azey13

If I had written my review after Season 1, this show would be an easy 8/10. The acting is strong from the three main characters, the premise is intriguing, and all together the first season delivered a fast-paced, entertaining, and compelling story that was equally touching, funny, and frightening.

Unfortunately, that all goes away in Season 2. I stopped watching after Episode 5, because nothing about this season makes sense. Except for Emma (the child), the main characters devolve into unlikeable, nonsensical messes, doing things because the writers apparently love drama instead of things happening because they're reasonably possible. New characters are introduced who serve absolutely no purpose other than to stir up more drama, and in the aftermath of such drama no one is behaving in believable ways. I'm very sorry to see this show go this way. Maybe they should have wrapped it up as a Limited Series after Season 1 instead of trying to peddle the crap that was Season 2.

The best thing about this series so far are the visual effects and cinematography. No question that each frame is beautiful to look at. This is simply not the story that Tolkien wrote, and to misrepresent it as such is just lazy and worthy of contempt. With an author like Tolkien, who has an established fanbase, we know who his characters are. We know Galadriel, we know Elrond. To mischaracterize them to superficially and disingenuously push a tedious tropey narrative is hard to watch. You don't need to reinvent the wheel to adapt Tolkien. The source material was already good, there was no need to better it because none of the writers or showrunners can claim to better than Tolkien. Will not be watching further.

I will admit to being a reader of the manga who drifted because of the terrible writing. I decided to watch the series in the hopes that the anime might cure the ills of the manga. Sadly, Vampire Knight remains a waste of potential: a terrific concept showcased by great art and voice acting, but let down by truly bizarre plot choices and flimsy characters and next to no character development.

Emily in Paris is a high fantasy imagining of a young woman's year in Paris. I think halfway through I cottoned on to the fact that it isn't meant to reflect reality, which made it slightly easier to watch. That being said, it's still a struggle to watch. I paused and came back to the first episode alone six times. The biggest problem (for me) is that for a glitzy escapist fantasy, it didn't succeed in suspending reality. I kept snapping out of it and going, "Yeah, that's so unrealistic" or "Wow, that is so inaccurate and offensive." I mean, even random background French characters are walking around speaking in English. Come oooon.

I have a soft spot for Lily Collins, which is why I really tried to like this. But her character--and everyone else, really--is written as a stereotype. Hers is "obnoxious Gen-Z gauche American" living every French fantasy the writers could cough up. It's like it was written by people who (a) have never been to Paris and just dreamed every aspect of it up; or (b) people who have been, and for some reason took nothing from the stay.

I can see how this might appeal to a certain market, but wow is the pandering laid on thick. It made it wholly unenjoyable for me.

It isn't often that Netflix manages to ruin a thing just by marketing it, but it totally did in the case of Mignonnes. I tracked the film because it did well at Sundance, but I almost didn't see it because of the unfortunate Netflix marketing campaign. (Seriously, whoever was responsible for that needs to be suspended until they get professional help.) When it premiered, however, I decided to give it a chance and I'm glad I did.

Without going too deeply into the movie's plot, it is a coming of age movie for children in the digital age and it does venture into the complications of that. It accurately describes the problems of raising children who have access to so much that may be harmful to them at their age, although it doesn't give us answers or propose solutions. To be fair, I'm not sure it was the film's intention to do so. The net effect is that the viewers are apprised of the dangers out there but that's it. No resolution, no neat conclusion--maybe that's why some viewers are so frustrated and equate that frustration with them having seen a bad film.

There are deeply uncomfortable scenes in this movie and it certainly depicts sexualized children. However, a lot of criticism of this film is off-base because this movie does NOT glorify the sexualization of children. In fact, one of its core messages is that the sexualization of children through their exposure to adult content is harmful and wrong. Saying a movie is bad because it depicts problematic content would put 90% of what's out there in the trash bin. Would I skip a movie simply because it depicts war? Would I skip a movie simply because it depicts murder, child abuse, sexual assault, and so on? Lolita (both the novel and the Kubrick adaptation) was leagues more provocative than this and there was still enough merit in it not for it to be canned outright.

So yes, this film isn't going to be a family film and you may still hate it after having seen it. But give it a chance.

(This review contains some mild spoilers but I do my best not to reveal anything plainly or directly.)

Before we get into the actual review of the show, I just want to give some personal context. The Anne of Green Gables books were an important part of my childhood, so I'm highly invested in any adaptation or interpretation of it. Like many people, I grew up on the Megan Follows/Jonathan Crombie version of Anne, and it's still that version which I love best. Megan just WAS Anne -- the red hair, the perfect nose, the more-charming-than-pretty aesthetic, and more importantly her portrayal of a sweet Pollyanna with a quick temper and a tendency to hold grudges. Similarly, Jonathan just WAS Gilbert -- the kind eyes (which he used to wonderful effect in all those meaningful glances), the mischievous smile, the way he was able to convey patience and caring interest.

Bearing all of that in mind, I was very reluctant to watch this new show because I knew it would be difficult for me to be objective. I wasn't exactly won over by the trailer, either -- it was too gritty for me, and it felt like too much of a departure from the golden Avonlea that inspired so many of my childhood dreams. After finishing the first season, that's still my general feeling about this show.

That being said, however, the show IS watchable once you do your best to stuff all your purist tendencies in a box.

I initially liked that they featured Anne's traumatic experiences before reaching Avonlea, though as the show progressed I do think they (again) went a bit too far. Anne's charm has always been that her soul is fundamentally untouched throughout all her childhood hardships, and under the loving care of the Cuthberts and Diana it is finally allowed to blossom. Having an Anne suffering from PTSD is realistic, but misses the point, I think.

I liked better how the show dealt with prejudice towards orphans. There were two particularly wonderful scenes in one episode where, by turns, Matthew then Marilla defended Anne from public scorn after she let her tongue get away with her and unwittingly implied scandalous things about a classmate.

This new show also does better at filling in the lives of characters other than Anne. We get to see a young Matthew and Marilla in their own painfully tender, heartbreaking scenes, and the show also spends some time showing us what Gilbert goes through.

Finally, Amybeth McNulty and Lucas Jade Zumann play their roles capably. (Other actors do great jobs in their own roles in this show, but I'm focusing on the leads because I think their roles are the critical ones for me.) While I must say that as a whole I don't like how Anne was characterized in this series (there are quite a number of scenes where Anne is rude, insolent, insensitive, or even unkind), that's hardly Amybeth's fault if that's the way the character was written. She brings a coltish enthusiasm to the role which grows on you, and in many ways makes up for the way her character is made to behave throughout the series. As for Lucas Jade Zumann, at one point he was the reason I decided to keep watching the show. Like Jonathan, he has kind eyes and in one or two scenes does some meaningful staring of his own. I didn't like the show's characterization of Gilbert towards the end of the season, but I can live with it in part because of how Lucas carried it.

In summary, this show will work best for people who aren't purists and who haven't seen the Kevin Sullivan adaptation from the 1980s. For those who are/those who have, this show is quite a dramatic departure. However, to paraphrase Anne, you can enjoy things if you are determined enjoy them. While the huge changes in the plot and characterization did spoil my enjoyment to a degree, I did end up watching the whole series and I do hope that it is renewed. However, here's to hoping that the next season stays truer to the source material or at least doesn't stray too much further than this season already has.

When my brother told me about this movie, at first I thought it was Unfriended. When I realized it wasn't, I decided to see it with no expectations at all considering how much I did NOT enjoy Unfriended. Thankfully, this film is not only MUCH better, I enjoyed it quite a bit. The acting was excellent, the story was decent and made sense, and I sympathized with the protagonists and hated the antagonist (which sometimes doesn't happen in horror movies where the lead characters are too stupid to live).

By far the best aspect of this film, however, is its soundtrack and graphics. The illustrations were darkly beautiful and the music blended disturbingly well from lighthearted to haunting on the very same track.

I highly recommend this film. In fact, make sure you see it with friends. One great side effect is that your social media-dependent friends who see it will be inspired to get off the grid.

The Wailing was an excellent effort and I badly wanted to enjoy it given the way critics have been raving. Instead, it left me frustrated and praying for the end credits repeatedly.

I sort of liked the ending and the atmosphere of the film was fantastic, but overall it fell short of being truly enjoyable. I saw it twice in order to understand what spoiled the experience for me, and upon contemplation I think it was because the film, overall, lacked focus. I don't think we needed to sit through two and a half hours of it in order to reach the conclusion that it did, particularly since there are still a number of things in the film which do not add up by the time it ends. I feel like the editing -- in terms of tightening the storyline -- could have been much better. Atmosphere is an important aspect of any horror film, but you don't need two and a half hours to build it and the flow of the story should never be compromised. Moreover, great atmosphere is pointless if you don't actually do anything with it, and this film didn't -- at least not until the last fifteen minutes or so.

Another thing that made it difficult to sit through once (and nearly unbearable to sit through a second time) was the lack of a "good" character whom I truly liked. I know that it's a thing to be annoyed with some characters in a horror movie ("Too Stupid To Live" is a trope for a reason), but this is the first film where I actively cheered for the evil side to win before the end. I don't want to give anything away, because I do think that this is a film that should be seen (especially since my opinion of it appears to be an outlier), but do prepare yourself to be completely aggravated by the characters' behavior in this film. If that was what the director was going for, then well done.

I'm a huge fan of the original franchise, so when everyone was telling me how terrible this reboot was, I decided not to even bother seeing it. Some of the feedback I was getting had to do with the alleged man-hating, some of it the allegedly offensively stereotypical black female character, some of it the reports that the director, producers, and cast were acting horribly towards people who weren't fans of the movie.

Then I got stranded on a Saturday night because of the rain and found myself in the cinemas with a good friend. I am SO glad I was pressured into seeing it.

Putting aside my love for the original franchise, I found this movie incredibly enjoyable. Paul Feig has NEVER disappointed me. I'm willing to concede that it may be that his humor is just my kind of humor. (Though I must point out that the cinema was pretty packed and everyone in it was laughing. Maybe not at all the jokes that got me, but enough to convince me that we were having a good time.)

Conclusion: if you have nothing better to do, give the movie a shot. Leave the bile that other people have been spewing at the entrance and you may just enjoy yourself.

The first question I asked myself about half an hour into the movie was, "Is this a spoof?" The flow of the movie was just so erratic. There were so many gaps in the plot, the personalities of the characters were confusing (particularly in the case of Snow White), and the humor was just so random--and not in a good way. Before long I was laughing at the sheer ridiculousness of the film, which is great if that was what the director was going for. The scene where the Prince breaks out of the house where Snow White locked him in and catches up to her and she asks, "Why are you here?" I nearly cried from laughter. Um...he loves you and you locked him in a house about ten feet away from where you're standing. It's almost as ridiculous as the scene where she writes the Seven Dwarfs a goodbye letter and then they open the door to find her fixing the exterior of their home. She says, "You were supposed to let me leave." Honey, you don't write a goodbye letter and then linger in the area, fixing things. And the reference to grasshopper rape was just so..."HUH?!" The Bollywood-like ending was fun, but I had no idea why it had to be in the film. I have no idea why Julia Roberts, Lily Collins (who is just SO pretty that she's the reason I decided to see it), and SEAN FRICKING BEAN agreed to do this film. They DID read the script, right? And while we're discussing that, who was the intended audience for this? It was rated G in some countries, I've heard, so I assume it's for children, but there were so many sexual references throughout the film that I'm not certain if that was the case after all. Overall, it's the kind of movie that's so bad that it becomes funny. It's like the director said, "Ooh, what do I think is fun?" and put everything he could think of into the film. Keep your expectations low and you'll live through the experience.

I don't usually like sequels because they fail to capture the magic of the original. Kung Fu Panda 2, however, was INCREDIBLE--or should I say AWESOME? It's even funnier than the first movie--but that aspect I expected. What I didn't expect was for it to be as emotionally moving as it was. It's embarrassing, but there were portions that had me tearing up as much as the five-year-old next to me. Overall, the sequel lives up to the first movie and even manages to exceed it in terms of the level of depth of its message. True, the kung fu parts (which are even more abundant in the sequel) are a big portion of Kung Fu Panda's appeal, but what makes it memorable is the message it's trying to convey. I'm going back to watch it again as soon as I'm done with this review.

I was surprised to find the rating when I first checked it out, but I suppose it's a matter of personal experience and the taste that goes with it. I like to be reminded of my own personal experience (which is similar) and compare it to what the main character goes through in the movie. I suppose you'll like it if it means something to you, so if you've got issues with your past (relationships, particularly) and you like happy endings, give this film a shot. There's a bit of stereotyping in the film though, but they're presented humorously, so I didn't really mind. Besides, they aren't very damaging stereotypes (at least in my view), nor very annoying ones.