Reviews

The first half of Tusk offers examples of to gue-in-cheek and gross-out humor in developing Justin Long's a-h*le podcaster character, and setting the stage for ensuing horror. This works minimally, especially the bizarre Frankensteinish twist. There's pretty decent character development and interesting special effects. When the nonstop Canada jokes start (yeah we get it) including an annoying, cartoonish goofball French Canadian Homicide Detective, it's all downhill. It certainly ranks among the most memorable horror/comedies I have seen, but not for the best reasons. Perhaps a glass (or four) of wine prior to watching may help.

The devotion and heart of the people depicted saving the kite birds is beautifully captured here. The ugliness of the out-of-control man-made water, air pollution- and the trash and rodent overpopulation in areas surrounding the rescue work are sobering, dark and foreboding, but nature's insistence on adaptation and survival (the kites, with some help from this rescue) offers hope. The cinematography, of even casual conversations, of litter-strewn waters.. is captivating. The 'pace' of this documentary may seem slow to some viewers, but not if they allow themselves to be immersed in the story, and the struggles of its human and animal protagonists. Superb.

Just a few minutes into this ersatz-thriller, it is hard to keep enough interest because of strange delivery of dialog by actors whose previous work was solid. I have to guess they were instructed to play 'wooden' versions of early soap opera-like characters. In addition, the dialog is unnatural (and not in a sci-fi way) and the plot development is muddled and forgettable.

In the adventure/romance genre, this film is hugely disappointing. It adds nothing new, and lacks basic elements that are necessary to make such films 'work.' Bullock. Appealing as usual, and an extended cameo by Brad Pitt are the two saving graces, for their fans, though both are failed by a muddled, simplistic storyline and generally unfunny dialogue.

Tatum's man-child demeanor as the protagonist romance novelist (Bullock)'s fellow adventurist-and potential romantic interest, is miscast. Bullock's mega-star presence eclipses his. His super-nice hunky- guy character moons over her, seeming at times as if he's medicated with something that keeps him from displaying emotion. It isn't bad acting- it's emotion-free acting. Bottom-line: the Bullock/Tatum 'chemistry' does not work here. See 'Romancing The Stone' for an example of how this should* have worked. Fan favorite Daniel Radcliffe plays the (far too-mildly) eccentric heavy, pursuing Bullock/Tatum. He seems to try to make the best of the character, but- again- screenplay and direction disappoint.

It's 'just' watchable for fans of the cast.. I suppose.

Enjoyable and fascinating look at how young elites live, and how easy it can be for mega wealthy ppl to be had by those who seem to 'fit in'. The machinations of Anna, which incredulously fool middle class and elite victims into giving her money, housing, etc etc seem so obvious when some victims repeatedly see all the red flags, that one has little sympathy for their losses. Anna isn't likable and, in her incessant, nasal faux German/Russian-accented voice, becomes nearly intolerable after 4-5 episodes out of the 9 produced. Also would have preferred sticking closer to actual events, to understand better what truly occurred and how. In any event, good performances, interesting characters, but only enough imo for, perhaps, two 90-minute episodes. So over it but will finish last two.

If you adore the visual brilliance and eccentric characters in Anderson's prior endeavors, like Grand Budapest Hotel, and that's what brings you to French Dispatch, you will not be disappointed. However, if you came for all those laudable elements coupled with coherent storylines, ( as with ' Budapest'), like I did, you'll find plenty of time to check your cell phone for texts, or to assess the facial expressions of those seated next to you, to see if they are displaying more amusement than endurance. . It is far from a 'bad film'. And offering three separate stories in an unconventional manner is fine. It just isn't everyone's cup of tea, even among this filmmaker's fans. Decide for yourself. A few glasses of wine pre-screening might help overcome your innate craving for some sort of cinematic order and context. Maybe I'll try that on a second-chance viewing one day.

Come for Rudd and Ferrell. But don't expect either to reflect the usual character traits that make them so popular. In this, at times, almost painfully slow-paced limited series, Rudd's character is not at all charming, and Ferrell's is not at all comedic. But the off-type casting is not what's disappointing -no- frustrating- here. It's the screenplay, pacing and overall length. There's enough reasonably compelling content for one ninety-minute movie, but The Shrink Next Door is much, much longer.

The result of all this screenplay bloat; the same basic scenario of a conniving 'shrink,' Ike, (Rudd) manipulating a neurotic, naive businessman, Marty, (Ferrell) to gain financially, plays over ..and over ..and over again. Sometimes, the manipulations are shockingly bold, but most times, they are sinister, but minute in scale. The result of drawing all this out: the audience, once 100% sympathetic to the manipulated patient, begins to care less about the add-on offenses. The thought: 'oh, come on!' occurs more frequently as the episodes stretch out. You're still sympathetic, but less able to understand that someone, even with neurosis, and the manipulation, who could run a successful business- would continue to fall prey to the ploys.

It's based on a true story. I do not doubt the real-life manipulation at all. But the way the actual events are portrayed seems to be the problem.

Finally, without* spoilers: I can tell you that the final 'payoff' in the conclusion is wholly inadequatei, in that it sums up hours and hours of expectation with basically ten minutes of 'wrap-up' that leaves so many key questions unanswered. You feel cheated and, ironically, manipulated, just like Marty. Perhaps this is intentional.

It's much like visiting an art gallery and stopping to appreciate a painting depicting a few interesting-looking individuals.. and guessing what each expression and backstory might reveal- if only you could find out. This film isn't plot- or story-driven. It's about 90minutes of expertly-acted, beautifully photographed, and ably-directed let's 'guess what this character is thinking at this moment'. Two plot developments exist, first adding, then, later, subtracting character(s). That's enough to stay involved-for awhile, but relying upon the telegraphed self-loathing of characters enduring or further sullying bleak interpersonal relationships makes an unsatisfying film, unless said characters are truly bigger-than-life, which is not the case here.

Watch to get a dose of Cumberbatch and savor the exquisite photography of the hills, mountains and prairies, but a satisfying Western this is not.

Much like my beloved 'Better Call Saull, ' Lotus is a show with great casting, direction and performances, but the pacing of plot lines is so glacial, that simply enjoying characters and the Hawaiian scenery sometimes is not enough. Through EP 3, still waiting. The ongoing objective seems to be to create an 'offbeat' series. That's accomplished. Now, let's get moving on some plot. Still hoping as I do like this cast.

Generally not a fan of movie/spinoff shows.arising from the Lorne Michaels SNL empire, I am unexpectedly pleased, even smitten, with this very well-done, creative project. It all somehow works. The cast is likable, the numbers well-written and performed by Broadway-veterans and newcomers. It's a spoof of smalltown-themed musicals, but the spoof is more a love note than a gag.

It works. I am still amazed. And it is possibly the most creative thing I've seen streamed or in theaters in a very long time.

I begin with this statement: I love, love, love the comedic talent of Kristen Wiig. She can usually bring laughs with just a simple expression. She, imo, may be the funniest of all female SNL alum. But this movie is so far beneath her capabilities, it is stunning. Wiig's most successful film, Bridesmaids, was a comedy with a touch of drama, and showcased her co-writing and considerable dramedy skills. This* twaddle is as far from that film as is possible. The Barb and Star duo are, well, obnoxious. It's possible to portray 40-something, single, middle class, far from worldly friends without the incessant witless observations and nonstop chitchat going on between the titular characters. This film fails at every level, including the 'supervillain secret plan' trope (upon which the two predictably stumble). Cannot wait to see Wiig's next* work, even so. I guess she's entitled to an occasional bomb. Her Bridesmaids costar, the talented Melissa McCarthy has had a string of them and scores a hit now again.

I just don't get all the hype. Or the Golden Globe nod. I applaud Hollywood for making bigger budget films featuring Asian themes and characters, but this was just another 'marriage plans complicated by class differences' plot. Add plenty of eccentric 'hip' friends and still not much to amuse. Meh.

Big fan of Ms Parton and Ms Aniston. Their pre-release interviews were far more entertaining than this mediocre film. It's sort of like a southern style ABC After School special. Minus the specialness.

Whereas Breaking Bad, the cult-status, Emmy-rich Vince Gilligan show that begat 'Saul' kept fans on the edge of their seats nearly every segment of every episode, Better Call Saul takes its sweet time. Several seasons into the spinoff, Odenkirk has yet to evolve into the titular character. So far he's been 75% Jimmy McGill, a well-meaning but corner-cutting loser-turned-attorney, always in the shadow of his bizarrely eccentric brother, who's a mega-successful-law firm founder.

Typically, in 'Saul,' the epidodes and segments therein accomplish only hints at plot twists that may take several more episodes -or seasons- to fulfill in any significant way. Thus, now in the 2018 season, to appreciate the spinoff, one must still savor the personalities and quirks of characters like not-yet-Saul (Jimmy); 'fixer,' Mike, 'drug kingpin,' Gus Fring, and Jimmy's increasingly more interesting, legit-attorney girlfriend, Kim. I was growing impatient for the Saul we all grew to relish as a memorably tacky antihero, to emerge until this season. Looks like halfway through.. we're well on our way. Great things are yet to come.

Most Westerns are, well, pretty formulaic, with a few novel characters and dependence on violent imagery to fill the 90-120 minutes in today's cinema. This film offers lush imagery of western landscapes, beautifully photographed, a heart-tugging romantic quest, and a story of redemption for at least one character with an admittedly shady past.

The story centers on a young Scot's quest to reunite with his true love, Rose, another Scottish immigrant making a new life in the closing days of the still-perilous wild west. He travels at first alone, spurred both by love and the idealized vision of a peaceful, tranquil west he has read about in books.

After a near fatal incident, he is joined by a veteran guide/frontiersman who offers to guide him to his reunion many miles further west. There are surprises, hidden agendas, poetic romantic reminiscences, and-yes- violent encounters, all contributing to a well-paced, gripping and oft times, moving story.

I cannot remember a film of this genre so diverse and gorgeous. Well done. More!!!

Is season2 really even the same series? New storyline, obviously, but the plot is contrived and thematically offers nothing new in the genre. I cared about Jessica Biel's character. This story and its protagonists, not much.

The ubiquitous 'ensemble cast of very mature stars in a 'last caper or acting like high school kids' theme generally featuring elder men, this time wastes the considerable talent of dome terrific actresses. Far from an affirming, positive story about independent, active senior professional women, it is quite the opposite. There's an obvious and strange parallel to Sex and The City here, only these women seem even more focused on getting laid than the 30-something cast of that HBO series. It's a positive concept that 65-80 year-old women are still sexually active, but that seems the only point made in the film. We see pairings like Richard Dreyfus and Candice Bergen, Jane Fonda and Don Johnson, and whoever else getting caught just after coitus in car back seats, swimming pools, etc. Great to see this cast. Sad to see them waste their talent. If Jessica Tandy were still alive today, she'd have been cast in some salacious subplot here. Truly unfortunate. The sex is fine. As a minor plot point, but runs out of fuel fast as the entire focus.

I am a devoted fan of Melissa McCarthy. She is naturally talented and can be hilarious in skits, movies and with no script at all in interviews. That said, I could not tolerate her parody of a typical upper middle class, middle aged Mom. I guess this was supposed to be the funny part of the entire film, as there are no real 'jokes' or physical comedy or sight gags. So that leaves the grating high-pitched, almost Cohen bros Fargo 'Marge' accent character that just annoyed me so much I had to shut the DVD off after about 40minutes. Awful. No redeeming qualities.

Matt (Clooney)'s a wealthy, hardworking, but out-of-touch with his family's 'feelings' and 'challenges,' Dad has to suddenly wake up and reassemble his life when his thrill-seeking wife suffers a traumatic head injury; her ultimate recovery uncertain. His teen and pre-teen daughters are almost unfamiliar, though not hostile, to him, and he must find a way to connect in this crisis. All this is set in both the bustling urban and unspoiled Hawaii - and to further complicate matters, As executor of an estate including a huge and gorgeous swath of virgin Hawaiian seashore granted to his great great great grandparents by the King, from whom his family is descended, Matt has an imminent deadline to reluctantly sell the property to developers. Oh, he also finds his wife hid secrets that suddenly arise, as well. Clooney is well-suited to this role. He's charming, noble, ethical, a bit in denial and has some issues with empathy and affection, but is a good guy we can all admire and with whom we can sympathize. To me, a standout in a supporting role, was young Nick Krause, who plays a 'surfer dude-type' friend of Matt's teenage daughter, alternately riling the adults and offering gems of authentic teen wisdom and support that oft times steal scenes from the other cast members. He was a joy. While I appreciate the nod to Hawaiian heritage and the references to island history and culture, I do wish the Hawaiian music, which plays almost continuously, would have been less ubiquitous. It becomes distracting at times. A great film all-around. Worth a look. I bought the dvd and love it more each viewing.

Set in a beautiful area of France, and includes original, charming and dome offbeat characters. Its elegance and poetry are accomplished by relatable characters and thoughtful direction and cinematography. Great humor, tenderness, irony and drama with much to say about thecworking class, the arts, great literature, sex, and basically.. life. Well done.

I adore Saoirse Ronan. I heard the critical praise. I expected to be awed or at least super-charmed. I was not. Imo, covers essentially same territory as the superior 'Ghost World.' With the exception of a more complex daughter-Mom conflict. Best performance in film, I think, was by Laurie Metcalf. Saoirse did a fine job (though appeared about 8-10yrs too old to be a HS student.) Timothée Chalamet was charming but Casey-Affleck-in-'Manchester' void of emotion. It was.. fine. Just.. fine.

To begin, it's one of the most overlooked and under-appreciated films of the last several years (even decades in the genre). Period. And by that, I mean not a great success at the box office, even though it was very* well-reviewed by critics and audiences, alike. If you haven't seen it because you are weary of the beleaguered and hackneyed buddy-cop/P.I. films (ever since Lethal Weapon started the endless cloning process), you must* see this.

It's got loads more to offer,from its kitschy 70's pop culture setting (Including some memorably awful hair, clothes, and Nixon.), a 'groovy'soundtrack filled with 70s Pop & R&B music..but much more. Gosling, charming as always, is the n'er-do-well, boozy, bungling P.I., adored by his oft-disappointed and precocious daughter. He stumbles on a case (deemed initially, at least, as unsolvable but an easy paycheck) offered first by the worried Grandma of an assumed- deceased porn star, and then another case offered by a tough-guy- for-hire/washed-up but capable P.I., (played appealingly by Russell Crowe in one of his best comedy roles, ever) -who is looking for another missing girl.

Eventually (of course! - and we are grateful) they join forces, stumbling into a wider plot that links the two missing women. Along the way, yes, as the genre insists: mishaps and humor. But refreshing, more sarcastic, less broad humor. And more finesse means better laughs- as Hitchcock found that less gore brings greater terror. This duo is 'fab' chemistry. It's enjoyable, more believable, and such** a relief from the formulaic action films endlessly put forth on CGI-laden cookie-cutter releases that gross 10x more, sadly.

Word is the Director, Gosling and Crowe are on board for a sequel; but the studios are dragging their greedy little feet, because the modestly successful box office of Nice Guys takes a back seat to 45 more Pixar/CGI/ or the ubiquitous 'Boys or Girls' Night Out-with hilarious result'..films. Note to Hollywood: We NEED this film. We NEED another. Please??

Okay, okay. Everyone* adores it. Considers it a masterpiece. Well, yes, it is understated and extraordinarily muted in its portrayal of a tragedy-marred life of its main character (Affleck) who mainly acts as if on heavy sedation then bursts into short fits of rage. I *get that a subdued and underplayed emotionally-traumatized portrayal is likely a huge accomplishment, but not my cup of tea. It was like living with someone suffering severe depression *in reality, and not being able to interact. Frustrating, though you empathize. **And then it ends. Suddenly**. Not my pick for BEst film of the Year, nor best performance. We shall see. Yes. fine acting. But ugh.

What happened to this film on DVD/Streaming in the USA? Anyone know? Where can it be purchased? It is an amazing combo of historical documentary and paranormal investigating. If you like either, or both, it's unparalleled. Devoted to the many many thousands of orphans who died in 'orphan asylums' in late 19th-early 20th centuries. Their story is told in a touching, sympathetic way and is not at all exploiting, as are many TV paranormal shows. Great music, photography. Great. But it has been yanked from N American distribution in 2016 and I cannot* find a single DVD or a streaming service in 2017 :-( Spooked Productions will not respond. If you find it, let us all know! A+ for the genre.