Reviews

44 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Bernadette (2023)
6/10
Great comedic timing
26 October 2024
When I heard about this script and casting (Deneuve), I really wasn't sure how it was going to be pulled off. Imagine if Bernadette Chirac said she wanted Catherine Deneuve to portray her in her biopic (which this sort of it, but isn't).

But with her glorious acting chops, Deneuve presents a clever and sarcastic Chirac in a very particular period of her life, and somehow, she makes it work! She has excellent comedic timing and deserves plenty of accolades for her abilities, longevity, charm, and choices in films.

Overall, a film for Chirac fans, Deneuve fans, or lovers of French politics, but perhaps a bit too specific and better suited for a particular audience (older), though it will be well-received in France, French Canada, and by politically-minded francophiles - and maybe not so much otherwise.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Lost Opportunity
26 October 2024
A fascinatingly creepy subject with a patchy script and lots of back/forth in time that becomes confusing. The story doesn't have to be chronological, but the glue to keep the order of things together is not nearly enough.

As a directorial debut for Kendrick, it's alright but not great. She has a promising career behind the camera. However, she couldn't get out of the way of her own personality to play the real-life victim, Cheryl Bradshaw, instead of Anna Kendrick. A rookie mistake, hopefully. Or next time, hire an actress and focus on only directing.

Kendrick can be witty in a verbal tete-a-tete - we've seen this many times in her films - but this display here was certainly out of line for "Cheryl" and for the 1970s, which made suspending disbelief really difficult and the story very superficial.

And the killer's wig should have its own film credit.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
PADDLER SAVES THE DAY
26 October 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Gosling 0186, aka Brightbill, is a drama queen.

The idea here is a good one (based on a book by Peter Brown), but the execution is faulty in various places.

For one, animals are not inherently mean or vengeful, hurting others for "fun" Anthropomorphism - giving human characteristics to animals - is necessary to tell a story for the human audience, I get that. But it's teaching the wrong lessons to the younger viewers (e.g., animals are just like us. Nope. Humans are inherently flawed and have the capacity for bad, not animals).

Another issue is how the film rushed the characterisation of Brightbill. One minute he's a tiny gosling learning to copy Roz (robot mum) and suddenly he is dramatic teenager giving a major guilt trip to Roz. Like, where did he pick up the human theatrics? Miscalculated anthropomorphism, that's where.

Thirdly, the tonality of voice kept changing in the robots. Initially for Roz - sounding like a robot, then human, then robot - and, later, Vontra who sounded bi*chy. Robots are consistent, no? (blame the direction?)

Finally, all the blowing up and setting things on fire was out of character for Universal Dynamic robots so why did they have warrior/fighter robots whose only aim was to kill and destroy? (answer: because humans made them).

Overall, I had slightly damp waterlines during the end scene, but the other elements that made suspending disbelief impossible prevented me from shedding an actual tear.

TL;DR The acting is decent but the overall execution was hurried and left much to be desired.

However, PADDLER WAS THE BEST.
3 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disclaimer (2024– )
2/10
Dear God
26 October 2024
I FEEL CHEATED.

There was so much hype at Venice Film Festival about this project but - alas - hype is all it is. Cate is the only reason for 2 stars, otherwise, it would get the bare minimum rating.

Catherine Ravenscroft (Blanchett) has it all, while Stephen Brigstocke (Kline) has lost it all. In flashbacks and with an overwhelming level of voice-over narration (is it AI or Leila George?), we learn about tragedy at an Italian beach town involving the main character (Catherine).

Lots of (soft core p*rn) sex and little of much else, much over-acting, so little Blanchett, and this drags out at such a painfully boring rate that - by episode 5 - I was only interested in looking for scenes with Blanchett. I don't even care about the story anymore.

All else aside, narration of this level is unnecessary and lazy. If I wanted to read the book, I would.

How did this get such rave reviews, HOW??
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Marcello Mio (2024)
3/10
It's Alright
15 October 2024
I went in expecting little and ended up enjoying this film more than I anticipated.

The story is funny, self-deprecating, and Chiara is charming, so one can't help but like her on screen. Catherine Deneuve is gorgeous and she has some of the most fun lines in the film.

There were some elements in the story that didn't make sense, however, and it ultimately came down to lazy writing. Some plot points were not properly explained, while expecting he audience was the audience to suspend disbelief, which was already asking too much.

In truth, this is a film for those who know Deneuve, Mastroianni, their history and myth, and who can follow along with the references made throughout the film. I happened to know quite a few of them, so my knowledge carried me along to the end but it feels like it wouldn't be the same for those not in the know.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Funny Birds (2024)
2/10
Weak Script
6 October 2024
The plot is on the thin side, but there are several heartwarming scenes between the main leads that carry the film through to the end.

It's just not clear why the film had to take place on a chicken farm, why in the United States, why the main character's mother had to be French (although it gave the perfect excuse to cast the wonderful Catherine Deneuve in the role), and why...a lot of things happen the way they do.

In the end, the film ends up being a predictable but gentle story, with a couple of mildly funny scenes, but it's never clear why the audience should care about any of the characters at all.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lee (2023)
2/10
Not What One Hopes For
6 October 2024
I was looking forward to this film but, unfortunately, feel let down by how patchy the plot is.

The film starts with Lee Miller (Kate Winslet) living an uninhibited artist's life in France and proceeds to follow her life as she he pushes her way into working at French Vogue as a photographer, then a war correspondent who goes to the front lines of WWII.

It's an interesting biopic but where it falls short is helping the audience connect with the main character. A bit of this is finally achieved almost at the very end of the film when Lee makes a small but significant confession to a colleague but, at that point, it's too late in the game.

The problem is not with the acting but certainly with the writing and some of the (aging) makeup used throughout the film. Overall, the film isn't all it had the promise to be and, I'm sad to say, it won't be a film one will remember amongst the many biopics out there.

The good news? Learning a bit about Lee Miller, who seemed determined to live a full and free life even if, at times, at the expense of those around her.
7 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Disappointed
3 October 2024
One of my favourite writers and some of my favourite actors had a very good chance of being a hit series, I thought. Well, it might have been popular, but I could barely get through the first episode, it was so dull and basic.

The entire premise of the series is based on a single tweet, that's it. I get it, the creators are trying to say the cancel culture and boomer behaviour is ridiculous, and to an extent, maybe it is. But a single tweet and faux outrage over a single tweet that doesn't even have much context goes to show how little they understand of how social media works.

The script just goes on and on...and on and says very little. They over-exaggerate every point and just hammer away at it, in case the audience is stupid and doesn't get it after the 100th time, and it's just boring??

I gave up by the end of episode 1. It's just not interesting and says little except their generation thinks they're better than the current generations? That's right, must be why the world is on fire.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Outlander (2014– )
2/10
What a Shame
12 September 2024
Warning: Spoilers
I've never read the books and I won't be doing so. This review is purely based on the series alone.

The concept of time travel and period drama is what drew me to this and, initially, my interest was peaked. Magical stones in a magical land (you'd understand if you've been to Scotland, which I have many, many times), time travel, romance, and intrigue all drew me into the plot.

A WWII war nurse, Claire (Caitriona Balfe) from 1945 London meets up with her historian husband Frank (Tobias Menzes) after being years apart due to the War and try to rekindle their romance/marriage by travellingt to Inverness in Scotland for a proper honeymoon. While there, they find their way to an historical/ritual site on All Hallow's Eve (Samhain), where they observe local women holding a ritual dance to commemorate the event. Soon after, Claire revists the same site to look for flowers she is interested in as someone who dabbles in apothecary and by pulling said flower, manages to open up a magical veil between her time and that of 18th c Highlands, where she has to learn to survive, adapt, and thrive while waiting to find her way back home to 1945 England. In the process, the audience gets to learn and meet lots of historical aspects of the time - from the clothing, to foods, way of life, language (sort of, it's still too modern), politics of the time, war, disease, punishment, and death - while we go along for the adventure.

The first series was rather interesting and I kept watching but by Series 2, I was beginning to lose interest. Not only is the main actress (Balfe) poorly cast (she's pretty and pleasant, just not a very good actress - her crying scenes are evidence enough), but the series is full of too many sex scenes, a sick fixation on extended rape scenes and plots focused on rape incidents, and very unrealistic characters that just don't ring true after a while. Jaime (Sam Heughan) and the Scottish cast is probably the best cast for the series, Jaime is just too good to be human! He's barely 21 when we first meet him and while people, back then, lived a lot shorter lives so 21 was probably our version of 31 years of age today, he is still much too perfect and mature, kind and noble...well, he's a typical romance novel hunk come to life and - yes that could be good for those preferring a fantasy man (don't exist), I would prefer some version of realism.

And then there is Claire's immense power to always adapt, always win everyone to her cause, to end up in 18th c France and immediately connect with royalty and the King himself, as if that was such a regular occurence. Super unrealistic and laughable. But everyone is at Claire's feet, she's so clever and canny, so stunning she's lusted after by every man (!!), and she can do the work of five modern-day surgeons with her 1940's nursing knowledge, like, what?? The number of times I have rolled my eyes at this series!

Anyway, I've never been able to finish it, twice giving up by the 3rd series and often falling asleep trying to watch, when I'm generally an insomniac.

If the series' creators had kept to the initial tone and premise of the series, it could have ended up a highly-rated classic. As it is, it's no more than a fantasy romance, doing a complete disfavour to the cast and production, and making it a lame experience for those of us who know something about history and TV writing, and instead putting us to sleep with it.

It's just too bad or, as the French would say, quel dommage.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Charity Shop "Broadchurch"
6 September 2024
I fell for the marketing on TT and thought to give it a shot on Netflix, even though I don't particularly like Liev Schreiber or Nicole Kidman (on TV series). I also noticed Isabelle Adjani in the opening dance sequence, so had to check it out.

Anyway, it's not good. It's a ripoff of "Broadchurch," with a sloppy, charity shop version of Olivia Colman in their detective. Nobody likable, I don't know 3/4 of the cast and don't care to.

Also, since when does this website require 600 WORDS? I don't work for you, I just want to write s brief review and this is ridiculous.

I would not recommend wasting your time.
60 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Paper Girls (2022)
2/10
Super Inconsistent
27 November 2023
Very simply put: The acting is poor across the board, the writing is highly inconsistent, and by episode 4 - if you even make it that far - you'll be clock watching.

Based on a comic of the same name, which I understand is much better than this adaptation, the story involves four pre-teen girls time travelling to the future because of some "time war". The idea is a weird mix of "Stranger Things" mixed with a hint of "Back to the Future," except there are so many confused plot points and bad CGIs that if one has any sense of storytelling, it'll end up being frustrating and awfully dull.

It wasn't even picked up for a second season and having barely made it halfway through episode 4...I get why not.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Flat
23 October 2023
I realize the story is supposed to be about a female chemist in the 1950s, when all women counted for the in the United States were as secretaries, teachers, and wives and that Brie Larson is trying to "act" like a chemist with a scientific, logical mind...but the acting on her part is so FLAT and poorly done that she appears to behave like a robot instead of a strong, brilliant mind who can't relate to the sexist and discriminatory situation she finds herself in.

I have never been a fan of hers, but the premise of the series was interesting enough to tune in. However, despite some interesting turns, whenever Larson has an extended scene, which is often, I find myself dozing off!

For that reason, even having made it past episode 3, I wouldn't recommend the series.

Oh yea, and the dog narrates one of the episodes?! Very confused show.
69 out of 171 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Physical (2021–2023)
2/10
Jumped the Shark
23 September 2023
This series started out really well. It had quirky elements that made it highly watchable. Series 2 was a little bit less coherent, but still entertaining to a degree. When that final episode of the series hit, I honestly didn't care if another season was picked up.

Now watching series 3 and it's chaotic and not in a good, dramatic way, but in a "we don't know what we're doing here" way that makes me zone out while trying to finish an episode.

We've got random odd characters (Zoe Deschanel) dropping in, then dropping out, but not adding anything to the plot. And the annoying husband is the focus of the 3rd series, which we could totally do without,

At this point, I'm hoping the series will get cancelled because what are we watching anymore?
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
How Could They??
4 August 2023
I watched the original 2 "Anne" series as a teenager and fell in love with story and characters. Every so often, I'd go back and rewatch them and get just as much joy out of the first 2 series. But this third creation is unlike the first two in every possible way.

Everything about it feels off: the characters we have come to know (Anne, Gil, Diana) are no longer (despite the same actors in the role) and the MOST important character of all - Prince Edward Island! - has been cast aside in favour of...the island of Manhattan! They then threw in some ridiculously disingenuous extras (Jack Garrison, the head doctor) which mean nothing to real Anne fans.

Sadly, this film lacks charm, simplicity, warmth, and the humour so beloved in the first two series

I stayed up until 5 am last weekend to finish Anne of GG and Avonlea. This last film, I've tried to watch for 2 days, but can't bear to finish.

A total loss of what could have been quality time with Megan Follows (Anne) and the late and wonderful Jonathan Crombie (Gil Blythe)
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
If Only (2022)
1/10
Embarrassingly Bad
29 April 2023
Where to begin? Firstly, don't waste your time.

The premise sounded good but there are so many issues with this series. Bad acting, bad execution, horrible wigs, BAD ACTING, unlikable lead, bAd aCTiNg, unrealistic plots...endless issues.

I gave it more than a fair shot, but dear God. One of the first things to irritate me? The main character goes on a first date and gets a slight nosebleed that looks like she has chocolate stuck to her nostril, but THEN when she sees her date and he points out the nosebleed to her, while the blood is nowhere else on her face, there's suddenly enough on her blouse to look like she murdered someone, like?!!! I was so annoyed but tried to give it a chance but, no, ridiculous things like that kept happening.

Did I mention the BAD ACTING? Ugh.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hocus Pocus 2 (2022)
2/10
Meh
30 September 2022
I love the original film and still watch almost every Halloween. But this one is a shadow of the original and not as well written or fun. The best part is probably the stage show by the Sanderson Sisters and the ending, with the same.

Shockingly, the CGI is not well done despite the massive advances in technology. Since the original film. Note, for instance, the first scene in the forest with the modern teen girls when someone remembers to "turn on" the moon behind them in the long shot. Did no one catch that in post-production?

Sadly, this is not a film that I'll be adding to my Halloween must-watch list from now on.
88 out of 118 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Odyssey (1997)
3/10
Great Cast, Bad Production
27 August 2022
There are many well-known actors co-starring in this mini-series about the Greek mythology of Odysseus/The Odyssey, but background actors and the production is so bad, all one can do is laugh out of second-hand embarrassment. Take note of the "Monster of Poseidon" near Troy: Pure comedy.

My favourite bit is watching amateurish backgrounds "react" to scenes. Dear Lord, why?

Is this how things looked on television in the 1990s? I'm assumthisit has a higher rating here for nostalgia reasons only, otherwise what was everyone else watching? That's all I've got and all I wanted was to spend time watching something about mythological characters...
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Never Have I Ever (2020–2023)
2/10
Grow Up
17 August 2022
Main character is awful and super unlikable, and she doesn't change. How she has any friends is a real act of suspending disbelief. Poster child for narcissism: Someone who thinks the world revolves around them. The way she treats her mum and how she gets away with it time and again, especially in a Indian family? Sure, Jan.

Mindy Kayling continues to live her sad fantasies of having wh i t e men fight over her, like, STOP. What kind of twisted, insecure message are you sending young, impressionable females, especially those in minority communities? GTFU.

Borefest.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Aline (II) (2020)
1/10
Creepy!
2 July 2022
Why would Valérie Lemercier CGI her ADULT face on a child? Was this supposed to be a weird comedy role? Such a strange choice and surprised no one on her team said anything against it. Makes this film ridiculous.

Stopped watching after 10 minutes. Just...no.
19 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Love & Gelato (2022)
1/10
Awful
23 June 2022
Zero chemistry between the young leads, terrible lead actress, total snooze-fest, very forced. I couldn't get past the first 20 minutes.

An American in Italy is so cliché.
68 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Annette (2021)
1/10
Booooring
18 February 2022
I thought this film might be awful and I was right. It is a complete snooze-fest and too up itself. Never have liked a Leos Carax film, anyway, and here's another one.

Also, Adam Driver is really unattractive.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just Long wrote this? Shocker...
30 January 2022
Actually, not shocking that the ever-juvenile Justin Long & Co. Scripted this nonsensical rubbish. Every has-been noughties actor is in this film, clearly to embarrass themselves.

It's so bad, I can't imagine what anyone had to do to get this greenlit. Ew.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Euphoria (2019– )
1/10
So Bad
22 January 2022
This is considered "good' tv these days? Everyone raving about this on the socials and I thought I'll check it out. One episode in and my conclusion is the show should have been named "Losers," because what these "kids" are portraying as cool and edgy is actually Loserville material. Who likes this trash?
57 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Discovery of Witches (2018–2022)
9/10
One of the Best Series In This Genre
12 January 2022
I loved this story from the first episode of the series. I haven't read the books, but I was drawn into the tale of passion, desire, hatred born of centuries of fear and prejudice in the various creatures, who are not unlike their human counterparts.

I've now had the opportunity to watch the entirety of series 3, well in advance of most viewers, and I have some non-spoiler thoughts to share.

I felt that S1 was the strongest in the franchise, although S2 and travelling back in time to England in the 14th century was quite a wonderful adventure that I was loathe to return from in S3.

The finale series ends as we want it to end - mostly. But, S3 seemed rushed to resolve certain lose ends in a manner that stood out starkly, at least to me. I can't say which character(s), as I don't want to ruin it for others, but let's just say some final events had little built up and were tied up so rapidly, it was jarring. Not sure what happened there, compared to the first two series (aside from COVID, perhaps) but I was left wanting a bit more? Some scenes had the feel of "it's the finale series, so whatever, wham, bam, end of". That was disappointing.

Overall, however, the series is a very good one: The cast, acting, set design, costumes, and production value very worth one's time. In fact, the entirety of series is a pleasure re-watch, so if anyone feels the absence of the Clairmonts and their clan, starting (again) from where it all began is certainly a good way to go.

Overall, highly recommended.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Secret Smile (2005)
4/10
Not Realistic
14 February 2021
This show is 1.5 decades old but I just watched it and mostly for Tennant. The rest of the cast was good, and I especially like John Bowe (Miranda's father).

All that being said, the ending was daft and completely unrealistic. That, alone, ruined it all for me.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed