Change Your Image
JoeBagz
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Clean (2021)
Don't Screw with the Garbageman
No spoilers. Wanted to like it more. Crime drama. The plot: A man tormented by past sins is compelled to save a child at risk by the bad men around her.
The screenplay: Mediocre, uneven with too many plot holes. Too many flashbacks. Could have gotten away with one or two, more take time away from the story happening in the present. Like when you're in an important conversation on the phone and someone in the room keeps interrupting. An unnecessary distraction easily corrected with better story telling.
Adrien Brody, a great actor. Totally in character, a great fit for the part. Scary almost. Supporting cast all good, the glue that hold the story together.
The cinematography is good, well shot. Urban setting, another sad example of urban decay so common in America over the last half 50 years trapping a portion of society too proud, stubborn or poor to abandon their homes as most others had done.
The writer/director Paul Solet shares writing credits with Brody. A decent story well shot with a very good cast and crew. Very violent at times captured in overly long scenes. Screen time that I think would have been better spent developing the small cast.
Rating this is a little difficult because the film is worth seeing just for the performances and the cinematography which to me expose the cancer afflicting our urban centers and the pain of people whose government over half a century has chosen to ignore. For those reasons I'll rate it a 6/10. See it.
The Lost Daughter (2021)
Change the title to 'The Nacissist'
No spoilers. Did not like it. A slow drama based on the novel by Elena Ferrante of the same name which I did not read.
The Plot: An academic on holiday alone on a Greek Island is confronted by events which remind her of her own uncomfortable past as a parent.
The screenplay. Not great. Too many long flashbacks makes it difficult to focus on the story they are trying to develop in the present. Also too many scenes where the main character is staring off into space, absent of dialog or meaning. Is she dying or mentally ill the audience can't be sure all the way through the climax of the film.
Livia Colman is a great actress but here is relegated to mostly pained expressions as she recalls her past to her standard beach face showing her to be content, bored or annoyed.
Ed Harris is wasted, just a prop, mostly absent and not developed as a supporting character.
Dakota Johnson is a character central to the plot but and is good, a small bright spot in an otherwise bad film.
The cinematography is forgettable, totally. Not a really pretty place, hard to imagine anyone travelling thousands of miles to visit. Exceptionally ordinary. The score is tedious, loud and seemed designed to annoy the audience. In that it was successful.
The writer/director Maggie Gyllenhaal wrote and directed a story about someone that's near impossible to like. And her actions in the present confirm she has learned little from reflecting on her past egregious behavior.
The only way to describe the climax/ending is strange. Thirty minutes into the film you expect some type of revelation and closure but it never happens. Ultimately I was super glad when it was over, a painful film to watch. Pass this one by.
I Care a Lot (2020)
Grotesque
No spoilers. Junk. I awarded this 2 stars based on the concept, what the story could have been. I didn't add anything for the acting because I hated the final product. So viewer be warned, pass on this one.
Annihilation (2018)
Interesting Concept with Poor Execution
No spoilers. Not very good. SCI-FI. Plot: A college biology professor signs up for a secret expedition to explore the shimmer, a slowly expanding zone from which nothing returns. The screenplay is based on a novel by Jeff VanderMeek which I did not read. While the premise sounds reasonable and some explanations of events offered by characters touring the zone are pretty interesting very little the characters attempt in the film over the 115 minutes makes any sense at all. These plot holes happen repeatedly and undermine the story. The response by government to the threat, the team they assemble, the supplies they carry or the objectives of their mission are all lame. Like watching teens in a slasher film, it get's old pretty quick. Am guessing writer/ Director Alex Garland best known for excellent work on Ex Machina kept the story a bit too close to the book this time. Decent cast too.
This might have worked better in the 60's when the audience might have been less likely to question why the actions of the characters make less sense than does an alien environment we can only speculate about.
Lady Bird (2017)
Bored and Self-absorbed while in Sacramento
LADY BIRD
Drama/Comedy - No spoilers - Somewhat bored artistically inclined teen comes of age, kinda, in Sacramento. Screenplay - Only mediocre, characters are kept pretty much as one-dimensional foils for the lead throughout the film. Thought it difficult to like or relate to the self absorbed, selfish, adolescent Lady Bird character much. What you see in the first 10 minutes pretty much sets up the entire story. The drama is mostly of Lady Bird's own doing. There is some character arc by the final credits but by then I've long since lost interest and don't care.
Overall an ok effort but cannot comprehend the multiple Oscar nominations and other assorted accolades associated with this film. It's just not anywhere near that good.
Sorgenfri (2015)
Not bad
No spoilers. Right off the top I'll say it was pretty decent little film... Didn't care for the clip from the climax that plays during the opening credits. Don't understand why the director felt the need to share that 50 seconds with the audience. Maybe a Danish thing.
Did very much like the camera work and shot selection used by the director, felt right there pretty much, in the scene. Felt personal, worked pretty well throughout. And they spend the first 10 minutes just getting to know the characters a little. Does it well enough to point out their character flaws without having to rub your nose in them. Showed real patience given it's only a 90-minute film, and no CGI so they focused on their characters and the story, which worked. Also thought they over did the lighting. Mostly shot indoors and at night so darker would have worked better.
However as the story progresses and the pace picks up the cast lags. The characters are a bit too subdued/lethargic as their world becomes unhinged with their survival increasingly in doubt. They should have been wired when instead they looked and acted a bit stoned. For people on the edge of the abyss they certainly lacked for nervous conversation. Think really scared people would have talked more.
As often happens in this genre the writer mistakenly believes the characters must make bad/stupid decisions for things to happen. Myself I never like watching stupid people. Prefer when the situation forces the characters to respond rather than vice versa. Have some of each here. Did not care for the climax much or for the ending, expected more, characters deserved a better ending.
All said not a bad little film, pretty good actually. Obviously a small budget but think it worked in their favor, worth a watch
Atomic Blonde (2017)
A quick painful trip to Berlin
ATOMIC BLOND
No spoilers. Liked it a lot. Action/thriller. Plot: Set in 1989, British MI6 agent Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) on a secret mission to retrieve a valuable intelligence asset from East Berlin before he's located and eliminated by the KGB. The screenplay is based on a series of graphic novels, 'The Coldest City' which I did not read. It is fast paced and fun to watch. EZ to connect the plot dots without being too obvious, nice job so kudos to the writers. The score is period and I thought worked exceptionally well with the action on the screen. Thought the director David Leitch did an all around excellent job. Would love to know how they filmed the action/fight sequences, rates a 10/10. The cast was great. But in this film Charlize is the film... and she smokes it. Also looked to be well beyond just a physically demanding film, looked seriously painful.
I've seen a few fairly negative reviews which surprised me. This is a well-done action/spy/thriller with no weak areas; it's pretty violent yet as I mentioned before, a fun watch. No, it's not Bourne, it's not supposed to be. Overall this is a 7 to 8 out of 10 stars.
It (2017)
IT... should have been better
IT
No spoilers. Pretty mediocre effort but a decent film based on a novel by Stephen King, which I have read several times since it was published.
The Plot: A loose knit group of nerds come together to fight a monster from the past that returns to hunts children... eventually stalking them. It's a great plot, timeless even. Worked great as a novel, seems much more of a challenge as a film.
Screenplay: was decent and had to have been a challenge to pick and choose scenes with so many characters to develop from a book that's almost 1200 pages long. That said the opening sequence was pretty creepy.
Direction: Think the film starts to lose traction soon after when the director forces the actors who are kids to try and act like kids. Tried too hard to make them look and act like losers, made them sanitized versions of kids. Andres Muschietti and the cast should have watched the 1995 film 'Kids' before the shooting started. Lastly, many scenes drag on way too long, shock value goes away pretty quick.
Cinematography: The film is shot in such a way that the audience never 'feel' like they're in the shot, more like they're just watching from a distance. Need to stay in your face, up real close for it to work.
The Climax: Again just mediocre and way too drawn out.
Overall worth a watch maybe but given the budget could/should have been a lot better.
The Snowman (2017)
Poor Storytelling in Norway in Winter
No spoilers. Pretty bad effort, not a good film based on a novel, which I did not read. The Plot: Burned out/damaged detective while investigating the disappearance of a woman, fears the return of an elusive serial killer. The plot I thought had real possibilities, the trailers for the film looked great... The screenplay was I think a huge part of the problem; it was all over the place. Lots of short scenes that lead nowhere, leave you wondering if you blinked and missed something important. Then it happens again and again and again. Subplots started then forgotten about making for a total absence of cohesive story telling... Based on the result it would seem three writers was a really bad idea. Direction: was weak or perhaps more accurately, missing, limited to vague/pained facial expressions. Zero character development, made the lead and the supporting cast far less interesting than the landscape where the story takes place. Cinematography: was very good, a bright spot making excellent use of the harsh weather winter in Norway. The cast: employed many screen veterans who's talents went unused. Just faces passing in and out of disjointed scenes. The Climax: pathetic, like the writers just wanted it over and done with. There ought to be a refund available for film ending's that are this bad. Not noire or art just very bad storytelling.
Do yourself a favor, watch the trailer bag the film.
The 5th Wave (2016)
The Fifth Wave - As in Nauseam
No spoilers. Plot: I'm borrowing the log line, "Four waves of increasingly deadly alien attacks have left most of Earth decimated. Cassie is on the run, desperately trying to save her younger brother." In other words moronic. The film is terrible, so bad as to be almost unwatchable. Heavy cartoonish score, like borrowed from a TV movie smothering whatever is happening on screen. IMDb listed 3 individuals with this screenplay, two with some really impressive films to their credit. Go figure, this sucks. Ditto for direction, seems like they were shooting a spot for Nickelodeon. Can't blame the actors with so little to work with. Ending was left open for a sequel, which based on earnings fortunately seems unlikely. Pass this dog by if at all possible.
Personal Shopper (2016)
Flat multi-genre, poorly directed, poorly edited film staring Kristen Stewart
Not a good film. A surprise considering many reviews I'd read were very positive, Kristen Stewart fans I expect, but the film fails on nearly every level. Think part of the reason is the director, Olivier Assayas couldn't decide what kind of film they were making. Is it a ghost story, a murder mystery or an artsy character study about the loss of a sibling and existence of an afterlife? Personal Shopper is a bit each with a touch of the Devil Wears Prada sprinkled on top... The director also chose not to develop his main character to any extent, perhaps it's a French film/director thing and I just don't get it. Night shots of Paris were good but the paranormal interactions were not very effective, goofy/funny actually. Also the amount of screen time given to the Kristen Steward character texting was absurd. Sorry, texting is not a replacement for dialog and story. But for me the biggest flaw was the lack of continuity between scenes during a critical encounter involving the main character in a hotel. The enormous story gap is never resolved, just hangs out there through the end of the film. Again, maybe it's a French film thing but it doesn't work for me. Lastly the ending sucked big time. Might have worked with David Fincher directing.
Alien: Covenant (2017)
Alien: Covenant... Does Not Deliver
No spoilers. Here's the thing, Alien: Covenant is a sequel in an anxiously anticipated trilogy but also the latest edition in the 4-decade long Alien series of films. This association/connection to the past brings not just anticipation and excitement but enormous expectations that the story/screenplay utterly fails to deliver on. Even as a stand alone sci-fi film the story line would present issues to any adult audience. The crew supposedly trained an extensive period of time for their mission but their lack of critical thinking about anything is difficult to get past. All the more surprising because the very talented director Ridley Scott also directed the original Alien film back in 1979. He's familiar with the story so what happened with this mess??? Casting is only so so, perhaps with a better story their individual talents could have made a difference but they collectively didn't work here, not at all like a crew and way too stupid/obtuse to believe. Did like Katherine Waterston though. The one positive aspect of the film is the CGI, it's great. To be honest a huge part of the problem for me, fair or not, is that Alien: Covenant is tied to the conclusion and promise made by its predecessor, Prometheus. The ongoing search for answers to where we come from and how humans evolved from the advanced civilization we presume to be responsible. All I'll say is regrettable they totally blew it off. Too bad.
Wind River (2017)
Wind River - Why you go to the Movies - An Excellent Film
No spoilers. Really, really good film. A thriller. The Plot: the body of a bare foot young woman found in the snow out miles from anything or anyone on a native American reservation. The screenplay. Tight, no wasted dialog, unnecessary characters or gratuitous overly long scenes. Characters are developed, frame by frame, fun to watch. Very well cast with wonderful performances by all. The cinematography is amazing, capturing a landscape that's beautiful, stark and frightening all at once. The writer/director Taylor Sheridan wove a story that grabs you in the first 2 minutes and hold you breathless till the final credits roll. Sheridan keeps you in the film, less like you're watching the action remote and safe more like you're right there just out of frame but close enough to feel the tension, feel the dread. An excellent film, somewhere way up there between 8 and 10 stars.
Cartel Land (2015)
Vigilantes
No spoilers. The film 'Cartel Land' is a documentary whose title is I think a little misleading. The subject matter focuses exclusively on 2 civilian militias, the Arizona Border Recon in the US and the Autodefensas in Mexico. The film is essentially a running dialog with Tim Foley and Dr. Jose Mireles the individuals who formed the militias in their respective countries recorded over a period of a year or two. The filmmaker did not question or drive the conversation in any particular direction while on camera. The intent seemingly was to provide a platform for the individuals to share their stories and pitch their case in support of organized civilian militias to oppose the activities and threat of Mexican drug cartels in the face of government complacency. The filmmaker bounces back and forth between the US and Mexico with far more time spent in the latter.
It is interesting that the purpose and tactics of the militias are very different. The mission of the Arizona Border Recon is to stop anyone crossing illegally into the US, regardless of their purpose or nationality. Where as the Autodefensas were, at least initially, organized to directly engage the Knights Templar drug cartel's campaign of mass murder and random terror.
There are no interviews with government officials from either country. All footage is of the militias either on the US border searching for persons crossing into Arizona or all over southern Mexico in the streets battling the cartels. There are no interviews with members of any cartels excluding 5 minutes at the beginning and end of the film with a group of men cooking meth at night somewhere out in the desert. There are no statistics provided on anything, the filmmaker not trying to prove or dispute anything.
My impressions based on the film.
Civilian militia is not an effective tool to combat drug cartel activities on either side of the border.
If you embarrass the Mexican government too often or defy it publicly you'll end up in prison or dead.
Building a wall across the US/Mexico border is totally and utterly absurd.
End the war on drugs, put the cartels out of the drug business. In the US put the allocated funds into substance abuse and treatment programs instead of sustaining the prison industrial complex and the mass incarceration of minorities.
A film that I would highly recommend with subject matter regarding Mexican drug cartels and US efforts to combat them is an excellent fictional thriller 'Sicario'.
Sorgenfri (2015)
Not bad
No spoilers. Right off the top I'll say it was pretty decent little film... Didn't care for the clip from the climax that plays during the opening credits. Don't understand why the director felt the need to share that 50 seconds with the audience. Maybe a Danish thing.
Did very much like the camera work and shot selection used by the director, felt right there pretty much, in the scene. Felt personal, worked pretty well throughout. And they spend the first 10 minutes just getting to know the characters a little. Does it well enough to point out their character flaws without having to rub your nose in them. Showed real patience given it's only a 90-minute film, and no CGI so they focused on their characters and the story, which worked. Also thought they over did the lighting. Mostly shot indoors and at night so darker would have worked better.
However as the story progresses and the pace picks up the cast lags. The characters are a bit too subdued/lethargic as their world becomes unhinged with their survival increasingly in doubt. They should have been wired when instead they looked and acted a bit stoned. For people on the edge of the abyss they certainly lacked for nervous conversation. Think really scared people would have talked more.
As often happens in this genre the writer mistakenly believes the characters must make bad/stupid decisions for things to happen. Myself I never like watching stupid people. Prefer when the situation forces the characters to respond rather than vice versa. Have some of each here. Did not care for the climax much or for the ending, expected more, characters deserved a better ending.
All said not a bad little film, pretty good actually. Obviously a small budget but think it worked in their favor, worth a watch
Cell (2016)
Dreadful
No spoilers, would have had to write 40 pages if I went that route. Terrible film. I wouldn't recommend Cell to anyone except perhaps if you want practice writing critiques of bad films. Initially hard to understand when supplied with veteran actors and a novel by Steven King the screenwriter and director should have been boatloads of material available to create a decent film. I thought I noticed that Steven King was listed with screenplay credits but if thats true it just makes this mess all the more difficult to understand. And before go any further I want to point out that I don't have any problem with the stories premise, it could have worked. And I have read the book from back in 2006 which I thought worked better in every way than does the film. For me the problems start early, once the 'event' begins the directors choice of shots removed me from the events he shows on the screen. A technique he employed throughout the film to eliminate tension, so you can forget about anything like horror.
Often films today rely too heavily on CGI rather than story but I can't blame these guys for that because in Cell the CGI sucked. If you're going to write it into the story then spring for enough to make it look real or do everybody a favor and edit it out.
Could have used a strong dose of character development
or at minimum try and get the audience to like, relate to or care about the characters but that didn't happen. Another issue,the city of Boston has like 650K people yet 20 minutes after the start of the event the streets are deserted and remain so, really? That premise might have worked in some suburb but not in downtown Boston.
Too many scenes didn't add anything to the story, seemed like they were written just an excuse to off a few characters, throw in some bad CGI or just waste time. All in all it make for poor scene selection and worse storytelling. Then there's the ending... like out of a bad 70's TV movie, dreadful.
Really seemed like the screenwriter and the director were totally unprepared to develop this type of film. Like it was a film project they had to write, shoot and edit in a single weekend. I'd suggest both the writer and the director watch a classic like 'The Birds' or for a more recent film that was infinitely better in that same genre, 'World War Z'. I'd suggest the same for anyone thinking of renting this dog
Skyline (2010)
Decent CGI looking for a story
As others have mentioned the trailer for the film Skyline looks amazingly. But after viewing this disappointing film one would be better off just watching the trailer and imagining how good it could have been. This is a bad film. Honestly, it looks like a CGI project for the Strause brothers that they forgot about or lost interest in directing. Like they had this concept for a film with this great panoramic shot of LA like you see in the trailer. But that's it, a concept that's used up in the first 20 minutes of Skyline. For the next 72 minutes the actors run aimlessly around the set playing with the shades and begging for some direction. In place of direction the Strause brothers use the actors like props to draw attention to their impressive CGI instead of developing the characters or building a story. Your money and time would be better spent doing anything else.