weaken the story and do not fit well into the whole picture. Also, all characters, besides Iris (a really great performance by Sophie Thatcher), are more or less just caricatures. Anyway, with a darker tone and a focus on the genres of sci-fi and thriller this one could have been a really good one. So as it is, Companion is still a watchable flick but not reaching its full potential. And last but not least, like other reviewers indicate, there are some plot holes you just have to ignore to enjoy the ride. All in all: solid.
  • A solid movie that is fun to watch but could have been truly great with some script improvements - especially considering the numerous plot holes and the somewhat dull resolution of the "mystery" surrounding the gorge, which diminish its quality. The somewhat unnecessary and drawn-out introduction of our heroes also stands out negatively.

    On the plus side: two charismatic actors (Taylor-Joy is a delight, as always), a more-than-solid production, and some really well-executed action scenes. Amid the mass of mediocre to bad movies that get produced and published these days, this one is not too bad.

    Recommended for fans of movies like Last Contact, Monster Hunter, The Tomorrow War, Underwater, and Annihilation. My exact rate 6 + 1 (for the Taylor-Joy factor only).
  • While I watched Bram Stoker's Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola multiple times and will do from time to time again, Eggers Nosferatu left me cold, and slightly bored, I should add, and I'm pretty sure I won't watch this one ever again. I really like Eggers previous works - The Northmen, The Witch and The Lighthouse, and I enjoyed them all and watched all of them a few times, but this one I do not like much. Sometimes it felt almost like a parody to me. Anyway, the production and settings are solid, the cast is okay, and if you are in the need for just another Dracula/Nosferatu movie, this one will most likely do. But without doubt, Coppola' s movie beats this one on all fields (setting, costumes, cinematography, acting) easy. Mediocre and more or less redundant.
  • If you're familiar with the good old 70s TV show Kung Fu starring David Carradine, you know what to expect: some martial arts fighting action spiced up with some mystic lessons. I like Circle of Iron mainly for one reason: it's a unique movie that takes you on a journey beyond your pretty standard Hollywood story - but only if you're open-minded and have some interest in mysticism and philosophy and such matters. For others, however, Circle of Iron might feel like a really big bite of cheese. That said, if you enjoy trying something a little peculiar, give this one a shot - it might surprise you.
  • A B-trash movie starring Frank Grillo and Katrina Law, Werewolves delivers just enough entertainment to pass a lazy Sunday afternoon. The production quality is solid and the werewolves are "nice" looking. The premise is decent, though the execution wavers between mediocre and passable. Fans of gore will find even a very brief glimpses to satisfy their cravings.

    That said, I have two main issues. First, the movie takes a bit too long to get the action rolling, which tested my patience. Second, the ending is really all kitsch in and I mean KITSCH.

    The rest of the film is entertaining enough if you don't expect too much. Of course, there are plot holes aplenty. For instance, despite having a year to prepare, the woman at home runs out of ammo suspiciously quickly, and the house's security measures feel amateurish at best. But well, it's a trash movie, and such flaws are part of the charm - or at least easy to overlook if you're in the right mood.

    Final verdict: not too bad but for sure not one of those trashy movies that by some kind of supreme magick reign supreme.
  • 26 December 2024
    Warning: Spoilers
    If you're in the mood-or actively hunting-for a post-apocalyptic movie in the vein of The Road, The Day, Colony or The Survivalist, Year 10 is a decent choice. The production values are solid for a small production, and the cast delivers watchable performances.

    What holds the movie back, however, is the script's reliance on contrived moments to create suspense. The protagonist's repeated, cringe-worthy mistakes (his actions, his behavior) undermine the narrative; his actions often defy basic logic. A particularly glaring example is the caravan trailer scene, where he steals a key from a group of cannibals. Realistically, such a scenario would only work if the group were completely drunk or stoned-neither of which is suggested in the film. But that's of course an issue of lazy writing.

    Despite its flaws, Year 10 is still worth a watch, especially for fans of the genre. It's certainly better than many of the lesser offerings in the world of post-apocalyptic storytelling. Still, it's frustrating to think about what might have been. With the same cast and production quality, a more sophisticated script could have elevated this movie into something truly memorable (for that kind of movies). Unfortunately, it seems like good writing is becoming a lost art.
  • Gladiator II does not possess the production quality of the original film, nor does the cast deliver performances that come close to the acting caliber we witnessed in the first Gladiator. Overall, the movie is filled with excessive CGI and over-the-top action sequences. More, more, more the movies screams while lacking of any emotional depth Gladiator got. While I have watched Gladiator multiple times, I seriously doubt I will ever watch the sequel again. Like the remakes of Ben-Hur or Papillon, this film is another inferior attempt that fails to fill the shoes of its predecessor. It may be watchable if you're looking for mindless action and want to turn your brain off. Verdict: a decidedly inferior movie.
  • The behavior and dialogue of far too many characters are completely off, bearing little resemblance to the intricate world Frank Herbert meticulously built. Instead, it feels as though the universe of Dune has been reduced to something akin to a soap opera, that is (like in many of these kind of shows, be it a historical costume drama, a sci-fi or fantasy show) occasionally interrupted by action or battle sequences. While I understand it's too early to make a definitive judgment, as only one episode has aired, the tone and execution of this initial installment leave much to be desired - I do not care the slightest for one of the characters introduced. Anyway, if this is the direction the series is generally headed, Dune: Prophecy will be just a shallow shadow of its source material.

    Dune: Prophecy reminds me of many, too many, other adaptations, like House of the Dragon, The Rings of Power, or Foundation. If you're familiar with their source material, they all share a common flaw: they are, in my opinion, major disappointments. While the production quality is often solid, the storytelling feels like comparing the work of a seasoned author to the early attempts of a fourth-grader.

    It's truly disheartening that such epic works are being adapted in an era where movie-making is heavily influenced by marketing departments and an overemphasis on ticking diversity check-boxes, rather than prioritizing world-building, storytelling, and technical or acting craftsmanship. Over the past decade, we've seen very few high-quality movies or shows and an endless stream of underwhelming productions.

    The best I can say about the first episode of Dune: Prophecy is that the production values are solid. Will I watch the second episode? I really don't know yet.

    Last note: did Q send Ragnar Lothbrok to this universe? ;)
  • I don't like this one at all - the visuals all look to me just too artificial, the story is redundant noise, the acting soso. It saddens me, that even a (former) giant like Coppola can not make an at least decent movie anymore. There may be some profound meaning to the story, but it's drowned in redundant scenes, CGI-generated visual blabla (I'm really tired of CGI these days), weak dialogues and, last but not least, maestro Boredom was one my side the whole time while watching the movie - I dare to say that some of my brain cells committed suicide... Megalopolis is in my opinion just another piece to the growing puzzle of the declining powers of the once dream-making kingdom Hollywood. If you adapt the story of Megalopolis to Hollywood, some stuff in the narration makes some sense... Over and out.
  • If you're in the mood for some pretty looking gore (and I do mean "pretty" - nothing here is truly repulsive), Terrifier 3 might work for you - to a point. But if you're after a strong story or genuine horror, it won't. The Terrifier movies have one big issue: there's nothing truly terrifying about them. The atmosphere isn't "serious" horror; it's more like a ramped-up version of movies like Final Destination in terms of violence. And honestly, Final Destination manages to provoke a stronger reaction in me than all this polished gore - because some of the death scenes of the Final Destination movies are really thought provoking. Still, if you've got some free time and want something to slash through, this will do. It's not bad, but it's unremarkable and certainly nothing a true gorehound will remember.
  • One of my rules for the cinematic universe: watch everything with Bruce Campbell. So, naturally, I put Hysteria on my screen. First off, it's one of the weaker projects that got Bruce involved. Hysteria isn't bad and is professionally made, but the pacing drags, and there's too much of filler time. In my opinion, the story would have worked better cut down to a two-hour movie - many scenes and dialogues just pad the runtime and nothing else. The characters are mostly caricatures too we've watched countless times. Verdict: watchable, and if you're committed to watching everything Bruce has worked in, you will give Hysteria your time, of course. What to expect: some teen drama, some elements of comedy, a little piece of horror, some twists.
  • I've got a new idea - a premise for a movie: people are transforming into brain-dead, zombie-like creatures because boredom is literally killing their brain cells. The only way to slow down the transformation (or the decomposing of the brains it is) is by reading one of the classic novels from long ago... Honestly, Die Alone is one of those movies with a single idea (the twist), but everything else is poorly executed. To all future zombie movie creators: first, analyze why people enjoy zombie movies. Second, think hard about your concept before making a zombie film. Third, think even harder... Back to Die Alone - it is a dull film that offers nothing we haven't seen a million times before, aside from that one small idea, the "twist", everything else: business as usual, but in a cheap way. Verdict: Boring. Final note: after a very short span of thought-work (a blink of an eye), I decided not to make a movie out of my precious idea...
  • 17 October 2024
    Titane is sometimes beautifully shot, however, despite my appreciation for the weird, obscure, and bizarre, I found that the story and the main characters never really captivated or interested me. For me, Titane felt more like a collage of grotesque and surreal scenes than a coherent narrative/story. While some viewers may uncover deeper meanings or thematic layers within those moments, I personally failed in doing so. I liked a few moments but mostly I was just indifferent and slightly bored.

    In my view, Titane is an ambitious experiment that ultimately falls short, but I guess that it may resonate with others in ways it didn't for me. The movie certainly has bold and some unsettling imagery that might appeal to fans of the grotesque and unconventional.

    So, my recommendation: if you're drawn to the bizarre and grotesque, give Titane a try and make up your own mind. Worth a try for those who know (and like) movies like Antichrist, Martyrs, Mother, Poor Things, Tideland, Horns and such oddities.
  • 7 October 2024
    5/10
    So So
    While I liked the tone and setting of Azrael, and the production and acting are solid, I must admit I felt a little bored. Despite its relatively short runtime of 85 minutes (which is brief by today's standards), the movie felt stretched. Also, the core of Azrael doesn't really offer anything new - as other reviewers have pointed out, the fact that the characters don't speak feels more like a gimmick than something essential to the story. If the same plot were presented with dialogue, nothing would really change. But I admit, it might be better to have no dialogue at all than the generic, often poor-quality dialogue we see in many movies today.

    What else? Azrael reminds me of movies like The Road, The Survivalist, The Day, or The Village (just a few examples that came to mind), but to be honest, I enjoyed all of them more than Azrael.

    My verdict: a watchable affair - just don't expect anything groundbreaking or a masterpiece.
  • Blink Twice is a fantastic example of a widely used recipe these days, which could be titled "How to Bore Your Audience Into a Brain-Dead State." Sure, the production and cast are solid, and the directing is decent too, but the story lacks momentum. Too many scenes are either a) redundant, b) overstretched, or c) both. The dialogues are mostly just, well, forget about it... That said, Blink Twice is not the worst movie ever, and if you're a fan of the actors or interested in Zoë Kravitz's career, you might want to give it a shot. But in my (most humble) opinion, if you're craving a glimpse into the lives of the ultra-rich, you're better off watching one of the many reality shows out there (like The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, Keeping Up with the Kardashians, Secret Lives of the Super Rich, etc.), which I admit I sometimes watch too - when I'm in the mood for a dose of shiny-sunny-candy-sandy land and want to put my brain on standby. Note: I realize those "reality" shows won't give you much in the way of violence or murder (at least not yet), but considering that what feels like 98% of Hollywood's output revolves around those themes, there's plenty of content to satisfy that kind of sinister craving.
  • 14 September 2024
    There are a number of movies that are better left untouched (the following are just a few examples that come to mind) - The Matrix, Pulp Fiction, Fight Club, The Shining, A Clockwork Orange, The Godfather, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and yes, The Crow, are perfect, or nearly perfect movies and any new version is bound to fail. This remake is a prime example - it lacks the dark charm, the outstanding actors, the fantastic, moody settings, and the iconic soundtrack of the original. What remains is a series of action sequences and some brutality. Brutality seems to be a tool used nowadays to mask a lack of substance.

    While the original version rightfully enjoys a certain cult status, The Crow 2024 will quickly, and deservedly in my opinion, fade into obscurity. Instead of rehashing classics, filmmakers should focus on creating new stories rather than making lazy and mediocre attempts to profit off the work and vision of others. This one is just a tiresome rehash, made to stock up the archives of streaming platforms. In short: like some other recent remakes (e.g. Fahrenheit 451, Road House or Papillon), The Crow is inferior and my recommendation is a simple one: just watch the original ones once again.
  • Clearly aimed at a younger audience, Uglies does have some redeeming qualities in terms of production value, and the acting is fairly decent. However, the movie suffers from a predictable and formulaic plot that only skims the surface of science fiction. The story feels like it's running on autopilot, devoid of surprises or fresh ideas, and fails to capture the essence of true sci-fi. In fact, you could transplant the characters or narrative into Hogwarts (or any other setting), and it would still feel the same.

    What could have been an intriguing exploration of deeper questions-such as what it truly means for a society and the individual if everyone were their "best self"-is unfortunately left unexplored. The movie offers shallow answers that feel biased and pre-packaged, merely transporting present-day issues into a fictional context and leaving little room for thoughtful reflection or complexity. Consider just a few potential questions: How would this kind of society impact relationships and social dynamics? What are the psychological and emotional effects on individuals? Would individuality be sacrificed for uniformity? Would everyone's "best self" truly eliminate all differences? These questions-and many more-are left unanswered, while the movie suggests that juvenile behavior is somehow preferable to, well, people just partying all the time. This leaves us with only superficial characters, as though "stupid behavior" is the right of the young (at least in my opinion).

    Similar movies like The Hunger Games, Divergent, and The Maze Runner are out of reach, and even less strong movies like The 5th Wave, The Host, and The Giver entertained me more. That said, if you're under 15, you might still find some entertainment value in Uglies-there's some romance and a bit of action. For adult viewers, however, Uglies is likely to feel like a missed opportunity and, ultimately, a waste of time.
  • I really enjoyed Poor Things (bravo to Emma Stone!), but Kinds of Kindness left me feeling indifferent and, at times, even bored. While the acting ranges from solid to fine, the "stories" themselves just didn't resonate with me. I've watched plenty of strange films - and enjoyed many of them - but Kinds of Kindness isn't one that entertained or surprised me much. Everything felt rather forced (like the use of the f-word): When you experiment, there's always a chance of failure, and for me, this movie falls into that category. There may be a good idea behind it, but it's poorly and rather boringly presented. That said, maybe I missed something important, the right "key" to unlock the core of Kinds of Kindness. My recommendation: if you're into experimental and weird films, give this one a try and decide for yourself, if not, avoid, despite the good cast.
  • The idea has some potential, but the execution sadly falls short. Down a Dark Hall aimed for a Gothic horror/fantasy vibe, but it only manages to be unsettling if you're either under, lets say, 12 or you have an extremely sensitive disposition, with nerves that react to even the slightest hint of suspense and thrill. The production values are decent, the acting okay, but without the help of the fast-forward button, I doubt I would have made it to the end of this little flick: The pacing drags, and the scares feel rather formulaic, lacking the depth or originality needed to sustain interest throughout the film. Ultimately, I dare to say, it's a missed opportunity.
An error has occured. Please try again.