Change Your Image
carmineitaly
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Man vs Bee (2022)
Somewhat uninspired
This series didn't particularly impress me. There were, within the different episodes, moments that I appreciated (such as the meeting with the policeman of the fourth episode or the explosion of the bee trap of the final episode), but summing up I consider this product somewhat banal and uninspired.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 9 (2022)
Nothing new under the sun
More than predictable conclusion for this series. Nothing new under the sun. The episode itself is not particularly funny (the explosion of the bee trap at the beginning is hilarious, though). However, this final episode essentially worries about concluding the narration of the events.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 8 (2022)
Psycho Trevor
Strange episode, in which at first it seems that Trevor has understood the insanity committed, then the narrative suggests that his intention is to build a house for the bee, but finally it turns out that in reality this is not the case at all.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 7 (2022)
More embarrassing moments
Good episode, especially for the embarrassing interview with the police (again) and for the crazy invention devised to capture the bee. It seems strange to me that the thieves decided to be arrested just to get out of the house, but in these series it is useless to ask these kinds of questions.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 6 (2022)
Ok
This episode is ok, with some fun solutions, like the piano scene. It does not shine particularly, but I think it is better than the previous one. At least it manages to snatch a smile, especially in the end.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 5 (2022)
Uninspired
Weak episode, probably transitional before the final phase of the story. Trevor's exasperation fails to entertain me, as indeed the proposed gags, which I personally believe to be uninspired.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 4 (2022)
Bloody Panda
First fun episode. Although the first part is still uninspired, I think the level of the episode improves with the new meeting with the policeman. The astonished face of the latter and the proverbial chutzpah of Trevor, combined with his absurdly crazy aspect, made me appreciate this episode.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 3 (2022)
Re-proposals
Weak episode, characterized by the re-proposal of solutions already seen, or in any case similar, in previous episodes. The scene with the policeman is an improvement on the previous episode, but which I did not particularly appreciate.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 2 (2022)
Nothing happens
Weak episode, which fails to confirm the same tone as the first episode. A partial recovery is observed in the final part, where the actor gracefully and lightly represents the mediocrity, bitterness and egotism of his character. This, however, still did not allow me to appreciate the episode.
Man vs Bee: Chapter 1 (2022)
Predictable but fun
Right from the start, Mr Bean's inimitable style is immediately recognizable. Even if there is nothing new under the sun and the narrative is very predictable, there is no shortage of hilarious moments (as in the final scene of the episode).
Personally, I did not particularly appreciate the model of the bee, which seems to detach itself too much from the rest of the scene. All in all, an enjoyable and fun episode.
A Pure Place (2021)
Confusion and lack of a compass
This movie leaves you very confused. The cult of a sect, obsessed with hygiene (hence the references to the goddess Hygieia) and controlled by a psychopathic leader, Fust, is established on an island. The command of the sect and the fate of every single member is in Fust's hands because of his economic power. In fact, alongside the pseudo-religious events, the production of soap, made from pig fat, is also carried on.
There already is so much information that it's not clear what kind of interpretation is more appropriate. For example, considering a socio-economic approach, references to class struggles, to the brazen laxity of the wealthy and to the manipulation exercised over the poor and ignorant masses are easily noticed. Or, considering a generational conflict, we can observe how children are relegated to the humblest jobs, how they are called garbage, how they fight against the pre-established order. Instead, if we choose a psychoanalytical approach, we can consider the character of Fust alone and the relationship with his parents (especially with his mother) in order to understand his behaviour.
As you can see, the interpretations listed above don't show any conceptual framework that leads the way to further the analysis. The movie's concern is to add multiple layers of information without worrying about offering any deeper material. We remain, therefore, stuck on a superficial level of analysis, banal and simplistic.
In a nutshell, I personally think the movie can be summarized in this way: a rich psychopath realizes that he can no longer carry on his narcissistic dream and decides to kill everyone (something goes wrong).
Some ideas leave a lot to be desired, especially because they are genuinely ridiculous, such as the scene with Sigfrid, Irina and the vision of Elysion between her legs or the final scene, where the surviving children observe a stripper on the stage while Irina, for a few moments, imagine that Fust himself is dancing.
A movie that offers food for thought is often exalted and appreciated, but thanks to a conceptual depth that, unfortunately, is bleakly lacking here. The confusion and disturbance after watching this movie are not due to the huge amounts of connections and possible parallels, but to the lack of a reference point, a compass to indicate the direction of the work.
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974)
Entertaining but nothing else
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot stars two very important actors of American cinema: Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges. While the plot structure is very clear and linear, a more in-depth analysis reveals a further, and more complex, aspect: the development of the two main characters.
Thunderbolt is a decorated hero who served the country in the Korean War, but he is also a bank robber who hides himself from his gang, who consider him a traitor. Lightfoot, on the other hand, is a reckless good-for-nothing, who jumps from one adventure to another in a daring, naïve and self-destructive way, without giving a real direction to his life.
This abysmal difference between the two actually reveals an underlying theme that unites both of them: the lack of a sense of belonging, a state of isolation in which they live. During the movie, though, the two will establish a sincere friendship bond that will accompany them until the end.
Unfortunately, it should be noted that the scenes dedicated to the characterization of the two protagonists are sporadic and sketchy. For example:
- Lightfoot reveals that he was not raised by his parents, but he says nothing else concerning his past for the rest of the movie;
- Thunderbolt liquidates, very quickly, the revelation that he is a war hero.
This extreme synthesis, which leaves many observations for the viewer to make, doesn't clarify the correct interpretation to better frame the psychology of the characters.
Is Thunderbolt a wise and melancholy bank robber because, without saying it, he feels abandoned by the same homeland that he defended at his life's risk or because he realizes that this lifestyle leads, after all, to an unhappy existence? Or maybe both of them?
Does Lightfoot's living in the moment reveal the need to have clear and solid reference figures in life or does it simply denote a slacker and an irreverent character without depth?
To complement all this, the movie is peppered with typical comedy scenes, such as that in which Red Leary and Eddie Goody sell ice cream on the street. This, however, clashes and contrasts too much with the serious tones of the final pursuit and epilogue.
Other scenes are even difficult to categorize. A striking example regards a madman, his car, lots of rabbits in the trunk and the exhaust of the muffler is inside the passenger compartment. Soon after letting Thunderbolt and Lightfoot enter his car to give them a lift, this strange character begins to drive recklessly, alternating off-roads and spins. The entire scene looks like a psychedelic dream, with comic and dramatic traits combined, but in the end is a simple filler to let the plot continue.
All in all, this is an entertaining movie, but fails to convey anything else despite the presence, although too shallow, of further elements that would have led to in-depth studies and interpretations.
Moll Flanders (1996)
Boring and uninspired story
Moll Flanders takes its name from the Daniel Defoe's work published in 1722. Although there is a clear reference to the events told in the book, in the movie there are no similarities either with the themes or with characterization of the protagonist.
In fact, while Defoe's Moll is a manipulative, shrewd, calculating woman, essentially indifferent through the course of her life to the fate destined for her children and lovers, with few exceptions, economically well-motivated, the Moll depicted in the movie is naïve, sentimental, spontaneous, morally pure and victim of the events and others' malice. The contrast between these two characters is even more evident below, as we analyse the themes addressed.
The arrogance of power is morally condemned and presented in caricatured forms that border on the ridiculous in every negative character that enters the scene, reaching its peak with Mrs Allworthy. Instead, Moll, the artist that falls in love with her and Hibble are shown in a totally positive light.
This presentation of the characters distinctly divided into two categories, ironically defined the bullies and the poor guys, can only offer the viewer a simplistic, immediate morality without any psychological or social insight. A clear example of this can be found with the artist, who rebels against his family to protect his love, but something feels odd: he looks like a spoiled child rather than a determined man in love, as you can see when he theatrically asks Moll to marry him at the same moment during which his family was humiliating her, and after blaming his father for not supporting him enough. As a whole, this behaviour doesn't differ much from the selfish spite of a spoiled child.
According to the movie, the truth is only one: money and power make people horrible and reprehensible, and this inescapable rule is declared on many occasions. For instance, the sale of Moll's virginity by Mrs Allworthy (the movie emphasizes the crucial importance of this passage but, in the end, it doesn't matter at all), the punishment inflicted to Moll, having she reported a sexual harassment perpetrated by a priest, Mrs Allworthy's blackmail against Hibble.
Already from the scenes set in the convent where Moll lived the first years of her life, we always notice the same behavioural pattern that will be repeated among the different social groups presented: the weak suffer and bear patience hoping for better times, while the strong exploit them to their pleasure. The rebellious and tumultuous nature of the young Moll is never even used to show how one can build a dignified life path despite adverse conditions; rather, the protagonist prefers to suffer, attributing any improvement in her condition essentially to unexpected strokes of luck, as it is the case with the drowning of Mrs Allworthy.
To further worse Moll's credibility, it is worth considering two specific scenes. The first is between Moll and a fountain that she discovers and enters after chasing a bird. The message that transpires, also in the light of how the events will unfold later, is that the girl is innocent and pure of heart, forced to live in an unjust and cruel world. And the initial situation equals the conclusion: there is no character development (for any character). With one sentence, the good guy remains a good guy and doesn't learn anything, the bad guy remains a bad guy and doesn't learn anything.
The second scene concerns Flora's arrival in the colonies: why doesn't the mother meet her daughter as soon as she disembarks, preferring to send for Hibble instead?
Why does she ask her daughter if she wants to stay with them, when it is clear that the girl cannot live alone elsewhere?
In conclusion, this movie has inconveniently disturbed Defoe's work to tell the boring story of a woman oppressed by the world, where money and power corrupt anyone without any possible redemption. All this woman does, however, is to take advantage of the strokes of luck that happen to her.
The pseudo-princess told in this fairy-tale doesn't stand up to the slightest comparison with Defoe's Moll Flanders, a strong woman who manages to plan, to lie, to cheat and to manage the situations in which she finds herself very well, in order to obtain the greatest benefit.