Change Your Image
birdseed-11
Reviews
Masters of the Air (2024)
Authentic but not gripping
This series was executed with great care and respect for the achievements and the sacrifices of the airmen of all of World War II. It is a fitting tribute to them all. It opened my eyes to the horrors they went through and the bravery they displayed.
The acting is top notch. The sets and scenery absolutely believable and realistic. The budget, not so much. One scene featured NO buildings and barely an air strip outline. I got the message that it was a primitive airstrip but it looked like they just went out to a local desert and filmed there with the cast and a plane.
There are too few side stories. There's nothing about their training. One of the officers went on to become a legend in the Air Corp but there's just a brief mention of it. There's little about the struggles of coordinating these missions from multiple air bases into one force. There's a lot of 'tell' and not enough 'show'.
The cinematography was too dark in places. We had to watch with all the lights off at night to see what was happening. (No, it's not our TV.)
It does do a powerful job of demonstrating the losses they encountered.
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
They just did more.
Saw it last night, this new one just takes the tropes and devices of the original and extends them further. There is nothing really new and mind blowing, which was the fun part of the original.
It is slow; be patient. And for all it's length it leaves gaps in the story that the viewer has to figure out himself.
The acting is great, but the "kooky characters" aren't nearly as kooky. And for some reason Agent K is a deeply pensive character. So the audience gets a lot of hard stares at the camera from Gosling, even when he's happy.
It's a good movie, but you have to actively watch it. In each scene look for what is interesting. This is more of a thinker's movie than popcorn vapidity.
The Zero Theorem (2013)
great visuals, shallow characters, unsastifying ending
This movie was all about spectacular visuals. It truly is a feast for the eyes and imagination. As a software engineer I love to see how my profession is portrayed on the big screen. This interpretation is a hoot, and not completely off in a "solving puzzles is fun" kind of way, which is what draws my type to this profession. And the acting was fantastic, Tilda Swinton, Melanie Thierry, and Christoph Walz captured their roles perfectly. Matt Damon seemed to be having an off day. Lucas Hedges (Bob) was adequate. What this movie lacked, and what made it hard to stay with, was depth of characters. It seems like this movie was written just for the visual effects. The characters are just there. They had no background, no depth. No time or care was given to give us a reason why we should care about them. For example when Bainsely ends up at his door with "everything she owns in her van", it would have been interesting to see how that happened. It would give us a reason to care about her. The same goes for Bob. He is the son of Management and won't do his father's bidding but why? A backstory would have made him more compelling, especially when he got sick. And why specifically the bodyguards? A scene with Management expressing worry about his son would have given us a reason to like or dislike the bodyguards. And Management. And the ending is ambiguous at best: Is he lying on the floor of his home in a coma? Did he achieve an out-of-body experience? Is it all a dream? Did he transcend physical existence? The end is unsatisfying to say the least. I did like the touch where after the credits role we hear the other characters saying hello to him, like they have appeared on the beach with him and have been saved from whatever-really-happened. That was clever. Great fun visuals, reasonable story line, great acting, no character development, ambiguous ending.
Mortdecai (2015)
Better than expected
I can't understand why this movie got so much bad press. It was great fun. Depp, Paltrow, Bettany, McGregor were all at the top of their game. The marital spat between Mortdecai and his wife were hilarious if you have ever been in a this-is-more-serious-than-it-looks argument with your spouse.
But really this is a buddy adventure movie with Mortdecai and his superhuman servant Jock. It is a modern day Jeeves and Wooster. Mortdecai is a rich, but idiotic, Englishman. Jock is his street smart, street fighter, and very clever man servant. Together they chase down a painting to save the world (as is typical). It is great fun, complete with a plot twist.
Ascension (2014)
good production values but tedious
All in all I enjoyed Ascension, but not as much as I had hoped to. I was very excited when I heard SyFy was returning to its roots and airing actual science fiction shows instead of hunting ghosts and featuring reality faux-stars.
The plot twists were great. The acting was great. The sets and costumes were excellent. They struck a good balance between the real 1960s look but not coming across as dated in their outfits.
But it was too long. While the acting was good, they tried to do too much with this elongated pilot. Some minor characters could have been introduced in the inevitable sequel or series. I had to convince myself to sit and watch at times. You have to sit through some silly, and ultimately pointless, subplots so you don't miss a significant plot development.
Overall a good effort to get back into real science fiction programming. Space adventure done right can be a lot of fun. And this was fun.
Margin Call (2011)
didn't build tension
Watched the DVD last night, good movie if you have the patience to sit through it, or are fascinated by the financial meltdown as I am. There were great actors in almost every role but there was no real chemistry. During the scenes when the characters were dealing with the stress in their own way, I just didn't feel it with them.
Some of the symbolism was very good. The dog represented the dying real estate market; watch where it ends up. The Seth character represents the everyman. Pulled in from his evening revelry he is forced to deal with this reality, and he never gets over how much money his superiors make. Sam represents the old guard career trader who is able to overcome his moral questions and put on a good front for his staff. This is the source of the heartless Wall Streeters. They are compelled to put profit over collateral damage.
There are a lot of great digs at the overpaid Wall Streeters. And some education as to what good they serve from an American dream of home ownership perspective.
For a first time director this was a great effort. He really knows his stuff. He just needs some polishing, like building palpable tension.
Pi (1998)
Collage of great shot making
This movie is best viewed as a collage of great camera shots. It is best understood as a movie used at film school to understand the affect of good shot making. Really the ideas for the camera placement and angles and the way the shots communicate the characters mindset are fantastic, perfect even in some cases.
If you really understood mathematics you would see the hole in the Hassidic Jews request for a number of so many digits. But if you aren't comfortable with math, what little is presented could intimidate you. So from a mathematics standpoint, this movie appeals to no one.
The acting is fantastic, especially with the camera mounted where it is in some shots. Sean Gullete, as Max Cohen, can really concentrate and stay in character. It was all very believable.
All in all though this is a depressing story of a man living alone in Chinatown who struggles with his curse of being a genius. Again, this is a movie mostly for a film school class.
The Battle for Marjah (2010)
heroic soldiers, biased film making
This is typical liberal schlock where they tried to cast the war as a lost and useless cause. You could see the filmmaker's bias throughout. They interviewed soldiers to make them sympathetic probably hoping one or more would be killed to resonate the horror of war. None were. Bravo Company, who was primarily followed, did not accidentally kill any civilians. Charlie Company did. So the film makers rushed over to get the sobbing story of the sympathy gesture (money) the American forces made to apologize. This was the low point of the film, way overly long and drawn out.
Every text description of the combat situation is made to sound like it is hopeless or pointless or both. Every quote was picked to emphasize the negative feelings of the soldiers. Interviews with townspeople are all Taliban sympathizers, or more likely snuck-in-to-town Taliban soldiers, who "just" want the Americans to leave. That's the repeated refrain the filmmaker's chose to highlight from the interviews with with locals. Every filmmaker is (still) trying to re-create the Vietnam War reaction among viewers.
In spite of this obvious, and cowardly, bias, the true heroism of our Marines shines through. Their courage and calmness under fire is amazing. Their tactics are consistently successful. They march to victory despite long odds. They made me proud to be an American. The filmmakers, not so much.
Browncoats: Redemption (2010)
Great volunteer effort
This was a clever story set in the 'verse that many of us Browncoats have come to know and love. While the movie had plot and technical flaws, it wasn't cheesy or unwatchable. And believe me when I say I can't watch bad acting. The script was written so as not to stretch the volunteer actors too far. And when they did get hammy the director was clever enough to have them refer to their bad scene as their character acting out of character. So the bad acting is made to work.
One of the problems with a fan movie like this is that the fans want to revel in the atmosphere of the source material. Where the original film, Serenity, and TV series, Firefly, only occasionally highlighted the culture, like companions and crew-as-family scenes, this movie is awash in both. There are companions everywhere and every scene with the crew is some kind of bonding or family support. This is what the fans loved about the series and in this film they overdo it.
The directing was effective. Almost every scene was done with a framed wide shot. A couple of lines needed close-ups so we could see the actor's expression to make the shot work. But every scene was in focus and the pacing was good. And a couple of scenes were downright high quality. The voice-over scene where the captain explains her motivations was excellent, for example.
The casting was excellent. The actors all appear to be cut from the same cloth as the characters they portray. The only mistake was casting the captain as a female tough guy. It just doesn't work. It's the same mistake they made in Cutthroat Island with Geena Davis. Without being too crude let's just say no one thinks that Heide Montag would be great in a street fight because of her overly developed upper body. We're asked to believe that here. (Just to be clear, there's no indication of plastic surgery on any of the cast.)
The special effects were well done. The pacing was good. The acting was acceptable, especially for volunteers. The story was an interesting addition to the Firefly 'verse. All in all a good and commendable effort. And especially worthwhile as a means to donate to some excellent charities.
Angels & Demons (2009)
portrays Catholics as imbeciles
The only thing that successfully carried over from the book to the movie is the complete misunderstanding of Catholicism. The Vatican is not like corporate America. While that model is easy for Americans and atheists to digest, it is simply not true. I know a lot of priests and bishops. They aren't against science. I think we learned our lesson with Galileo, Darwin, etc. and don't argue about it too much anymore. (And as much as science will understand, there will always be a need for God.) The only thing that was vaguely Catholic, other than the settings and costumes, was the very end when the Cardinal thanks Langdon and explains that Langdon was called by God, even though he wasn't a believer, to get this straightened out. That was the Catholic attitude. The rest of it was Hollywood.
Other instances of non-Catholic behavior: In St. Peter's square when the "stem cell research" supporter is yelling at the nun that "You are condemning sick people to death." and she replies "Man is not God.". That is not the problem Catholics have with stem cell research. The issue is "You have to kill babies to have enough stem cells to do your research." This is not the forum for a science or religious debate so I won't go into it. I'm just saying "Man is not God" is not the main argument Catholics make against stem cell research.
Catholics don't believe in suicide. The end scene when McKenna self-immolates is completely ridiculous. No priest would think he is going to heaven just because he said a little prayer just before he killed himself. That's just ignorant.
Even the supporting statements of Catholicism are very limited. When the head of Vatican security confronts Langdon with "my church comforts the sick and dying and feeds the poor. What does your church do? Oh yeah, you don't have one." He makes it sound like Catholicism is like joining the United Way. It's not. There are many more rewards than that. Those acts are just the fruits of our faith. Real Catholicism is about following the will of God, having a loving heart, trying to be like Jesus, and having the peace and joy of knowing that all will be well because you are following God's plan for you. From that we go out and comfort the sick and feed the poor, and many other ministries.
I thought the movie clipped along at a pretty good pace and the riddles were imaginatively portrayed. But the film bounced from scene to scene a little too fast in an attempt to create a frenetic pace. And the death scenes were unnecessarily gruesome. I can't recommend this movie.
Letting Go of God (2008)
Pedantic Hogwash
I watched this last night on cable. I was intrigued by the other reviewers here so I gave it a shot. That was a mistake.
Julia Sweeney was a fine character actor on SNL, but as a comedy writer, philosopher or theologian she is pathetic.
One person stage shows rarely make interesting movies or television. This was no exception.
Her jokes reached too far into incredulity. She pushed the premise of her jokes so far that you could tell she was trying desperately to make a joke out of something. One almost got to the point of rooting for her to find the punchline just so she could move on to the next topic. She's a much better performer than writer. She needs someone to write for her.
As a philosopher Ms. Sweeney is easily confused. Again, trying to make light of deep questions is very hard, well beyond the means of Ms. Sweeney. One could see the point she should be coming to but then she missed it, sometimes intentionally just to make a joke, and usually a bad one at that.
As a theologian Ms. Sweeney has a lot to learn. She tried to come off as this 'been there done that, I know better now' wise man but really most of her questions could have been answered by her local priest. She just didn't bother to ask the right people.
Clearly Ms. Sweeney has lost her way spiritually. I understand the cancer scare and the profound effect it can have on someone who is self-centered. When all you think about is yourself, it's very hard to accept that bad things happen to you too. So, in an apparent act of revenge, she has sacrificed her faith in an effort to make a buck on this show and movie. It sounded like what she has done was pursue atheism with the intent of arriving there in a comical way so she could make a few bucks on it.
I gave this movie a 2 instead of a 1 because of the good stagecraft. The set was nicely done and functional.
Harper's Island (2009)
Started well but got sappy and stupid
My wife and I really enjoyed this for the first half or so of the series. Then it got sappy. At one point the only reason we kept watching was the promise that it would be done at the end of May. We watched through May and only kept watching then because there were only a handful of episodes left.
There were some dumb scenes. In the bar when Wakefield burst in with the knife, Trish is pointing the gun DIRECTLY at him, and instead of shooting she backs into the bathroom and hops out the window. Dumb! And of course some of it defies belief, in the end we find that Henry really loves Abby and the marriage to Trish is a ruse. So why did Henry lay a trap for Trish when he thought she might be two-timing him? You'd think he wouldn't really care about that. That doesn't make any sense. Bad plotting by the writers is all I can think. They had too much air time for the show they were writing.
And another thing that bothered me was that they never found the first body, Trish's cousin, the one tied to the propeller shaft in the first episode. Again, more sloppy writing.
I read somewhere that this was going to be a series. I wonder how they were going to pull that off with a continuously dwindling cast.
In the end we found the show disappointing. Oh, and Katie Cassidy's hair and acting were so bad that I was hoping her character (Trish Wellington) would be killed off next.
There Will Be Blood (2007)
Awful
I can't believe this movie received so much hype. It makes me think someone like Daniel Plainview, the protagonist (antagonist?) of the film, is in charge of the movie studios. Someone is using his guile to dupe us sheep into giving away our money for no good reason, namely this film.
This movie should only be viewed by those who loved Upton Sinclair's novel "Oil!", on which this film is based. The cinematography is excellent. Daniel Day Lewis is excellent, as usual. But the film is nothing more than a moving-picture-slide-show of the key scenes from Sinclair's novel. There is no coherence, rationality, or depth to this film. We never feel compelled to root for a sympathetic character. Granted, Daniel Plainview is a monster, but there should still be a hook in the film. There is none. The director relies on our patience, or resistance to just walk out, to hold us in our seat.
This is a beautiful film but it is only for the extremely patient. One should also not be squeamish. There are scenes of very realistic violence and harsh emotional abuse.
The only reason I don't give this one star is that it is watchable. (Keeping in mind that I have never been able to sit through Annie Hall.) A great book does not automatically make a great movie. See Angela's Ashes or Seabiscuit (speaking of a movie that is really just a slide show). Sometimes a book is great because of the great writing. Hollywood doesn't seem to get that. They didn't get it for this movie. That's for sure.
Shut Up and Shoot Me (2005)
surprisingly good
I rented this because the box said "Czech version of Fargo". I loved Fargo and liked this one quite a bit.
Colin is an insecure man who depends entirely on his wife to keep his life moving forward. In the few (two?) scenes he has with her he relies on her to direct everything and encourage him. They are even in Prague at her suggestion. I got the impression that he might have just been released from some kind of therapy. It just seems that anyone who is that dependent would need some kind of professional help.
His wife dies in a startling way. I sat open mouthed for a full minute trying to wrap my head around it. It was very well done. Colin then realizes that his life is completely rudderless. He has no idea how to proceed and decides to end it all. After a painful attempt at suicide that fails, he decides that he'll need someone else to off him.
Enter Pavel who is an honest very hard working man with multiple jobs, one of which is driving hotel guests at Colin's hotel to the morgue when they need it. (It's not really clear how this was arranged.)
Colin asks Pavel to kill him painlessly, quickly, and so that Colin won't see it coming.
If you liked the part of Fargo or Crackers where the criminal's plans keeps going wrong, you are going to like this movie too. (But this is not like Burt Reynold's The End (1978).) Nothing goes perfectly for Pavel and Colin. Every situation ends up in some way they didn't expect, or even consider. As Pavel's life spins out of control, Colin slowly regains his composure. Although neither gain any real control over the events that they have started to unfold.
The actors do a great job. Andy Nyman is very convincing as Colin, who depends on everyone making decisions for him about everything. He doesn't even enter the morgue office until Pavel directs him to. Andy also portrays the shock of Colin's situation very well. Colin doesn't cry over Maggie's death until very late in the film.
Karel Roden is also outstanding. He does a great job of convincing us that while he wants the "thousands of pounds" that Colin is offering to kill him, he is very far out of his comfort zone. Pavel is a hard working man who loves his wife very much and will do anything to keep her. It's pretty clear that he has never complained about his situation or her.
The duo cross paths with a gangster and his girlfriend. Those actors are great also.
My only dings on this movie is that it is a little slow in places, mostly with Pavel's wife's scenes. But they pass, so with a little patience this is a very enjoyable movie.
Also, in the first lake scene it's not clear that they are alone on the ice.
The cinematography is excellent, but there's no solid reason to see this on a huge screen. It mostly takes place in enclosed spaces.