brandythefox Reviews

The Bubble (2022)

Unbearably bad, lazy attempt at comedy

[1/10 · 24 November 2023]

Stick a bunch of actors known to have done comedy. Have them play characters that are unbelievably dense. Make meta comments at the movie industry ad nauseam. And write jokes that are simply unfunny.

This one felt like an algorithm put the storyline together. The lifeless script felt like an endless catalogue of cliches and stereotypes of celebrity culture and it never improves or rises above it. This is hollywood / mass media navel gazing that continues forever. How many times can the average viewer laugh at, what is essentially, 1 joke done over and over again?

Apatow delivers one way, way below his usual standard. Avoid.

Come Play (2020)

Worth a go.

[6/10 · 20 November 2022]

A little too many jump scares but the film otherwise has a some depth. There are some cliches and over-used devices, but there's a nice little message about loneliness in the digital age.

There is definitely some resemblance to the Babadook. That movie has a book at the heart of the story and there's one here and both films have layers to them, so the comparison's merited. Like the Babadook, the story revolves around a family that's in distress. The modern dilemnas that many families have to deal with is always a rich canvas on which you can build a horror story - instant empathy, finding an audience and giving you a place for evil to inhabit.

Worth a go!

We Summon the Darkness (2019)

Surprisingly good

[8/10 · 20 June 2020]

I went in expecting a trite teen slasher flick but it was surprisingly clever and well made. The first 20 min or so was a little slow and I wasn't sure if I was watching some pointless ditty, and then the menace ramped up (no spoilers) and it kept going. The cast was good but kudos particularly to Daddario. Reminded me of a scary Faruza Balk. Well worth your time.

Mark of the Devil (2020)

Confused piece of garbage that proves not everyone can do horror

[1/10 · 30 March 2020]

You had gore. You had special effects. You had earnest acting. You even had a little twist. But the mix didn't gel because it was so cynical about the tropes they thought they were subverting. In today's market where there are plenty of good horror movies, this weak and tired Hellblazer-imitation might have been mildly interesting 20 years ago but is totally missable today

Lord of War (2005)

Wow, surprisingly good

[8/10 · 27 December 2018]

So first we have Nicholas Cage, who hasn't shown much judiciousness in picking scripts and overacts regularly. Then we have Niccol, who's got an essay writer's penchant for making workable film premises a real chore. Somehow, both of them dialed back their tendencies, and nailed it.

Let's start with Cage. I kept expecting him to break out into some over-the-top emoting, or overplay cool (so that it was uncool), but if you are looking for evidence that the man can act, this is exhibit A. As Orlov (guess that's a nod to Nosferatu), he makes an utterly believable sophist who can compartmentalise good and evil. Everything with him is a little caricaturish, but the character he conveys has enough cracks in the facade to make it relatable.

Then there's Niccol. I was surprised to see his name on it. If you've ever watched Gattaca or the Truman show, his movies have h"igh ground" content but ate often stilted and poorly delivered coming over as set pieces. This one though, has enough grit and grime, and enough dimension to lift it out of film school.

Many will react to the social message of the film and I guess that was the point, but looking at it as a film, it is good.

It compares with War Dogs (2016) and War Dogs is much better made but this film does a lot more.

Go watch it. Remind yourself that Nic Cage can act.

Hereditary (2018)

Well crafted - but am divided on the ending

[8/10 · 26 December 2018]

This film is curiously what everybody who's posted reviews here say it is. It is both stunningly good and disappointing. The last 20 minutes are where it breaks down into either a masterpiece or a cheap parlor trick. Really can't tell which one it is but guess you need to watch it again a few times to be sure.

Toni Colette is a legend and this film will continue to cement her legacy as one of the best actresses out there. Shapiro and Wolff arr revelations. Byrne is just Byrne (been the same character for the last 20 years) but it's a decent effort.

Well worth catching

Three Seconds (2017)

A Russian "Hoosiers"

[8/10 · 26 December 2018]

Read enough around the events of the 1972 Olympics gold medal basketball game and one thing is clear: this isn't a documentary, it's a sports fable. And what good one too.

If you've watched Hoosiers or Rudy, and aren't particularly political, you'll see that this film is built on the same formula and has the same mojo going for it. Grab us with human interest stories, get us to care and root for them, and make the sport the canvas for the drama.

Take what you see with a pinch of salt - the events were so long ago and yet remain debated to this day. Don't come to this film looking for the facts, come to it for the fun of a well told story.

The Hateful Eight (2015)

Fine work

[6/10 · 26 December 2018]

It's not hard to see shades of Reservoir Dogs in this one, and of course Django Unchained, but what the Hateful Eight does well is to tell a fine whodunit in a tightly confined backdrop. Same story could've been told in a totally different backdrop and it would've been easier to pull off but, hey, worth the watch.

Silence (I) (2016)

Scorsese's ode to his faith

[7/10 · 26 December 2018]

Far superior to his belly flop Kundun (& less sanctimonius), Silence is a confession by Scorsese that despite working in the trenches of secular hollywood, Scorsese will one day die clutching a tiny crucifix in his palm. A must watch film which will be misunderstood by liberals and misused by conservatives, this is quite possibly Scorsese at his least pretentious.

How does it stack up against his other work? Whilst the Last Temptation was a shallow comic book adaptation of a great novel, this is a more mature rendering of the burden of faith. Is it as good as Goodfellas (still his best) - nope, but it is better than the over processed Casino, or the dead-because-it-should've-been-a-documentary Gangs of New York (which was clunky and sloppy).

Can't say enough about the cast. Excellent work that they should all be looking back with pride on for years to come.

Over the Hedge (2006)

Excellent character driven story!

[9/10 · 6 June 2006]

I enjoyed it! By now, some of us are pretty jaded when it comes to CG movies. Over the Hedge ought to make you think twice.

The digital rendering of facial expressions have come a long way since the early days and Over the Hedge gets it right by giving us subtlety instead of fireworks. This movie features some of the most expressive and well-"acted" characters I've seen in a while.

All the actors used their voices to great effect showing again that a where all the characters are CG, the vocal acting skills are all-important. A special shout out has to go to Steve Carell whose Hammy is a wonderful gas and also to Bruce Willis who (drained of the needless machismo he usually plays his roles with) gives us a wonderfully charismatic RJ the Racoon.

A superb family film. Definitely worth collecting on DVD.

Ice Age: The Meltdown (2006)

A Lukewarm Outing

[4/10 · 5 June 2006]

What they got right in the first movie, they messed up in this second one.

In the first movie, the story was thin but it was a good backdrop for the characters who had a real chemistry going. The humor came out of a strange, almost-New York-ish mix, of cynicism and warmth. Characters making fun of each other but genuinely getting to look each other as the plot developed. In this installment, the story's still thin but the humor's pretty much gone. They really could have spent more time figuring out the jokes and using each of the characters better.

The first one is worth collecting on DVD. This one, ain't worth it.

In Good Company (2004)

Decent script and good acting - What's not to like? *SPOILER*

[7/10 · 2 May 2006]

*SPOILER* below This movie is deceptively simple. The writing is plain and spare, but effective. The topics it tackles seem ordinary. Even the marketing seemed to misunderstand it, and I would never have guessed, from the trailers and ads that it would be anything more than formulaic tripe.

But the truth of the matter is, this is a good movie. The characters are clearly crafted from real personalities. Dennis Quaid was good, and very rarely strayed beyond the core of his character - a father and an old man dealing with changes in life. Topher Grace was excellent, a young man so hoodwinked by his own success his own doubts are starting to overwhelm him. Scarlett Johansson under-acts, as she usually does, but this time, the script provides her with enough material to get by.

The only somewhat fomulaic bit about the story that is the somewhat happy ending Quaid's character receives.

Weitz is talented and certainly needs to be given more movies to make.

Transamerica (2005)

Felicity Huffman deserved to win

[7/10 · 16 April 2006]

People, Felicity Huffman was robbed at the Oscars. Yes, Reese Witherspoon did a good job with Walk the Line but Huffman's performance blew me away.

Think about it. A woman pretending to be a man who pretends to be a woman. This isn't "acting" in the pretending sense. Huffman really became her role and nicely brought out a lot of nuances and parts to her character that really made me think about transsexuals in a different light. This is a role that is worthy of reward and another reason NOT to set any store by the Oscars.

My favorite moment is when her character explains "diuretic" to the son, something about it makes me laugh every time I think about it!

Inside Man (2006)

Spike Lee tones down the rhetoric and comes away a winner

[6/10 · 16 April 2006]

I've always thought Spike Lee's movies were heavy-handed because he always seems as though he's trying to pack political sentiment into his narratives. Not this time. Thankfully, the story in Inside Man is a plain, simple and neatly executed heist film.

Yes, there are some political overtones but when the story is rolling, it's that much easier to buy the political side of it. This is the best Spike Lee joint in a while.

The jury's still out on Clive Owen - can't make out if he's a good actor or not. Jodie Foster was under-utilized. Denzel was irritatingly over-playing everything in sight (why did they give him an Oscar?). I would've picked Jamie Foxx over him for this role ANY day. Chris Plummer is a player.

Nice twist at the end but won't spoil it for you. Go watch it.

Exorcist: The Beginning (2004)

OK directing, bad script as opposed to OK script bad directing (mild spoiler)

[3/10 · 9 March 2006]

I've seen both films: this one and Paul Schraeder's first attempt - you can look for my comments on Dominion under that title.

Renny Harlin won't blow you away here with clever directing, original thinking, command of atmospherics, good use of cast. Oh no, he'll have none of that in this film. Instead, he'll do a passable job, make a film which you can sit through and finish your popcorn.

They hired him to replace Paul Schraeder. Now Schraeder's film lacked directorial ability but the script was at least half-way decent. So when the studio decided to hire Harlin, why did they junk that script in favor of this one? The script is downright juvenile, as though it were written by a bunch of spotty faced teenagers thinking: "hey yeah, let's do that because everybody thinks it's cool". Seriously, aside from the starting premise (which really came from Schraeder's script), this film has absolutely not a shred of originality.

I can understand what the studio thought would make a more sell-able film. The change of female lead is nice - she has a lot more physical appeal. Oh, and it never hurts for the studio to toss in something offensive to the catholic church. But frankly, there's nothing in this film that makes it re-watchable.

Maybe that's the real curse of the Exorcist. The first film was so good, it's not enough for the rest of the franchise to be so-so.

Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist (2005)

OK Script bad directing, as opposed to bad script and OK directing

[3/10 · 9 March 2006]

I've watched both prequels: Renny Harlin's The Beginning and this one. Frankly, I sympathise with the studio here. Schraeder's prequel had a fairly intelligent script but awful directing whilst Harlin's had a brain dead script and fair directing. What does a multi-million dollar studio do? Bust its money on both lousy films.

I think one reason to watch both films (other than a severe need to empty your guts) is this - it gives you an insight into how important the script and direction is.

Schraeder's script has got a nice sub-text. But it needed a keen director to get a better performance out of the cast. Gabriel Mann's Father Francis as about an ineffective performance I've seen, Clara Bellar is under-used, even the excellent Stellan Skarsgard seems confused, muted and not sure as if he belongs in this movie.

Worst of all, the horror's not really scary at all. Maybe it's us being jaded and all after years of shock horror and cheap tricks by other films but this one has nothing approaching a scary scene. There is simply not enough attention to atmosphere and under-utilisation of film design.

At least Harlin's version is the usual drivel you expect a B grade horror film to be. This one belongs in the can.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

George, you can't make a movie with a mouse!! (spoiler)

[2/10 · 9 March 2006]

This is an example of how technology can render actors impotent, mislead a director, bury the story-making process and basically result in a film that looks like a video game.

I'm sure you've heard endless comparisons with the original trilogy, episodes 4, 5 and 6. You know what those films had going for them that this one doesn't have? Focus on the story.

This isn't a film, it's an advertisement for Lucasfilm's digital effects prowess.

Apart from the over-digitalization of anything and everything, let's look at the story. We know Anakin needs to get to the Jedi and become apprenticed. Really, all the good stuff happens NOT when he's a kid, but when he's older. They could've done Phantom Menace in a half-hour and taken Attack of the Clones for the next one and a half, and set us up for Episode 3 earlier.

But no, Lucas wants to show us how clever his digital effects are. So he puts us through a pointless racing sequence, a gratuitous land battle that doesn't add anything to the grand scheme of the saga, and a space battle of no consequence.

George, you can't make a movie by moving your mouse cursor excitedly over your graphics program, OK?

Goodfellas (1990)

Best film Scorsese's made yet and probably ever will

[9/10 · 9 March 2006]

I come back to watching this film every few years and each time I watch it, it gets better and better. This was Martin Scorsese at his best.

You can debate all you want about his early films, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Mean Streets... they don't hold up to this one. It's as if Scorsese's got everything rolling on this one - seamless editing transitions, intelligent use of soundtrack, clever camera work, sharp script, nuanced acting ... this film had everything he had to give.

In many ways, it makes me kinda sad to see how the quality of so many of Scorsese's films have tanked since. Oh, the critics will love the movie he churns out every now and then but really they usually stink.

(I mean, films like Kundun - big yawner, Gangs of New York - a documentary disguised as a fiction film, Age of Innocence - enervating drama of manners) Casino is probably the only exception - it's a decent film.

It's frightening how a director can slide downhill so fast.

So, enjoy this film if you can. Rent it. Buy it. Watch it. Re-watch it. You'll not see a better Scorsese film.

A Love Song for Bobby Long (2004)

Awfully, Awfully Boring and Pretentious (mild spoiler)

[1/10 · 9 March 2006]

This movie is an incredibly self-indulgent character piece that assumes that the mere impression of a story is as good as an actual story. It was utterly painful to watch and had I not been suckered in to buy the DVD because of John Travolta and the positive buzz, I would not have finished watching it.

This film lacks anything resembling an interesting premise and seems to rely on weighty (and frankly, heavy-handed) characterization. There is one altercation scene between Purslane and Bobby Long in which a TV is destroyed that, when played out, is incredibly flaccid and ill-timed.

I found myself caring less and less about the characters as I watched it. It was probably very fun, film-school-wise, to make it. But it is just awfully boring to watch. A indulgent and pretentious film school project you should not waste money on.