signlady Reviews

Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014)

Extremism

[1/10 · 21 April 2024]

I fail to understand why this movie with contradictory 'gentlemen' vs grungy, ghetto-trash style rates a 7.7, but The Avengers (1998) - which was perfectly delightful spy fun, rated only 3.8.

This Kingsman movie MIGHT have been fine sans the mass church killing, and especially without the EGREGIOUS use of the F word, & many other curse words.

But another one of the main reasons I hated it is bc of the premise of the 'gentleman' spies - supposed to be gentlemen but cuss like ghetto trash thugs? It was somewhat tolerable with the bad pub guys & eggsy as a street kid. But all the talk about 'manners' & the twice quoted 'manners makes man' - you'd think at least among the Kingsman vocabulary would change.

The entire movie was a real missed opportunity to make a guenuinely fun, cleaner movie.

Another point of angst: Roxanne who became Lancelot, apparently needed encouragement whereas none of the males did? I'm not a feminist, but she passed the tests - SO putting phrases in the script like, 'You can do this' & 'Good girl' was beyond dumb. Yeh. And it was said not by an older person, but by Eggsy! 'Good Girl' 😖

But then Arthur said she had 'the balls' to pull the trigger on her dog (turned out to be a blank) So I think it would've been FUN & cool to nickname her 'ROX-A-LOT' a mix of Roxanne with Lancelot, balls, & Rock bc she rocked all the tests.

But no. Rather than think creatively, the creators just preferred to think of culturally cliche trash in some ideological attempt to make a 'fun' 'contemporary' spy movie . . . ?

I guess the high ranking comes from ages about 10 to 30, bc we know of course an R rating means nothing to many younger parents anymore & the F word is used a commonly as conjunctions.

I had to do one star bc zero stars is not an option here.

Tammy (2014)

Dysfunctional family display

[4/10 · 13 April 2024]

Unless you can find the humour in dysfunctional family dynamics - you will hate this movie.

If your suffering in such a family, you may hate this movie.

Understandable.

It can be hard to watch dysfunction being made fun of.

Also, the lesbian agenda is promoted here - so if you don't want to endure that 'in your face' ideology, stay away.

Also, with a plethora of cuss words, & thematic elements this is not one for the kiddies - altho unfortunately, children in dysfunctional homes hear & see the reality & unhappiness up close & personal on the daily, sans humour. I'm on the fence about whether that child should see their dysfunction made into a redemptive comedy . . .

Would it give them guenuine hope or false hope? . . . tho - almost every person in dysfunction survives with just plain hope ...

Regarding comments about the close ages of Tammy & her matriarchs - it was not an error in casting, but intentional - the closeness in age between Tammy, & Tammy's mother & grandmother is meant to add to the humor of dysfunctional family situation - knowing the grandmother was & is promiscuous, became pregnant very young, & suggesting Tammy's mother also became pregnant quite young. IMHO - it's ridiculous so many people focused on that being some kind of dumb casting error, when it was anything but.

There were a few humourous moments in this film - for example, When grandma tells a shapeless guy wearing a sleeveless t-shirt: 'Muscle shirts are for muscles' Really funny.

McCarthy is funny bc somehow, she understands dysfunction & can portray it both realistically, with both sadness & hopelessness & yet make you want to laugh thru the knot in your throat. She's capable of showing the goodness in a person juxtaposed against the raunchy, obnoxious behavior - that shows the deep insecurity of the person she's portraying.

There's just something she gets about the dynamics of being a victim of circumstances combined with a realistic portrayal of people who impulsively act stupid or immature, but if they would stop behaving like an insecure-victim, they're are actually not stupid. And thankfully, these type movies she does so well - seems to show her character has to face the music for wrong-doing & take responsibility - but redemption comes from that - which is why people can say these movies are 'sad-sweet.

She shows how dysfunctional people almost seem to thrive on drama, they definitely crave & create drama, but by behaving in more mature ways, anyone can reduce or eliminate unnecessary drama, & be prepared to handle issues beyond our control with maturity.

I give this 1star movie 4 stars only bc it provoked me to these deeper thoughts - realizing these are not things the average movie-viewer would consider.

Bottom Line for me personally, this movie is not a 'keeper' - once was enough.

Fall (I) (2022)

Buzzard bait . . . ?

[4/10 · 29 March 2024]

Just up front I'll tell ya - I know very little about the actual sport of rock climbing, extreme climbing, or being an adrenaline junkie for any reason. I'm also considered an old woman to anyone under 45,

but even I can say, a lot of things took me out of what could've been a better movie . . .

That said, as a 35 year painter, I've done some dumb stuff over the years from as high as 10 stories. Mostly ladders & lifts 3 stories or less. Veteran painters, scaffold builders, industrial workers, crane workers, can I get'a witness? How did we ever live this long?

ANYway - things that took me out of this movie - but also being fair, also bearing in mind some considerations;

First - these are girls who seem to be under 25 - I will acknowledge the ill-prepared, impetuous, hot-dog, stupidity-factor of the AVERAGE young adult - which in this case, actually adds to the realism -

Just to name a few blatantly obvious character stupidity factors and unrealistic portrayals of things:

* No fail-safes - like letting at least one other friend know the plan

* ONLY 50ft of rope. Not even a survival bracelet?

* Little or no valid tie off euipment

* Very little rappelling equipmemt

* Zero gloves

* Totally unaware, not even taking a single moment of considering the condition of the structure, the rust, the guy wires, AND continuing even after a rung breaks off

* Also, the season is not really mentioned but, if it's late spring, summer, or early fall - your hands would blister on hot metal by about rung 4.

* Were we supposed to think these young adults were 'experienced' or trained climbers? Just self-taight climbers? Or just plain ol' adrenaline junkies? I mean, the latter explanation is the only one that holds up this story line.

I do realize, as with all suspense type action movies, if those realities were addressed & portrayed, we wouldn't have any suspenseful crisis scenes, would we.

Finally, about the most entertaining part of the movie was the too-short special feature 'Making of FALL' which is really what garnered my 4 star rating.

The gals did a lot of their own stunts on a customer built exterior set tower 100ft up! They had to endure the actual weather - wind, sand, & storms during the on-site shoot. I can fully appreciate that, AND they didn't use green screen or CGI stuff. They also endured an onslaught of 'flying ants' on the set which I can only assume were termites.

It's kind of stunning to think of how much crew was at this location & no one could identify 'termites' They just called them 'flying ants'. 🙄 I really worry about the education & life experiences so many people seem to be needing . . .

Paradise Hills (2019)

Elizabeth Bathory meets Alice

[5/10 · 29 March 2024]

I mean - meets Alice in Wonderland AND Go Ask Alice plus the Elizabeth Bathory story also present.

Tell ya right up front: yes, spoilers.

* This movie was fairly interesting until the scene where suddenly, out of the blue, we are handed mysticism with our futuristic, sci-fi story, as the Duchess becomes zombie-like . . . (but great casting 'Resident'ially speaking).

There was no explanation for this scene with the duchess other than some slight clues that the duchess was a scorned woman, steeping in anger, often feigning self-control bc of her coming rewards . . . The bodies of the girls who were cloned . . .

And the words of the duchess in the secret death garden seemed to suggest apparently the blood of clone-donators was keeping her youthful . . . ??

Also - I think when your running away, tearing thru the dark in garden of wild rosebushes containing dead bodies & running into a blood sucking duchess . . . There's a lot a director could do to make that more realistic & suspenseful -

1. Like, if you're in a dress made of tull, it would catch and tear a lot. They just ran thru there like it was soft butter . .

2. Even before you discovered dead bodies, wouldn't you smell them first?

And wouldn't you say to your friend, 'WHAT is that terrible smell?!'

3. The character Uma played that scene almost speechless - I think she called out to the other girl once or twice, while the other girl who had been with Uma was frequently calling her for help. I reckon she was just speechless bc of who all she saw there. But IMHO - it's kinda like the script & the director took a lunch break during that scene. Something was missing.

Other observations:

* I thought the scenes of the clones hanging out in the dark catacomb pool was unecessarily bewildering, their facial bandages looked ridiculous, & an explanation of the pool could have been offered. It also seemed silly or inexplicable why they suddenly were so forthcoming with revealing themselves, except maybe they been just dyin' to be seen & chat.

* We also don't get a lot of back story about the narcissitic billionaire 'son' who apparently funds this island world.

But . . . After writing that point, I can see we don't need more. Lol

* A lot of the scenes with the famous songstress made no sense, & after she left the island & later was seen on social media, it made no sense why or how Uma could know or say, 'Thats not her.' - even before she knew what was really going there.

* But the ending with Uma & Anna was a redeemable pay off for all the problem areas, except I will always wonder what it meant for the one who stayed on the island.

I think it was cool that we really don't know which one stayed & which one left.

* I gave this a middling 5 stars for the visually stunning wardrobe & sets & all the other scenes that carried a potentially good story.

* The special features were interesting bc the set designers talked about all the architectural influences used.

* Also, this story kinda represents how cloning could really go awry & create serious ramifications for future society.

I like a movie that creates thought provoking, philosophical conversation. If you enjoy that, this might be a good one to watch with friends & have a great discussion after.

Robin Hood (2018)

. . . meh . . .

[6/10 · 18 March 2024]

It wasn't a wasted movie night. Worth 2 bux to rent from Redbox.

Tells the basic story of Robin Hood with a few different changes & tries to do it mixing more contemporary styles costumes & especially the way the scenes, the action & music are cut & put together..

In fact, I kept thinking the whole time - this director is tryin' to imitate Guy Ritchie, and can't do it.

I'm not sayin' it was a Guy Ritchie copy attempt - but it sure seemed like that's what they were TRYIN' to do . . .

And it was not even close to achieving his unique style.

Younger teens will probably really enjoy this. I suppose it's filmed like a live action video game.

I also thought there could'a been a bit more humor, some lost opportunities for humor. The cast was good.

Russell Crowes Robin Hood remains my favourite of the many movies that have portrayed the story.

Red Dog (2011)

Excellent

[10/10 · 18 March 2024]

I can't believe I have not reviewed this movie here yet!! This is one of my favourite keeper movies - I reckon I watch it 3 times a year. If doing a movie night with friends it's among the first I suggest.

And the soundtrack is amazing.

You fall in love with not only the star of the fil, Red dog, but also all the characters portrayed here, portraying how Red dog brought this remote mining community together.

I expect if you were around any type of construction boom-towns of the 70s anywhere, you will really identify with this film.

This movie has all the elements - history, drama, comedy, romance, tragedy, hope, location, & a fantastic cast, crew, & production team that brought this story together perfectly.

The DVD also has very entertaining special features.

There should be more movies like this.

California Solo (2012)

If only . . .

[4/10 · 16 February 2024]

I got this movie on DVD - the story sounded good, I really like Carlyle in other movies.

But the main problem - there were no captions. They were even 'unavailable' on my TVs CC option. I really don't see how anyone could understand the dialogue without captions - much of it whispered, mumbled, or with music.

Secondly, I thought a lot of scenes were redundant and/or over long. A lot of scenes didn't move the story enough to hold my interest

I also didn't care for the age of the 'beau' character. Too close to the age of his daughter . . ? Also the Beau character was not well written, therefore not well played. Or maybe the character was just cliche'.

If only it had captions, maybe I would've been more interested in this story.

Seraphine (2008)

Too long - something lacking

[6/10 · 14 February 2024]

I only 'liked' this movie - Of course, the art is stunning, & I realize the creators of the movie had to do a lot of guess-work to portray this woman bc there seems to be very little info about her. But therein lies the issue. They just elongated every scene unecessarily - for what?

The DVD I viewed had an interesting 'making of' featurette, but this mostly talked about the production elements - no special references to any historical info that informed the choices of this portrayal other than the actual paintings that exist.

The scenes of her joy in contact with nature were delightful, but this movie could have been shortened considerably by eliminating endless walking & housekeeping scenes. After so many unnecessary scenes it just slowed the story down too much.

I suppose the director wanted to immerse us in the mundane-ness of Seraphines life . . .

But after a while it just seemed super redundant. Egregious. As if the director just isn't convinced that I understand her hard life.

And that leads me to another thing that took me out of the movie even more - the actress for Seraphine was too large.

The two actual images that exist of this woman show a very short, petite, tho possibly muscular woman. The actress who portrayed seraphine did a fine job as an actress. But I'm just sayin' - considering the basic facts: the actual size of Seraphine according to existing photos, the hard worker she was, as much as she very likely did walk & climb stairs, & considering the period where she was portrayed as needy - the size of this actress just didn't jive.

The other issue I had is that somehow, I just couldn't seem to get invested in the artist, the art patron, or his sister, or his partner. Probably bc of the story being interrupted with endless repetitive scenes.

The only thing I did care about was her art, and I liked it before I saw the movie, and alas, the movie didn't do a thing to increase that.

And this would not normally be a 'keeper'-DVD for me, but bc I like her art I will keep it (& just fast fwd thru the ongoing redundant scenes straight to the scenes of art discussion, actual painting scenes, & scenes of her enjoying nature.

Point Break (2015)

Decent action/scenery

[7/10 · 11 February 2024]

I've seen the '91 version. My most vivid recollection of PB91 is that the characters played by Swayze & Reeves had a serious bromance. There was defintely a chemistry there - I think they might have even had an affair off screen LOL I also liked that PB91 was an action movie directed by a talented woman.

But, I like the 2015 better for several reasons -

* There's a variety of interesting extreme sports - not just surfing. The action was immersive. I didn't even think about CGI in any scene. It all looked real & like the guys were really in it.

* There's a variety of great locations & panoramic shots I really enjoyed. Epic vistas.

* I liked the different kind of chemistry portrayed by main characters - it seemed more guenuine, - there was earned respect & trust but always tentative at the same time. They were always reading each other. IMHO - this kind of guy relationship was more real & had deeper meaning than a 'guy-crush-bromance'.

* It is not a vehicle for any 'over-used celebrity'

* I had never seen the actor who played Utah - he reminded me a lot of Heath Ledger . . .

* It's rated PG-13

* It's a decent action & popcorn movie night. Hope you can enjoy it that way too.

So I give it 7 stars.

🎸

Goya's Ghosts (2006)

Brilliant

[9/10 · 5 February 2024]

Late to review here - altho this is a keeper movie I rewatch every 12 -15 months as soon as it became available on DVD -

It is beautifully done & there are many 8, 9, & 10 star reviews here who very eloquently explain why.

This movie should have had an even higher overall rating than just 6.9 At the very least an 8.5

To understand this, I read the low star reviews and I found - in every low star review the same complaint - the second half of the movie seems 'all over the place' , 'disconnected', 'chaotic'. A few even admitted to not knowing much about Goya.

Yeh? So WHY write a review?

Because this entire story portrayal - which obviously, & everyone unanimously knows is seen thru the eyes of Goya, absolutely perfectly depicts in the second half of the movie the disconnected, chaotic way any person going deaf & becoming completely deaf would see the world.

That's exactly why the movie is so brilliant. To be able to put the viewer right in the middle of this kind of confusion, to be looking right out of Goyas eyes at the world happening around him. Of course, if you're writing 3 star reviews without this understanding your wasting your time & ours.

Before you write reviews, do some studying. Then if you decide to write a low review at least it will be an educated one.

Dog (I) (2022)

My kinda movie

[9/10 · 20 January 2024]

This is simply, my kinda movie.

The fact that I understand dogs has somethin' to do with it.

But the story line is great, there's humor, drama, portrayal of real issues, & this movie has a great sound track too.

I also like many movies Channing Tatum happens to be in, 'redemption' themes.

I'm not one to watch a movie just bc an actor is easy on the eyes. (he is, but he's also young enough to be my son)

No, it's just his acting. He just fits & acts narural & real in every role.

I think I have 5 or 6 DVDS with him now - right off the top of my head - The Eagle, Jupiter Ascending, Dear John, Logan Lucky, Public Enemies & now I'll get Dog. These are all very different type roles, but most of them have that sort of 'redemption' theme.

I don't have Netflix or any kind of internet TV or movie viewing. I don't even get the free channels on TV. I don't do bluerays.

I only do DVDS. (have around 800)

If I see a movie in-theater, at a friend's house, or rent it, & I know I'll watch it again & again, I get it on DVD.

And this one is a keeper!

I really appreciate that it was produced as a family friendly movie too.

Meanwhile, if you're not a dog lover, &/or you're not a fan of military issues, or anything that portrays PTSD - avoid this movie.

Otherwise, I think you'll love it.

Godzilla (I) (1998)

If . . .

[5/10 · 1 September 2023]

Very Latetotheshow yet again . . .

My review is yet again as much about the reviewers as the actual movies . . .

I offer this observation ... If all the low star reviewers and all the big star reviewers watched this movie again 25 years later - I'm pretty sure, they'd track more middling - 5 stars, not all, but probably most of them.

The 1 & 2 star haters would increase to 5 stars.

And the 9 &10 star lovers would decrease to 5 stars.

And we would still have pretty much the same current rating we have now 5.4.

Those extreme reviews just cancel each other out anyway.

And why such extreme opinions?

As with just about ALL movies these days expectations are ridiculous. Honestly, who can live up to the expectations movie goers have?

Low star reviewers were insanely, but quite naturally, disappointed, no extreme expectation was met. High star reviewers were still in high expectation mode, and therefore in denial of accepting less (also some were likely friends & family simply tryin' to boost the rating) all because, once again a movie didn't meet ridiculous expectations. (eg; based on emotion, not logic)

What if movies just came out to simply to be seen as they are without insane hype that didn't create this emotional, expecting-angst??

Right. I know. This'll never happen.

Well . . . ANYWAY . . .

Godzilla was a perfectly fine, average entertaining, popcorn indulging movie night! (see my 5 stars) It's not a keeper I'll watch over & over, but it satisfied an evening of movie entertainment.

Btw - I was never a big fan of the old Godzilla movie I saw as a kid - it was just cheezy to me. It looked like a rubber toy not even as flexible as Gumby - and in the same ridiculous genre as The Fly, Creature from the Black Lagoon, that movie with the giant rabbits, etc etc.

For their era and tech at the time, they were ground breaking, and certainly exciting to certain age groups. I watched them as a kid like everyone else, 'cause there wasn't nothin' else to watch (lol).

But I'm not part of the cult that claims these movies were excellent or whatever makes them such 'cult-following' fodder that are somehow now 'the standard' ...? Everything compares to them??

I reckon I'll never really understand why those old cheezy 'monster' movies are so exceptionally held up as standards for today & have 'cult followings'. . . I'd say it's largely related to the same theory of expectations that illicted strong emotions in the viewers, and anytime they think of or see these movies, they relive those emotions. It's not based on reality or any logic.

How's that for gettin' into the psyche of movie reviewers????

The Paperboy (2012)

Didn't even have to watch it . . .

[1/10 · 11 August 2023]

A seller sent me this dvd to make up for some dud dvds I purchased. I don't recall ever knowing this movie existed, so . . .

I came here to read reviews. (and also the parents guide, which I often do with any R movie)

Read a few glowing reviews.

9 & 10 star reviews are almost always skewed by outrageous, biased, irrational adoration.

Read a few middling 5 star reviews - they're usually, almost always more realistic.

But after reading all the low star reviews?

I felt like I needed a tetanus shot.

So I didn't even watch this movie.

Reviews are here for a reason. Trust your fellow movie reviewer . . . And to them I say thanx for helping me save my time.

All the Pretty Horses (2000)

Hey Billy . . .

[8/10 · 11 August 2023]

23 yearslatetotheshow . . . But better late than never.

Can't think what I was doin' 23 years ago that I missed this movie - but a friend gave me a bunch of DVDs and this was amongst them.

And I'm so glad.

What a great contemporary western. The cast and story portrayed here are great, and the music is beautiful. I'm a musician (bass & guitar) and already learning Marty Stuarts beautiful song 'Far Away'.

And scene compositions were georgeous.

But - as I've discovered the movie had to be drastically cut - I believe that's why some of the story seems a little out of context/disjointed, missin' . . . Definitely left me wantin' more, and I ain't gonna read the book . . .

So, hey Billy, where's that full length directors cut?

I'll give much more than a buffalo nickel if you'll just release that on dvd . . . 😉

Meanwhile, All the Pretty Horses is a keeper - going in with all my other westerns - I'll watch again & again . . .

Beau Is Afraid (2023)

A drama portraying mental illness

[3/10 · 29 July 2023]

First - I'm not familiar with this director or his other movies, so my review is just simply as a person who chose a movie based on the usual reasons, in this case, a good cast.

Secondly, there is zero comedy in this movie. The 'horror' is the realistic portrayal of mental illness.

Obviously, this whole movie is meant to put you in the head of a paranoid schizophrenic. Including the long tedious 3hr run time - further trying to make you see what it's like to live in the chaotic monotony of insanity.

In this case, insanity is caused by an extremely controlling, abusive, narcissitic (high-drama) mother, (who has her own mommy issues) and with her extensive finances, has staged her own death (and hired the therapist who is giving Beau hallucinagents) We see the extent of her rigid, insurmountable control on his whole life culminating in a son reduced to insanity . . .

The problem(s): The director assumes people want to think this deeply, or even know enough psychology to do so.

Hence reviews illustrate an overall disdain, disgust, confusion, and even boredom.

Others who don't really understand mental illness rave that this is ART and throw 10 stars at it.

And the director tries to make it 'light' enough to be labled a 'dark' comedy???

Poor judgement.

Dismal failure as a comedy.

Was he tryin' to make fun of mental illness???

If so, that's incredibly NOT ok.

Or was the filmaker trying to tell his anguishing life story in a way that tries to spare us some intensity by insinuating humor?

If so, that didn't work either.

The plot synopsis uses the word 'anxiety' to describe Beau, (as do many reviews).

Completely wrong.

No wonder so many were disappointed.

As devastating as anxiety can be, I fail to see it as an adequate word to fully describe Beau. He is beyond 'anxiety'. He is a full blown paranoid schizophrenic complete with elaborate hallucinations (seemingly caused by meds the fake therapist prescribed).

This movie portrays how dysfunction & mental illness operates, and we get a few clues as to why Beau is as he is. His angst, memories, & ongoing utter confusion is heart wrenching to watch.

Also the movie clearly portrays clues that the therapist is amiss - his nonchalant detachment, leading questions, and 'new' drug pushing are all clues - and then we finally realize he's just some guy paid off by the mom. This was a big key to his perceptions & hallucinations

The movie did portray mental illness pretty well, IF you really WANT TO or even CAN watch a movie with the understanding of a psychiatrist or novice psychologist.

But who wants to??? It's really too much work.

I also note - there are very few scenes of reality. Mostly just Beau's flashbacks as a kid. A much better movie would have been to juxtapose more scenes of reality with how Beau sees everything in his disconnected, hallucinating, non-reality of strange events, & thoughts and imaginations all influenced by paranoia & distrust, wrong meds.

That would be real insight to the world of paranoid schizophrenia.

As for going into the head of the mentally disturbed this deeply - it's probably a 7 star portrayal. But with very little juxtaposition to reality, it leaves us as clueless, wandering, & grasping as Beau.

And do I need to be in Beaus head for THREE hours? No.

As for so many complaining about an 'unresolved' ending - well, it was totally resolved: Beau tried to choke his mom, she, in her glorious drama as the shocked martyr-victim, seems to have had a heart attack, fell, & died.

Beau wanders down to the water (a theme throughout the movie), feeling some grandiose peace (the starry-sky boat scene) but soon the guilt his mother has 'bathed' him in his whole life - returns - as a hallucination of a harsh 'court'.

Beaus emotions are shaking, erupting - the defense is weak (illustrating Beau's defenses are weak against his mother's overwhelming, overblown, accusations spoken thru her oracle ( a voice we heard earlier in the movie - likely another paid flying monkey)

Beau finally 'explodes'.

(commits suicide) (by drowning).

3 stars for great portrayal of mental illness. But I should subtract them for the grueling run time . . .

Dune (2021)

. . . just too vague.

[3/10 · 24 July 2023]

I thought I reviewed this when I first saw it. I just watched it again & remembered - the reason I don't review it earlier is bc I wanted to wait to watch with CAPTIONS - so I got the DVD and it's much more interesting knowing what's being said.

I never read the book. But I actually liked the movie as far as the world & premise it takes you into. So I'm reviewing this just simply as a viewer of a movie story.

As movie lovers, we enjoy movies that DRAW US INTO a story.

It COULD HAVE been great, but this movie had too many issues that not only took me OUT of the movie, they seem to force me out.

First issue; Dialogue matters. Regardless of the story or length of a movie, dialogue is is a huge part of understanding the story & therefore being drawn into it.

With Dune, you will constantly be trying to discern dialogue unless you watch it with captions.

The biggest issue is the overall vagueness of everything that's happening;

WHY does the director seem to assume everyone has read the book AND/or seen the other film, and is already familiar with this story????

That just ticks me off.

I spent a bit of time pausing the movie and looking up answers to many questions about why/who/what was happening on the screen.

Of course that was helpful - but should it be that bloody vague?????

I don't think I should have to do extensive research on a movie to be able to 'get into it' & enjoy it.

Well, just how vague is it???

THERE'S A GLOSSARY available.

People knew it was SO vague as to have provided you a glossary of terms to help you fig'er it out. THAT'S how vague it is.

So why did the director allow so much vagueness?? . . . It really comes across like their pretending this movie is exclusive to a certain group, when in reality, it's utterly too vague for every single person regardless of whether they are familiar with the story. (bc of course according to the readers, it doesn't follow the book well)

And when I see a high movie rating, here 8 stars, I like to read a few bad reviews. Just for balance and some middle star reviews.

I find 4 to 6 star reviews are the most 'level', realistic, objective thoughts. 10 star reviews almost always seem overly & ridiculously adoring & vapid, while 1 & 2 star reviews are almost always infantile. Both extremes will have an exception or two where their extreme rating is actually lucidly explained.

In this case, (a very high rated movie) I went to the lower ratings. I never even made it to the middle ratings.

There are an insane number of 1 & 2 star reviews for Dune. Almost every title includes the word 'boring'. This is a brainless way of saying 'vague'.

It is impossible to read them all. I finally just swiftly scrolled thru so many 1 & 2 star reviews it still took like 5 minutes and I quit before I ever even saw 3 stars.

Finally, my recommendation?

As far as the actual story - if you like sci-fi, different worlds, and the often paradoxical operations that are portrayed in those worlds you'll probably enjoy Dune - however . . .

Whether or not you go in familiar with the story, the book, or the previous movie, and especially if you're not familiar at all - I suggest you watch it with captions on, & you'll likely need to keep your finger on the volume. Also read the plot (like on Wikipedia) and if you google that Dune glossary it's very helpful.

But . . . Do ya really wanna work THAT hard to watch a movie? 😕🙄👎

All Is True (2018)

A few observations

[7/10 · 12 July 2023]

Allittlelateto the show here - But a few observations:

First, I'm a novice Shakespeare fan - read several books in my teens. Limited to movies in these days. Like some of his stuff, hate some of it.

Second observation - sometimes I like to read a few 1 star reviews. Ever notice how people who absolutely abhor a movie elaborate on it in lengthy reviews?

Anyway - most of the few I bothered to read were up-in-atms about the title vs the actual story portrayed. Apparently they all missed the short scene where a young fellow comes to William and asks about writing. Wills line here usesthe title of the movie - in essence, paraphrasing, he tells the young man, 'If you write what you know and feel, then all is true.' So I believe the title reflects that philosophical ideology - why then so cut-&-dried would any viewer assume 'this whole movie story is supposed to true.' ...?

Thirdly, I enjoyed the movie overall and caught much more humour than hard-core Shakespeareans claimed and musr have missed, but I also agree it was a bit more dramatic than expected.

Another observation - I too agreed Dame Judy seemed too old to play the wife - but since most of the characters ages are askew - so what? (I think it came across like a stage play filmed) I think the film cast is cream-of-the-crop adored. So whatever.

I also think it's helpful being a novice, bc I could simply enjoy a movie without influence.

So that may sound 'unlearned' & stupid to some, but think of the many young people who might watch this and simply be inspired to explore more Shakespeare.

Finally, did anyone else think Branaugh looked like Ben Kingsley? 😅

Tár (2022)

But . . too ambiguous

[3/10 · 11 July 2023]

Here is an example of a movie that is showing the evasive ambiguity of a human being. And dragged out to length with vague images . . .

The character (Tar) is (apparently) some sort of predator, possibly narcissist, pretentious & condescending, delicately evasive, displays 'entitled' detachment. But we also see other sides of her, seemingly considerate partner, quite good with her daughter, skilled at music and teaching, sense of humor, high achievements.

She weilds her position & fame together - apparently to maintain it as well as revel in the submission & 'dire respect' of every person in her realm.

That is until almost everyone, one by one, then in groups, finally realize how fickle she is.

And we finally discover she's from a very humble background, has excelled, yet has elaborated a fake persona, and in the end, all her spinning plates fall, and she gets taken down to the very bottom of the proverbial ladder.

I thought the very end was rather comical given her achievements combined with the high brow persona she constructed both thru legitimate education & as a result of achieved fame. We realize, by the end tho, her achievements would have meant much, much more if she had embraced her true self & background rather than changed it.

In fact, unless you're at least somewhat familiar with academic psychology and understand to some degree the dynamics of low self-esteem and resulting behavioural patterns, you will be totally bored with this movie. And you may even be bored with it if you are a psychology major . . .

But I barely deciphered any of the movie story or elements by watching the movie. The movie plays exactly like a dream; disjointed, illogical, snippets of images or events . . . As if you're a fly on the wall yes, - but one that comes and goes.

I had to do some plot reading to nail down one thing: This fictional movie portrays the same vague, questioning, ambiguity that the general public & investigative commitees in reality have over any scandal.

I reckon that was what the directors goal - with only the addition of us being able to see her nightmares, 'hallucinations' & hearing sounds. (these all suggest schizophrenia)

All these story elements given to the viewer in Tar's private moments on screen - that in reality the public or a committee would never see; the nightmares, abusing young girls, sounds, or whatever scenes were supposed to be 'hallucinations' - were all so extremely vague & inexplicit as to simply leave me frustrated.

Again - maybe that's the exact point . . . ?

I did register expressions of distaste from her partner over Tars decisions, glances, & comments towards certain women.

Tars assistant shows expressions implied of utter respect & admiration as well as utter resignation & hopelessness. Other characters revealing expressions; - the conversation with the releasing of the assistant conductor began with polite conversation which Tar escalated into hatefulness, the deserving cellist overlooked/replaced, the condescension Tar engaged in towards the male orchestra leader (Mark Strongs character who remained admiring, respectful & rather desperately so) and who Tar ultimately attacked in a public display of raging jealously, etc.

But overall, we as the viewer are given very, very little of what really ever actually happened other than the blacklisted girl who commits suicide. Yet I keep going back to the (only possible) point of the movie;

The inner working mind of any person is a complete mystery to every one else. All we can do is watch their actual actions play out AND/OR view them thru hearsay or media and try to piece together some kind of truth.

The bottom line is - do I really wanna deal with that level of ambiguity in a fictional movie???

No. And I avoid it in reality as well.

There's an avalanche of reality investigative programs, actual biographies, actual local, national, and world news to provide all the ambiguous stories one can possibley endure from crime to politics, wars, sports, and entertainment.

For a movie, I don't mind a little open-ended ideology or tossing good conversational questions. I mean everything in every movie doesn't have to conclude in a neat little package, and 'The End'.

Sure, I like to engage in 'what if' and story imagination 'before & after' what's presented on the screen.

But I do tend to prefer to check out from a lot of the ambiguities of reality, get engaged in a story and have at least a few things made clear. And pretty often these sort of psychological films just aren't going to do that, bc the disturbed human mind is so evasive . . .

Finally, I expect the long running time of this movie exists in order to try to insert as many of these ambiguous elements as possible in an attempt to portray how a self-aggrandized cookie crumbles.

But in fact, it could'a been done with more concrete story images in a standard length film.

80 for Brady (2023)

Half way thru this movie . . .

[8/10 · 2 July 2023]

I'm only halfway thru this movie.

I stopped one time to read trivia - and I read a few of the repetatively, lame negative reviews, mostly complaining.

But here's the thing:

Sally Field is age 76.

Lily Tomlin 83.

Jane Fonda 86, and Rita Moreno - age 93!!

All I can say is - you go gals!

Other than playing a random grandmother type here and there - how many parts are there for actresses beyond 50 or 60???

If they don't provide parts - well - create movies that show those ages!!

As for the negative reviews who say this is sappy or unrealistic - well, I disagree.

And I ask - don'chall know ANY vibrant elderly people?

I would think just about everyone knows one or all of these types - Jane Fonda's character - we all know some really old gal who is active, falls in love with every man she meets and spends every penny on face lifts & wearing clothes too young for her - tryin' to hang on to youth. Jane played this part bc she IS that gal.

Sally Field - the hot sauce eating contest is hilarious!! (my dad in his 80s could eat the hottest stuff like candy) I also love that Sally's character is such a nerd.

Lily Tomlin's character is so normal, and determined to have fun, and everyone has to deal with cancer or knows someone who is.

And- Rita Mareno's widowed character is perfectly real & interesting. And by the way - look at Marenos filmography! This 93 year old has been crazy busy even in the last 5 years!! What an amazing chick!!!

I think the negative reviewers are either too young to get it, or if they're older, they're the less vibrant type, AND/OR they're all just jealous that these old gals can still work energetically!!

I say kudos to these gals and this cute story which as I said - haven't even finished the movie. But I don't care. It's an easy seven stars. I may come back and give it a 10.

I'm only 61, but I want to be just like all of these women when I grow up!!!

A Walk to Remember (2002)

An ok movie night

[8/10 · 30 May 2023]

Latetotheshow again . . . But recently someone gave me about 500 DVDs and I found Walk to Remember in the mix.

I recognized the title bc I actually saw this when it first came out but I had forgotten the movie.

If that tells you anything.

This movie is based on the eponymous book, which I never read. However, many reviewers who loved the book - hated this movie. They unanimously agree the movie strayed far from the book.

So that might help you decide whether to watch this. Having never read the book, I was able to simply watch a movie without influence.

And over all it was an acceptable movie night.

The premise: Frumpy, high school loner, pastors daughter. Deliquent bad boy & his crew. Lots of peer pressure.

Bad boy gets 'school-community service' detail which puts him around the girl. Instead of him & his peers typically making fun of her, he now observes & actually gets to know her thru these different activities he otherwise would never have participated in.

We also see how his old friends react to him as he gradually changes, so it concisely portrays these reactions from them; betrayal, confusion, anger, making fun, and actual guenuine 'sticking by'.

At first, the pastor father is against these two dating, but he sees the bad-boy actually change as he does a lot of 'growing up' during this time under the influence of the girl. She is a very, very focused young lady for a specific reason which I will let you discover if you watch the movie. Of course, they fall in love.

It's kind of like a hallmark/lifetime sort of movie. It's sweet & a little sappy. But, again, a perfectly acceptable movie night.

A few dislikes I had with the movie - why the girl dressed so extremely frumpy and impractically at school. The question of continuously wearing the green sweater might have been answered with the addition of ONE simple line of dialogue - like - she could have said, 'It was my mother's.' This would have had greater meaning later in the movie. Clarity would have served better than letting me wonder or assume.

Also, one brief scene where the 'Christian' 'icons' (obvious diamterically opposed concepts) displayed in her home were severe and off-putting. Just really unnecessary.

This is the problem with Hollywood trying to depict Christians. It's often an entirely unrealistic and certainly unbilical portrayal, often portraying us as severe & hateful.

In fairness, the pastor-father never bible-whipped the boy. He acted protective of his teen daughter as most father's do, Christian or not. However, the father also knew the reason for his daughters extreme focus (her secret).

And he eventually allowed the boy to date his daughter because the boy proved himself repeatedly.

I read several reviews where people didn't understand the fathers allowing his daughter to marry the boy. It's like they obviously did not watch the transformation of the boy, nor did they understand the impetus of her future, and that the father was actually trying to protect the boy. He told his daughter, 'Be fair to him.' (ie; tell him the truth).

I did not click 'spoilers' bc this is such an old movie and many reviews already contain the exact spoilers. I simply tried to give you an objective outline.

Also, this is good for an all-family friendly movie - especially with teens - who are usually dealing with peer pressure.

Hope this helps you in choosing a great movie night!

Come September (1961)

Overall - fun

[8/10 · 4 May 2023]

Really fun old comedy I caught on TCM recently.

Who can get enough of Gina Lollabrigida or the original 'Rock' . . . Perfectly georgeous cliches, right?

Here, they are Lisa & Robert.

Great premise - this rich bachelor Robert who rarely comes to visit his own Italian villa or his Italian girlfriend Lisa - takes things for granted - He also gets surprised when he realizes the villa caretaker has been profiting from using Roberts vacation home as a tourists hotel.

Fun ensues as college girls are staying there, and then a group of college boys arrive, intent on dating the girls.

Then, Robert is determined to fully chaperone every moment.

The funniest thing is the boys thinking Robert can't keep up with them - instead, to their bewilderment, he totally out-does their assumptions.

The only thing I kinda didn't like was the caretaker & his girlfriend - I think they should've cast totally different actors - much better known, more comedic actors in those two roles - Also - didn't like a couple of over-bearing sound issues ; the vehicle scenes with the chickens squawking constantly was ridiculously noisy - and the train station scene was just loud-chaotic.

Other than that, overall, it's a great little early 60s rompI.

The Courtship of Eddie's Father (1963)

Cute comedy

[7/10 · 4 May 2023]

Just caught this on TCM - probably saw it when I was a kid - but that's been a number of undisclosed decades ago . . . :D

Ron Howard is adorable here. Glenn Ford is just Glen Ford. I like him, but he always seems to be brooding.

Simple plot - widowed dad sad, son wants to fix him up with a new lady. Dad is aloof to the perfect match just across the hall, instead engages a self absorbed dame. Son takes exception. Everything works out.

I like the fun notion of a redhead, a blonde, & a brunette. I wanted to like the brunette - but it was on/off obvious she didn't really want a stepson around. I think that could've been made more clear.

As with all old movies, (& some new ones too) there's a lot of unecessary scenes that don't really move the story along - but overall this is a pretty fun old movie that'll take you back right to the early 60s styles of everything from clothes to home interiors & home accessories.

Mixed Nuts (1994)

So fun

[8/10 · 27 April 2023]

This movie is so funny - it's pure slapstick about neurotics.

Let me say - if you liked for example, Carol Burnett's comical skits, and things like that, you would love Mixed Nuts.

The 'help line' office premise is humorous because the people who answer the help lines, and all their aquaintences are just as messed up & neurotic themselves, along with the added premises of the landlord, the tenants about to be evicted, a killer-on-the loose, and more, all during the holiday, at Venice beach.

Everything is extreme & exxagerated here but done so with such truth that it's hilarious.

So you may want to read the parents guide - you may be offended by some things in the movie - some themes and so forth not for kids

But as I said, it's all parody & exxageration - that's why it's so fun. If you like Steve Martin's energy & humor, you will love him here. He & Rita Wilson play off one another with perfect timing as the story plot speeds up. A lot is happening in every direction with every one!

And Madelyn Cann was fabulous and hysterical, using her lilting voice as she plays the condescending type . . .

I've never been a big fan of Adam Sandler's silly behaviour & childish voice, but this is role where he puts his goofiness to excellent use and it's funny.

Hats off to Norah Ephron for directing this - it must have been either super crazy or super fun, on a real 'mixed nuts' set - dealing with these scenes and this group of actors, and cutting it all together so well in this fast-paced comedy!!

I was stunned to see this only garnered 5.4 stars. I figured it would be a solid 7 or even 8. It is in my book.

Also, a great treat at the end is, the beautiful song written & performed by Carley Simon.

Sunshine (1973 TV Movie)

Have never forgotten it . . .

[10/10 · 22 April 2023]

I saw this movie in the early 70s - probably when it first came out on TV when I was about 11 or 12 years old, and I have never forgotten it.

It seemed to portray perfectly what my vivid imagination thought of as how real, down to earth hippies lived. I also was just beginning to learn guitar.

To this day, I still randomly hum or sing the the theme song 'Sunshine'.

The cancer plot - sort of means even more now than it did then, because cancer was really sort of rare back then compared to the past 20 -30 years. But at the time it was such a tragic, tear jerker of a movie.

Now cancer isn't nearly as rare . . these days there are great movies on the subject

• But back in the early 70s, or at least to me as a kid - the word cancer was seldom heard, so Sunshine I think was rather ground breaking.

I would just love to see it again. And I'm so glad there are some here who still remember & love it.

I remember it was just a really beautiful movie too. It really drew you in. I mean, I saw a lot of movies as a kid - but 50 years later, I still very often remember this one . . .

UPDATE; I finally snagged a DVD of Sunshine!

Wow. . . . how my perceptions have changed after 5 decades. It's pretty clear now, rewatching this, that Kate was a like every 18 to 19 year old; inexperienced & impulsive, unsure yet convinced, insecure yet confident- the actress definitely played the teen character perfectly.

Since Kate mentions that she left home at 14, she was undoubtedly street smart & mature in some ways, yet still childish emotionally & mentally.

She could've had the leg amuptated and lived perfectly well. That would've actually been more courageous. But she chose the dramatic path - I think thru death she believed she would live on more than really being alive. The idea of being around via book & cassette appealed to her more than staying here herself.

I reckon it worked, bc here we are - at least about 79 of us - still remembering her story!

She chose a really utopian idea created out of emotional turmoil & natural teen dramatics. Other comments made it sound like she had an abusive childhood, which very often stunts ones emotional growth, yet influenced her greatly in all her decisions & ideas.

As we older folks know, we change and mature a lot (or should) every 5 to 10 years. It would interesting to know what 30, 40, 50, 60 year old versions of Kate would look back and think of herself.

In my teens I wrote poetry, did drawings, & journaled extensively. (I left home at 16) By age 23 I had a 5 year old child and a divorce under my belt. In a fitful 'epiphaney' of my 23 years on the planet & summary of the short 8 years of my 'freedom', I burned the entire collection of poetry id written - about four 3-ring note books and 4 or 5 spiral notebooks full of almost every thought & belief I'd ever had . . . Mostly under the influence of substances - lol But alas, the 30, 40, 50, 60 year old versions of me all agreed - I wish I had never done that! How I would love to have those things to remember who I was as a young adult, and see what I've learned since, & how I have or havent changed in my thinking. . .

Well, anyway, Sunshine remains beautifully done, well acted & over all, a great movie portrayal. And now I'm looking for the book!!!

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

Pretty good sci fi

[7/10 · 1 April 2023]

Well - latetotheshow - but ANY way - right up front - sorry to say I didn't see Pitch Black but now I want to. But just so ya know - my review reflects simply a person who simply saw a sci Fi movie without bias or expectation.

The Chronicles of Riddick has been slashed & shredded by one star reviews - and highly lauded by a bunch of 10 star reviews. It has been middled by many 5 star reviews. But I found it to be neither a 1, a 10, or a middling 5.

It was just good sci Fi entertainment.

It has a really great cast, and good special affects. Interesting story/plot.

Oh yessir. It has the requisit outlandish, dramatic, cliche, cheezy 'camera-zoom-on-cool-hero' when the hero makes it out of some extraordinarily, impossible situation.

As well as the requisit number of mindless, trash-acting mercenaries & prison guards These (apparently) are present in all such action movies.

I don't know why a lot of one star reviewers couldn't follow the simple plot unless they were somehow influenced by the preceding Pitch Black movie.

Anyway - a solid 7 stars for an old lady's entertaining movie night. Cheez popcorn goes well with this one . . . : D.