duane-lambe Reviews

Infinity Pool (2023)

"It insists upon itself." --Peter Griffin

[5/10 · 15 February 2023]

The definition of a Film Festival movie, this thing is long and pretentious. The entire story is based around one "What if this was possible?" premise, circling the drain endlessly until finally flushing out to the credits. They could probably cut at least 20 minutes, and tell the same story.

There are a few scenes that aren't bad, but overall, there's not a lot here that hasn't been done before.

Every scene that was supposed to be shocking was only mildly so; most dragged on for far too long, indicating that this film was obviously a delivery system for said visuals, rather than presenting a cohesive, interesting story.

There will never be a reason to see this movie twice.

Day Shift (2022)

Terribly derivative, wildly unentertaining.

[3/10 · 12 August 2022]

If this movie was fun, it might be worth watching.

It is not.

You've seen every scene in this movie before, in some other movie. You already know how things are going to progress; there are no surprises.

It's hard to say which is worse, the acting, writing, or action scenes. The action was the reason I was in, since that's what J. J. Perry does, but unfortunately, there's nothing spectacular here.

A house full of super-strong vampires would tear these idiots to shreds, yet that never happens, everything goes their way; they buddy-cop their way out of every situation.

If anyone made over fifty-grand for this movie, they got over-paid. What a waste of everyone's time and resources.

It gets a 3 as a nod to those behind the scenes that had to put up with this monstrosity.

Garbage like this is why AI is going to win.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)

Science-Fiction in the Hands of Imbeciles

[1/10 · 21 April 2015]

What a friggin' waste of human time.

A 176 million dollar budget. No idea how much Kunis and Tatum made for this pile, but I would guess a few million, at least.

Keep those numbers in mind while watching this movie.

Kunis is the focus of the story. She does very little but exist; constantly being rescued, objectified, etc. Practically speaking, she is useless, and a liability throughout.

She's some sort of space princess, that has to sign her ownership of the earth over to some dude so he can farm the humans to live longer. I think. The story is so stupid, scattered, disjointed, unnecessarily convoluted, terribly written and imagined, that "The Wachowskis" now means "Complete Pandering Bullshit Because We Need More Money".

Mila Kunis has two expressions: slightly frowning, or dead-eyed stare. I'm certain she's been told too many times that she has "pretty eyes", because she refuses to change their expression. As such, she is posing, far, far more than "acting", throughout the entire film. In fact, I have yet to see her act, and this movie offers no new evidence.

Kunis has zero emotional awareness, as many sociopaths might experience. If you can't feel emotions, and you want to act, this is the result, every time.

Don't believe me? Watch her eyes throughout the movie; if you can bear the pain. I guarantee you, on a brain scan, her emotional centers are either stunted, or non-existent.

Channing Tatum's not much better. He's more like watching a football or basketball player turned actor. Nothing going on, and his makeup is ridiculous, like someone dressed him up as their cute, pet emo-dog. The opposite of intimidating, and as equally expressionless as Kunis.

If there is a fine line between homage and plagiarism, it was too fine for everyone involved to notice. Every idea you've ever seen, all the cool stuff from modern science, all the lines you've heard before, all the transitional scenes, idiotic catch-phrases, pauses for romance despite how "in a hurry" they are; it is a mash-up of too many ideas, with zero originality.

They even stole Dragonlance's Draconians, for Fi's sake.

Nothing new, everything old, badly acted, badly cast, terribly portrayed, and an absolute embarrassment for everyone involved.

This is the job people won't want to keep on their resumes.

This is the movie that puts you into Ghost Rider 2 territory.

You will leave the theater feeling like someone pick-pocketed you.

You will hate that the "stars" made any money for this crap.

Avoid this movie, and laugh at anyone dumb enough to try and apologize by proxy, to justify that they didn't just waste 2 hours of their life.

Stop supporting crap. Stop apologizing for rich, public figures that produce nothing useful to the human race. Stop giving your money to dumb-asses.

176 million damn dollars was thrown away just making this thing.

What a terrible machine, that can produce drivel on such a monstrous scale.

The human race is friggin' doomed.

Theater:No Stream:No Free:No Avoid Like Plague:Yes

Furious 7 (2015)

The longest beer commercial you'll see this year.

[5/10 · 6 April 2015]

If you're seeing this movie because you think Paul Walker will know somehow, you're wrong. Also, his family's probably pretty well off, with the 25 million dollar estate that was handed down upon his death to his daughter.

Just because you saw him on a screen, doesn't mean you're family. Use reason. Respect the living; simply remember the dead. It is not necessary for everyone to know how sad an actor's death makes you. You don't have to be the most mournful. You don't have to be mournful at all, if you didn't know him, or the family.

He's been dead for close to a year and a half, by the by, so this ain't "too soon". People already forgot about Robin Williams.

I never met Paul, and so I'll review the movie as a movie.

The action sequences in this film are mostly good. Fight choreography, also pretty good. It's all meant to be over-the-top, and while they take great liberties with physics, it's fun to watch.

The "story" and "acting" sequences in-between the action are awful, often ridiculous, especially near the end, when, at one point, they eschew medical procedures for a friggin' story - and that works, somehow.

You may not have seen this many clichés and catch-phrases in another movie, so that's something they might have achieved. Not good clichés, mind you, just borrowed ones from every other action movie you've ever seen.

So many "nick-of-time" sequences were included, it's hard to stay on the edge of your seat for the whole movie, and eventually, everything becomes somewhat too "extreme", and subsequently deflated.

The tribute to Paul Walker at the end was very tasteful, well done, but that isn't going to gain it anything in the "movie quality" department.

The movie itself is not much of a tribute to anyone, and will quickly be forgotten by this viewer.

The 5/10 is for the work the guys behind the scenes did to make this thing worth watching in some way; the digital guys, the choreographers, the coaches, etc.

The end sets everything up for "FF:InfuriEight" (suggested title).

Theater:No; Buy:No; Rent:Yes, Free:Yes.

Divergent (2014)

Surprise! Another angst-ridden, Dystopian view of society from Hollywood.

[3/10 · 23 July 2014]

Effects? Nope. Awesome visuals? Nope. Acting? Nope. Realism? Nope.

This review can't not contain spoilers, because the movie is full of spoiled, overpaid brats pretending they know what hardship is.

If the hardest choice you've had in life is what to wear to prom, how the hell are you supposed to represent a futuristic society on the brink of civil war? What lottery ball-spitter are they launching these imbeciles out of every year?

No one in this movie deserves any credit for anything.

You will not be surprised, interested, shocked, entertained, or happy after seeing this movie.

There is nothing new, or good, about it.

It's just another movie, you say? Nope, this is an /industry/ movie; formulaic, a dollar-maker, a Hunger Games knockoff done poorly, quite obviously.

Wikipedia: "The film was released on March 21, 2014 in the United States, despite mixed reviews, the film reached the #1 spot at the box- office and has grossed over $274 million worldwide against its budget of $85 million, making it a financial success."

That's a quarter billion gross, and they'll make tons more once the discs and netmovie joints grab hold.

You tell me, if you're unfortunate enough to see this film, if it was worth the paycheck, or if that original budget of $85 million wouldn't have been better served not funding these sociopaths and their pandering, no-effort work, but rather building something of use, or feeding the people that die every damn night just so these idiots can pretend anyone cares about what they do.

Such a waste, on every level. Vote with your dollars, folks, don't pay to be insulted.

Transcendence (I) (2014)

Hollywood vs Science? Science always loses.

[5/10 · 16 July 2014]

Holes in the tech, acting, expression, storyline, and general human nature of the characters might enrage you.

This is not a new story. This is a very boring view as to how humanity will become ensconced with tech.

Any gamer will laugh at the "drama". Any computer scientist will ridicule the tons of "quantum" chips they need (they'd need, like, one).

How the quantum brain is able to cram itself into every crappy digital device on the planet makes literally no scientific sense, considering it needs a huge quantum, self-powered town just to function.

Nanotech, you say? Are the nanobots quantum devices? Maybe his consciousness is spread out like ants? He can enhance devices, and even nature itself? Maybe, he can communicate with particles at the quantum resonance level, thereby allowing him access to the programming of the universe, and all the universes?

Well, I just wrote that. That's my movie. That wasn't in the movie I saw at damned-well all.

Nope, just dim-witted actors, buzzwords like "quantum" and "nano", badly written and researched technology, and a "twist" that could have been resolved if anybody in the movie just /told/ people what they were doing, instead of just "surprising" everyone with actions, and hoping that they understand.

"Oh, I'm tapped into nature now, and I'm healing the planet."

All he had to say.

I give a 5, because everyone /else/ that didn't get paid millions for their work on this movie - everyone but the main actors and directors/producers/writers - deserves the money, because they're the only ones that looked like they worked during this movie, and as such, if I rate it down, they're work would also not get recognized.

Actors should start /apologizing/ to their public for inferior, overpaid and under-talented work. This work is nowhere near worth a million dollar paycheck for the "stars".

Terrible movie. Exactly how Hollywood views, and would handle, a scientific dilemma; with drama, not science.

My final point: That's enough, Morgan Preeman. Give someone else a chance to be the wise old leader of whichever rebellion is happening this year in movies.

Gun Woman (2014)

Hardgore 80s movie tribute, in the best sense.

[8/10 · 30 June 2014]

The subjects of the story - and the story itself - are very compelling to watch.

Gritty, desperate action scenes serve as stark contrast to the narrators' mostly mediocre performances.

Great camera and effect work rewards the watcher while telling the admittedly complicated, but plausible, tale.

80s keyboards and guitars abound throughout most of the film, and there's even a montage to make you feel nostalgic.

The imagery is pretty hardcore, might even make you wince a few times.

You'll probably hate the main antagonist, which means he did his job quite well.

My expectations were exceeded, "Gun Girl" herself was fearless in the role, and I'll be watching it again, I'm sure.

Easy 8.