DanStiegen Reviews

2000 Mules (2022)

FAKE BALLOTS AREN'T COUNTED... For heaven's sake, folks

[6/10 · 25 May 2024]

The entire premise of this film is completely misleading. You can't stuff fake ballots into a drop box! They won't be counted!

Yet that's what the filmmakers promote as some way of stealing an election. You just push paper in. They even have an actor doing that.

Ignoring the fact that only real ballots matching the county voter lists will count, and officials check signatures and for duplicates. Election officials have been doing mail-in for 100 years.

And real ballots can just be mailed.

So there are no mules. There's no point for them to exist and no evidence for them. They are a complete invention.

The only real video clips D'Souza has are normal people putting their ballot into a box. All his other videos are staged, and his cellphone data includes countless people who didn't go within ten feet of a ballot box. He never ties a single person to any phone to any drop box.

How can anybody believe this nonsense?

Better Call Saul (2015–2022)

One of the best series ever

[9/10 · 23 November 2022]

BCS is both a prequel and a sequel to "Breaking Bad". The latter is an earlier series in which "Jimmy / Saul" here was a 'minor' character but stole every scene he was in. Hence the spin-off.

"Breaking Bad" was excellent, except for a distinct tendency to melodrama and a couple of completely worthless episodes that seemed to exist only for the main characters to Act. Chasing the fly? Wandering around nude?

"Better Call Saul" has none of those problems. The acting is superb, but always to advance the story and never there for its own sake. The story is continually interesting and the dialog first-rate.

A minor annoyance is the bizarrely bad opening credit patch which flickers in and out like a failing TV signal. And it opens every episode, of course. A weird choice for these artists.

Because it occurs both before and after Breaking Bad, BCS has chosen to jump forward and backward in time. This only makes sense if you have already seen Breaking Bad, which is required and highly recommended anyway. The BB prequel in BCS is shot in color, and (as I recall) the BB sequel is in black & white. That does help in following it. To summarize, which spoils nothing:

>> The prequel part of BCS is Jimmy's lawyer life up to getting involved in the Breaking Bad events. During this time he's involved with Rhea Seehorn, in Albuquerque.

>> The sequel part of BCS is Jimmy's life on the run after the Breaking Bad events. He's on his own, hiding as the manager of a pastry franchise in Omaha.

Fargo (2014–2024)

Excellent seasons 1-2; 3 less so; 4 is interminable

[8/10 · 14 November 2022]

User "grantss" wrote a very good review here (27 Apr 2019). Read that.

Having just, somehow, finished Season 4 I will comment on that. It has an intriguing start but takes itself way too seriously, reaching for every artsy effect and social message to be had. The writing changes this season from thriller to melodrama, with too many capital-A "Acting" sequences that drag on. A few scenes and characters were memorable and very good. But too much of the plot was lazy writing eg. A tornado appears from nowhere to carry off two main characters; and another of those shoots himself when he trips carrying a gun. Problem solved!

Season 4 by itself would get a score of 6 from me, and that's earned largely by the very interesting 1950s sets.

Taken (2017–2018)

Hight-tech, high-drama, high-action boredom

[2/10 · 22 September 2020]

Completely ridiculous plots: "A group of bankers is going to destroy the world economy !!" "We'll get right on it." Recovers a stick drive... happy music; hugs; lame banter. Rinse and repeat.

Nothing makes any sense but seems to be included just as formula ingredients or to bring the non-existent story to a close. Bad guys show up and vanish. Police show up and vanish. Obstacles appear and vanish.

Production values are on the floor. Fast camera cuts obscure most of the supposed action. Acting is mediocre.

I could go on but don't want to waste even more of my time. Go re-watch "24".

My Gun Is Quick (1957)

Believe the negative reviews. Scenes of LA are the only value.

[3/10 · 27 August 2020]

Lead actor Bray is well-named as he simply screams his lines in people's faces. - most of it cliche tough-guy talk from 30's era comic books. Besides the miserable dialogue the story is weak, the acting wooden, the direction poor, the sets cheesy, and the music awful.

Ironically, the extended freeway scenes - originally useless filler that wrecked what little dramatic tension existed - are now a treat. Remarkably uncongested, as are the beach properties, these along with the tail-finned convertibles etc. are part of a great nostalgic glimpse back.

The Outpost (2019)

Excellent war film; way underrated

[9/10 · 21 July 2020]

There are a few war-film cliches, but that doesn't make the those scenes unrealistic. And the rest is (to this non-soldier) very real! I don't see how this could have been done better. The actors go all-out, the direction is taut, the action almost non-stop, the effects convincing. Well worth a watch if the subject doesn't simply depress you too much.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Greatly overrated

[3/10 · 21 June 2020]

Must be something about the bat-signal that causes people to up-rate blindly. This is over-produced, over-storied, and over-acted. Bale is wooden, the Bane character is stupid, the all-fists action is lame... it goes on.

I watched this followed by "Bloodshot" (2020). The latter, at a 5.7 rating, is a much better film. Choose it instead.

Lethal Weapon (2016–2019)

Brainless cartoon mush

[2/10 · 23 September 2019]

Idiotic "cop" action; superficial direction; formula writing.

That this would get more than 5 simply reflects the low standards we've been driven to. If it has giant gunfights (with few if any casualties), car wrecks, outrageous behavior, and non-stop banter then it's automatically good.

For the non-discerning 13-year old.

John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019)

Equal parts stupidity, pretension, and expense.

[3/10 · 1 September 2019]

Ditto the other reviews here noting the endless (!) repetitive and inept fight scenes, meaningless story etc. The only positive aspects are some good city views and the production values in general. The rest is insultingly bad.

If this film stopped at half of its ludicrous action and overblown settings, it might be seen as a parody. But at this length you can only conclude that there was no taste, judgement, or vision involved - just mindless formula carried to extremes.

Reeves better have medical coverage for repetitive stress injuries. And, until they offer that for viewers too, don't take the risk.

Bearcats! (1971)

For undiscerning 10-year olds

[2/10 · 3 August 2019]

Ignore the current 7.9 nostalgia score. This isn't for adults. Silly plots, hamfisted action, stilted performances, repetitive low-budget camera work and soundtrack. Don't waste your time.

Dragged Across Concrete (2018)

Almost as stupid as it is pretentious

[2/10 · 24 March 2019]

This film has maybe four minutes total where story, writing, and acting come together. Those are *solely* in a few scenes between Gibson and Vaughn. Even then it's nothing special.

The rest alternates between gaseous capital 'A' acting, repellent violence for its own sake, and idiotic plot developments. The nadir is watching the fine actress Jennifer Carpenter trying to get through what has to be the worst cameo segment ever written - so excruciatingly bad that it may go viral.

This is grade F movie making in general, sometimes sinking to Z. If you actually enjoy it, there is something seriously wrong with your mental faculties, never mind taste and discernment. So it does may some value as a diagnostic tool...

Skyscraper (2018)

Underrated !! Give it a chance.

[8/10 · 2 October 2018]

I'm very picky with action films (just panned the "Jack Ryan" series). This is a good one. Acting, direction, dialogue are all spot-on. The plot is equal to most in the genre and better than many; certainly not a clunker. The special effects and stunts are outstanding. A worthy effort which deserves a ~7.5 rating and may have it someday.

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)

Hugely underrated here (from a non-Marvel fan)

[8/10 · 11 June 2018]

I couldn't care less about the comic book lore. But this is a top-notch adventure movie on its own merits which include an epic plot, sensitive screenplay, good dialog, dynamic direction with few lapses, great acting, plenty of suspense and terrific special effects.

I'm giving it the 8 it deserves. The 7.0 it has now is silly. If you like adventure films, catch this one.

Pacific Rim: Uprising (2018)

Underrated!! Honest - from a fan of the first one

[8/10 · 27 May 2018]

This is much better than its current 5.8 rating! I almost didn't watch it because of the very poor score. Having gone to see the original film twice, I wanted to remember that rather than a bad sequel.

But this is actually almost as good. The only things I'd criticize are the prehistoric plot devices of a locker-room fight between two young pilots (will screenwriters ever tire of that?) and the absurdity of a young woman having built her own giant robot.

It's also true that nothing here quite comes up to the originality (how could it?) and impact of the original. But the special effects are impressive, the direction moves along, and the plot is no worse.

I'm giving it an 8, because there's no way to directly assign the 7.3 it deserves, and I'd rather round up than down on this one. And a thank-you to the producers.

The Terminal (2004)

A series of idiotic events

[3/10 · 29 December 2005]

How can this turkey have an average rating of 7.1? Does nobody else resent being swindled out of 2 hrs of their time + rental costs? Do you rate a film at 7+ just because it's in color and has sound? What are the criteria here?

This moronic concoction embodies the worst of big-time Hollywood filmwriting, with lots of cheap "feel good" moments pulled out of nowhere by utterly illogical (and often incredible) plot contrivances. Accompanied, of course, by the requisite "uplifting" orchestral surges.

Plus it assumes (or rather affirms) that we are all ignorant of anything in the rest of the world. I watched this with an eastern European immigrant friend and was embarrassed for my country. How can we spend tens of millions making such tripe? And by the way, Viktor's documents are in Russian, and he studies a Russian guidebook to learn English. So much for authenticity, should you expect even that.

Don't waste your time. If you watch this film despite my warning and think that you enjoyed it, try to remember if you ever had a frontal lobotomy. That could explain it.

Opera (1987)

Plan 9 from Opera Space

[1/10 · 24 October 2005]

IMDb should allow negative ratings, so I could give this a '-10'. I'll have to settle for '1' which just means "awful".

This film is possibly the worst I have ever seen. The direction is tedious beyond words, the plot is unbelievably stupid, and the acting is no better. What puts it below "awful" is its gratuitous pandering to anyone who likes to see eyeballs gouged out etc. This is not only an awful film, it is a disgusting piece of work as well. It actually achieves the astonishing feat of being worse than Brian De Palma's self-indulgent grade F "thrillers".

Puhleeez don't tell me that Argento's photography is "striking" or that he's working on some other level or whatever. This is sleaze on a stage, that's all. The ONLY redeeming feature is the first 15 seconds when the birds are photographed with Verdi in the background. Probably aware that this fragment was the sole bit of actual creativity in the whole bucket of slops, Argento repeats it about 50 times. The point of it (in fact there is none) and the effect are lost immediately.

Don't waste your time on this or, I would guess, any of Argento's other works.

Papoulka

Se7en (1995)

Like everyone says... SUPERB

[10/10 · 16 April 2005]

After the rare experience of seeing such a stunningly crafted film I spent some time thinking what I should say on IMDb. But I find that many others have had the same reactions and opinion, and explained them as well as I could.

I do wonder why its IMDb rating isn't higher. This is easily a 9.5 film across the board. If only one thriller out of 100 would be this good. Wow.

I also wonder why IMDb insists on 10 lines of text for a submission. But it does prod me to add: if you like thrillers and can stomach some very, very strong scenes, don't miss this one.

Is that enough lines?

Gods and Generals (2003)

Iron ships and wooden actors

[4/10 · 29 August 2004]

Well, I don't know if the ironclads show up in this movie, but the wooden actors are there in force. Though even great actors might look bad saddled with such a mediocre screenplay and stilted direction. Every scene is a setpiece, with actors taking a deep breath and delivering the speech they've been handed. Even the battles are by-the-numbers, step-at-a-time affairs, with little sense of what it probably was like.

As always, it's sad to see so many resources go to waste. I could only get through about 30 minutes of this.

And why does IMDb require 10 lines of comment, minimum? I've said all I had to say. Save your time for another film.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

Watch out, Crimson Batman!

[1/10 · 29 August 2004]

This film should come with a warning that it is only suited to those adults who never outgrew watching Batman on TV, and would like to see the same thing with swords. Despite its many pretensions - and a great opening scene - the "movie" immediately degenerates into nothing more than a cartoon. The "acting" ranges from pathetic down to non-existent, with Thurman on the top end. A lot of it is based on people reverentially pulling swords out of sheaths and then pushing them back in, and similar ripponese mummery. The special effects are right down there with the acting, with awful gaps between what Thurman, for example, does in FX and what she can do on her own.

And what is it with this being Tarantino's fourth film? Perhaps he's aiming at Beethoven and Mozart status, and we can look forward to speaking in hushed voices of "Tarantino's Fifth". Oh, and we have "The Making Of..." titles too. What claptrap!

Altogether, though many try to justify it as homage to this and that, or coo over its uniqueness, it is only a silly pastiche, thrown together in the expectation that enough people will be fooled into paying for it. It insults the viewer, especially viewers like myself who think Tarantino does have some talent. You wouldn't know it from this turkey. Don't waste your time on it.

Tears of the Sun (2003)

Weak formula flick. Save your time & money.

[2/10 · 11 November 2003]

I've liked several Bruce Willis films, and looked forward to this one. But it turns out to be completely predictable, burdened by a really mediocre screenplay and plotholes big enough to fly a chopper through. My advice: watch "Blackhawk Down" again. Or take a nap.