Reviews

This movie has a lot of potential and I really wanted to like it, it just seemed like it pandered too much to Gen Z, and it felt like it was trying too hard to appeal to kind of an Uber PC crowd.

The homoerotic storyline just didn't work for me at all. I don't have any issue with people of any persuasion, but it just didn't feel to me like it belonged in this film, it felt out of place. Also I found it objectionable that there was plenty of male nudity, but no female nudity. That to me is just pureile, and somewhat of a puritanistic streak on the part of Hollywood. Very fake morality.

The film was decent, but it was a little difficult to understand her character and her motivations, especially towards the end when she felt the need to get with Patrick, who was a homeless, broke, wannabe tennis star. That just didn't work for me at all. I had multiple issues with this film, the soundtrack was marginal, the camera shots were good at times and completely zany and bizarre at other times, and the film felt like it could have been great had it been in the hands of a more appropriate director.

There's nothing wrong with the work of Gaudagnino, he's done some great work, but this didn't seem like the right project for him. Overall I would say if you have a couple hours to spare and you can stream it for free, it's probably worth your time, other than that I wouldn't go out of my way unless you're big Zendaya fan, which I'm not.

The cast in this movie was good, Kristen Stewart can act, and Katy O'Brien was a real presence. Harris of course is amazing but the real issue with this film was the direction. The direction was just absolutely awful. Unfortunately they create these projects and then they give the film to someone like Rose Glass, who's done one terrible film previously and she just has no idea how to structure the story, how to direct the actors, how to create any sense of rhythm and mood. This movie started well, I loved the lesbian love story theme, and it looked like it had some potential, and then it very quickly spun off the rails once the action started happening.

These guys need to stick with directors that have demonstrated talent, and handing a project like this to a neophyte with one terrible film to their credit is just not smart. It might save alot of money, but what's the point if the film becomes nearly unwatchable?

This film really could have been outstanding it has a lot of elements of Indian mythology, Indian culture and had it been done with a more reasonable pace, and a more skilled director it could have been a lot of fun to watch. But as it was rendered by Patel it was just a bloody mess.

The hand held camera shots were dreadful. The frenetic pacing was all wrong. There was nothing to indicate that the Monkey Man was skilled in multiple martial arts, prior to the final scene.

I have seen many comparisons to John Wick. Perhaps the last one, which was bad. The action is extremely important in the John Wick films and the various other movies influenced and inspired by them. It's presented in ever-more creative and exciting ways.

Monkey Man doesn't do this. The action is shot incoherently, with the camera spinning all over the place and plenty of hand-to-hand fights where the camera is overly focused on the characters' feet for long stretches. On top of that, while going for "gritty," the word that comes to mind with Monkey Man is "cruddy." And Monkey Man is undercooked regarding another defining thing about John Wick- worldbuilding.

There are a couple of memorable moments, especially one scene in an elevator in which Patel employs a knife in an exceptionally creative way. But that's one of the only times the film stops to breathe. Many elements of the story were incomprehensible, and the film tried too hard to incorporate politics, history, and mythology, into a tale of vengeance.

Ultimately, the film fails. Patel needs alot more experience to learn how to direct a film. He can act, but he can't direct. Not yet.

This movie left me quite astonished for a number of reasons, first of all I wonder how this film ever got made. Considering the extent Hollywood pretends to be liberal and open-minded, but in reality they're very, very prudish when it comes to sex. This movie was very open when it came to sexual themes and nudity. Which was great. My guess is that it must have been an independent production that somehow secured Hollywood distribution.

Emma Stone's performance was astonishing, Mark Ruffalo, Willem Dafoe and right on down the line this movie contained a lot of great performances. The production was gorgeous, the cinematography was outstanding, and the soundtrack was compelling. There were so many things about this film that I found really stimulating and outstanding.

My guess is that there are a lot of Americans that will be turned off by the content and there will be a lot of women that will be put off by the way the sexuality is handled. There's nothing American about this movie, it was magical, it was surreal, it was gorgeous to look at and the story was wonderful. I really loved this movie but I'm not a normal person, and I think people who consider themselves normal (and pure) might have a hard time with the content.

The saving grace of this film is Jake Gyllenhaal. He brings a certain amount of charm, swagger and a lot of screen presence to the role. Other than that there's really not much else to like about this movie. McGregor was entertaining, but super annoying. Had they been reasonable with the violence it would have been a lot more believable, but there's only so many times a man can get run over by fast-moving motor vehicles and get up and walk away.

That kind of thing is so Hollywood right now, it's so Marvel, it's so cartoonish, it's so childlike, it's so juvenile, it's so infantile, it's so unbelievable, and it takes away any shred of credibility that the movie might have had.

Shame on Hollywood for turning out such garbage, month after month.

I really don't know what to say about this movie that I just watched. I was reading a critical review on the movie and they were suggesting that this is the kind of movie that has to be viewed two or three times for one to be able to begin to understand the story, and the allegorical nature of the film.

Ultimately I think this movie was about a man who was so severely emasculated by such a horrific version of mom, that he ended up nursing mental issues that were beyond comprehension.

But if I think about the possibility of watching this film again I think that I would rather eat dirt, or go 10 days without food. This was a hallucinogenic nightmare and though I got some of the symbology behind it, I can't say that I really got the film. I can't say I derived much pleasure out of it, and I can't possibly describe it as any form of entertainment. I've heard it described as a comedy and there were a couple of moments that were funny, but really?

I am sitting here quite astonished at how terrible this series is. I sure expected more from Glover. First of all the writing is really poor, there's nothing intriguing about either of the main characters, there is no story development in terms of the progression from normal people to spies, they don't behave like spies, they don't have any tradecraft, nobody knows why they would have been selected, and the entire spy businesses is completely and utterly unexplained.

The series is not funny, and most of all I don't understand why Maya Erskine was cast as the female lead. She's not sexy, she's barely pretty, and it's impossible to relate to her as the seductress that they portray her to be. What does Hollywood have against casting attractive and sexy women? I know a lot of women aren't going to want to hear this but she was terribly miscast for this part, and there's no chemistry between them.

I just don't get the vast majority of what this film and these filmmakers are trying to convey for me. For me this is a total failure.

If you're a pure action freak and you have absolutely no qualms about believability, feasibility, or realism you might get a kick out of this movie. Hemsworth was given a really lame script and he was asked to pretend that he's some sort of operator with absolutely no experience, yet he manages to be the hero nonetheless. It's a very cliche story, very poorly written by a hack writer who probably got $5,000 for the script. Somehow the project got two big stars, and got green lit. It was a fairly large production but the feasibility aspect of it was just ridiculous.

There are far better action films out there and the only saving grace about this film was Russell Crowe. He was great as usual, other than that better to take a pass.

This is an utterly fascinating film, and is very well written. There is a level of surrealism that is rare in film these days. Nicolas Cage is definitely back to his old form, and bringing alot to the table these days. The film asks a lot of questions of its audience, what I got out of it was the extreme level of weakness that society is engaging in and allowing, by embracing woke culture, Uber PC and allowing cancel culture to happen, especially at the university level, where it's rampant.

The secondary message that I got from the film is that Gen Z is likely the weakest generation in the history of mankind, and some of the things that we need to be asking ourselves are how prepared we for any sort of disaster, a great war, or famine and such. Would the current generation of youth simply crumble under such pressure?

For me this movie asked all those questions, in a very abstract manner and Illustrated the extreme danger that we're all in, by embracing woke culture and victimhood, fake terror and massive self delusion.

Ultimately it's important to acknowledge that dreams are ridiculous, they are a form of mental diarrhea, and absolute garbage. They mean nothing and they simply must be dismissed.

I live in a world where I often dream about being a vigilante. I sometimes wonder if an opportunity will ever come along, where I can eliminate really bad monsters, who prey on humanity. Especially children, there's never any excuse for that kind of behavior on any level, so when a film like this comes along I find it very refreshing.

I never was a huge fan of Emile Hirsch, though he is a good actor. I consider this to be a truly outstanding performance, he really nailed the nuance, he was able to build a really fascinating and believable character, who was quirky. The script was funny and smart, but at the same time sincere and compassionate.

I really enjoy this film well beyond what I expected going into it. I highly recommend this film for people who don't take themselves too seriously, and understand the potential value of setting limits, and crossing the line if that line needs to be crossed.

The film started out quite well and the very first action scene was excellent, though it was a bit of an exaggeration, however with a fairly minor leap of faith it was somewhat believable. From there it just went downhill, there was that Hollywood tendency to over blow everything and to stretch every premise to the absolute limit of implausibility, which just gets old after a while. You just you want to see some good action, you want to see a good story and you don't want to see a story stretched to the absolute end of what is physically possible in the known universe. However, if you like Marvel type films, silly stories made for kids, or cartoons, you will likely enjoy this drivel.

After about 45 minutes, the film got very tiresome. I also thought the female FBI agent (Lampman) was very poorly miscast, and written, and the South African bad guy was just a ridiculous cartoon.

It could have been a decent movie but it wasn't.

I had a considerable number of issues with this film, the primary one was the fact that they spent way too much time dwelling on the relationship between the Enzo and his wife, in addition to the relationship between Enzo and his mistress (played by a tragically miscast Shaileen Woodley) neither of which were particularly interesting, as relationships, as characters, or as stories.

We went into this film assuming it was going to be a movie about the evolution of Ferrari as a car, as a company, and as a legend, and it ended up being more or less a melodrama about failed relationships. Michael Mann, who is quite an accomplished director, failed on his part to not discern the fact that audiences wanted to see more about the company, and more about the car, and less about these relationships, which I don't think we're all that interesting.

Enzo's first wife, played by the talented Penelope Cruz certainly had reason to be miserable, but her character just possessed this black cloud everywhere she went, and every scene that she was in was difficult to watch.

This was the most boring racing film I've ever seen in my life and I just can't recommend it. It had an incredibly somber tone to it that just didn't work. Very little about this film worked and I was very very happy when it was finally over.