Change Your Image
christopher_m_k
Reviews
The Menu (2022)
Blah
I think they've stopped making good movies. So many letdowns lately. This one just milked a very simple premise, and it did it very clumsily, wasting a ton of star power in the process. I'd put this in the same conversation as Glass Onion. Just absolute junk.
They really could have made the movie more interesting and satisfying if they'd done more with the diners and their stories, not to mention the staff. And there were a few funny lines but lots and lots of room for more wit.
I guess it was a fine enough concept, but the execution was almost childish.
And yet again, the movie delivered a very bad ending in many respects. Skip it.
FBoy Island (2021)
Finale ruined the show/sequel possibilities
SPOILERS- It was sleazy and dumb not to pay Garrett M. The show can't pretend to have the moral high ground when it lies like that, to a person who consistently delivered what he promised from the outset. Also, why would anyone participate in another season or watch? I loved the show until this nonsense, so congrats on screwing up another ending HBO (GOT-style) and ruining a show. Start asking me before pulling these bs moves. Happy to help.
OG Jared was genius btw. Best character since Cartman.
Gravity (2013)
even sandy's underpants were boring
i have no idea how the masses have been able to muster the patience this movie requires. and i'm more than a little confused about the praise. there isn't enough story to fill a commercial. i'm not sure how to fill ten lines of text, even if i were to describe everything that happens in the movie. they passed up every opportunity to pepper in something interesting. sandy was fantastically boring. george--a total snooze. i had heard tales of something visually stunning happening, but i wasn't impressed by anything. it was very sparse. unenjoyable. trite and lazy, not subtle. i want my time back. i want my money back. i'm not on team jesse, but one more movie like this . . . .
Mud (2012)
another dreadful movie becomes the critics' darling
This was a very long and unsatisfying movie. And it was poorly executed in significant parts. I'm reluctant to criticize the work product of children, but this neckbone character was astoundingly bad. How did they locate a child who was unable to play a child convincingly on the screen? It smacks of sterling nepotism or a casting agent deep in the grip of alcoholism. And what can one say about the plot and character development? Nothing good. Was this a was among the genders? Were we to believe these swamp people had real emotions? Would I have rather watched my dog eat monkey grass for two hours?
This was a bad, bad movie.
Up (2009)
correcting the over-inflated praise
"Up" is merely fine. There is little to like or dislike. The story isn't particularly engaging, and everything is fairly predictable. The jokes are bland and good for little more than a smirk. But the cartoon wasn't preachy, as animated movies seem to have become in recent years. I saw the 3-D version, and I wasn't particularly impressed. Although the 3-D provides added depth, the effect was very subtle. I was hoping for something that popped out of the screen more. I see no need for understatement in a 3-D cartoon, especially one that leans so heavily on the fantastic and implausible. In short, I'm confused by all the praise this movie has gotten, and I think the 3-D version is a waste of time and money. And to put this within the top 20 movies of all time on IMDb (its current ranking) is absurd.
There Will Be Blood (2007)
a lot from a little
There's something powerful about this film. What packed the biggest punch was the idea of a hollow victory, which the film beautifully portrays. I'm surprised that so many people seem to be enjoying this film, but there are many levels on which to appreciate the work. I've been finding it more insightful as I back away from it. On closest inspection, it's the story of a man doing what we observe and saying what we hear. A little further back, it's a exploration of a character. Further still, we see cruel and powerful movers in a harsh light. But when you back up just a little more, you can see something even more true. It's the emptiness behind everything. It's the futility of choice. It's heavy stuff, kids. Heavy stuff. So I guess there's something for everyone and nothing for everyone.
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
16 dollars + 87 minutes + 3 chuckles + 8.3 stars = 2 open eyes
They speak of rapid-fire jokes within the first 30 minutes. I heard no such jokes. They speak of tremendous wit. I saw no such wit. They acknowledge problems with the plot. I saw no such plot. This movie was everything I had expected it to be before I read the good reviews. I have been misled. I have been misled in a way that makes me mistrustful of those around me. There is no way people could have mistaken this movie for something entertaining. No way at all. And that means they lied! My brothers and sisters have lied to me. The republicans have finally done it. We're all against each other. We're ready for war. We will destroy anything because we know what people are. We know what people do. They lie. They lie. They lie. Enjoy your movie, brother. Ten stars, brother. A laugh a minute, brother. Hate the infidel. Love the infidel. How long can this last?
El laberinto del fauno (2006)
smells like pan
Because the film was named "Pan's Labyrinth," I expected something a-maze-ing. This is not what was delivered. Perhaps it is a product of my age, but I have no appetite for superfluous violenceand the film was practically dripping with blood. I did not find the richly imagined fairy tale some reviews had described. The fairy-tale aspects were sparsea shame because of the interesting look of the mythological elements and avenues they could have opened. Del Toro opted to construct both an under-developed war movie and an under-developed fantasy tale, resolving each with transparent cop-outs and plugging holes along the way with murder. I am beginning to suspect the Spanish are a gullible and artless people. Their limp thrusts at profundity bring back memories of a biologically thwarted collaboration of sorts that followed a night of heavy drinking. But fret not, ladies: that was my last night as a Spaniard.
La marche de l'empereur (2005)
boring
Birds are not very nice, especially when they freeze and die before your very eyes. They certainly noticed the cameras, so the least they could have done was stay alive for the benefit of everyone watching. Also, birds can do lots of tricks and many of them can talk to you. These birds, however, stayed true to inconsiderate form and didn't say a word. Now if the babies had looked into the camera and said "I love you," my heart would have melted. But did they? Nope. Shiver and squawk. That's all you're going to get. And there aren't any polar bears, which is a bad surprise for people who like polar bears and reasonably assumed there would be bears because of all the ice on the cover of the DVD box. Let me tell you--sad realization. So overall, I give this a not very good score because I don't think it is very good.
Clerks II (2006)
Clerks Number Two
The bright spots in this movie are few. Jay provides almost all of them. This movie is just more evidence that genius is chased away by happiness. Kevin Smith has a fondness for the sentimental but lacks any sort of aptitude for writing touching scenes. The acting is almost as bad as the first movie. I saw nipples, but they didn't help that much. There is a minimum length to these comments, so here is the word "hippopotamus." Would you like another word? How about "onomatopoeia"? Does that get your motor running? The funniest part of the movie occurred during one of the more quiet portions. I started making sucking noises. It was a riot. Slurp. Slurp. Hehehehehehe.
The Aristocrats (2005)
fun for the whole family
I caught a sneak preview of this flick from the front row of a packed theater. Nonetheless, a good time was had. What intrigued me about this movie was twofold. 1) It was free. 2) One of my female colleagues first told me about it and read aloud many of the dirty words and phrases, often times naming body parts and acts that I found incredibly exciting. I would have expected a movie with such a narrow focus to drag, but it didn't. I was also expecting some sort of free-speech slant to things, which would have been incredibly boring. But they didn't do this either. It was just pure entertainment. My only word of caution: See this movie at an off-peak time. There will be a lot of braying from the audience (and applause, God help us), which can drown out some of the dialog. The jokes come in rapid succession, so a boisterous crowd will certainly tax the ear if not ruin jokes entirely. Enjoy!
Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)
me and Miranda sitting in a tree
Having heard that "Me and You..." was this year's "Sideways," I was pretty excited about going to the theater. The preview looked OK, getting my attention only because of Miranda July, not because of the story. The movie was a lot like that, too. I found it lacking in substance. It was more of a painting than a movie--not a bad painting though. Miranda July is charming. You would fix a nice dinner for her and the lighting would be just right and she would look at you and cry and cry like she was watching something really beautiful. And you would never feel more loved. People have been giving the movie good reviews because they are confused. They are in love with her, and they don't know what else to do. While I understand this, I also recognize that "Me and You" was in tremendously familiar territory for those who've watched "The Safety of Objects," among other things. The dialogue was also a little strange, giving the movie sort of an unnatural feel. I give it 5/10, recommending it only if you have a little crush on Miranda July, which you probably do.
Se7en (1995)
more like 4
I used to have a thing for movies, but I think that I've more or less exhausted the supply of good ones. "Seven" was not one of the good ones, despite the high rating. The main problem comes in the form of the villain. I just didn't buy it. By going down the list of the seven deadly sins, it seemed like he was trying to incite reform amongst the people. However, he did it in a way that kept it from being relevant to the general populace. The scale was completely warped just for the sake of the number seven. There needed to be more blood spilled in a less ordered way to scare people, and I would argue that such a killer would know that. Fear motivates people and could have brought about the changes that all the characters wanted to see take place. That would have been an interesting movie--people dedicated to maintaining order realizing that the order needs to be subverted to do actual good. That is an interesting conflict. Could the divorce really happen? The groundwork was there for such action to take place, but the result would have been too thought-provoking to be thrilling for the average viewer. Fear shapes people's behavior more than anything else, when present. Think about how many churches you see on your way to work. Inertia takes over when fear is absent. The killer was too calculating to suffer so many ineptitudes. And speaking of ineptitude--I am saddened that people seem so incapable of telling the difference between a good movie and a bad one. Shame on you again.
Chang hub thengs gcig gi 'khrul snang (2003)
terrible movie with a deceptive trailer
I felt as though I had been hoodwinked about fifteen minutes into this movie. The trailer made it look like it might be funny and charming, which it was not. Men dancing in a silly way and men wearing silly hats are highly suggestive of comedy, warmth, and charm. That and nice scenery (inherent in Asain cinema) were what I was expecting. Instead I got a sermon told through the stories of completely flat characters. When I used to work at Cheddar's, I was the world's worst waiter for about two weeks, but it wasn't entirely my fault. One of the things I got in trouble for was constantly spilling Margaritas. However, the management at Cheddar's had selected Margarita glasses that were much more like plates with stems than anything meant to hold a beverage. I would come to the bar with wet sleeves and ask for more over and over again. The customers got angrier, my sleeves got drunker, and eventually I quit, preempting being fired. These characters were like those Margarita glasses. This was a shabby, preachy fable, which could have been told more artfully with my nipple hair directing and my toenail clippings as actors. Shame on everyone for giving this a high rating. I fear I have fallen victim to the because it's foreign and independent it must be good and I'm a filthy commoner if I don't enjoy it crowd. Don't do the same.
Off the Map (2003)
women simply don't know what counts
"Off the Map" was not a very good movie--watchable but not very good. You could tell that a woman was making many of the creative decisions because the movie focused on things that weren't interesting and abandoned the things that were. Women do things like that. The precocious little girl wasn't believable at all, no matter how many times this type of character shows up in movies. And I don't even think that the depressed fellow was sad. Maybe he was just constipated. Here's what would have been interesting: a little more attention paid to the relationship between Joan Allen's character and the fellow from the IRS. That's where the desperation and emotion could have surfaced. Trying to use the silly little girl as a focal point was a mistake. This movie was like too much syrup on waffles that didn't need any syrup in the first place and you knew it and you ate the waffles anyway even though you knew they were ruined and the texture and flavor were all wrong even though it could have been very nice and there were so many calories and you feel bad all day and everything is such a waste. Know what I mean? 3/10 plus a 2 pt. nudity bonus (which was very nice) makes this a 5/10.
Schultze Gets the Blues (2003)
Schultze bores this dude
"Schultze Gets the Blues" was entirely too sparse, especially for a movie that lasted so long. Many of these foreign films are more or less the same: uninteresting people doing nothing much. I see enough of that for free. I heard that there was immense charm. While I saw the potential (namely when Schultze rubbed his belly), very little charm was actually exuded. The end wasn't so bad (relatively), but I can't help thinking Fellini's pocket may have been picked to some degree. I had also hoped for more music. And the absence of alligators in the bayou was deeply felt. Perhaps if Schultze had some sort of libido, things would have been interesting. Some fat accordion player who beds strange women at home and abroad would have made for some fun times. It would have been nice to see that marvelous gut put to more creative use. I'm seeing notches inside the accordion case. I'm seeing Schultze wearing knickers on his head instead of that silly hat. And this time, plenty of alligator wrestling when Schultze Rides Again. 2/10
Un long dimanche de fiançailles (2004)
Very Long, Not Very Engaging
"A Very Long Engagement" was not a horrible movie, but it was much better when it was called "Amelie." There were too many characters, diluting the impact made by the few interesting ones. Often times, it was difficult to follow the twists and turns, probably because I was waiting for something to care about or the movie to end. Some of the shots were beautiful, but that's not why I go to a French movie. I prefer Asian movies for that. And it's hard to take French soldiers seriously. It's a lot like watching my Pomeranian show his teeth and bark at strangers. Discerning audiences should not attend this movie. However, some girls will be fooled, which is generally true. To summarize, this film is not very interesting. 5/10
What the #$*! Do We (K)now!? (2004)
What a mess!
"What the Bleep Do We Know!?" was one of the worst times I have spent at the movies. It was less of a movie and more of an after school special, but at the same time nothing special at all. The attempt at a narrative in which they grounded their ideas was absolutely pathetic, which almost anyone will tell you. Marlee Matlin in her underwear just shouldn't happen. I won't dwell on it. What I will reveal is a criticism that many are unable to formulate. This movie, while tedious, also suffered a tremendous flaw in reasoning. It was horribly contradictory because it took such a manipulative, become a creator of your life, manifestation of abundance, shoeless piece of propaganda. Interconnectivity is explained as a large party of our existence. However, the movie encourages that we control our surroundings with our minds. It completely neglects that there are other people with minds that could be controlling us, which seems to be more the case. Or at least the structures in which we exist greatly limit us. In this way, the movie was inappropriately solipsistic. Solipsism and interconnectivity just don't mix unless you're God almighty. If you are, you will be impressed (?!?) by all the neat things this movie will reveal that You can do. If not, you will be sorely disappointed, a moron, or perhaps both. Also, the title is so ridiculous, I have trouble warning people not to see the movie because I feel retarded mentioning it by name. Shame on everyone involved.
Primer (2004)
"Primer" Rib = Rump Roast
"Primer," which could have been very interesting (It didn't drag, which is something.), ended up being too obscure to be enjoyable. While some will pretend to understand what happened in order to appear technologically erudite (and therefore desirable?), I am not that insecure. I'm not afraid to be confused by things that don't make sense. "Primer" simply didn't make sense. The possibility remains that there was something to this story, that it could be understood if only the viewer is willing to think more about it--perhaps for months. However, there is one large problem with this delayed reward: so little is revealed about the characters and their situations that, after the sting of wasting eight dollars subsides, it's nearly impossible to care (unless you're one of those people who must understand). The most enjoyable part of this movie was seeing the people in the crowd scanning the faces around them as the credits rolled, hoping to find a look of enlightenment. Humans are cute.
2/10
p.s. To the people who want to watch "Primer" because they have something to prove: I saw "Primer" despite its low score on this fine database, certain that I could decode it and be enriched in ways not available to the common man. That's not how it went. I'm a scientist (though not a physicist), and I had no luck at all. For once, the rating reflects the quality of the work.
Garden State (2004)
wicked garden
"Garden State" was terrible. Tomorrow, I'm going to punch all my ridiculous peers that told me to watch it. What on earth are all these people thinking? I can't see anything redeeming about this film. It was supposed to be charming and dark. That love fest was dark!?! Take a look at my teens--that's dark. This was a lovely Sunday afternoon with a basket full of egg salad. It's been said before, and I'll say it again: Zach Braff looks like Ray Romano. As a result, it's nearly impossible to take him seriously. To compensate, he takes himself very seriously, which seems ridiculous, especially when he's pawing his father's chest hair and making a speech about grabbing the reins of his life. I understand that it's hard for young people not to be entirely trite and mundane (Look at the world they've been left.), but there are some moving things out there. They just take a little work to uncover.
And keep in mind that I am a vegetarian, so I am predisposed to things with "garden" in the title. It means a lot when I give it 3/10.
Reconstruction (2003)
getting to know you
"Reconstruction" was an excellent movie. Some have renounced it for its little tricks. Shame on them. While the little tricks themselves weren't impressive, they contributed to the film's ideas. Maria Bonnevie was enchanting. Interestingly, when I left the theater, I felt as though I knew (and perhaps loved) Aimee even though she was a construction, a fiction about whom next to nothing was revealed. In this manner, Alex and I bonded although there is no Alex. This movie was something that viewers can feel. I loved the skepticism. I enjoyed belong dazzled by the beauty only to have it taken away. Was it ever there? There is an honesty in "Reconstruction" that is rare in cinema. This movie wasn't especially subtle in its nihilism, which was fine. Anything more subtle would have been wasted on many, maybe even me. Who knows?
Dogville (2003)
I lift my leg on "Dogville"
There is nothing redeeming about "Dogville." It is artless. There is a clumsy statement, communicated as cleverly and subtly as a seventy-foot billy goat. Such flat characters are not vehicles for a statement. Every character is a device, a rusty farm implement. I found it impossible to care about any of them. Patricia Clarkson is almost always disappointing, and Chloe Sevigny is almost always in need of a bath. When combined, even in old-fashioned clothes, they are more than a person can be expected to handle. And the underdeveloped setting did not achieve the effect of making the town into any town. It became no town at all. Something so foreign quickly becomes irrelevant. And it was long, like "Dances with Wolves." But there was no dancing. There were no wolves. No Indians. Nothing. Almost three hours of nothing. If you want a story with a moral, do something bad, and punish yourself. That would be relevant. 1/10