pexu Reviews

Fallen Leaves (2023)

Not a new chapter but a cross reference

[5/10 · 25 November 2023]

This film is nothing new in Aki Kaurismäki's catalogue. It is both a strong point but its weakness as well.

While the movie promimently places itself in the 2020's, on the other hand scenery and mannerisms do not. This by no means an accident. Majority of looks, including anything from buildings to the smallest decorations, could be easily anywhere from 1950s to 1970s. However, definitely not anytime past the millenium. While likely a just funny little accident, even an odd logo in a hat resembles one used by an older Finnish company during that time period.

Excluding the story commentary, this film could have been as well made in the 1990s, with perhaps and Kati Outinen and Matti Pellonpää in the leading roles. That said, the story itself is not particularly interesting. Timeless, if you would like to recommend the movie or clichéd if not.

Not style over substance so much, but cinema over substance. For someone who has not seen any of his previous movies, this might feel utterly dull. One viewing this must be able to extract the story, not from the story itself, but from the context.

For audiences not having any Finnish background in this particular case Jim Jarmusch's works might be used as a connecting point.

On the other hand, if the scenes are pleasing, there are many more like this already produced a numerous years ago. Those might not have subtle (and not so subtle) references to the modern times, but unfortunately the connection to the past (or to the future, if you will) is not fully utilized. Or, rather, leaves room for essentially any kind of interpretation.

So, passable, but requires an acquired taste.

Mona Lisa and the Blood Moon (2021)

Underdeveloped

[5/10 · 12 November 2023]

Very stylish, and perhaps self aware of the level it sets. It never exceeds the threshold that immediately triggers the style over substance flag. The sounds match the visuals well. While one might not like neither, one at least has to agree that choosing something else would have probably been a mistake.

However, the style is not also very original. While bright colors might be trademark of the era, camera movement is nothing new. It will not be not difficult to find a similar, especially less mainstream, film.

Unfortunately, as the story remains flat, in this case the overall subtance is minimal. You've essentially seen the film after the first five minutes.

The main enseble, Mona "Lisa" (Jeon Jong-seo) and Bonnie (Kate Hudson), are not fleshed out to a high degree. The characters are very unoriginal. While Bonnie might not need much explaining, it is just because it's a paper thin copy. Mona is even worse, as from the very beginning, she is essentially invincible.

The most unsatisfying character will be however officer Charlie (Craig Robinson). While playing a major part in the movie, the character is treated like a punchbag. There should be, but there is no friction between the main lead and the officer.

All the actors, including the ones playing smaller parts, do a good job. There very little sloppyness and the movie feels very decent. However, the fault is that pitch only lasts a few minutes, where as the film has been streched to cover almost two hours.

It is a really shame, because at end one might be asking: is Mona just a reflection of a desire of always getting what you want. The desire slips in the dark night, leaving us in the cold, separated from the loved ones; possibly having even less than in the beginning.

Mad Ship (2013)

No wind in the sails

[4/10 · 24 January 2023]

Depression and poverty. The age old subject of many stories. Given it is not very difficult to come up with negative aspects of life the story and the ultimate goal should rise above the occassion. Unfortunately, besides all ill fortune that lands upon the leading actors very little happens.

The vast majority of this film is just a setup for the eventual title reference. It is very unfortunate, as the part that is now left untold would have been probably much more interesting than the one that has been told so many times. Also, while this setup stirrs up some potential tragedies and drama between the dream (farm) and the reality (bank), these are mostly left unexplored.

However, what is the most lamenting fact is that the film is very claustrophobic. As if everything happens in a box where the walls constantly crawl closer. There is no feel of wide and unobstrucated praire where the wind whirls free. Camera does not pan and reveal the emptiness surrounding the characters. As the subject is nothing new, at least the few good clichés could have been picked from the presentation category.

Sadly, the vast emptiness is in the story and how it is being told. There is nothing that would attract a season viewer. There is very little that would inspire or motivate either, so perhaps these depressing stories that have very little color in them are better left untold.

March of the Penguins (2005)

Wishful thinking

[4/10 · 11 August 2020]

MARCH OF THE PENGUINS is not a true documentary. A proper documentary film would presents all facts (i.e. it would at least /have/ some facts) as they are and not tone down or sugar coat the pictures we see by an artificial story line. Instead, this film is a more like a live action version of a fairy tale. Of course, there will be some truth behind the images but mostly this is has just some entertainment value. At least this is not a totally staged or bogus film, excluding the entire narrative track obviously.

Technically speaking this film has not aged very well. Typically this type of film would a timeless show piece for modern high definition screens. Unfortunately, this film leaves too much to be desired for. Perhaps film to digital transfer is to be blamed, but film quality isn't par with modern standards. As there is no real other content than what the viewers see, this is no good. For showcasing picture quality one is these days better off with free streaming platforms and videos done by amateurs.

Unless one likes to watch all films that have been nominated and eventually won some award, nominally Academy Award in this case, there isn't much that this film can provide. If one would like to immerse to a documentary like picture without any real content (than the video and audio content itself) it has been already done: For an example Koyaanisqatsi (1982) does that much better. Instead of wasting time to create a telltale story it simply swaps it for a great soundtrack. Sound editing isn't very rich or verstatile in case of penguins, nor are the selected tracks.

15 years after its original release this is only for the "hard core" fans. To translate that to IMDb language: To get your 2006 Oscars badge is more rewarding than having seen this boring pseudo-documentary.

Crimewave (1985)

An overflow

[5/10 · 10 May 2013]

It's been proved and it gets repeated time after time, that is not solely the names that make the movie. A viewer might expect solid directing and a clever story when such a names as in this one are behind the scenes; Or sometimes seen thru the lens.

It must be said, that clearly there was some talent put in this movie. However, it feels like a try that ultimately fails to deliver everything what was originally thought and what went thru the mind. The cast, the set and the pacing.

Mostly the pacing.

Crimewave has a little too much of everything. It's a patchwork where the joy is in the making, not in the actual result itself. The story is practically non-existent. When the end credits finally scroll in, everything locks in place, yes, but not in a way that brings joy and happiness.

This movie is not only boring, but it's frustrating. It's a bad ghost train in a creepy amusement park that visits local town every now and then. All the enjoyment wears off when the you sit in the rusting carriage, painted over way too many times.

Everything happens in a rush and there are no slow and developing phases whatsoever. As the rail is straight, you'll know that eventually an exit will come and that ruins everything. The whole story is anticipated and expected from the very beginning to the bitter end.

Or better still, the ending itself is the most important thing. Now that the journey has been made, there's no need to ever again repeat it.

And that's what this movie is all about today. A journey to the roots only for the sake of the journey itself, never ever to be repeated again.

Stolen (2012)

Stolen.. Two Hours of Your Life

[4/10 · 4 October 2012]

The best way to ruin a movie is to have hopes set too high. As Nicolas Cage hasn't really been up to the task (or maybe it's been the script, or perhaps director) lately, Stolen wasn't really on that must-see movie list. Better still, as Simon West (Con Air, The Mechanic [2011 remake] has pulled some entertaining movies in the past and the script was coming from David Guggenheim (Safe House) maybe this could be Cage's way out of the B-grade movie swamp.

Well, one thing is for sure. This three lines of defence system fails on all sides. Horribly.

It all starts crumbling down from the very beginning. During the intro soundtrack it's not really apparent if this is an action movie, or some strange television comedy. The first five or ten minutes do actually lay down some basic but solid ground, but then it all goes down the drain.

Something goes horribly wrong, we've seen this. One old and crampy janitor at a wrong place, at a wrong time, we've seen this. Best friends forever partners get cranky in less than ten seconds and a gun goes off. Seriously, we've seen this. Too many times. However, not so often in such a record breaking time that all this takes place in Stolen.

The rest of the movies goes like that. Plot takes a new route (not the plot destination, grande finale) every second scene and things happen so fast, so quickly without any planning or momentum building whatsoever. But unlike blockbusters, there's no shiny CGI anywhere, just some unimportant dialogue and speeding cars here and there.

Yes, it's a movie. A movie usually exists solely to present a scene that takes place far from a real, everyday world. However, the stunts that are pulled in Stolen are so far fetched that this might be indeed more like a comedy than a proper, serious action movie.

And the ending? Well, it's so obvious at this point that there wasn't any other option than to warn you about the spoilers.

Skip this one unless you want Stolen to steal any more than what reading this review took of your precious time. You've probably seen all Stolen has to offer anyway, not just under that title.

Act of Valor (2012)

An unskippable cutscene

[3/10 · 17 May 2012]

Act of Valor has entertainment value of an unskippable cutscene from a big budget video game. You can't really call it a movie, as it lacks all the elements that would make it one.

The acting. It was OK, at best, but mostly bad. The actors should portray their characters and simply because you actually are your alleged character doesn't make you one, actor that is. But the acting really isn't the Achilles' heel that makes Act of Valor such a bad and boring film.

The script. There really isn't any. There's no point checking "Contains spoiler" option because there isn't anything to be revealed. In the end, Act of Valor is just loosely tied scenes put together. It's nothing else but a place and time for "the good guys" to pull the trigger. I can't really compare this to any real action movie. Good ol' action movies, especially those with stars such as Schwarzenegger or Stallone, had a perhaps a poor script but it was at least a script. Maybe there was even a bit tongue-in-cheek put as writers did after all, write action that couldn't really ever take place in a real world that this kind of films do try to portray in the very end.

And that's what bothers me. I felt like watching a friend play some blockbuster video game that tries to be realistic but ultimately fails miserably. We may see some actual hardware gizmos but mostly everything is ruined by Hollywood's way of seeing realism with too much sugar on it. As the film isn't realistic in this sense, I really don't see why they'd use "real characters" as "actors" then. Why try to make a realistic war movie (as that's what this film tries to be) but water it down right away.

The cinematography. It was just awful, I wonder why they didn't try to shoot everything in POV. It would've looked much more a like game that they'll ended up portraying anyway. Long boring scenes from a single position, others were absolutely nothing we've seen too many times before.

Ultimately, it all boils down to those little things that turn the consecutive pictures played at a certain speed one after another a movie all failing miserably. There's no tension, no drama, "the good guys" never take a fatal hit unless it's a heroic sacrifice, as they see it, to be made. There's no real value of any kind, it just bunch of "good guys" rushing everywhere, pulling the trigger first and then not even bothering to ask questions later. There's no comedy or self irony, no real realism but nothing indicates that it matters anyway.

In the end, there's only void and wasted time, way too much wasted time, to put it correctly.