Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
ListsAn error has ocurred. Please try again
Entertaining and pretty low-key
"Ceres" is about a woman named Proserpina, who goes to her mother's house. Her mother is Ceres and she's not home, so Proserpina has the house to herself, but Ceres soon comes home. The two of them do some planting outside and they lie on the ground. I don't wanna spoil the rest of the film.
There are definitely scenes that don't have any dialogue, like at the beginning, but when there is dialogue, it's good. Proserpina is played by Hannah Morrish, who also wrote the film, and Ceres is played by Juliet Stevenson. Their performances are fantastic and their characters are likeable. The film is well-edited and it looks very nice. I particularly liked the opening shot of Proserpina walking through an empty field. "Ceres" isn't a comedic or action-packed film and that's fine with me. Maybe not everyone will enjoy it, but I did.
How to Get $100 Million (2020)
I really enjoyed "How to Get $100 Million". It's about a young woman named Hope, who lives by herself. She's played by Jessica Marie Garcia. She watches TV and discovers a self-help guru, played by Aaron Groben, talking to his audience about how to get rich. Hope is interested in this mysterious guru and follows his advice. She wants $100 million, which is obviously a lot of money. Will she get it? Well, I won't spoil the ending.
I love the acting in this film. Groben gives an excellent performance and Garcia is also really good. The writing, cinematography, music, and such are terrific. Hope is a likeable character. She isn't shown interacting with many people. I kinda wonder if she has any friends. Anyway, the film succeeds at being dramatic. When I first saw it, I was kinda underwhelmed by the ending. I was hoping there would be more. However, I watched the film again and I think the ending is fine. "How to Get $100 Million" was made with great skill and I definitely recommend it.
Self Care (2022)
I guess it's OK
"Self Care" is a film that's only a minute long and has no dialogue, no actors, and no music. You see objects on the ground or a table (I'm not sure), like a mirror, a cigarette, and some kind of machine that has a dildo attached to it. By the way, the noise from that machine is the only sound you hear. That's the film. The objects you see (presumably) all have to do with the film's title.
The cinematography is good. The film seems to be a single shot of those objects. Despite the very short running time, I was a little bored, but I don't know if this film was made to be entertaining. "Self Care" is truly a film where pretty much nothing happens. It's a weird film to review. Like I wrote, it's OK, I guess. If you wanna watch it, yeah, go ahead. If you don't like it, it obviously won't feel like a huge waste of time.
Shit Show (2023)
Disgusting and mostly unfunny
I first discovered "S*** Show" on Kickstarter and decided not to pledge money to it, but I was still kinda interested in seeing the film after its completion. Well, after watching it, I'm glad I didn't pledge any money to it. It's not terrible, but it just didn't make me laugh.
"S*** Show" has both animated and live action scenes. It starts with two guys talking about the film "You Got Served" and whether or not that's the title of the film. I haven't seen "You Got Served" and I forgot about the fact that it exists. The two guys are playing tennis and their ball is accidentally hit into a sewer, where we meet the three animated main characters. They're a bloody tampon, a piece of excrement, and a used heroin needle. Oh, and they talk. Admittedly, the sewer looks very good and the stop motion animation of these characters is also very good. I liked the voice acting of the needle and the excrement, but not the tampon. That voice sounded rather obnoxious. The tampon screams and I thought it was awful. I wanted it to shut up.
Like I wrote, I wasn't laughing throughout the film. There are maybe a few moments that are a little funny, but that's it. There's a live action scene where a guy says to a woman that he kissed Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in the '80s. Is that supposed to be funny? I don't get it. I dunno what to say. Humour is subjective. Will most people who watch "S*** Show" find it hilarious? I'm not sure.
At times, this film isn't easy to watch. It's gross, but it tries to convince you that the three main characters are more than what they look like. That they deserve to be loved or something. OK, fine, but I didn't really care about these characters. The concept of an ugly looking character having inner beauty is unoriginal. I guess I don't really like films that are too gross. I was watching this obscure feature length comedy film called "Gross Out" and I couldn't finish watching it because it was really disgusting. Luckily, "S*** Show" is pretty short and I still wanted to give it a chance. Plus, while it has excrement, nobody eats it like in "Gross Out".
So yeah, "S*** Show" isn't very funny, but it definitely has good animation and mostly good acting. I should mention that there's a scene with a drug addict that is visually interesting. It kinda reminds me of that film "Spun". "S*** Show" is certainly odd, but an odd film isn't always a good film. Again, it's not terrible, but I don't think I can recommend it.
"Cruise" is about two guys who are forced to call people and convince them that they've won a free cruise. The callers aren't just forced to convince them, though. They have to also get their contact information. If the callers fail three times, they're killed by a gunman who's sitting with them in an office room. It seems that a lot of people are forced to make these calls. I don't know why, but I didn't care why. It's darkly funny. Do these two guys succeed? Well, I'm not gonna spoil the film for you.
The acting, writing, cinematography, and such are great. Visually speaking, the film is dark, but it doesn't look too dark. Like I wrote, it made me laugh. I really liked the ending. I don't *think* the story is realistic, but this is a film and films don't always have to be realistic. "Cruise" is well-made and I highly recommend it.
In the Red Corner (2016)
Unoriginal and mediocre
"In the Red Corner" is about a boxer who fights an opponent in a room. They don't fight in a boxing ring and there's no referee. The boxers also aren't wearing headgear and they fight on a hardwood floor. I'm not an expert on boxing, but isn't that dangerous? Is this something boxers do? Were the filmmakers unable to afford a boxing ring? Well, anyway, the story isn't unique and the film often looks too dark. Who are these characters? What's the protagonist's life like? I don't know. During the match, two people talk to the protagonist and I really don't know who they are. One of them is a woman. Is she his girlfriend? Yeah, you may be kinda confused while watching this. I was.
The acting is not great, but there's nobody who gives a godawful performance. I guess the guy who plays the protagonist is OK. The music is good, but the writing is so-so. This film has opening credits. However, the film is only about six minutes long, so I think those credits are unnecessary. None of the characters are terrible, but they're not interesting. I guess the fighting is decent, but I didn't care who would win the boxing match. I think the filmmakers should've learned how to light their film because, like I wrote, it just looks too dark. So yeah, I don't recommend "In the Red Corner".
One Shot (2020)
Well-made and unpredictable
I definitely didn't know what was going to happen in "One Shot". It's about a man sitting on a bench who's being filmed for something. Probably a movie. He takes a basketball that's beside him and goes to shoot it into a basketball net, but something shocking happens. I won't spoil it, though. While he's being filmed, you hear members of the camera crew talking.
The acting, cinematography, and such are good. I like that there's no music, especially during the end credits. It's appropriate. "One Shot" is only a couple of minutes long, but if you watch it with other people, you might be talking about it at least for awhile. To me, it's difficult to just ignore the film once you've seen it. I highly recommend it too.
The Apprentice (2014)
From what I understand, "The Apprentice" was going to be a segment in "Movie 43", but it wasn't included because I guess it was too controversial. I haven't seen "Movie 43" and I don't have much interest in seeing it. As for "The Apprentice", I think it's both funny and unfunny.
The film takes place at a morgue, which seems like an unusual location for a comedy. The protagonist is a guy named Wayne, who only recently started working at the morgue. He's played by Anton Yelchin and his performance is good, although he didn't always make me laugh. I guess he did the best he could with the film's script.
One night, Wayne is alone with a young dead woman in a room and the film gets pretty weird, dark, and unfunny. I'm not against black humour, but I just didn't find what Wayne does with the corpse to be funny. I won't spoil what happens, but you may find it hard to watch. I didn't personally find it hard to watch. However, I'm someone who watches extreme films like "Pink Flamingos", "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer", and "Nekromantik". I did get *some* laughs from watching "The Apprentice". I won't spoil the ending, but it is kinda funny. There's also a scene where Wayne is (presumably) mopping the floor, listening to music, and singing. He's oblivious to what's happening near him and falls. Yeah, I think that part's funny.
The acting, editing, and cinematography are fine. The music can be a bit weird at times, but it sounds good. I don't think I've ever been to a morgue and I don't know if the film was actually shot at one, but I'll just assume the morgue in this film looks like a regular morgue. "Movie 43" wasn't well-received by film critics and audiences. If you're one of the few people who enjoyed it, I don't know if you'll enjoy "The Apprentice". I *sort of* enjoyed it. Even when I wasn't laughing, I wasn't hating the film. It's only about six minutes long (including the credits). I think you have to be gutsy to make a film like this and I admire the filmmakers for taking risks. So yeah, I don't know if I can recommend "The Apprentice", but if you're not a fan of dark comedies and you become nauseated easily, then definitely don't watch it.
Odd and amusing
You wanna know what "T. P." is about? It's about a talking toilet paper roll that gets put in a filthy public washroom, but it wants to escape. The toilet in the washroom also talks and so does a plunger. The toilet paper roll struggles to break free from a holder attached to a wall, but does it succeed? You'll have to watch the film to find out. The story is rather weird. Was the writer on drugs when he came up with it?
All of the characters are apparently voiced by Bob Bergen, who did a good job. The film's stop motion animation looks impressive. I laughed, like when "Ave Maria" plays in the end credits. The film is a bit gross, but I don't think it's extremely gross. Humans in the film come to use the toilet, but from what I recall, you don't see any urine or excrement. This might sound weird, but the toilet paper roll protagonist is likeable. So yeah, I think "T. P." is well-made, funny, and entertaining. I recommend it if you're looking for something short and unusual to watch.
Farewell She Goes (2021)
In "Farewell She Goes", two young women go to a beach with a dead bird to give it a burial at sea. One of them throws the bird in the water, but it just comes back to shore. This is the only part in the film that made me laugh and it also made the two characters laugh. What are they gonna do with the bird? I'm not exactly sure when the film takes place, but judging by the clothes the characters are wearing and the film's ending text message, maybe it takes place in the 19th century. Again, I don't know, though.
The characters are likeable. They're played by Isabella Speaight and Cat White. Their acting is good. The writing, editing, cinematography, and music are also good. I had a little bit of trouble understanding what the characters were saying, but I heard most of their dialogue clearly. The film isn't powerful and the ending didn't make me cry, but I like the ending. If you enjoy period dramas, you might enjoy "Farewell She Goes".
Bad, but a little funny
I could be wrong, but it seems that the people who made "Calvinball!" just wanted to have fun and did not take the making of the film seriously. Well, it may have been fun for them, but it wasn't really fun for me, the viewer. For those of you who don't know, "Calvin and Hobbes" is a comic strip about a boy named Calvin and his stuffed tiger named Hobbes. Hobbes seems to be a real anthropomorphic tiger when he's just with Calvin, but to other people, Hobbes is just a stuffed tiger. It's a funny and wonderful comic.
This film features live-action re-enactments of moments from "Calvin and Hobbes", but they're not well-made. The characters, including a girl named Susie, are played by adults and their acting is terrible. It seems that they didn't even bother to buy a tiger costume for Hobbes. It's just a guy with his face painted and wearing fake ears on his head. His clothes aren't even orange. That's Hobbes? He hardly looks like Hobbes! If you were to do a side-by-side comparison with pictures, it would just look funny, although probably unintentionally funny.
From what I recall, the re-enactments are usually(?) different from the comic. In this film, Calvin sometimes wears what looks like a Transformers mask. I don't know why. I don't recall Calvin watching the animated '80s Transformers show or even having Transformers toys in the comic. There also seem to be live-action re-enactments of moments from "The Far Side". Why? Again, I don't know.
The sound quality isn't good. You can barely hear what the characters are saying. Sometimes, they'll say something and I don't even know what they said. I did laugh maybe a few times. Like in the comic, Hobbes is a stuffed tiger, at one point, but he looks like the Winnie-the-Pooh character Tigger. OK, that's funny. However, I didn't laugh much while watching the film.
"Calvinball!" is cringeworthy, cheap looking, amateurish, and mostly not entertaining. Luckily, it's only about 12 minutes long. I think you'd be better off reading "Calvin and Hobbes" than watching this film.
They Can't Hear You (2018)
An entertaining short film that might be difficult to watch for some people
"They Can't Hear You" is about a young woman who's tied to a bed and she has blood on her. She's given two minutes to try and escape. Her sibling is apparently the perpetrator and you don't see his/her face. The woman tied to the bed is clearly suffering and wants to live. The actress playing her gives a great performance. You really feel sorry for this character.
This is a single take film, meaning it was filmed in one long take or at least it looked like it was. I've seen the film twice and I don't remember it having a music score. That's fine with me, though. The film's not extremely violent, but it may still be tough to watch because you're mostly watching a character who's very unhappy and afraid.
I think "They Can't Hear You" is effective. The acting, writing, and cinematography are very good. I liked the ending, but I won't spoil it. I recommend this film to horror fans, but you may want to watch something upbeat afterwards.
Mostly unimpressive and confusing
I'm having trouble understanding this film's story. It begins with a cop chasing a few people and then... the cop wakes up in a field wearing different clothes? Did this happen later? Is it a dream sequence? What does this cop have to do with the rest of the story? Well, anyway, we see people in a church playing poker or some other card game. Who are these people? Are they gangsters? A different cop named Jonas goes inside the church and I think he wants revenge. I believe his... sister died? Jonas is basically a one-man army and he fights these people in the church.
"Clash" is just puzzling, but not in a good way. The fighting is not on par with, say, "The Raid" movies. Some of it looks OK, but some of it is unconvincing. There's a part where Jonas stabs a guy on the ground (presumably killing him), but you don't actually see him stabbing the guy. It's off-screen. Was this done because the filmmakers didn't know how to show it properly? The acting is so-so at best. I guess it's better than "The Room" (2003), but not by much. The guy who plays Jonas is OK, I guess. The editing and the sound are not great. I was watching this film with my headphones and there were at least a couple of times when the sound seemed to be coming out of only one side, for some reason. The film also doesn't look great. In fact, it often looks dull. I didn't care about the characters. There are maybe a few funny moments, but I don't think they're intentional. For example, when a character says, "Anne, don't rush me like that", the actor says the line poorly and I laughed.
If you think I'm being too harsh, well, what can I say? It's my opinion. I know movies require a lot of work, but I don't think "Clash" is entertaining. It's certainly not the worst short film I've ever seen, though. Maybe Orlando Giraldo, the writer/director/editor/etc, will make something better in the future.
Santa Baby (2019)
"Santa Baby" may not be a great short film, but it sure is memorable. After I saw it, I couldn't stop thinking about it. It takes place during the Christmas season. A killer in a Santa suit breaks into a home of a woman and a mysterious person living in what I think is the basement. The killer looks in the dark basement with a lantern he finds in the house. I don't know why he doesn't just turn the basement's lights on... or does the basement not have lights? I won't spoil what happens, but this film has a very weird and unpredictable ending.
The acting is good. The guy who plays the killer in the Santa suit is pretty convincing and frightening. The violence in the film looks OK. However, at one point, the filmmakers seemed to use cranberry sauce or something for blood and body parts, which looks rather fake. There's a suit that looks like it was made out of humans and it's very good. It reminds me of "The Silence of the Lambs". Anyway, the writing, editing, and cinematography are decent. The ending is great and it definitely helps make this film memorable. If you're looking for a short Christmas horror film, "Santa Baby" is good enough for me to recommend it.
To the Sea (2020)
Pretty good and a bit sad
"To the Sea" is about a brother and a sister who live in a rural house near what I'm guessing is a sea. They live with their mother, but one day, she just leaves in a car. The siblings throw a party at their house. The sister later thinks she sees her mother's car nearby, but it may not be her car. The mother also may not be coming back. What are they gonna do?
I was impressed with the acting in this film. The people playing the siblings give believable and solid performances. The film looks very nice and it's not predictable. I had a bit of trouble understanding the characters' accents, but maybe that's just me. I felt sorry for the main characters. Why would their mother just leave them? I don't know, but I guess things like this sadly happen in real life. Anyway, the writing and the editing are good. I tend to watch films that not many people have seen and "To the Sea" seems to be one of those films. To me, it doesn't matter if this film is obscure. It's worth watching.
Eerie and brilliant
Well, this is a weird short film. It's well-made, though. "homer_a" is about the lives of a few people who wear masks of characters from "The Simpsons". There's no dialogue and it looks like it was shot on a VHS camcorder. We see someone wearing a Bart mask on a bridge and he appears to be getting intoxicated. He strangles someone wearing a Milhouse mask in a garage (I think). There's also someone wearing a Homer mask drinking in a parking lot at night. By the way, these random scenes are in the first few minutes of "homer_a". The rest of the film basically shows Bart, Milhouse, and Homer in a park or a forest. I won't spoil what happens, though.
"homer_a" is unusual, unpredictable, hair-raising, entertaining, and rewatchable. I've seen it a few times. The actors, camerawork, editing, and such are great. I don't know who the actors are. They're not credited in the film, but that's OK with me. I guess it's a mystery. If you wanna show your friends a strange little film, then show them "homer_a".
"Traveller" is about a woman named Haf who finds a horse in the wilderness. They seem to live in a post-apocalyptic world. Haf loves being with the horse and she rides it while we see amazing scenery. However, a mysterious man who looks kind of like Ethan Hawke encounters them, which makes Haf fearful. It's definitely a suspenseful scene. I think the ending is good, but I won't spoil it.
I should mention that there's voice-over narration that reminds me of a Terrence Malick film, but that's not a bad thing. Haf is a likeable character. The acting, writing, music, cinematography, and editing are all magnificent. I actually have the music stuck in my head, right now. The film is somewhat grim, but it's also uplifting and I like that. If you have about 14 minutes to spare, then check out "Traveller".
Unidentified Woman (2019)
Your roommate can't always be trusted
This is definitely a good short film. It's about a woman named Dawn, played by Melanie Scrofano. Her possessions and money are stolen by her female roommate, played by Carolina Bartczak. There are probably some viewers who can relate to this because they've gone through either the same thing or something similar. The former roommate is staying at a motel, but Dawn obviously doesn't know this yet. The last few minutes of the film are excellent.
The acting is mostly very impressive. I love Scrofano and Bartczak's performances. The film is well edited. It looks nice and the writing is good. When it's trying to be intense, it succeeds. Dawn is also a protagonist that you care about. So yeah, I think "Unidentified Woman" is worth watching.
The Prowler (2018)
I'm not really sure if I like "The Prowler", but I guess it's kinda interesting. It's about a guy who walks by himself in a neighbourhood at night. According to the end credits, he's just called the Prowler. Is he planning to burglarize a house or something? I don't know. The film becomes strange and it makes you wonder if this guy is on drugs. Then it just ends and you might think to yourself, "What?" Yeah, this film is a bit weird, but it's not one of the weirdest short films that I've seen.
The film looks nice and the music is great. It's definitely suitable. The acting is very good. The film's only a few minutes long, including the credits, so even if you don't like it, it won't feel like a huge waste of time. I guess the film is merely OK. Maybe I don't understand it. Well, maybe I don't *have* to understand it. Anyway, "The Prowler" is visually appealing, has excellent music, and is at least fairly creative.
Wuhan Driver (2021)
"Wuhan Driver" has an interesting story. It's about Zhang, a Chinese man who works as an Uber driver in New York during the COVID-19 pandemic. He wears a face mask even though his passengers don't have to. The film more or less takes place during one difficult night for Zhang. One passenger vomits in his car and another passenger with a crying baby doesn't pay him. I won't spoil the ending, but I honestly didn't find it to be predictable.
The film's cinematography, editing, and writing are superb. Zhang is a protagonist you care about. He's played by Wayne Chang and his performance is great. Most of the acting in the film is good. I think the acting at the end is the main problem I have with the film. It's kinda unconvincing. There's a somewhat awkward scene with Zhang talking to a priest, who's a passenger, but I think it's believable. Conversations can definitely be awkward in real life. Anyway, "Wuhan Driver" is a short film that's worth checking out.
True Love (2006)
It's decent, but I have some questions
"True Love" is a crazy short film about a gunman who enters a store, abducts a man and a woman, and forces them to get married, have sex, and raise a child in a house. It's pretty bizarre, but it's kinda funny. Why is the gunman doing all of this? I have absolutely no idea. It's never explained.
Amazingly, the gunman is with these people for five years. How does he sleep and use the bathroom? Does he generally lock them in a room when he sleeps, showers, and uses the toilet? I'm not sure I believe that this guy can force these people to do what he wants for five years without them escaping and/or calling the police. Who's house are they living in? How do they buy groceries to stay alive? There's a priest who's in the wedding scene and the sex scene, but that's it. Well, what happened to him? Did the gunman kill him? Is it even fair to ask all these questions? I don't know, but I still enjoyed the film. Maybe you're not supposed to think too much about it.
The acting is definitely good. The guy who plays the gunman gives an impressive performance. The film has a low budget look to it and while the cinematography isn't great, it certainly isn't awful. There seem to be a lot of handheld camera shots, although I could be wrong. There were at least a couple of times when I wished the camera would just be still, but it's not a big deal. The film is funny, strange, and interesting enough for me to recommend it.
A Recipe for Seduction (2020)
Finger lickin' good
I don't know if I've ever seen a film that's presented by Kentucky Fried Chicken. "A Recipe for Seduction" is probably the first. It's a somewhat strange and silly film about an upper class woman who's in love with Colonel Sanders, the chef of her home. Yeah, Colonel Sanders, the guy who was obviously the founder of KFC in real life. He actually passed away almost exactly 40 years ago. In this film, Sanders is played by Mario Lopez, and he does a good job. I don't usually watch Lifetime films, but I wonder if this short film is a parody of one of them. It has to be a parody. I was certainly laughing. I mean wouldn't you be laughing if Colonel Sanders was one of the main characters in a friggin' romance film?
"A Recipe for Seduction" sort of takes itself seriously, but it also sort of doesn't, and I like that. I haven't written much about the plot and I won't write more about it. I think the acting and the writing are pretty good for this kind of film. Sanders is definitely a likeable character. Well, the film *is* presented by KFC, so the fast food chain's founder has to be likeable, right? Even though I enjoyed this film, I don't know why it was made. Maybe KFC just wanted to show people that they have a sense of humour. I guess there's nothing wrong with that.
"Zenimation" is beautiful, relaxing, and very enjoyable. It shows clips from many Disney animated films like "Zootopia" and "Aladdin", but without dialogue and music. Well, there *is* a clip of the "Frozen" character Elsa saying, "Ow! Ow!" However, does that even count as dialogue? There are plenty of sounds that you hear like birds chirping and rain.
Maybe this show will be boring to some people, but I didn't find it boring. The episodes are pretty short. Each of them are less than 10 minutes, which is fine with me. A lot of the animation is great to look at, even though I don't think there's new footage from any upcoming Disney films. This show also has humorous moments. I laughed when I heard the noise the "Hercules" character Pegasus makes while sleeping.
So far, there are 10 episodes of "Zenimation". I don't know if there will be more, but I wouldn't mind seeing more. If you've had a stressful day, this show might be nice to watch. It certainly makes me appreciate gorgeous animation.
The Mascot (2020)
Hoo boy... "The Mascot" is bad. Really, really bad. When you think it's over, it keeps going... and then it *finally* ends. What makes it so bad? Well, it's poorly acted, it's poorly written, it's not scary, it's boring, it's infuriating, and it often looks terrible. You know what? I can't think of a feature film I've seen that has cinematography that's worse than this. "Ben & Arthur" is a film that also looks bad, but at least that film is kinda entertainingly bad. This movie? No. I mean I did laugh a little at times, but I would rather watch "The Room" (2003) again, instead of this. That movie is a lot funnier and a lot more enjoyable.
OK, so "The Mascot" is about a high school tiger mascot who kills a few people who are hanging out at an apartment. The mascot uses a knife that, to me, doesn't look like a real knife. At one point, the mascot cuts off a guy's fingers, except his fingers definitely don't look real. They look like they're made of plastic or something. I did kinda laugh at this part, but I don't know if it's intentionally funny or not. This movie is mostly unfunny and I simply didn't care about the characters. They don't say anything interesting or amusing.
Why is this movie's cinematography so bad? Well, it's at least partly because the camera shots are often out of focus. It's completely amateurish to do this. Did Sean McGann, the director and cinematographer, not know what he was doing? Did he not care? Well, I don't know, but these shots are distracting. I could probably write a lot about the camerawork, but I don't feel like it.
There are times when I think there should be sound in the film, but there isn't. There's a scene where a guy is outside by himself smoking something, but there's no sound. It cuts to the mascot looking at him and there *is* sound, but then it cuts to the guy who was smoking and again, there's no sound. It then cuts to the mascot and again, there *is* sound. What's up with this? Luckily, this doesn't happen often, but it's still distracting and amateurish. I'll say this, though. When the mascot is looking at this guy, it's a bit creepy (in a good way) and at least it looks adequate.
You eventually find out who the mascot is and, admittedly, it's surprising, not to mention weird. There's what I think is a dream sequence and it's weird, as well. It contains footage of the mascot repeatedly smacking a wall with a pillow. Um... OK. As bad as this movie is, this dream sequence is a *little* interesting. I certainly wasn't expecting it.
Watching "The Mascot" is like watching a terrible feature-length student film. I don't think it *is* a student film, but if it is, I can just picture a teacher giving it a bad or failing grade. However, I don't wanna discourage the filmmakers from making other films or the actors from acting in other films, as long as those films are much better than this one. They could certainly have better cinematography.
There's only a small amount of things that I liked or somewhat liked in this film. The music is good. It seems that most, if not all, of the music is by Nine Inch Nails, which is a band I really like. I'm not sure if the filmmakers got permission to use their music, though. Anyway, there's no way I would recommend this film. It's just awful.
The Nostalgia Critic: The Wall (2019)
Currently on YouTube, this episode has more dislikes than likes. While I'm someone who gave it a dislike, I don't think it's one of the worst YouTube videos I've ever seen. This episode seems to be a tribute (I'm not entirely sure) to the film "Pink Floyd: The Wall", which I enjoyed, although it's been a long time since I've seen it. I used to watch "The Nostalgia Critic" a lot, but I lost interest in the show. I watched this episode to see what all the fuss is about and... well, I didn't like it, but it's not godawful. It has parodies of songs from the film. For example, there's a parody of "Comfortably Numb" called "Comfortably Dumb". Hardy har har. The songs aren't funny and I wouldn't care to listen to them again, but I don't think they're atrocious. Doug Walker's singing voice isn't terrible.
This episode is admittedly somewhat amateurish and cheap looking. The animation in it ranges from being bad to OK. When it's trying to be horrifying, it does look kinda horrifying. I remember "Pink Floyd: The Wall" being weird and so is this episode, but the songs and the animation in the film are definitely better. Corey Taylor from the metal band Slipknot is in this episode and at the end, he performs a cover of the "SpongeBob SquarePants" theme with cast members. It has nothing to do with "Pink Floyd: The Wall" and, unfortunately, it's not that good of a cover, but at least it's short.
There's a bizarre commercial with Doug Walker for something called Honey. I don't really know what it is, but it's not actual honey that bees make. For some reason, Doug is really hyperactive in the commercial. I guess he's just trying to be funny, but he's not. It's weird watching him act like a crazy cartoon character without being funny. Also, the commercial goes on for too long.
Even though the show is called "The Nostalgia *Critic*", there doesn't seem to be much criticism of "Pink Floyd: The Wall". The Nostalgia Critic does say that he likes the film, but this episode is obviously different than other episodes where he sits in front of a camera and reviews a film. Again, I'm not quite sure if this episode is a tribute to "Pink Floyd: The Wall". Maybe it's a spoof? Maybe both? Well, unfortunately, it's not funny and entertaining. At times, it reminds me of this crappy low budget film called "The Amazing Bulk". Both that film and this episode have bad animation and actors who definitely look like they're in front of a green screen. "The Amazing Bulk" is actually funnier, but to be fair to this episode, some of its animation *is* better than that film.
The acting is OK, I guess. It's like other episodes of "The Nostalgia Critic" that I've seen. I don't watch this show much, anymore, so I don't know what other recent episodes are like. This one could've been a lot better... or maybe Doug Walker should have left "Pink Floyd: The Wall" alone.