Change Your Image
DJLore22
Find me on Instagram: clerics_love_lore
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Northman (2022)
Pretentious
I really wanted to like this movie, but I could not get over the artificial presentation. It's trying too hard to be like Beowulf, and the result is neither enjoyable to watch nor remotely entertaining.
Like Beowulf, we have a script that is highly affected; unlike Beowulf, it is overly manufactured and comes across as too much.
The main hero is quite similar to Hamlet, which in itself is not necessarily a terrible thing--after all, most new stories are just retellings of old ones; however, this made the plot incredibly predictable. I saw the plot "twist" of his mother inspiring his father's betrayal and murder coming from a mile away...snooze. What I did not anticipate was the passionate kiss between mother and son after all was revealed. Oedipus Rex, much???
Fate plays a large part in the plot. Our vengeful hero could have killed his father's usurper right after killing his mother and half-brother, but oh no. He has to fight him at the base of a mountain near the mouth of hell (or whatever phrase was used for dramatic effect). He dies in that fight, which comes as no surprise, because it was foretold approximately 25 minutes into the movie.
What this movie lacks in cinematography and soundtrack, it attempts to make up for with gore and special effects. If you watch this movie, prepare to be wildly underwhelmed.
Five stars for Alexander Skarsgard's shirtlessness throughout.
Dog (2022)
Beautiful
I loved this movie so much that I bought it after seeing it once. I know, right? Who BUYS movies now? It is a cinematic treasure. Absolutely worth it.
The story begins with a veteran, unsure of how he fits back into civilian life. Working an average job, all Jackson Briggs desperately wants to do is get back into the fight--that's what he has been trained for and what he knows. However, the audience quickly learns that he has endured a traumatic injury, rendering him unfit to be a military contractor without the proper recommendations, one of which must be from a former commanding officer.
In order to obtain this recommendation from his captain, he is entrusted with what seems like a straightforward task: delivering a combat K9 to her handler's funeral for the ceremony and then returning her to another base, where she will be put down, having outlived her usefulness for the military due to her many PTSD triggers from multiple deployments. Jackson agrees, and he and Lulu set off on an Odyssey-like journey.
Along the way, they meet obstacles and make new friends, all while getting to know each other and bonding. Laughter is feathered in throughout, which keeps the movie entertaining and enjoyable.
A particularly moving part of the movie happens when Jackson stops off in L. A. so that Lulu can visit her brother K9. His handler--now a civilian also-- talks in depth to Jackson about rehabilitation for all veterans. He stresses the importance of talking to God, whatever that may mean for each individual. Not five minutes later in the movie, Jackson is having a full-blown conversation with Lulu.
In the end, Jackson keeps Lulu and rehabilitates her, but I think she also rehabilitates him.
Lulu is a mirror for Jackson--a broken reflection of himself. This story addresses the very real effects PTSD has on veterans and how they often do not have a good way of coping with it.
Fair warning: it is tearjerking in parts. When Lulu laid her head down on her previous master's boots, I lost it.
The cinematography is absolute perfection, and the soundtrack compliments the storyline. However, I was most impressed with Channing Tatum's performance. I have seen him act in many other movies, but I did not know he had this kind of gravitas in him. I was pleasantly surprised. It takes an amazing actor to carry the bulk of a movie's story without boring the audience, and Channing does so with his signature style and charm. Of course, he did have a little help from the well-trained Belgian Malinois, but Lulu obviously provided little dialogue.
For anyone who is a fan of war movies, this is one without the war. The price of freedom is not always exacted on just the battlefield.
My Zoe (2019)
But it's not your Zoe, is it?
I think this movie raises some interesting questions, worthy of a discussion. That being said, it provides few answers.
In the beginning of the film, we see some bonding between the mother Isabelle (Julie Delpy) and her daughter Zoe. However, as a viewer, one can already start to see that the mother is slightly unhinged. Her soon-to-be ex-husband James (Richard Armitage) picks up Zoe for an afternoon, and instead of concentrating on work, she spends the day obsessing over what they're doing together. At no point during this film does one get the impression that Zoe is less-than-safe with her father, but he seems to be constantly treated as a second-class citizen. Whatever happened between Isabelle and James is never fully addressed (something about how she felt after having a kid and how she felt he perceived her after that--seems like nothing a marriage counselor could not help them work through if they were BOTH stable), but she can't seem to let go of her bitterness long enough to quit copter-parenting and sniping her ex every chance she gets. This type of behavior does not endear her character to the audience. The "woe-is-me-I'm-a-single-mother-now" trope has been done to death, and this was not even a good portrayal of it.
I did not understand the point of her new boyfriend, who was portrayed by Brunette #49-dilly-2. He serves no real purpose, other than just being an extra in scenes with a woman who seems incapable of being alone with her own thoughts for five minutes.
Zoe's father James seems to gain all of the sympathy in the movie (hopefully this was done on purpose). I wish they would have allowed more lines and character development for his role, because Richard Armitage is truly a force of nature in front of the camera. He convinces the audience early on of his lingering love for Isabelle (unstable though she is), and his devotion to their daughter.
Halfway through this movie, Zoe dies tragically, though not entirely unexpectedly at that point. The father's grief is practically tangible, while the mother remains wooden, armed with a plan and a tissue sample of her late daughter. She heads off to Russia with no explanation, abandoning her ex when they should have been grieving together over their joint loss. She does not even tell/ask her ex about this crazy plan of hers, which definitely involves him (Zoe was half-his, remember?). In Russia, she approaches a scientist who is leading the field in cloning technology, begging him to help her. After much hem-hawing, he reluctantly agrees. Insanity.
I understand the woman has just experienced a tremendous loss and is at the end of her tether, but let's examine how crazy this is. First, the scientist could end up not only losing his livelihood (he is a husband and father also), but he could even face criminal charges if he was discovered to be party to unsanctioned human cloning. So, is she selfish? Without a doubt. Her loss is the most important and trumps all others. Second, as the scientist is attempting to dissuade her from pursuing cloning, he exhibits a picture which one can only imagine is a tragically deformed puppy. Would a good mother truly risk creating a short-lived experiment born knowing nothing but unimaginable pain and confusion? No, but this woman would. Third, many parents lose children; they have to live with the pain, emptiness and grief. They are not so overly-privileged that they can create an exact replica of the child they lost, which brings me to the biggest point of all: this clone is only identical to Zoe physically. She is not the same little girl; she will have her own personality and quirks. So, going to all of this absurd expense, effort and time with all the possible collateral damage and even danger, all to get a child that looks like Zoe, but is not Zoe? Worth it? No, yet this woman does it.
At the end of the movie, time has passed since Zoe 2.0's birth, and Isabelle introduces her to James, who surprisingly seems amazed/happy to meet her (this is probably the most unbelievable part of the entire film, which is saying something). A grieving father who had neither consented nor had comprehensive knowledge about his ex-wife's deranged scheme...would act happy? I feel like the most realistic response would be horror, a renewal of grief, perhaps even anger.
One last note: how would a child feel when they discover the only reason for their existence is to be an exact replacement of their mother's firstborn? Talk about causing a child some serious psychological problems. Oh, the therapy bills would cause one to drown in debt, wouldn't they?
After watching this movie, I wish Isabelle would have never had a kid at all and saved me an hour and a half of my life. Six stars for Richard Armitage solely.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Atrocious
I watched the extended cut and was thoroughly disappointed, so I can only imagine what my utter unhappiness would be with the theatrical edition.
I'm giving this title five stars out of ten solely for Ben Affleck's amazing rendition of Batman. He truly does the character justice and is exactly what I picture for a hardened anti-hero: grizzled, jaded and distrusting. I appreciated that he was cast as an aging playboy, which I think suits Batman's character very well. Jeremy Irons as Alfred was also stellar. He had the best lines in the entire movie and had very good banter with Affleck.
The reason I watched this movie is because I had just watched Man of Steel, and I loved it so much that I was eagerly looking forward to a reprisal of Cavill's Superman. They destroyed Superman in this film, to the point where I found him unrecognizable. Eighteen months since his victory over General Zod, he has been reduced to little more than Lois Lane's big, dumb, lovesick puppy. It's upsetting to watch. He is filled with self-doubt throughout the film; this isn't Superman--not my Superman. Superman knows who he is; he always does right. He always stands tall. Yet, they gave him an existential crisis and sent him off wandering in the mountainous wilderness, leaving a bombing site half-way through rescuing victims. Even Henry Cavill didn't look convinced about this while he was schlepping uphill in the falling snow. His relationship with Lois Lane is absolutely uninspiring, yet it seems to define him for the course of this film. She constantly (it feels like every five minutes) is inserting herself into dangerous situations where she needs to be rescued, and of course, Superman obliges, as if he has nothing better to do than follow her around. I mean, it's not like the world has anything more important going on, right?
Lois Lane should be renamed Lois Liability. She drags him down throughout the movie. She "loves" him but cannot be bothered to stay out of harm's way for more than ten seconds at a time, consistently distracting him from his greater purpose. The woman needs more saving than a Microsoft word document written on battery power. At one point, she even takes him away from an epic battle because she almost drowns trying to retrieve a weapon she discarded IN THE FIRST PLACE. Lady, just stay home. After saving her from drowning, Superman still has to retrieve the spear on his own, and by the way, did I mention it's Kryptonite? Thanks for the help, dearest. At the end of the movie, at what should be its saddest point, she can't even muster up a singular tear. She sobs a little, like someone who just watched the last episode of their favorite TV show. Ridiculous. And we're expected to believe that Superman wants to marry this woman?
Lex Luthor, as portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, did not convey criminal mastermind vibes at all. He incoherently blabs and blathers his way through what I can only surmise is supposed to be impressive psycho-babble. The only thing I was impressed with was the fact that he wasn't drooling on himself. More like Lacks Luster. Although, my favorite part of the entire movie was when he pushed Lois off the building. I appreciate irony. If he had succeeded in killing Lois, he would have actually been doing Superman a massive favor.
A couple more items to be addressed: 1) Superman doesn't call his mother by her first name--it's really weird. 2) Superman wouldn't trust anyone else to save his mother, let alone the guy that almost intentionally murdered him sixty seconds earlier.
This entire movie is based on the premise that Batman holds Superman personally responsible for the destruction of Metropolis that took place in Man of Steel. Batman? Oh, you mean the guy that is the original anti-hero? The one above all others who should understand that sometimes innocents die alongside the guilty and that some victories are hard-won? What was the alternative to Superman defeating Zod? Should he have let him overtake the planet and wipe out mankind entirely? The plot makes no sense; it was solely written as a money-grab attempt in response to the MCU.
They ended this travesty exactly the way I would have expected: by murdering the only reason I wanted to watch it in the first place. But, will they let him rest in peace? Heavens no, they've dug him up for Justice League. I'm giving that movie a hard pass. As far as I'm concerned, Man of Steel was the only Superman movie made in recent years.
Man of Steel (2013)
Spell-Binding
I held off watching this movie for almost a decade, in defiance of the insane MCU culture and the fact that I felt I was sure to be disappointed. However, I should have never waited this long.
Aside from the blatant disregard for the theory of relativity in dealing with space travel (which is why I gave it 9 stars out of 10), this is by far the most exquisite Superman portrayal ever made.
Superman has always been the rarest of superheroes in that he overcomes his "heroic problem"--his inner conflict--with a singular decision: to always do right and protect the Earth. He surpasses other superheroes in this regard because it is not an ongoing conflict; he resolves it everlastingly in one checkmate move. This film captures that epic choice with clarity and precision.
Henry Cavill does more than shine--he glistens--in this role that was his from birth. Watching this movie, you feel with him all of the pain, sacrifice and triumph of Superman's story. I have never been so moved by a superhero.
I have heard people say that Superman is "too good" and that they prefer dynamic superheroes who walk a fine line between good and bad. However, I find that Superman is refreshingly absolute in a world enshrouded by various shades of grey.
This film does his character justice, and I encourage everyone who has the opportunity to watch it.