SebastienSpa Reviews

Schumacher (2021)

Everyone was waiting for the end... (and new information)

[30 November 2021]

The documentary itself doesn't reveal much new about one of the world successful Formula 1 drivers. It's mostly montage of people's statements saying how great he was.

By doing so it follows the paradigm of TV documentaries, mediocre music - subsequently no real dramaturgical arch. A lot of emotion about a driver who wasn't that emotional.

In fact, most people watched this piece to finally get some new information about Michael's current state.

It's a little bit like the South Park episode about the new Terence & Phillip trailer - you have to watch through a lot of stuff that you don't necessarily want to see (like Senna's death live in every detail - was that really necessary?) and things we already know (yes, Michael was great, we get it), only to get to the point we've all been waiting for.

And then...

Sorry, Senna and D2S have production and dramaturgical standards where this documentary doesn't even come close.

The Grand Tour: The Grand Tour Presents: A Massive Hunt (2020) Season 4, Episode 2

Arrested Development

[26 December 2020]

Sometimes you come to wonder what you loved so much about the holy trinity of car presenters/entertainers. You re-watch previous grand tour episodes, and you come to realize that the package as a whole was the key ingredient. It was not just May, Hammond and Clarkson in hilarious situations, it was their stations they passed through on each episode. And part of that was the connection to the audience - because they simply behaved very differently when in front of a live crowd. This switch between the "real" and the(ir) fantasized world constantly became visible and created fantastic humour.

Now, here we have (as promised) another (actually very late) new adventure only episode to Grand Tour's season 4. Let's make this one short: What you get, is a (now) classic episode of Hammond, Clarkson & May, once again doing what they love doing most when not being in the UK: Going to remote places in ridiculous vehicles, cussing/discussing/laughing/failing/triumphing/etc to a Grand Tour like editing style and reaching the conclusion that we haven't learned anything from the one and a half hours that we had just spent with this topic.

To be quite honest, the encounter and chemistry between the three probably hasn't ever been about anything else, and some might argue that this is exactly why they, and only they can pull off something like this and come out victorious.

But do they? I have found this episode rather repetitive, easy to predict and above all - very one dimensioned. I do miss those car tests, those arguments over it, those audiovisual masterpieces they once presented to illustrate an experience. I do miss the arguments about certain topics in front of a live crowd. And I really miss the comparisons of cars in their Top List.

It now literally feels like a homeless clown trio on its voyage to ridicule the (third) world with infantile statements/ideas/actions. When you see these ingredients on several different stages over about 50 minutes, it's funny and plenty - but when you them only on one stage over about one and a half hours, it gets dull very quickly, no matter the high production values.

Bad Boys for Life (2020)

"Bad Boys for Life" tries to be a real movie, when yet I come to realize I want a thrill ride

[17 April 2020]

Oh, how did I celebrate when I heard Michael Bay won't be directing the movie, oh, how did I laugh about the intellectual quality of Michael Bay films... And yet, here we are with fresh blood trying to fix what seemed broken. A good movie needs not only characters but solid character development - that's what we've learned about movie making.

Now, here we have two characters and they haven't really been given a lot of development so far, so what do we do? We give 'em some! And while this drama unfolds in front of your eyes, a great share of nostalgia, a decent portion of "coming of age"-breeze and a constant reminder of the final ultimate point-of-no-return end of the protagonists' relationship - you quickly start asking when something will blow up? Because, huh, you got me there, I actually came here just to see that in the first place. But instead we're treated with characters who not only play to be, but really appear tired.

And, subsequently, we should be treated at least with our fair share of action, right? I mean, even the The Dark Knight Rises paid off in that sense. And the action in Bad Boys for Life is big - on paper. But it's unbelievable unimaginatively captured and put to screen. Yes, the colors are the there (just like Bay), the lights shines nicely on everything we need to see (just like Bay), the dialogues are sometimes stereotypically snotty (just like Bay) but, and what am I saying here, BUT this certain Mr Bay would have made this movie more fluent, more, *trembling here* gracious.

Right after I saw BBFL I went home, turned on Netflix, watched Bad Boys II and was blown away by how good this movie looks even by today's standards, 13 years later. Even the CGI is mostly bearable. In BBFL the camera angles, movements and focuses are sometimes just lazy compared to Bay's work in the two previous movies. And then there is the music - once again compared to Bad Boys II, it's generic, sometimes even non-supportive, thin and sits bad in the mix at times. To be honest, the music of Bad Boys II wasn't necessarily original, but it had a drive, it pumped and blasted when it had to. BBFL's music, however, is just a collection of phrases and instrumentations we've heard I-don't-know-how-many-times. Lazy would be a good word to describe it.

Bad Boys for Life is the best "movie" of the three (if you go by by-the-book rules) but it's the worst Bad Boys film (if you loved the first two ones for what they were - and are).

Sonic the Hedgehog (2020)

It seems I'm quite a rare minority here...

[13 March 2020]

...or maybe I've just seen too many movies that are basically as formulated as this one.

Let's start with the genre itself: movies based on a video game. Oh my goodness, did we see fails - in fact the fails outweigh the wins. Wing Commander - huuuh, a movie video game made into a movie that sucked even more. Super Mario Bros - yes, it really happened. Mortal Kombat - ugh, and with a blink of an eye the magic was gone. Doom - well, you tried, you failed. Double Dragon - you thought it couldn't get any worse. Street Fighter - it did. (Don't get me started at Uwe Boll) These days you are actually happy to call movies like Warcraft "decent". But it remains a tricky genre...

So, here we enter Sonic the Hedgehog, a beloved Sega video character from the (early) 1990ies who set not only the bar for character design but also for fluidity and underdog status. Sega was the Apple in a world of consoles dominated by Nintendo - they had Mario, but Sega was different, more stylish, and Sonic was their iPhone. And what did Sonic do? He ran around and collected tons of golden rings, doing it fast, in style and over some of the most insane courses, taking the player on a constant rollercoaster ride - but super smooth.

In a world of Flashs, Quicksilvers, Dashs etc - the feature of just being lightning fast is a little, well, outdated. But one could follow the MCU fork and build solid background stories that work in themselves as a microcosm that can later be interwoven with other microcosms. Even if those stories are mostly silly, they invite you into a different world. Sonic's world - well - uhm - it doesn't make ANY sense, at all. Where the movie could explain why and who and how and what - it chooses to let Sonic explain how he likes to ditch school. So, there we have a villain - he's evil, obviously... and he's annoying. Yes, Carrey tries (!) very hard again - never really been a fan of his acting style but this is a video game movie - it's ridiculous to begin with, so, let it be ridiculously annoying, fine. But where does he get those weapons from? Where does he actually come from? Why does he.... Ok, we agreed, instead of background we get more hair raising action and a perfect introduction into stereotypical American culture. It's these moments when you wonder if the Japanese originator of Sonic would have wanted his character to end up in an American trucker bar with every cliche available...

So why does this thing do that? And why can he do these things but yet at the same he can't and why.... They keep a woman tied up around a kid for about a whole.... oh boy. Ok, we agreed.

Something positive to conclude this: It had some beautiful pictures and some beautiful faces. Sometimes faces said something that revolved around some term called funniness. Considering it's a video game movie it would actually enter my Top Ten! Yay, thumbs up (kinda).

Don't F**k with Cats: Hunting an Internet Killer (2019)

Extremely ambitious, yet caught up in weird story lines

[9 February 2020]

Just to open up: yes, the content of this documentary mini series is serious and current in a lot of ways. But let alone the story itself it is very difficult even to start.

If the maker of this documentary is trying just that - the difficulty of explaining the "chicken or egg, what was first?"-concept of the weird excesses of today's connected society - then they did a pretty good job. What I believe though, is that some of those hidden messages are unintentional.

The premise is simple - an online community decides to investigate a user who posts videos where he's being incredibly cruel to animals. The more they dive into the into the story the more they (and we) are shocked as we hear more and more people tell hair raising details.

Particularly the head police officer appears extremely incompetent - to me this was a little bit the key of viewing this over 3-hours depiction of a person who is as sickening as equally fascinating. But the fascination comes from a strange angle - because the actual protagonist of this documentary is not the person in focus but rather the internet itself. This whole story is, after you calmed the moral part of your brain down, a very logical event. In fact, it is a topic that should be more present in today's classrooms. We are telling our kids to put our phones away instead of discussing the actual meaning and power that it has - and that power is not the screen, the camera or the processor, but the internet that's dictating their very self image and perception. After all, the medium IS the message (Marshall McLuhan)!

If you can compare the Matrix to Fight Club when it comes to "What is or makes your personality and where does it come from?"-question then you could compare this documentary to the 2019 movie "Joker". What makes a villain? Lack of attention? A certain characteristic of ego? A certain What makes someone be ready to kill? The simple fact that people will remember you for it? Both films can agree that exposure via mass accessible networks is key. Both can agree that society plays an important role - particularly when it clashes with a fragile mind.

But, and that's the point of DFWC that just comes a little short, what role do WE play in this? Unfortunately the whole three parts spend only a few minutes on the fact that the internet has given us a chance to immediately show our reaction, thoughts, emotions - whatever we want, basically. And it's exactly what fuels so many people these days -> reactions. The hunt for likes and comments on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Twitch, etc. - it's become am custom, obsession and a clever business - a business that can produce drama, hysteria, emotion (and sometimes even information) to keep people tuning in. Many of the actual protagonists are therefore the marionettes that they (almost) completely ignore to acknowledge themselves. Yes, at the end we get a little poke - but for the sake of drama it was kept unexplored until briefly at the very finale.

I liked the information, the production values and some of the pacing - but the drama parts were so painfully overstretched that only two parts would have easily done the job without losing any credibility. But this almost MTV style like presentation of certain points was not enjoyable. The music plays an integral part in this - very dramatic, very hollywood'esque, and very guiding - which unfortunately only contributes to being hard to watch at times.

All in all, solid.

Starship Troopers: Traitor of Mars (2017)

The word we are looking for is "lazy"

[25 September 2019]

It's hard to find a worthy introduction here because this is more of a mess than a movie. After everything that spawned after the original movie, everyone was so much in hope that one day there will a sequel or spin-off that kinda got the idea of part one and continued it in a decent manner. Well, we are still waiting...

In times where computer games cinematics are made in a very sophisticated way this movie looks like it's been made by fans using a game engine. Some animations and (bug) walk cycles look so bad, you can literally say "my playstation graphics look better". Things we have to distinguish though is effects quality and cinematography, and the cinematography is quite ok at some points. I actually found the music quite fitting at most points and the theme(s) of the original film received a passable makeover, except for when the music department decided to make a dream-metal version of it. It's one of these many moments where you just look into the sky and scream "whyyyy"?

But the most annoying two things are the new characters (their interactions, their models - some much less detailed than others -, their dialogue, etc...) and the (missing) logic of some scenes. The most prominent point in my opinion is time: Time is so scarce in some scenes, the bugs are advancing fast in vast numbers - it takes forever to just kill one - and yet the characters find lush windows of time to spew out dialogue that is, and here we are again, duller than in most mediocre video game cinematics. Certain decisions made, some serious lag in reaction times and some immediacies of unfoldings in situations just make no sense at all. And as much as I tried - it killed the atmosphere, credibility and legitimacy of this film for me. You may get through with in video game cutscenes - but not in a movie.

All in all: Here and there a scene is nicely set, here and there an effect actually works, here and there something not completely predictable happens and here and there story proceeds in a way that actually would make sense on a larger scale of tolerance. But most of the time this is just an empty movie that decorates itself with names that we once learned to love - only to find dull shells of the past. Yes, this one is lazy, very very lazy.

The Dancer (2000)

The problem with dancing movies...

[10 March 2019]

If we consider ourselves as "quite" serious movie reviewers, we must acknowledge the fact that a movie tells a story - that's what it's supposed to do.

Just like action movies - dance movies traditionally run short of a story to make room for the action, uhm, dancing. This is an important background fact to review this movie.

I also have to admit that I don't really like dance movies - I never saw the necessity to push a story with dancing scenes - Indian movies rely heavily on it and even in western movies some productions have reached the point where the story is, well, the gap filler between the dancing. And that would rather make for a "performance flick" than an actual movie.

Luc Besson tries really hard to makes this one stand out. He gives the protagonist characteristics that make her very special. He adds characters that really try to propel a story. The settings are great, the sound is mostly awesome and avantgardly cool, the camera and editing is (of course) Bessonesque deluxe - so what's there to complain?

Let's jump back to the beginning of my review. Even though there is a lot of substance compared to other dance movies - in the end it's a dance movie and the crucial part is the final performance, like in any other dance movie. And that, unfortunately, makes it very predictable and prototypical.

It makes me a little bit sad as you can tell that everybody here is working so hard to make this movie stand out as something different. As a performance flick this is probably one of the best and most original I've seen - but unfortunately as a movie it's only average.

Star Raiders: The Adventures of Saber Raine (2017)

Hallelujah...

[11 March 2017]

I guess everyone who took a quick look at the cast was wondering: "Wow, really, THAT Casper Van Dien? The guy from Starship Troopers and Sleepy Hollow?" And yes, this is the only reason why I sat down at a friend of mine who collects trash movies. And it didn't take long and I got this weird "Command & Conquer 1 Cinematic" feeling. It's been 20 years ago that Titanic actually looked kind of realistic and Starship Troopers set the benchmark for action packed CGI. And here we are in the year 2017 and are being served with visuals that could have been done by a group of self taught high-schoolers. But that's only the first thing you notice - after this is goes on and on. This story. Sorry, I am usually a guy who tries to value even smallest mercies but no, no mercy here. This story is recycled, rehashed and wrecked - you are pulling your hair out because you just know everything ahead.

The camera, the sound effects, the dialogues, the music, the costumes, the locations (this was probably shot in a forest nearby), the whole way people encounter and talk to each other, it's all so unbelievably lame - i wonder what some of the actors thought when they read the script. In fact a few actors try so hard to make this work you can immediately tell the quality of someones talent. Even with bad camera, clumsy dialogue and cheesy costumes some prove that even in worst conditions they can at least deliver a believable performance - and that goes to some actors, and the actors only.

When you see some student movies coming out of some film or media universities you'd be surprised what the next generation has to offer. Even they would laugh about this embarrassing excuse for a movie. I'm so sorry, I just couldn't be nice this time. This is an insult to movie lovers - and yes, I'm also the kind of guy who also "gets" and laughs about Kung Pow - Enter The Fist.

Top Gear: Episode #24.1 (2017) Season 24, Episode 1

Let's put it this way: It's a high-budget entertaining car show now

[8 March 2017]

I think the biggest problem everyone has here is the name: Top Gear. Over the time span of more than a decade the trio of Clarkson/Hammond/May has built as cult TV-show that, let's be honest, can't be topped under that name. But what followed in the season after their departure was not just an attempt, it was an insult. Instead of reinventing the format properly we had way too much going on with an armada of hosts who frankly didn't quite know what they were doing - although their casting and presence mostly made sense.

In the meantime Clarkson, Hammond and May picket up where they left off - only with a lot - yes, a LOT more money. So come on, honestly, how can you top that? You simply can't.

So what did Top Gear do for its 24th season? They've gone through a diet, obviously a tight one. What's left is LeBlanc, Harris and Reed, a rather politically correct response to the all white, all British trio Clarkson/Hammond/May. What I did was what most of you couldn't: Give 'em a chance.

The chemistry is at its beginning - you can literally feel how the three have to find their way to each other first and the show sends them through plenty of scenarios to do so. Nice. We got the Stig back, we got the Top Gear track back and we got great cars, kind of pointless but fun challenges (like before) and a celebrity. Now the new hosts have to glue these parts together in "their" manner and to be honest - for a first shot they did it quite well.

LeBlanc brings the typical American swag, Harris is a nice guy with three times the technical knowledge of cars of the previous trio combined and Reed is the funny guy who brings things closer to the average-joe-watcher. It's a balanced recipe, but of course it needs time to sit to start working properly.

Yes, eight stars may be a bit generous but it's my trust bonus as I believe those three can actually pull it off. Production values are high as usual and I'm looking forward to what's coming up next. You should do the same - it can't be a Grand Tour 2 anyways, so let's be open to where they carry it.

The Grand Tour: Opera, Arts and Donuts (2016) Season 1, Episode 3

Maybe time is better than crash boom bang

[3 December 2016]

Quite honestly, on the first watch this episode didn't have wow effect that episode one and two had.

But on a second glimpse it probably offers the essential recipe behind the trio's being. On top of that this might be the summary of ingredients that a show called "The Grand Tour" needs - grand touring, fooling around and being kids trapped in an adult body.

Anyone who missed the classic moments (from their previous show) that unfold slowly and happen as the three move on might be just right here. If this is what TGT is supposed to be it appears like this is what the fans want it to be - and therefore is just right.

I personally like the idea of experimenting with the format itself but this is just classic material in the way that probably most people expect Clarkson, May and Hammond to move around in. So, maybe this is one for the fans - and they deserve to know that the trio hasn't forgotten its core fan base.

Still, I hope for more experiments - they got the money, they got the production crew, they got the settings, and, of course, they got the cars. So how about a little bit of both worlds? I'm ready!

The Grand Tour (2016–2024)

Very very very good, BUT...

[19 November 2016]

The facts first: Everybody knows the background story of Jeremy Clarkson getting sacked from the BBC for hitting an employee and Hammond and May following him only to sign with Amazon for the Über-sequel of their original show.

That being said, the first thing you notice is the budget. Oh yes, The Grand Tour is big, very very big and expensive and you will be constantly reminded of this.

The heart of Top Gear was the chemistry of these three gentlemen, so, where is it? Exactly where it's supposed to be - nothing has changed, the three are still a joy to watch, particularly when they have different opinions on things. So this is also the heart of The Grand Tour.

What do we get? Well, what we got on Top Gear - three hilarious lads driving fast cars, chatting and disagreeing about then while taking things to absurd levels. Half of the show is in front of live audience in a studio tent and the other are prerecorded films that are being played in between. We also have a track that is being used to measure the performances of a car and we have a new racing driver to do this.

Is The Grand Tour better than Top Gear? Hm, in its current state this is a definite yes. Is it the ultimate car show? Considering its budget and passion you may have the right to say so. Is it original? Come on, let's be honest, it isn't. Even though there are a few minor new ideas here and there it is exactly what we have come to expect from the trio formerly steering Top Gear. Don't get me wrong, they do what they do very very well and without a doubt this is already one of the biggest car shows on the planet. However it isn't new - at all.

That's why I can't give it 10 points. Quite frankly even 8 are very generous already - but as a little leap of faith this may prove to be right.

It actually doesn't matter, Clarkson, Hammond and May are back in the game and they play it just as everyone hoped they would.

The Escape (VI) (2016)

A bit of a blend between "Chosen" and "Ticker"

[25 October 2016]

After a decade-and-a-half break The Hire returns with a bang. The Escape definitely feels like the original films and is a worthy sequel regarding the production standards. Everything is here - the speed, the tricks, the booms and of course, the driver and his BMW. The passenger is once again cast splendidly and the antagonist feels real. Yet I just can't help feeling deja-vu's all over:

• the child on the back seat that's transported for the wrong reasons - a helicopter brought down by the car without using any weapons - the driver changing his mind in favor of the character that the films builds empathy around - all forces working against the driver - that he escapes sublimely

All this doesn't matter though, because what you get is a state-of-the-art action short film for free. It does everything right in terms of impression and its original purpose - which is to promote a car. And by doing so BMW builds a carefully designed image that combines reliability with coolness. The driver always acts in favor of the audience - and so does his car.

So what is this? To me it's more a homage to the original series than an actual sequel. At this point no further installments have been announced so I think if there was an upcoming series it would have to dig a little deeper into the character of the driver - or else it would prove to be what it was originally made for: an extremely cool car car commercial. I believe it can effortlessly be both.

Eddie the Eagle (2015)

The feel-good movie of this year

[4 May 2016]

Will Eddie The Eagle win many prizes? Probably only audience related prizes. ETE doesn't reinvent the wheel but it does everything right that you can do right with this source material.

As a European I am VERY familiar with this sport (AND Michael Edwards) and here is my comparison, Eddie The Eagle vs reality: It is true, you start jumping at around 6 and you everything you work for is the take-off and landing. That's the bread and butter of this sport, regardless of the size of the jump. Eddie's approach stirred up media attention as it really really takes a fine set of balls doing this with the experience he had at this point. Ski jumpers really do exactly look like depicted in this film - Tall, slender, boy-like athletes who can silently tame their fear.

And now a little bit to the other side. You can't just walk into a ski jumping arena, go to the top and jump, no no no, you have to sign a load of waivers, apply for a license, have your team and material set up and follow training schedules. The Eddie-way in this film is optimistic but as far from reality as you could be. I will dive a little further into this later. His coach is merely a projection of this instances that Eddie had to learn from - there was no actual coach but many many tips from here and there that he built his knowledge on. I guess the producers thought it would be easier to follow to have one entity - they were right. Now the Warren Sharp thing is also extremely far fetched as US-Americans haven't really done anything significant in this sport. The big ski jumping nations are Japan, Germany, Austria, Finland, Slovenia, Norway (and maybe Poland, Russia and Czech Republic) and only the idea of having a pioneering American icon is absolutely ridiculous.

Back to real. The portrayal of Eddie is superb - he really did look and act like this. Egerton gives the character the life it needs to endure this completely crazy trip and to be honest, you have to be a little crazy to face the challenges in ski jumping considering the experience and resources that Eddie had. He really did jump withe material and brands shown in the movie and he actually did stir up a lot of controversy within the British Olympic team.

On to the other side again. A jump (including in run) barely lasts ten seconds, meaning that the emotions and stretched-out comments while shown in slo-mo are just not possible. One blink of an eye and it's over, in both ways. How did his (ex-)coach get across the world from a little remote mountain town AND into the Olympic arena (as an outcast) in less than 24hours? Ski jumping is shown a little bit like a gladiator sport that "separates the men from the boys" which is probably farthest away from reality as it can be. The (European) media focuses on the technical aspect rather than the emotional. Don't forget, there is also "ski flying" - regular part of the ski jumping world cup - where jumpers frequently surpass 225m (app 740ft). The style is also a little mixed up. While back then ski jumpers were still jumping with parallel style Eddie applies the now common V-style which was considered "dirty" at that time.

The one thing that really disturbed me was the portrayal of the Olympic games itself. As if everything around this private money machine was for the athletes, the people and the good of mankind. In fact no one from that side wanted Eddie to be there. Not the International Olympic Committee, not the British Olympic Committee, none of the associations, (at first) not the British media, not the other athletes and certainly not the organizers. Right after those games the rules for qualification were changed to prevent people like Eddie to ever compete in the Olympics again. I suppose the makers of this movie had to do this in order to get the rights to show the rings at all. Anyway, to me this is a huge hypocrisy.

This film is suitable even for kids of the age of five as it is completely "harmless". The only real challenge to Eddie is Eddie himself, all other obstacles and antagonists are too soft to be a real threat to him - which is good. Some Americans may argue, that his coach's description of the take-off may be unsuitable for kids but hey, it's done in a charming way. "Eddie The Eagle" is about an underdog who does not accept boundaries and overcomes his fears in a very human way. The perfect lesson for a kid and the perfect reminder for an adult what someone is capable of when there is a will.

The sceneries are superb, the cinematography is a nice blend of British filmmaking and Hollywood-like hero celebration but it treads on the "safe path" as there is nothing here that we haven't seen already. The music is a fitting hybrid of orchestral score and 80's style synth-tracks that works perfectly. Jackman gives his character the grumpy style that a fallen hero needs and Christopher Walken is the icing on the cake. For a family evening, this movie is a total no-brainer. As a movie itself it's a "safe run" for what it wants to tell. Definitely a recommendation.

Streif: One Hell of a Ride (2014)

Very narcissistic mess of great pieces

[12 February 2016]

The premise of this film is actually quite ambitious and interesting. The world's most dangerous ski track in the world, forces that even race car drivers only rarely encounter - but skiers have no aids to work against them but plain muscles, fame and fortune if you win this vicious run on this infamous killer slope...

The pictures actually do reflect what i just mentioned, but it keeps doing it over and over again. It seems like this film's mission is to constantly remind you of the danger and significance simultaneously. It appears like no other downhill race on the world cup calender counts - only this one. In fact it's the holiest of holy grails but it can kill you. Do you start to see a pattern here? Actually there isn't much to say about the contents of this documentary. We have this dangerous track, like a wild bull, and the cowboys who can tame it, heroes, as we would call it. The framework is a very straight forward editing with heavy use of dramatic music and sound effects to underline the fury of this "ride" - yet, you never get to see the full ride. Although this movie spends near two hours glorifying this race you never really get a chance to hear very basic facts.

Over and over we hear preparing athletes pay their tribute and respect to this course and how it changed their lives but just after you think a chapter will be further explored it jumps around very loosely and mixes rather incoherent scenes using quick cuts.

Although there would be so much substance this film actually lacks a real story. It is more a portrayal of fates than actually a developing story, a TV two parter in ESPN production standards. And that makes me a little be bit sad because all the material was basically there, but the ones who put it together really should revisit film school. Although it meets all the production standards of modern documentary film making it is just not thoroughly pleasant to take a look at the clock and being told you still got an hour to go.

I call it the Transformers effect: Once you cross the invisible line of perceivable magnitude you end up achieving exactly the opposite with the viewer. In other words: far too much may achieve far less than even the sum of its elements - and yes, less can be really be more. The problem is that this film relies too much on tons of effects instead of just giving an insight on what this is actually about.

Lemmy (2010)

Great persona - film way too long...

[22 February 2012]

Before I start I better confess right away that I am a huge admirer of Mr Kilmister, his music has branded me since I was a kid, his legacy is present everywhere around the modern Rock scene.

This is exactly with what this film starts and where the excitement may take its path, BUT, I'm not reviewing Lemmy as a person but a film portraying a human being. After the first 15 minutes I was in mood, I was hungry to know more about someone that inspired millions of people. But the more the film moves on the more it becomes clear that the people who made this film are obviously die hard fans. This is not a bad thing, but unfortunately it leads to this impression of "Hey, didn't I just hear that same statement out of another mouth with other words about 5 minutes ago?" - The news factor decreases steadily and the repetition factor grows with every minute of this documentary.

After about an hour I was a little skeptical on how this film is supposed to end. Yes, it's nice to see him meet, talk (about), perform and socialize with lots of other giants of the Rock industry - but even that becomes a little repetitive as this documentary continues. I thought "Ok, I got it, this guy is god, stop reminding me!" - In fact it's Lemmy himself who "downs" most of those glorifying statements with really grounded responses that reflect the wisdom that he has gathered during the years of his stunning career.

Long story short: Lemmy Kilmister is not just an amazing musician, he's a great person too. But it doesn't take 116 minutes to make that clear. Lemmy is simple, maybe that's what makes him so great, but this film tries to stretch that over almost two hours and to be honest, this becomes quite boring.

Why 7 out of 10? Because "Lemmy" has its/his moments for sure. The most interesting thing about it is the fact that as a viewer you don't start distancing yourself from Lemmy but rather coming closer to him in a very natural way. If that is what the makers intended -> applause! Still I believe that 70 minutes would have done that too.

Die Piefke-Saga (1990– )

an anthropological guide to the "German<->Austrian-problem"

[7 August 2010]

I suppose the metaphor that this series is trying to express can be applied to any two neighboring countries that on one hand need and on the other hate each other.

If you cut down the metaphors to actual sentences the story can be explained like this: A stereotypical (from the eyes of an Austrian - like the writer) German family is traditionally vacationing in the Austrian Alps. After realizing that in the background they (and their fellow Germans) aren't welcome at all they (in fact mostly only the father) try to boycott the holiday area. But the mayor manages to persuade the family to stay and even "binds" them to the place by starting to make business with them. From now on a "looking behind the masks" from both sides emerges allowing both parties to dig a little deeper into the real cultures of their opposites. It is a changing play of illusion and disillusion and coming to terms with them.

In fact "Die Piefka Saga" breaks a taboo by telling the truth about the holiday industry that nobody (on vacation) wants to hear about. The German family comes to Austria with the illusion that this country is still "pure" and free of pollution, corruption, big industrialization and cosmopolitan bias. Isn't that the promise we get from the travel agencies about almost any country we (want to) travel to? The final chapter of the series is even a satire in itself as it uses almost US-American like slap-stick humor at some points to exaggerate this fact: History and tradition have become a lucrative business in the past decades which is a global matter. In this version it's actually Japanese people who took over in the background - assimilating everyone into traditional Austrians to keep up the illusion of uncompromised purity for tourists.

In fact (if you understand the metaphor) this is happening all around the world. People pretend to be traditional to sell a product - as a result even if you buy a souvenir in Brasil it will most likely be made in China.

Even if you are a non-German speaking person and can get your hands on a DVD with translations, don't hesitate. This is definitely more than just a satire and (by the way) gives you a great view on Austrian/German cultures and how they interact.

Iron Maiden: Flight 666 (2009)

An amazing "feel good ride" even for non-Maiden fans...

[6 November 2009]

First off, i was into metal but not that much into Maiden, i always respected them but didn't listen to them very often.

When the DVD started at a friend's place during a party i began watching "accidently"... Towards the end of the film i was asked where i was and didn't realize i watched the whole movie and completely forgot the time.

Sam Dunn has gone to the next stage, he made a "movie" - which can be enjoyed by anyone, not just metal fans. Right from the beginning you dive into a very private side of a band that doesn't have to be described any closer - that's what this movie is here for. The history and achievements of Iron Maiden are completely unimportant at this point - it is reflected by the adoring audiences around the world which is brilliantly (simple but effective) put in picture. As the viewer you literally meet a group of people telling amazing stories, experiencing memorable moments, sharing a lot of insight and just immediately grabbing your sympathy. Though the main frame of the film is quite simple it never fails to make you lose interest - it is an elegant swing between information, emotion and impression.

I was very impressed by the fact that the making of this documentary was obviously not very expensive. It is a perfect example that a high budget doesn't always capture as much sincerity, passion and honesty as this one does. And this affects you - considering the previous productions of the makers - it is received way less "fanatical" though it ironically covers only one topic.

I can really recommend this documentary to everybody, it is a great display of how famous people can stay grounded even after two decades of filling big stadiums. I was entertained, amazed and moved. A solid gem in a world where the quality of documentaries is visibly declining.

Don't Look Down (2009 Video)

a revelation to snowboarding

[12 June 2009]

Finally there's a documentary out that shows what snowboarding has come to. Shaun White is the prototype of a "bred snowboarder" that pushed the sport to an athletic profession where nothing counts but winning contests.

Watching a twenty-two-year-old calling his Mom after a contest to apologize for turning second is more than even the biggest fan can take. And grabbing all the pullovers to give them away on a trip to Africa might just not be the best idea to help fight poverty on a continent where heat is a killer.

In summary this documentary can more be compared to "Some Kind Of Monster" from Metallica though I'm sure it was intended otherwise. It is very interesting to watch Shaun White reveal himself as something completely alienated to the sport itself by his behaviour and attitude. I enjoyed it because it gave me a different angle towards snowboarding and where it will probably be in a few years.

Hotel Very Welcome (2007)

very real but not for everyone

[9 June 2009]

This rather unusual films follows five stories of people who backpack (or just travel) through Asia. For somebody who hasn't been to (South East) Asia it is a revelation of how strange situations, mishaps or states of emotional instability prosper (as a Westerner).

Anybody who has already grabbed a Lonely Planet and travelled through this part of the world gets a mirror in this movie that very authentically portrays and reflects the intentions and reasons which drove you there in the first place AND how they got transformed, altered or even smashed by reality. These points make this movie very real and comprehensive but it is not very clear where it wants to go. The main misunderstandings between Western and Eastern cultures are well explained and explored, yet still the viewer is left a little unsatisfied as all the small plots hardly reach a conclusion. The cast plays very well, convincing and insightful and it almost appears as if some of the scenes were shot completely freestyle.

I enjoyed watching it but was left with a strange feeling, an incomplete feeling. Maybe that's what the writer and director intended...

Sicko (2007)

Michael Moore again advancing the genre...

[29 June 2007]

It is truly incredible to see how "Infotainment" can be so grabbing and carrying while delivering you with interesting comparisons. Michael Moore rather digs into the basic moral of a human being than trying to demonize larger corporations leading our medical lives.

I saw the movie at a Sneak Preview and was not prepared for it. At the beginning I was deliberately moaning to the dislike of the rest of the audience. More and more embarrassed I was when it started hitting me. Yes, there are people out there in our very own society that don't get the medical treatment they deserve... And of course they only are a minority... Well, obviously not. I can only thank for not ever sustaining any serious injury but I just don't wanna know what happens if I do.

The film really plays with that thought and juggles it around the continents. By doing so it really delightfully plays with the human emotions and introduces us to a number of REALLY sick people who don't receive the care and treatment that they need and deserve. If you look closer its formula is very similar to the ones of popular propaganda films, just that in this case the message really makes sense. Actually it could even be considered as some kind of revenge to its "bad brothers" but Sicko really transports a thought which should (!) be taken for granted and even though the movie is almost too heartwarming at some points it understands to be what it tries to make us understand: human!

La vie en face: Citizen Krone (2002) Season Unknown, Episode Unknown

Abuse of power deluxe!

[22 May 2007]

What is the Kronen Zeitung? Actually it doesn't matter. What is being portrayed here is more than just a reflection of the most powerful newspaper of Austria. It's rather a revelation of how opinion is being made by people who don't have a fundamental education and merely try to transport their ideal of a better society which is very isolated, dualistic and racist. The truth is that this ideal is dark, fascistic and leaves no space for other opinions.

This documentary appears a little boring in the beginning and it takes some time to actually realize the weight of the messages that the Kronen Zeitung staff is transporting very clearly. It shows up the narrow minded interpretation of a better Austria and how it is being transmitted in a language that rather simple people would understand. The only criticism is the portrait of Jörg Haider, who is being linked directly to a demonized Kronen Zeitung. This association is not quite legitimate as Haider's ideals are not fundamentally the same as the ones of the newspaper.

But the bombs are being dropped regularly, a reporter who openly admits that he wants to control the politicians by manipulating people, an astrologer who appears like out of a bad trash movie, an editor from the animal department who puts animals above humans, a politics "specialist" who invites politicians to extreme activities in order to worm a secret or weakness out of them, and finally an Austrian president kissing a$$ to the boss of the Kronen Zeitung in order to get good headlines.

Fact is that the Kronen Zeitung tried to ban this documentary from the Austrian screens and even took Arte (the TV station that produced it) out of their television program after it broadcasted it. It is shocking to watch but eyes opening on the other hand. Definitely worth watching, even as a non-Austrian. I guess this form of abuse of power is very allegoric to a lot of other institutions on this planet.

South Park: Timmy 2000 (2000) Season 4, Episode 3

One of the last REAL classics...

[18 March 2007]

If you look at the script you will notice one thing to begin with: perfect cinematography.

Despite the fact, that Timmy is handicapped and therefor temporarily rose to be a hit character, the episode just reflects the talent that Matt Stone and Trey Parker have in their profession.

Although moral is an issue that South Park really looks at with a critical eye, "Timmy 2000" proves to be not just entertaining but also "point proving": Laughing at something odd doesn't mean that people don't care about it! Timmy may be handicapped and amusing, but at the same point the creators prove that he has heart and moral, but furthermore, character! These (if only little) shifts of classical story telling make a very enjoyable episode that will definitely be one of "South Park"'s best! And it also doesn't surprise me at all that the character "Timmy" became a cult from this point on!

South Park: Cartman Sucks (2007) Season 11, Episode 2

....still waiting for the big embarrassment!

[18 March 2007]

As a huge South Park fan the only thing you are waiting for is Eric learning his lesson. As time goes by the viewer more and more abandons that faith. "Cartman sucks" doesn't 'hit' it, but it comes close to satisfying the urges of a fan seeing Cartman being humiliated by his own stupidity.

Frankly, I liked it! The more you know Trey and Matt (creators) the more you know about their multiple alter egos being represented in this show. Eric Cartman obviously remains a focus, and in this one he's getting it, but somehow out of his own fault.

Taking a picture of him having his penis stuck in Butter's mouth while holding his thumbs up may appear perverted in THIS context... But if you try to get into the minds of children, it may sounds reasonable. It works, as politically correct I'm trying to be in my awareness, this episode is not immoral or sick, no, it just shows a classical situation of misunderstanding that most of us have probably already been into. Definitely in a similar context but maybe in a similar feeling.

I liked it... All the time while I was confronted with these scenes I thought "Why not?"... He's just a boy (at least that's what we're supposed to know)!!!!

The White Room (1989)

...yet waste, but soon the cultural root of tomorrow!

[28 February 2007]

What is the KLF about? What is the White Room? Does it matter? Yes it does...

Popculture has its boundaries, and we are bound to them. Today we praise "The Who" for destroying guitars on acid after their concerts because it wasn't a common thing to do. The most remarking statements were mostly made by Rock heroes or Pop poets. In the United States everything coming out of a synthesizer is almost automatically Techno. And Techno became a synonym for missing creativity, stupidity, drugs and lacking consciousness. But hold it, there are some fragments in this Genre which have probably gone beyond any border known to us pop-culture consumers.

The KLF can be described as "sophisticated mindlessnes", people who exactly know what they are doing but yet leaving you (the listener/perceiver) with hardly any clue at all. "The White Room" is a milestone in this very relieving way of art. It underlines a very serious attitude of The KLF against consumption and pop-fascism. This movie can be interpreted in a lot of ways, but most importantly it doesn't try to suggest anything. Bill Drummond and Jimi Cauty start their quest for the White Room and this film describes their journey to it. No word is spoken, no line can be read, only estranging visual metaphors mixed with an electronic trance score that only has one thing: continuity! If you are a "Steven-Spielberg-storyline"-loving person that expects the point to be served on a silver tablet I really dissuade from watching this movie. It will only be a let-down. But if you are ready to experience a smooth kick for your conscience, freedom of thought and art in its entirety of modern school this might a film to go with. The way is the goal... It's up to you to interpret it but remember, it has never been (officially) finished, maybe that's up to you or your mind!

First Descent (2005)

...not quite the information that's truly important...

[5 April 2006]

No doubt, First Descent is definitely one of the most versatile snowboard movies out on record BUT unfortunately the movie is very "American". Sure, the idea of the sport was basically mainly developed in the states but the other continents made a valuable contribution to the heart and soul as well.

The movie features four US and one European rider and the title would promise that you are about to see an American conquering untouched mountains. In fact, the ONLY first descent in this film is being accomplished by an European, Terje Haakonsen. The rest of the riding activities can rather be considered as a training and comparison camp for pioneers and pro boarders from very different sections of the sport which is very neat to watch, no question, but the documentary parts lack heavily in essential information about the full (r)evolution. Europe and Japan are almost being demonized and pointed at for destroying the spirit that snowboarding stood up with to lay itself down.

Protocolling each move, statement and achievement is rather pathetic at some points and appears like "time fillers" to me. "(S)He's so great", "We are so cool" and "Oh, incredible what we just did" are statements that really miss the point in my opinion. Some of the shots are very nice and "expensive" and definitely offer never-seen-before perspectives of the activities that these athletes are experiencing but it could have been less stagy.

After all it is an interesting summary of the US opinion on the history of something that has obviously not reached its climax yet.