Change Your Image
rohitian
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Puppy Love (2023)
Watchable
A contrivance, but really lovely. Both leads leaned in to their characters' idiosyncrasies, and the story took its time. It's what you want it to be, has an indie feel, and a really great pace. I laughed pretty hard a couple times. If you like rom coms or dogs or just need an escape, I recommend it. (It's making me write more...). Well, I suppose I appreciated the fact that the characters were believable, and the story dealt with relatable issues, like depression, and anxiety and how difficult it can be to step out of your comfort zone or make friends when you're an adult. I hope the folks involved get more work when the SAG AGTRA strike is resolved. Ok, I've written enough.
JLA Adventures: Trapped in Time (2014)
It's pronounced "chee", not "key"
The voice actors were talented -- especially veterans like Dante Basco (Rufio/Zuko) and Diedrich Bader (Drew Carey Show). However, the animation was grainy and uneven. The direction was lazy here. The starkest example being the mispronunciation of the word, qi. Maybe don't direct others to pronounce a word, if you don't know what the word means. All you had to do was consult the writers (or a dictionary), before going into the sound studio. My one criticism of the writing might be that the script did not really commit to a tone. It was sarcastic with Robin, and childish with the future heroes, and dark with the Time Trapper. As a result, the dialogue often felt forced. Always fun to watch these characters, even in orchestrated productions -- it would have been nice if the makers knew their stuff better.
The Little Things (2021)
What the f%*{ did I just watch?
Spoilers: At the end of Panic Room (oddly another Jared Leto film), we find Forest Whitaker (the sympathetic villain) caught by the police. And as he raises his hands in the air, we see the found wealth drop from his hands and fly into the void. It sits poorly with viewers that might root for certain comeuppance for truly bad guys and possibly some forgiveness for good deeds. I suppose he didn't die, but in the end, the black thief is going back to jail, destined to serve a longer sentence than the crime justifies because of his prior record. Not even the magic of movies could rescue the story from some of the social tragedies of our time.
Then there was this movie. It also had notable acting and thoughtful camera angles - nothing on the level of Fincher's tremendous camera storytelling found in Panic Room. Here, the viewer is taken on a journey of possible redemption for a man dedicated to serving his community, who lost his personal life because of this dedication. Denzel's old detective sees himself in Rami Malek's young hotshot detective; and the two begin an unlikely friendship as they thwart procedure in order to solve the case and possibly bury past ghosts. They do not solve the case and instead bury a suspect that might not have done it. This was Panic Room all over again. No one got what he deserved: not the killer, not the detectives, not the parents of the missing girl. And similarly, this film only reinforced a negative stereotype found in today's reality: #ACAB .
Panic Room is a much more redeemable and enjoyable movie, but I was reminded of it tonight when in the end, we were again left with a dead Jared Leto and a big blank "meh!" in place of where a moral of the story belonged.
Frozen II (2019)
"What do you need?"
This movie got an extra star for simply being filled with really great messages for young people (future women AND men). Also, it was super entertaining. ("Their parents are dead!") The music might be better than the first, even if not as catchy. My sister said: "I'm going to buy it when it's out and just keep showing it to (her daughter) over and over". My 9yo niece loved it too. So, something for everyone.
Riverdale: Chapter Six: Faster, Pussycats! Kill! Kill! (2017)
Hmm... Implausible
SPOILERS - Six episodes in and the writers already jumped the shark. The viewers would believe the implausible requirement that a 16-year old kid must execute a contract as a corporate officer in order to grant authority for the corporation to do business. Of course, even the laziest show consultant would know that a minor does not have the legal capacity to grant such authority. Even if Veronica was entitled to such right, that right would have to be held by a conservator or guardian until she reached the age of majority. So, not so scandalous that her mother would sign the contract, considering she would likely be among those considered to oversee her daughter's estate until she reached the age of majority. So ridiculous...
Inhumans (2017)
Incongruent, Intolerable
Spoilers, and you're so welcome. This show is remarkably bad, considering it bears the Marvel name, which has grown so far beyond Eric Bana's rendition of a Beautiful Mind.
Boy, the 3 rating is really only because I'm hoping a Whedon steps in and fixes this mess. Swan and Mount might be a little too talented for this cast -- take from that what you will. How Iwan Rheon became the 1st season's Napoleonic villain is confounding. He is awful. His face is awful. His expressionlessness is awful. His affect is awful. He is terrible at being terrible.
We can talk about how uninspired the effects and design are, but you merely need see ALL of the hair in the first episode.
We can discuss the confounding actions of the humans in this story: - Ex: I'm a cheap rendition of Felicity Smoak (don't even pretend that's not what you're doing Ellen Woglom) and I immediately want to be friends and break laws for you. - Ex2: My surfing buddies and I just saved a half-centaur from drowning about an hour ago, and now we're willing to die for his cause, which is what again? Save some mute to get back to the moon? - Ex3: Some weird, bleeding, older guy (by 15 years) with a messed up face and serious head trauma just walked into my illegal drug plant spouting nonsense. I'd like to have sex with him.
In the end what's most stark (pun very much intended) about the first 4 episodes is this: the creators, writers, actors, production staff clearly do not have affection for the source material. What you see on screen as a result is a loveless rendering, told solely with the aim of riding the coattails of a brand name to the bank. Vote with your dollars, and opt for something else on TV.
Seeking a Friend for the End of the World (2012)
Lovely! Heartcrushing as it is Earthcrushing.
Boy, do I love this movie. Nevermind the likelihood of certain scenarios happening the way that they did. This story simply seeks to answer the classic question: how would you spend your time if you knew you were about to die? I think the considerations thrown out by the writer are worthy. We'd sleep, because we still need to sleep, while we're waiting it out. We'd find the ones we love and tell them. We'd likely stop working. We'd probably loot, or worse. We'd indulge, but even that can grow tiresome. In the end, however, we'd hope to find an ounce of beauty in this world and enjoy it with a person that understands us, that embraces us, that complements.
Fans of Audrey Hepburn should be drawn to Knightley's youthful quirk and stealthy charm. She took the source material and created a character with depth through several moments of joy and defeat.
Carell does more with a silent glance than most of his contemporaries could with the most poetic script. Kudos to the direction for allowing him his moments, wherein the viewer is permitted to identify with his struggles, almost projecting their own back story onto his.
At its core, this film is about human wants/needs. The back stories and odyssey of encounters with random characters are irrelevant to propel these characters forward -- they merely create scenarios. Carell says this best to his estranged father (Sheen), when he suggests their differences and mistakes no longer matter, because they are all now in the same place.
A rich work of philosophy that warms the heart as much as it will torture the mind, once you accept the truth: this is the very scenario we all find ourselves in, regardless of whether our impending demise comes in the form of an end in three weeks until an asteroid hits or the likely, but more ambiguous, deaths. Toward the end of the movie, the promise of three weeks is abruptly revised to two, on the eve of impact -- only further evincing how the scenario is mere allegory for the uncertainty of our own ends -- and Carell wisely says: It would never have been enough time.
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
What the hell did I just watch?
Fun? Check
Lots of pretty shots? Sure
Comprehensible storyline? Well...
Understandable character motivations? Um...
Olsen Twins' more talented sister playing a twin? Well, yes, actually. I guess, but---
Too many characters? Actually not really. They've done a good job of setting it up....
A completely different plot from the 1st Avengers? No... I might have even seen some Chitari....
But this one has robots designed by Tony Stark? Yep
And this one has AI gone amok? It does...
And this is basically like Terminator? No. It's more straightforward what the machines in Terminator want and why they want it....
Is Natalie Portman too expensive to make cameos in these movies? It seems that way...
Bechtdel Test? Hahahahaha!!!
What was the most charming part? Surprisingly, Hawkeye. Totally charming... Natasha was also.
What was the most confusing part? What the hell was the pink guy played by Paul Bettany? That seemed important, but what the hell was that all about and how did they figure it out in a matter of hours And what about the whole: I really hate TonyStark motivation for Ultron? That didn't seem to be his undoing? In fact, it seems like they forgot about that idiosyncrasy midway through the movie.... And why isn't Bruce Banner a better voice of reason around Stark? Seems like he should be. And why didn't Ultron just shut down the global network? Did they really explain that? And why did this turn into a Bond movie halfway through? Seriously... I'll destroy the world with a meteor? And why wasn't the infinity stone more powerful here? In GotG, that stone pretty much destroyed a planet if it touched the surface...
Would you watch it again? I might have to just to try and figure out what the hell was going on....
If you get the chance, watch the honest trailer: http://youtu.be/GeDJAKvcZ9o
Blindspot (2015)
Vacancies Abound in the Protagonist's Past, as well as the Script's Substance
***Absolutely contains spoilers, but I hope it will help you from spoiling your evening***
"One thing's for certain," says the extremely cheesy Sullivan Stapleton, a questionable choice for the series' leading man, whose Milo-Rambaldi-esque necessity to the plot is certain to reveal itself through agonizingly and unnecessarily slow seasons of pseudo revelations aimed to win over his skepticism, a job that should already have been achieved by a massive back tattoo, "someone is playing a game, and they've only just begun."
And with that wholly empty declaration that would have made apparent acting coach, Steven Seagal, proud, NBC declares it is uninterested in quality and depth in its writing. It has no care to indulge in the grit of a narrative, where a capable woman of great skill and intellect was somehow overpowered by her circumstances, deprived of her past, violated, all for much more important, darker ends. It merely seeks to entertain you in the same way Flash Forward, or Revolution have sought in the past. The formula is simple: there is a great secret, with possibly global consequences, and the creators are going to string this out for as long as possible. In their journey to understand the answers, our heroes will likely solve smaller puzzles or help others along the way -- all the while learning more about each other, likely, nauseatingly finding a spark or fulfillment in their pairing.
Beyond the vapid dialogue, what is most irritating is the immensely clean set. Why do the networks insist that our government agencies have such clean offices, high-tech gadgets, diverse work staff? Why would our government have some sort of person-sized laser-scanning device on a lazy susan? Just in case someone covered in tattoos is found in Times Square and needed to be scanned? Make sure to scan her in a substantially dark room -- that would help with the photos, while ensuring a network-standard of modesty. At one point, I felt as if I was watching late episodes of 24. NBC takes pride in that comparison, where they aught not. 24 was an implausible, formulaic series (often derivative of itself) -- only slightly salvaged in the moments it offered Sutherland. Like Sutherland, series focal point, Jaimie Alexander is clearly capable, possibly overqualified, for this role. Her internal struggles -- coping with the challenges of learning everything about your life as a grown adult -- are interesting. Even there, however, the stereotypical network direction leans heavily on the draw of Alexander's loveliness rather than her suffering. It does Alexander's character no favors that the writers have chosen to surround her with constantly incapable boobs, who just happen to run national security. And even there, the writers don't intend to present these side characters as idiots, as counterpoint to highlight the hero's struggles. Rather, their ineptitude is merely the vehicle by which these writers can elongate the process of telling their secrets.
The final step in the formula for this type of conspiratorial pilot is to provide a "mind-blowing" revelation at the end -- it is an offering to the audience, as if to suggest they will not drag this thing out, that all details are key to this story. But we've already seen this series before. We already knew -- despite all characters scratching their heads as to who could possibly have done this to her -- that she did it to herself. Nevertheless, the final scene shows our hero complicit with the presumed villain/terrorist (whom we know is going to be more complicated than that -- see: Season 2 of Lost) in erasing her memory. The implication is that she tattooed herself with a roadmap to her intended ends. The series hopes you'll constantly ask yourself whether she is "good" or "bad," as if those are the only choices. NBC hopes you won't deny that the roadmap saved lives: "she could be the most important resource we've ever had."
NBC doesn't care about telling a good story. NBC just wants to distract you with pretty sets, eyes and skin. It's a shame -- like most stories told on TV, it could be an interesting adventure, if network executives weren't so concerned with stretching to 5 seasons in order to gain secondary revenue through syndication sales.
Watch it or not, but don't fool yourself that this is something new or well-told.
Selfie (2014)
My Fair Selfie -- Why the miniseries needs to return: Spoiler (of sorts)
I was curious about Selfie when I saw the teaser. Hadn't we seen this before? An unrefined Eliza Doolie seeks out the help of a dull, but polished Henry by appealing to his zest for a good challenge.
We all see where this is going. A show that has a dated title, relying on a single conflict that couldn't possibly carry a story over the course of seasons. One of two things will happen: you will either find Miss Doolie constantly making the same mistake over and over through seasons, such that no one could possibly tolerate watching a character that fails to grow. And the show will be cancelled. The second, and more likelier option is this: the charming leads will both grow. She, becoming more personable, he, becoming more fun, and the show (even with the greatest efforts to incorporate episodic challenges for the protagonists) will have exhausted all of their source material by the season's end, such that the title, Selfie, will no longer fully apply to our now-enlightened heroine. And the show will be cancelled.
Clearly, the creators identify strongly with the Henry "Higgins" character, as the pilot was an absolute essay on the state of social media, a critical judgment of modern, hi-tech- driven, narcissist culture. Any attempt to show a balance in the vulnerabilities of the two leads was poor, as one didn't leave the pilot believing Higgins had any true shortcomings, save being slightly "unfun". John Cho, sadly is too charming to truly feel sorry for. Selfie also subtly praises the hipster DIY community, but the show failed to address why the hipster neighbors would be so giving of their time and talents in an almost turn-the-other- cheek fashion. In attempt to show how easily friendship can be achieved, Selfie reveals the biggest reason it is doomed for cancellation. The premise is unsustainable. For whatever reason, the hipsters offer their friendship readily. So, either Eliza discovers friends and is happy or these hipsters are just pathetic and the show expresses the very judgment of others it is clearly reserving for those who judge others.
This story is better suited for that archaic vehicle, the television mini-series, where the writers won't have to manufacture what we all see coming: a slowdown in our heroine's personal development for the sake of stretching the show. Better yet, maybe this story could have been told in the format of a two and a half hour play... Or maybe a musical. That would have had me dancing all night.
Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)
She must take the ring to Mordor and choose between the Wolf and the Vampire...
With a running time of 2hrs, 7 mins, this movie felt like it had a running time of 4 hrs and 4 mins.
Charlize Theron is beautiful. Kristen Stewart is beautiful. If you take away two messages from this movie, those might be the messages. Two other messages might be: dwarfs look like hobbits when you run panoramic shots of either hiking through beautiful mountainside; and Kristen Stewart's contract always requires that her character be caught in a love triangle, no matter how necessary that may be to the plot line.
To say I enjoyed this movie might mislead one into believing the film's writers shared a cohesive sense of the tale they attempted to tell; it would also be untrue, and yet I would see it again for reasons I still don't understand.
Kristin Stewart was a compelling Joan of Arc -- what? Wait, who was she playing? And that guy from Thor could hold an axe like a hammer. Seriously, I believe the actors did a fantastic job with what they had. And the direction, though consistently grossly indulgent, produced some beautiful imagery. The writing, however, was all over the place. There were scenes that seemed to stretch for eternities, and after reflecting on the way those scenes enhanced the story, we struggle to find an answer. For example, there was a scene in the middle of the story, where Snow White wanders off from her "fellowship" and meets a white buck in the middle of the fairy forest. The "Doc" dwarf explains: "this has never happened before," and when one of the other characters very reasonably seeks a better explanation of what happened, Doc responds: "She is going to meet Him." What the...? Who is Him? The buck? God? So, she meets this white buck, who then gets shot by Snow's pursuers and turns into a thousand butterflies (of course only after throwing a tremendous tantrum about being shot). The writers clearly decided that was a sufficient explanation and never again returned to this storyline to explain what happened.
In another scene, the characters host a funeral for the 8th dwarf -- a character we were only recently introduced to, who, in fairness, died a noble death, but the funeral dragged on forever. By the end, I was ready for jello. In the final scene, we are at Snow White's coronation (you know that's how the movie will end, c'mon!) and the director decided to tell a story without words. Perhaps the entire film would have benefited from this tactic, but not this scene alone. Kristen Stewart rose as if to say something and never did -- that scene must have lasted a solid 3-4 minutes of actual run time. It was weird...
Perhaps the most classic example of confused writing in this film was a scene where Snow has just met the Huntsman, and he gives her advice on fighting. We all of course predict the maneuver he teaches her will be her salvation at her most desperate moment later in the film. However, at the beginning of the film, she responds: "I don't know if I could do that" (i.e. kill another person at close range), and the Huntsman explains: "You may not have a choice." However, sometime after this scene, and having received no other instruction, Snow is in a full suit of armor, marching on the queen's castle, and fighting and winning against clearly stronger and trained castle guards. So, wait, she knows how to fight now? Then she storms up the stairs to meet the queen, and then returns to her former state of incompetent fighting, lashing about and hoping for the best, before she uses her secret maneuver to win. So, she didn't know how to fight, but then figured it out, by sheer rage, but then later didn't know how to fight again, but followed through with the maneuver her Huntsman previously taught her...
In short, see SWHM for the preview, because it is a beautiful preview, but just know this, that was some messed up stuff I just watched, and it felt like I watched it for a long time!
Hellboy (2004)
It's exactly what you think...
This film hopes that its high production quality and charming wit will compensate for the fact that it lacks continuity and quite often defies the very rules it invents for the Hellboy world. One example can be found after Hellboy has been pushed off of the front of a train, only to keep knocking his shaved-down horns on the bottom of the cars that are passing over him. This resulted in a great deal of friction, heating his horns, and leading the leading man to say "Ouch!" after touching these horns, indicating to his viewers that they were hot. However, not 60 seconds later, Hellboy reveals one of his powers, by grabbing a rail and allowing the electricity to surge through his body and fry his opponent. How could his horns be too hot to touch, but yet he could sustain who-knows-how-many volts of electricity? Then, there was the Liz Sherman character, played by Selma Blair, whose fiery temper could set an entire asylum ablaze all the while leaving her clothing completely unscorched. Oh, how we long for the days when a man's rage might turn him big and green, but would also magically grow an appropriately placed pair of purple pants! Also, Rasputin looked like a pimp, for some reason. Ron Perlman, however, offers an even and sardonic delivery of an extra-worldly character, whose human upbringing shares the quintessential values of hope, love, and freewill. Although the writing at times desired something more, at many times, especially in scenes with Jeffrey Tambor, the film would surprise you with its happy-go attitude. And it should not be overlooked, the special effects were fun and engaging. Hellboy's a watch-it-once, maybe watch-it-once-more kind of movie that has you happy that you didn't take it too seriously and thankful that we still have Sam Raimi to show us how a comic book movie is really done.
In America (2002)
Beautiful
The constant anticipation of bad news coupled with a child's wisdom of the beauty of life is the ingenious formula that created "In America," the chronicling of immigrants' lives as they pursue their American dream in the street's of Hell's Kitchen. Do not see this movie if you hate thoughtful writing or inspirational characters. Its minimalist dialogue was so brilliantly crafted, revealing only what the story must and allowing the viewer to interpret the message as she chooses. The actors, allowed a great deal of on-screen time and emotions to explore their characters, did not fail in delivering their hopeful message. The narrator, an especially appropriate pick--powerful and persuasive-- offered a cohesive sense to this gritty and still well-shot film.
"In America" quite amazingly holds universal appeal. Those who do not watch this movie only do so, believing that it is as they believe all movies of such small budget, independent feel are-- elitist. Just as the characters of this story must overcome their hesitations, all general viewing members will overcome their doubts of a small film's might by watching this movie!