truthspeaker-17825 Reviews

Past Lives (2023)

Boredom beyond compare

[7 January 2024]

One boring bloke becomes a stalker to his boring childhood girlfriend. They get in touch again 12 years later to have a boring FaceTime montage and decide to not talk again for another 12 years, during which time nothing has happened, which didn't surprise me because they did nothing but get involved with other people who were equally boring and so when they finally meet up after not having been in the same place at the same time for 24 YEARS, they have nothing to do but have the same BORING conversations again in person!

Not a poignant story about what could have been, but more of a boring story about which level of boring relationship to settle for in life.

YAWN!

The Predator (2018)

Another disappointment

[16 May 2023]

Another wasted opportunity for the Predator franchise.

What starts off as, at least, a unique take with actors that give us hope because they're involved, turns into a generically-directed jumble of improbable-verging-on-impossible nonsense.

So many films these days-and this one is a prime example-start off as though some thought has gone into the script and end as if the creative team was replaced by a child playing with action figures.

Shane Black being involved gives misplaced faith that this will be a decent instalment.

Wacky characters, feeble comedy, a child with inconsistent autism that becomes a superpower to translate all things, several appearances from Basil Exposition and characters who have knowledge of things they couldn't possibly know. Also, bullets don't work. ...but then they do.

The 1987 original wasn't perfect, but it has enduring personality. Not least because a great director was in charge and the writers weren't bland or pandering in their style.

This one will sink without trace.

The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck (2023)

Who are ya??

[15 May 2023]

It won't take you long to wonder why you're watching this.

I've listened to some of the audiobook and it didn't feel this meandering or pointless.

Unlike superior theses like The Happiness Advantage which includes examples, anecdotes, psyche research and conclusions, this "film" is just a series of pointless anecdotes told by some random bloke in a chair.

If I was with this guy at a party, I'd find an excuse to walk away from him. His anecdotes-whether personal to him or gleaned from somewhere else-have no conclusions.

If the overall message to this thing is that "life isn't perfect, make the most of what you've got", then it was pretty much summed up at the beginning.

I thought this would be an interesting watch. It wasn't.

Resurrection (2022)

Interminable

[7 May 2023]

"Rebecca Hall, we've got a script that requires you to act at all ends of the spectrum. The budget for locations, special effects, script development, etc. All comes to under $1000. We just need you and Tim Roth to put your names to it and we can get this steaming pile of nonsense made... No, there is no real point to the film and nobody will understand it unless they go to the internet to read viewer interpretations, but we'll get away with it by describing the film as 'psychological'... Yes, it only has enough substance for a 10-minute short film, but we'll get you to repeat the same conversations over and over until the audience is so bored that they'll realise that no pay-off could be worth this interminable rubbish. So, are you up for it, Rebecca?"

Inherent Vice (2014)

Like eating attractive tasteless food

[10 April 2023]

The trailer is 100 times better than the film. That's because the film is nothing like the trailer.

It's not a stoner comedy, it's not a detective story. If the bullseye is The Big Lebowski, Inherent Vice misses the board altogether.

The cast are appealing to have all in one film and the costume, hair, makeup and production design are pleasing to look at.

What is missing is a plot. It doesn't help that the opening scene requires subtitles to understand what is going on. Every scene afterwards is semi-coherent and thinly stitched together.

Another boring vanity project from a director who, unfairly, keeps being given money to make boring vanity projects.

Spencer (2021)

Pretentious nonsense

[20 December 2021]

The synopsis for Spencer states: "Christmas festivities at the Queen's Sandringham Estate... SPENCER is an imagining of what might have happened during those few fateful days."

In which case, the entire film begins from a point of inconsequentiality. And, if it's all a concoction of Steven Knight's mind, I would hope he could come up with something more interesting than this pointless dirge.

The scene opens on an over-the-top performance from Kristen Stewart, displaying every Princess Di affectation and mannerism in the space of ten seconds. I presume the film was shot chronologically as she does slowly get better. Unfortunately, the screenplay gets worse.

The supporting cast are fine, although the distinct lack of physical similarities between the actors and, say, Prince Charles and Prince Philip, is pretty distracting.

The story was already dull, but it was the inclusion of a ten-minute sequence of Stewart wandering around and having dream sequences cut to an instrumental-more akin to a Kate Bush video than a feature film-that the film completely lost me.

I don't care that the soundtrack was supposed to evoke themes of mental disquiet: in places it was irritating to the point of wanting to reach for the mute button.

With the fad of Downton Abbey and The Crown, producers know that they can farm out any old depiction of upper class England and make a profit. But if this is the best story currently available, it's time to funnel that production cash elsewhere.

Jobs for the boys rubbish. The fact that it's up for so many awards simply demonstrates how much of a circular-mutual-pleasuring society the film industry is.

The Cleanse (2016)

Didn't follow through.

[19 December 2021]

It's amazing how this film made 1 hour 20 minutes feel like 2 hours of waiting for something to happen. The "wackiness" isn't strong enough to make up for all it's flaws.

Dragged out to feature-length because it was cheap to make and has a handful of household names in it, I could literally edit this film into a 15-minute short that would adequately carry the theme of "even though it can be scary, let your self-made limitations go" and it would be infinitely more watchable. Also, it's not funny enough to be a comedy and not horrific in any way, so why was it on Netflix's list of horror films?

As a feature, it isn't anywhere near ambitious enough. Boring.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

Another missed opportunity

[23 November 2021]

Ghostbusters II was a let-down because the storyline and the humour was weak in comparison to the first. The Paul Feig reboot at least had great comedic actors, but it failed because the humour was generic and, ultimately, not funny.

The original Ghostbusters was a perfect storm of Saturday Night Live alumni at the peak of their comedy chops bringing great characters to life, with a fresh storyline, a wonderful soundtrack, a brilliant line-up of supporting actors, a superb director, appealing special effects and-something that I feel is always overlooked when talking about Ghostbusters-superb cinematography. But, most importantly: IT WAS REALLY FUNNY!

'Ghostbusters: Afterlife' can barely be called a comedy. Paul Rudd is the only comic actor in it, and does his best with the little he is given. The Podcast kid provided a couple of smiles. The main girl in it is a decent character. But where are the laughs?! The original had humour in every scene, which appealed to adults and kids alike. The non-stop homage to the original in this one seemed to take the place of any humour; it sits more in the mystery genre, with a bunch of heavily-ladelled sentiment on top. It's one of those unfortunate productions that leaves you feeling, "When is this going to get moving?" because you constantly sense that you're in Act One. It's only because the minutes are ebbing away that it dawns on you: this is all it has to offer. There's also a distinct lack of ghosts, and the ghosts that are in it are 70% from the 1984 film. Couldn't they come up with ANYTHING original? Even the score was a cut'n'paste job, which felt out-of-place at times.

Also, if you're going to send Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson out to do the rounds on chat shows, one would assume you've put them in the film to a decent extent, not just shipped them in as day-players, with a "special appearance by" credit. I did, however, appreciate the inclusion of Egon Spengler. You can believe that, if any actor would have appreciated being brought back to fruition as a ghost, it would have been Harold Ramis in a Ghostbusters sequel. Just, maybe not *this* one.

The problems with the film are highlighted when Ray Parker Jnr's 'Ghostbusters' song kicked in at the end, accompanied by the wordmark, and (for anyone who likes the 1984 film enough to have many repeat viewings) it takes you back to the fond memories of how brilliant everything was that followed the opening title of the original. For this film, however, it reiterates what was lacking in the past two hours.

Summary: like an elongated episode of Stranger Things, made for kids. Some people might like that, but from a Ghostbusters cinema release, we should expect more.

As a supernatural film: 6/10 As an action film: 6/10 As a comedy: 4/10 Originality: 2/10 As a Ghostbusters film: it probably inches ahead of the 2016 version, but still ambles into third place.

Oh, well - at least we still have the original, which will remain a watchable classic. 'Ghostbusters: Afterlife', however, will sink without trace. Totally disposable.

Wrong Turn (2021)

Tripe

[5 September 2021]

Six predictably diverse young people with personalities as compelling as sugarless porridge get lost in the woods, behave irrationally, shout at each other, and thankfully get picked off one-by-one.

Who funds this rubbish? It's nothing like the original, which doesn't matter because the original isn't Citizen Kane, but this isn't a remake or an improvement and shouldn't have the title "Wrong Turn" because they don't make a wrong turn.

Having an ethnically-, sexually- and gender- diverse cast does not equal characters of value. The six protagonists don't have a single interesting personality trait between them, unless you count shouting at the drop of a hat.

The second half reminded me of feeble D-movie horrors from the 80s - boring and not really horrors.

I wouldn't be able to point out the main girl in a line-up of personality-bereft leading girls.

Matthew Modine appears as the one name you recognise in need of a paycheque. Daisy Head was alright. Otherwise, this was a bland and no-talent waste of life.

The Mighty Boosh Live: Future Sailors Tour (2009 Video)

Insulting

[2 September 2021]

I enjoyed the first Might Boosh live stage show. Even though it went on far too long, I liked that it had a lot of extraneous stuff outside of the main story section of the show and there was a lot of interaction with the crowd.

THIS show, however, was just insulting to anyone who paid more than 50p to watch it on DVD. The humour is weak and there is no main story! The first half is all long, drawn-out introductions to characters and the second half legitimately feels like a bunch of sixth form drama students who made it up half an hour before they went on stage.

Really very poor. Don't waste your time.

Aftermath (IV) (2021)

What's the percentage of DECENT Netflix-produced films?

[15 August 2021]

Another amateur hour (nearly two) from "Netflix Original".

A rambling screenplay with numerous extraneous characters and subplots that lead nowhere; an intrusive music score that can't make up its mind what film its in; the world's most irritating female protagonist who makes you pray that she'll get horribly murdered; a cinematographer who seems to be limited to a single fisheye lens; scissors that are just randomly left lying on the floor with no explanation; and a "ghost" who had his makeup applied by a kid with Halloween face crayons.

Seeing as it obviously magpied from films such as Paranormal Activity, Poltergeist, Halloween & Rec., it's amazing that there was not a single scary or tense moment in the whole thing.

Rubbish.

Werewolves Within (2021)

We've been sold a pup...

[14 August 2021]

I rented this based on the trailer and was disappointed. Sam Richardson is good value in Veep and was one of my main reasons for watching this.

Unfortunately, the film doesn't work. There are some gentle laughs but nothing outstanding. Not enough laughs to be a memorable comedy. No decent scares or gory moments to be classed as a horror. 'An American Werewolf in London' this is not.

And, if it was trying to be a whodunnit, then it lacks the suspense, and any sense that it was actually a mystery plot.

Importantly: surely werewolf films need to have some werewolf action?

A missed opportunity with a decent cast.

All-in-all, pretty feeble.

The Dark (I) (2018)

Rubbish

[1 August 2021]

Watching a slug crawl for a mile would have been more interesting and less sluggish than this waste of time.

20 minutes of intrigue failed to find any meaningful or relevant pay-off, and so was followed by 76 minutes of drawn-out, pointless and boring scenes filled with irrelevant conversations. Filmmaker: silence does not equal suspense!

The overblown sound design may have been a creative choice or a mistake. Either way it was off-putting and, in several scenes, served to highlight the seconds of my life that were ticking away while I tried to work out whether I should switch this off in favour of something more stimulating such as staring at magnolia paintwork.

Oh, and if you're waiting for an explanation as to why she's a zombie, you won't get one.

Oh number two: the end doesn't make sense.

Who got paid to sacrifice their credibility and award this so many 7s, 8s, 9s, and 10s out of 10? I've got a slug video that you will probably think is better than The Godfather.

Backcountry (I) (2014)

High on the list for worst movie ever

[8 July 2021]

A "screenwriter" with no screenwriting abilities; a "director" leaving zero trace of having directed anything; a "director of cinematography" who relies on a cheap camera and one lens; and an editor who doesn't edit out anything.

So worthless I can hardly be bothered to review it. Boring, tedious, boring and painful to watch. The first clue this was going to be a waste of time comes from the banal, generic cinematography. The only drama comes from an interaction with an utterly inconsequential character. Once the one piece of (badly filmed) action takes place, the rest of the film is dragged out more than any film I've ever seen and filmed without even the inspiration of the lacklustre first three quarters.

Deserves to sink without trace. Turgid.

The Harvest (I) (2013)

Poor

[12 May 2021]

This falls into the category of films that you hope will be good because of the cast, namely Michael Shannon, who is dependably great in everything he's in. But this film doesn't work.

The cast does a stand-up job with the script material given, but there is one fatal flaw in the story: why doesn't the girl phone the police?

Answer: because it would end the film.

Telling Grandpa once (who ignores his granddaughter and thus three people die and an innocent person is mutilated, but who is having a great life himself at the end of the film with no sign of guilt) is not a concerted effort to sort the situation out.

Someone else has pointed out it's a Misery carbon copy. Most definitely.

One more question: why smash a window and post out an invalided boy into a wheelbarrow (which looked unintentionally comical), when you could just put him in his wheelchair and walk him to the front door? We'll never know.

Beneath (I) (2013)

Can I swear in headlines?

[12 April 2021]

Is this supposed to be funny? It isn't.

Four guys and two girls with zero charisma and no reason to be as melodramatic as they are, go onto a boat in a lake and are menaced by a huge sprat.

Instead of behaving like normal human beings, they all lose their sanity and act like utter morons.

Jaws, this ain't.

Two Distant Strangers (2020)

Oscar-worthy? Really???

[12 April 2021]

A film about the karma of what happens when you leave your dog home alone overnight, this remake of 'Groundhog Day' forgoes much of the original's humour.

Apparently the time of nuance, metaphor and the principle of "show, don't tell" in film has passed. Now writers can just stick sermons in the mouths of their characters and get nominated for an Oscar! Yayyy!

The message of this 34-minute short is a worthy one but was understood within the first 5 minutes. But, in case you missed it, the main protagonist feels the need to explain it out loud at around the 25-minute mark.

Well filmed and fair acting, but a screenplay, dialogue and image system that is as subtle as a breeze block in the face.

The Turning (2020)

What?

[7 February 2021]

Can studios stop making arthouse nonsense and marketing it as mainstream? All you end up with is a film that people resent for wasting their time and misleading their expectations.

The 2/10 is for the performances and cinematography, which are both very good. Less than zero for the script and director who should have ripped up the script and demanded a new screenwriter.

Artsy-fartsy pointlessness with a less than unsatisfactory ending.

Bad.

Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (2020)

Boring and over-the-top

[6 February 2021]

This is the second over-praised film I have seen in recent times, the first being One a night in Miami. Both address black issues and history and both have valid points to make. Unfortunately, both are also dull as ditchwater, full of overacting, stuffed with inconsequential dialogue, characters getting angry with each other over nothing and over-the-top dramatics.

When I say "angry with each other over nothing", I mean that situations explode in second and people shout or fight with each other over things that have not been emotionally conveyed to the audience. Very often, due to the directors of these two films sticking with the limited scope of filming a stage production, they both feel like a parody of a stage play.

The scenes with Viola Davis feel most worthy of being on screen because she has an understated honesty in her performance and a valid underlying statement to make. But what helps this the most is being outside of the filmed stage play environment.

Unfortunately, most of the film involves her band in a room, telling boring, scenery chewing stories. I don't care what the subject matter is if I'm not given a reason to emotionally invest in the characters. Anyone can put a talking head on-screen and have them tell a sob story.

The main issue is that not enough has been done to take the stage play material and make it fit for cinema. Take, as an example, A Few Good Men, which feels nothing like the stage play it is based on.

There are reasons why stage acting is different to screen acting; you need to project voice and action from a stage to reach the audience at the back of the theatre. You don't need to be as forceful on screen. SO CHANGE THE PERFORMANCE!

The epitome of this over-the-topness comes when Chadwick Boseman shouts at God for a prolonged period and expects a reply.

Theatre adaptationists: must do better.

The Fanatic (2019)

The worst film ever made

[29 January 2021]

I've always struggled to answer the question of the worst film ever. There are bad films made by amateurs, boring films, misjudged films, self-indulgent nonsense films, etc. But this steaming heap surpasses them all to the bottom of the pile.

Several actors, over the years, have attempted to portray a character with mental health issues in an attempt to prove themselves to have tremendous range. Unfortunately, many Miss the mark to the point where it just becomes aggressively, inexcusably offensive (see Ricky Gervais in Derek). I doubt whether Travolta, the writer or the director did any more research than watching a YouTube video before making this toss. As a consequence, this film does nothing but demonise someone who is presumably supposed to be on the spectrum, surrounded by a supporting cast of cardboard characters.

I like John Travolta in many roles, e.g. Grease and Pulp Fiction, and I know that sometimes actors have to do whatever turns up to keep the bank account topped up. My respect is highest for actors who take on a shocking script and still turn in a decent performance. But when they just go through the motions, it's insulting to the audience and, in this case, reprehensible in the resulting trite and underprepared portrayal.

Something else that is inexcusable is that the writer and director occasionally can't decide whether there should be comedy within this story (who knows whether that was intentional or not?!) and so come across as making fun out of people with learning disabilities. I doubt the vulgar script had any more than one draft.

The production companies behind this travesty have names that sound like they were made up in ten seconds before a pitch meeting with Travolta: "We're from...erm...Wonderfilm." "Yeah. And we're part of Media... Finance...Capital!"

Before seeing this, one of my main nominations for worst film ever was Battlefield Earth. But this tops any terrible film I've seen hands down because I believe the main players behind it could have done better if they tried. They didn't.

Avoid this pap. Watch The Fan with Snypes and DeNiro.

What Keeps You Alive (2018)

Poor

[9 August 2020]

Turgid film that thinks it's clever. It's not. In fact, it's decidedly stupid. The only reason we watched it all the way through was because we were having fun pointing out how many bad and illogical elements there were in it.

A facial bruise that disappears in the space of an afternoon, then reappears. An ankle that is mistaken for being broken but she can run on it the next day. Only covering half a room in plastic when chopping up a body. Cleaning up all the blood and then pouring water all over herself and splashing the bloody water back on the floor. Several ludicrous decisions made by the feeble one. Why does she turn round and go back? Sloppy dialogue. Sledgehammer exposition. The acting of the main two was melodramatic and bad but that's probably due to the pitiful script and bad directing.

It had a decent seed of an idea but it was poorly executed.

Only worth watching if you enjoy laughing at how bad a film can be.

Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood (2019)

Yawnsville......again!

[10 July 2020]

How long is Tarantino going to surf along on the success of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction?

What a pile of undisciplined, inconsequential, self-indulgent nonsense.

So long as studios give this bloke the money and zero restrictions, he'll be able to write and film endless scenes of thoughtless drivel punctuated with guest appearances from his Hollywood chums and foot fetish shots from his current favourite Hollywood starlets.

It serves me right for not having learned my lesson from Death Proof, Django Unchained and The Hateful Eight. Why use 2 minutes of storyline when 1000 minutes of pointless waffling will do?

With every film he consigns himself even deeper into the most overrated director category.

Quentin Tarantino: movies to fall asleep by.

The Dead Don't Die (2019)

Pointless

[9 June 2020]

Why does this film exist? Who wrote this and thought, "Yep! Got a quality piece of work here!" I really want to meet the studio exec who gave this unfunny, slow, subpar rubbish the green light.

Most of all I'm just perplexed. Why do the likes of Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Steve Buscemi and Adam Driver read a script this dull and agree to take part?

Where was the script editor?? Pointless lines that should have disappeared at the writing stage that weren't caught by the editor either. Is the line, 'Wild animal...or a group of wild animals...' supposed to be humorous? If so, explain it to me. If not, why does it appear four times in the first hour of the film?

We turned it off after 55 minutes as life is too short for garbage like this. Jim Jarmusch must've done a lot of favours for people in his past. Such a waste of...everything.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

Meandering nostalgic box-ticking

[22 December 2019]

Here's the thing about the original Star Wars films: they were made with the sole intention of telling a story; they were not box-ticking exercises.

With this, more than even episodes 7 and 8, it feels as though the studio's/writers' main concerns were to get as many nostalgic points and "woke" moments in there as possible.

None of this would be a problem if they focussed on what they were supposed to focus on first and foremost: an original, good quality story.

Spoilers follow...

Fantasy takes a leap but needs to be grounded in solid realities. In the first trilogy, yes, there were ghost consultants and a weird hallucinatory sequence in which Luke cuts off his own head, but the current makers seem to have taken these as a licence to throw in whatever they want to plug the holes in this leaky script.

The ghosts of Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi were Jedis. They had earned the right to be ever-lasting. But why does Han Solo make another appearance? As Ben Solo's conscience?! What is this, a cartoon?? What about doing some acting instead - some soul-searching rather than a premonition of his dad?

Then there's the Emperor's unexplained resurrection! Can anyone stay dead? And if they can't, death loses its threat. For example, Ben gets hurled into an abyss and crawls out unharmed. What's to say the entire cast can't return for episode 10: Return of the Lazy Scriptwriting?

Five minutes earlier, Rey and Ben are helpless at the Emperor's powers of suction, and he's able to disable the galaxy's entire space fleet with his lightning fingers, but then Rey is able to render his powers obsolete with two lightsabers. Erm, what?? Consistency, please!!!

So, is he dead now? Or can he just inexplicably come back as part of a roll call in Episode 12?

Also, didn't he say that if Rey killed him, he would infuse her personality and she'd become the Sith ruler of the cosmos? What happened there? Or was it Darth Sidious's ultimate plan to live on a desolate sand farm and drink blue milk for eternity?

When I was a kid I used to love making up adventures with my Star Wars figures. I had fun, but I wouldn't presume to put these stories on the big screen as part of the definitive Star Wars journey. That's what this film felt like - people making it up as they went along, with a whole bunch of exposition to justify every scene.

Lastly, there was very little that made any of the characters special or unique. Finn had a bit of personality in Force Awakens, but he could have been any random character in this film. And the previous one.

I'll stick with just episodes 4, 5 and 6, thanks.

Spider-Man: Far from Home (2019)

One of the weakest Avengers films so far

[12 July 2019]

Very disappointed with this one.

Firstly, the positives: the acting and CGI is as good as it needs to be. The mid-end credit sequence is pleasing in it's satirisation of Alex Jones-style news exploitation and the statement that "people will believe anything they're told these days" even when they've seen behind the curtain, shows that the big companies behind the Marvel franchise are on the right side of history and doing what they can to educate people via their stories.

The negatives: The established characters were not as interesting as they have been before. The story is run-of-the-mill, at best. The antagonist is fairly uninteresting and therefore Spider-Man isn't tested as much as he needs to be. The humour misses FAR more than it hits. Nick Fury was reduced in stature, despite the excuse of the after-credit scene. "Thor is off-world," erm, what about Hulk? Holograms are like dream sequences - utterly tedious and inconsequential.

Yes, one has to suspend a certain amount of disbelief when watching superhero films BUT look at the end credit sequence of a film with tremendous amounts of CGI and you'll see hundreds of people working on it. Are we supposed to find it credible that these holograms that fool the world are created by one little fella and his laptop? Also, when was the last time that a hologram caused severe weather conditions? Holograms don't cause wind to blow, rivers to overflow or bridges to collapse and the drones aren't a credible source for that either, as they were all in a satellite until the climax of the film.

Also, I know that force vs. damage is inconsistent throughout the Avengers (e.g. Thanos is smashed by a speeding spaceship and gets up unscathed, but a drop of blood is drawn by one punch from Iron Man) but can the makers try to get SOME consistency to it? Spider-Man being hit by a speeding locomotive and just getting winded, kinda makes him as invincible as the tedious Captain Marvel.

The main thing that astounds me is the level of 10/10 fake reviews of this film. Anyone who honestly thinks it's the "best one so far!" is not in touch with his/her critical faculties.