christopher-dallas-113-229541 Reviews

Love Is Blind: The Reunion (2022) Season 3, Episode 12

Wow. That was some low budget, tasteless, low class wreckage

[8/10 · 17 November 2022]

2 villains dodged a bullet.

1, 95% honest/good person was thrown under a bus just before the bus was ran over by a freight train full of evil clowns.

So horrible that the producers had to add a B-roll after the credits to offer the most insufficient concession.

I hope the person will recover fast and be approached by someone 100% deserving.

Episode 11 was the precursor and brutal.

Prior to watching the Episode 11 and the reunion, a co-worker and my daughter told me those were, "lit" and an epic sh#t show.

Other observations: Alexa's lips were really bizarre. I'm a regular guy so I don't know how to describe. Maybe Botox or the application of lipstick.

There was a funny cheap shot at a guy that didn't get selected. You'll know it when you see it. I hope that person watches their self on camera and learns to look from the outside in and make a course correction. Maybe the modern description is, "poser." Pretentious is pretty accurate.

I know that we, the audience, get manipulated. No need to hate on the cast. We also don't know right away what develops afterwords. Some people mend and some people tank.

Emily the Criminal (2022)

If you like Michael Mann

[7/10 · 4 October 2022]

The tone, pace, concise dialogue and cinematography is heavily influenced by Michael Mann.

Mann's signature still landscape settings are not copied; that's okay.

That's what will set John Patton Ford up for a rising director.

The story isn't trope or cliche.

It's sedate yet powerful.

Our heroine is strong and 3 dimensional.

Emily has been screwed over by life.

She continues to get screwed but turns the table.

But not in an over-the-top action flick way.

There's plausibility and simplicity.

Aubrey Plaza is flawless in her role; she's living the character.

I'll watch for her in other roles.

Emily did not go too far, just enough to succeed and fly under the radar.

I enjoyed watching this at night.

I've been to Los Angeles many times. The atmosphere is LA but not overtly so. Again, there is the subtlety.

Uncomplicated and very satisfying.

I give this 7.5 / 10 since 7 isn't good enough and 8 is reserved for a film that has significant impact.

8/10 is always questionable as early reviwers or shills go to high.

Prey (I) (2022)

Exceeded my expectaions

[8/10 · 6 August 2022]

Prey was really good and exceeded my expectations.

It's difficult to describe.

Prey stands on its own. It is also not a shallow/cliche movie. You'll see another element woven into the story.

I grew up in the 80's action movie time period. Even worked at a movie theater in 1987 and watched Predator dozens of times. I loved it.

35 years have gone by since and at 54, I have to look back on many of those movies thru the 1980's lens.

An allegory would be comparing a dollar adjusted for inflation. Predator was a 7/10 entertaining movie by 1980's standards. It would be a 5/10 now.

Movies like Predator, Commando, Rambo, Lethal Weapon, Conan, Die Hard would seem cheesy now and today would go directly to VOD.

I was excited that Prey came out on Hulu but would gladly have gone to the big screen.

The First King (2019)

Awesome quailty

[7/10 · 5 July 2019]

As others have mentioned, the cinematography/photography is impressive. The dates are debatable but the basic legend is consistent. Acting was superb. Now the honesty. As much as I love foreign films and non-mainstream, this was dull for me. I do not expect hollywood action garbage and do not watch those films. It may also be a matter of timing. Maybe I watched it at a time when I needed something fast paced instead. Good movie though.

A.I. Rising (2018)

Slow burn, contemplative

[7/10 · 2 March 2019]

In the opening sequence my first thoughts were, "this is derivative" and "a revisited trope." We've learned to tolerate much more for a sci-fi movie than other genres. It's extremely difficult to produce an original sci-fi film with good acting/delivery, story line and arc, proper amount of visualizations that do not distract. A balance must be carefully achieved. George Lucas pioneered the concept of "used future" where all the shiny blinkey things were grimy and functional. Not at the level of duct tape and JB Weld held together but presenting the film as character and story driven. Modern sci-fi is tech porn. George Lucas Vs. Michael Bay Another great example is Bladerunner. Ridley Scott gave us Los Angeles in the year 2019, near-future for the 1982 release date. It was a mashup of old and new. Everything was grimy but still amazing. And it is a masterpiece of film noire, in fact inventing the genre of tech noir. Scott also gave us Alien. Grimy but in a not too distant future. Alien was character and story driven. Strip A. I. Rising of a sterile Star Trek environment and you are left concentrating on the story. I watched it imagining reading it as a book. Hard to explain. It felt like a good debut film, that the writer/director/producer has promise in the next endeavor. I felt there was not a huge suspension of disbelief to overcome. Again, that's because the focus was not on technology but the story. Yes it could have been better with just a few minor tweaks that probably don't come easy and not without experience. In contrast to a Serbian born reviewer, I will give points for the origin. I grew up during the Soviet empire. I was stationed in Germany when the Soviet Union collapsed. I watched the East Germans flood in and witness the start of a new era. For people of my generation and older, we find any cinema coming from former Soviet bloc countries - as well as very rare releases from Iran or Afghanistan - to be welcome, anticipated and encouraged. On a related note, I would prefer to have watched the film subtitled - as I prefer for all the foreign TV and cinema I watch - and expertly translated. That would definitely add to the film. 7/10 can be a high number but it's relative. That is a good score for a sci-fi film. Anything below the magic 7 for any film and I have to dig deep to find out what caused low scores. Decent music score as well.

At First Light (I) (2018)

Light hearted, well made, enjoyable

[7/10 · 7 January 2019]

Very light-hearted romance and Sci-fi that skips the cliches. The filming, production and acting were minimalistic yet effective. There was a subtle depth to each of the characters. The entire film was subtle. It seemed to be very short for me but looking back, the length was just right. Hop in and just enjoy the leisurely ride and you might be surprised.

Bird Box (2018)

Disappointed. Bad story. Bad writing.

[2/10 · 19 December 2018]

I was very much looking forward to this. I really liked It Comes At Night (that's almost 8/10) and A Quiet Place was decent but nothing special (6/10). This is horrid. The story, writing and dialogue are juvenile. The characters were boilerplate, superficial and 2 dimensional. Sandra Bullock's acting was over the top, too dramatic. It's okay not to see very much of a monster. Sometimes less is more. But we were given pretty much nothing. Sandra Bullock is a capable actress. She seems to accept terrible roles.

Siberia (2018)

Quality and Betrayal

[6/10 · 21 July 2018]

Keanu Reeves broke thru his type cast with Bill & Ted and is now an actor to be taken seriously. It's refreshing to see an actor develop. Especially ones who are "older." I've really enjoyed the recent John Wick films. The style, slow burn pace and art is impressive. The story isn't new so it's style over substance without being superficial or throwing around sparkly things. For 97 minutes I was watching a film I expected to linger with me and add to my list of favorites or recommend to others. And then, it nose dived within the span of a heart beat. I despise Hollywood endings. Hollywood's own ineptness is what churns out one bad vacuous movie after another. Foreign film is so much more honest. I'm not saying that as a pretentious film snob. I was prepared and hopeful to give this a 7 or 8 (to be more accurate, 7.5/10). In the end, we were left with a story lacking redeeming qualities. Just 7 more minutes to make things right. As to others giving the film a 1/10 - because there isn't a zero - they have been betrayed and striking back. There is quite a lot of excellent elements and direction. The minimalism is a key factor. The filming was subtle although detailed. If you do watch, watch as a student of sorts, not as the audience and take from it what you will.

Sand Castle (2017)

Accurate, avoids cliché and worth watching

[7/10 · 22 April 2017]

The story was an accurate portrayal of the environment and the people in the conflict zones. It was based on the true events of the film's writer. Nicholas Hoult did a good job. I saw it as minimalist. He spared us the over dramatic self reflection/moral dilemma that is too common in writing or film. I thought throughout the movie that it sure looks like Iraq; it was filmed in Jordan. The areas I were in looked like images from the Mars Pathfinder. There were rocks, clay, sand and more rocks. During the winter, it was mostly orange. This is not a Hollywood retread or an action film. I'm glad that they had no flashbacks/flash forwards to home/U.S. Coming home and life after is a different story. The music score was subtle and the end title was really good. Similar to Brian Eno. Great to see another quality Netflix original.

Secret in Their Eyes (2015)

Please watch the Argentine/Spanish original

[4/10 · 9 February 2016]

The original, "El secreto de sus ojos" is a masterpiece of cinema and story. Not just the premise but you get to see the justice system of Argentina and Spain. It's pretty interesting since we are saturated with the American justice system.Very much unlike the US and similar to France (Engrenages is a great French police procedural TV series). People either cannot or will not watch foreign cinema or have difficulty with subtitles. I understand that it is a challenge in that your eyes are diverted from the screen, the cultures are unfamiliar or the intonation can be confusing. Cinema and literature is escapism. Step outside of the box. I'm hearing impaired and use subs for all TV programs. I acknowledge that it's easier for me. Hollywood ruins spectacular foreign films. If American audiences want to see less engaging movies, there are films for that. And that's fine. We call them "guilty pleasures" or "no brainers."

The Frame (2014)

Mesmerizing

[8/10 · 23 November 2014]

Mesmerizing and hypnotic.

The soundtrack is a crucial part of the film and tells part of the story, not in words but by eliciting emotion and strong but subtle empathy. The only way to achieve that level of intricacy is to do what the director did; write the soundtrack as the story was written and filmed.

I really liked Ink and was impressed what Winans did with a micro budget. There is a tie-in or signature from Ink and it may show up in later films.

I really hope Winans retains the style and not bound by a production company. As for the film; original, artistic, surreal and romantic. It's something that will leave its mark on you.

In its genre and as an art house film, I give this an 8. No films are on equal playing fields or genres.

I consider a 7 to be the magic number of "must see" but not necessarily award winning material.

An 8 is for movies that leave a lasting impression, not just for entertainment.

Where/how to watch it: You can purchase directly from the site for $8. This includes the soundtrack. They have various packages and you can donate as well. I would be glad to help support Winans future films.

$8 to own it including the soundtrack? It usually costs me $60 to see a film with my daughters when you add everything up.

Great movie.

Intruders (2014)

Excellent method from the X-files

[7/10 · 10 September 2014]

One of the successful methods with The X-files was Chris Carters' premise of, for every one question answered, 2 more are posed.

I found it intriguing, dark and mysterious. That's really difficult to accomplish now.

I suspect that a chunk of the negative reviews are from persons who want all of the answers up front.

I knew a guy that would finish a book in hours. I asked him how he could possibly do it. He said, "Simple. I just read the first and last paragraph of a book."

This is why we live in Idiocracy.

Crawl or Die (2014)

Micro budget. Highly intense. It's a slow burn.

[7/10 · 16 August 2014]

7/10 to get the ratings up a few points. Otherwise I would give it a high 6 to pass the threshold of "should see" / "worth watching."

You have to judge it for what it is and the constraints.

The plot is entirely incidental to the flow.

The Descent, Beneath, Buried, .REC, Alien, Cube, Dead Calm, Open Water, Das Boot, The Vanishing, this takes claustrophobia to a new level, or depth .

It's not reasonable to compare those movies to Crawl because of the constraints. hold Crawl to that level of quality.

Don't fast forward it because the value of the movie is in the extreme intensity and claustrophobia.

My anxiety level built up to the point at the 2/3 mark I had to take a break and a sedative. If I'm going to have a heart attack, I want it to be for something really enjoyable that involved several companions and wreck my marriage! Just kidding!

I'm thinking the whole time how incredibly fit the protagonist is and boy do I need get off the couch. What a motivator.

A couple of improvements - personally - I would have made: no special audio effects. Sound, yes but not effects. Sometimes, less is more. That's worth a point in itself.

There's some obvious/blatant copy/paste from other movies. But they are not important. Just let it go.

Lastly, I watched it at 2 in the morning by myself. Perfect recipe.

Enjoy the show. Disregard the very high and the very low reviews and you'll get a more accurate/objective recommendation.

The Upper Footage (UPPER) (2013)

Disappointing.

[2/10 · 3 May 2014]

"The Upper Footage"

It wasn't just bad, it was annoying.

Had it been made prior to "The Blair Witch Project" and just a short film made by a group of friends with a good camera, it would be OK.

I want to state all kinds of negative one-liners but that's not being objective and will get ignored. s in the Found Footage genre were was, "The Blair Witch Project." Quite a few of my co-workers thought that Blair Witch was real. That was due in part to the multimedia campaign elements such as the website.

The Spanish film, ".REC" was great. It was engaging from beginning to end. Not that a real budget necessarily matters but it had about $1.8 million and the money was widely spent.

I found V/H/S to be better than this and that movie received poor reviews. It was crudely filmed but then so was The Blair Witch project but it wasn't dishonest.

I was misled by the list of positive reviews by Internet critics on the Vimeo site as well as the user reviews.

I'll stop short of accusing the film makers of using their own people as shills. For all of the dishonesty, lack of creativity and lack of entertainment value, I'm giving this a 4.

Only because the male anti-hero actors were good. Not being sexist. The females were just one dimensional.

If "The Upper Footage" entertains you then great. I can't stand Ranch dressing, avocados or curry but don't criticize others who do.

If you enjoy found footage films and never watched ".REC" have a look at both the Spanish original and the American version with Dexter's sister, Jennifer Carpenter. The American remake did justice to the original.

If you watched this on Vimeo, the Joss Whedon film, "In Your Eyes" is a better choice for your first Vimeo rental. A nice romance, low key, great acting with characters you liked.

Roger Ebert was the last of the educated and credentialed, objective professional critics. The rest have zero credibility whose one-liner reviews are from a copy/paste cheat sheet.

The Veteran (2011)

CONTAINS SPOILERS: I give the audience and critics 1/10. This is an 8 movie.

[23 July 2011]

The movie's flaw was the antagonist formulaic Dr. Evil plan. For once, it would be OK to kill the "overlord" without having him explain the diabolical purpose.

I was impressed throughout the movie that the characters didn't use one-liner tough guy clichés.

Miller was matter-of-fact. He performed "the weary war veteran" as it is in real life. I'll qualify that by saying I did heavy combat in the Gulf War (1991) as a reconnaissance specialist and fought in 8 major battles (sorry about the narcissistic statement) I just want to say that I am qualified to make that statement.

Miller had to have been trained by a professional combat/SWAT team. If you spot someone "double tapping" the trigger, looking down the barrel (the right end) and actually reloading (firearms usually carry between 7 - 30 rounds, not 900).

I appreciate that the ending was "sad." I didn't like that he was taken out by a kid. The kid was not a worthy adversary, but that's a reality too. How stupid if I came back home from heavy battles and died by falling off a ladder or by a 12 year old wanna-be gang member with a stolen, cheap gun.

But that's real and you never hear of veterans talking about the irony. You also knew he would die from the very beginning. He had nothing in life to prevent him from making the sacrifice.

He didn't win the war, but he won the battle and ultimately saved lives.

You can say that he also payed for the collateral damage - the female tenet - that he couldn't save the boy from going down the path. And, to have ended the movie with him escaping would be disgusting Hollywood, cookie- cutter pulp.

This has the stamp of an indie film; it was low budget (I don't have the figure) but it meant it was not constrained by studios that pacify the masses.

The paste eating audience and band-wagon critics can throw out 8's for The Fast and Furious, Harry Potter, Star Wars 1-3, Toy Story, you get the picture. Some films are entertaining but they cannot be considered as cinema. They should be classified as theme park rides.

Hollywood movies are like roller-coasters; you're guided on a track, at the mercy of a controller and make you vomit.

Real cinema has disappeared long before paperback books.

I rate the audience and critics as 0/10