RayCharles81 Reviews

Dune: Part Two (2024)

Editing is needed

[5/10 · 2 March 2024]

I went in blind, aware of the hype and praise but giving it a fair chance.

First of all, there are some great scenes, no doubt. The first 45 minutes were pretty good.

However, it is simply too long. Too long means it gets boring and monotonous, and like some astute critics have said, the problem of it lingers in the question of, "why should I care?". Sure, there are religious and political elements that carry truth, but ultimately they come across as cliche.

Basically, you have a quasi biblical savior story here (I guess you can just compare it to Neo in the Matrix), with his journey of being the "one", the savior. The problem is: we've seen it all before.

As much as I was immersed in the visuals and interesting and grand visual scenes, by the one hour point, u couldn't help but to check my watch and how much time was left. Then, it picked up again for fifteen minutes before becoming boring again.

This will suffice as a sci fi experience, and I can see fans of the book loving it maybe, but it just lost me about halfway through. I won't deny the reviews and arguments that say part I was probably better.

Masterpiece? Certain "scenes" scattered about it were, but overall, it is just too long and needs serious editing to be a true one.

5/10.

The Outsiders (1983)

Subgenre Masterpiece

[9/10 · 10 February 2024]

It's cringey, it's corny, it's sometimes poorly acted by one or two cast members. It's arguably outdated, it's occasionally unrealistic, and some character decisions (Macchio burying the knife in grass ten feet from the crime scene just one inch below the surface) are stupid.

Despite all that, The Outsiders is a subgenre masterpiece translated to the screen by legendary director of The Godfather, Francis Ford Coppola.

As you smile and laugh at the cringe and over the top acting, you simultaneously see a realistic, heartwarming, and heartbreaking story about a bunch of hoodlums from the fifties or sixties fighting and fighting to stay out of trouble.

Dianne Lane, Swayze, Howell, and Dillon give competent and moving performances in the small town tale of friends, enemies, and sunsets on both sides. It's a guilty pleasure masterpiece if you just stop and watch it.

8.5/10.

Oppenheimer (I) (2023)

Good Biopic About Strong Ideas Such as WMDs, War Strategies, and Ripple Effects That Suffers From Too Much Superfluousness on Slightly Weaker Ideas Such As Political Stunts

[8/10 · 13 January 2024]

Oppenheimer excels to great cinematic achievement and heights when it focuses on three things: the consequences of knowledge of great scientific quantifications, the raising of awareness of the weight of conscience when ambition is achieved in the dichotomous face of the realization of its actualization (theory/abstract versus fruition) on a person's soul, and the illustration of the processes of professional construction and professional teamwork paying off to incredible scientific success. It excels when it is personal.

Unfortunately, in the 3 hour runtime, these amazing aspects lie few and far between, shrouded in what feels like a neverending, densely packed, claustrophobic, superfluously wordy and erratic technical dialogue. Nevertheless, it is a good flick, and I liked it.

Upon just revisiting it for the first time since the summer, I concluded much of what I felt originally, this time having the "much needed" ability to rewind dozens of scenes that contain key bits of story information that are truly impossible to fully keep up with on one watch. Not only is the editing incredibly jumpy, but actors often whisper critical pieces of information to the story underneath an already loud musical score, making it a true chore to follow what in the world is actually going on.

The top review on here "Breaks All the Rules...Not in a Good Way" is probably the most accurate description of the experience of watching the film, especially the phrase, "like being told a story you think you already know by an overly hyperactive kid" (lol), although I disagree with the 6/10 rating and give it an 8/10. To that experience, I personally had to (and I strongly recommemend) rewatching and rewinding (often "several" times) countless scenes where the dialogue is hard to follow or hear. Closed Captioning is a requirement for watching this film.

In this regard, even though it would've made the movie even longer, Nolan and the film would've really benefitted by more "slowing down" of the pacing- to let us "be there inside of the movie". When the movie does do this "breathing", which is very rare, Oppenheimer truly reaches "masterpiece" levels of filmmaking. Imo, these scenes alone are worth the watch and are rewatchable, but most of the film, especially in the first half, is so fast-paced that nobody can keep up unless they are in some kind of prepared competition like a speed reading competition to follow the movie.

That might be good if Nolan intended it in a metaphorical way pertaining to the story, but with no prior warning, it leaves the viewer in an impossible position to follow key plot information. Maybe Nolan's aim was to coerce people to have to rewatch it to understand it all; if so, he succeeded, and box office revenue supports this. Paradoxically, with all that having to be said, it actually does in fact elevate immersiveness and intrigue simultaneously because it turns what would basically be a banal, monotonous biopic and material into a riveting scientific and political epic and adventure that defies you to take your eyes off the screen.

Still, the film is far from perfect. Just by using more of the CGI graphics that intermittently are occasionally shown when Oppie describes quantum mechanics and physics would have made the movie better, more cool, and more entertaining. Instead of elaborating more on this feature visually, Nolan delves superfluously into political scandals, courtroom scenes, hearings, and peripheral characters who need to be fleshed out more. Once again, that's not to say these scenes aren't fine, okay, or good at times, but it's just that the movie could have been even better.

Specifically, the three to four scenes that make a brilliant, poignant, and everlasting impact are: the triumphant celebration of Oppenheimer at Los Alamos after the successful Trinity test, the breathtaking genius scene in the auditorium where Oppie gives his post-war speech to the college crowd, the meeting with Truman, and the ending on "ripple effects" in a conversation with Einstein.

Other scenes, such as the romance scene with Florence Pugh where he reads the Bhagavad Gita- "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds", his profound realization that he was handpicked by Groves because he could be controlled, the scientist and politician meeting discussing the anticipated effects and consequences prior to dropping the weapons, and minor (too short) emotional conflict scenes also stand out in what otherwise is a compelling speed race to keep up with every bit of excessive dialogue in a still very well made and mature movie.

In conclusion, Oppenheimer ultimately depends on how you look at it; I ultimately prefer to interpret it based on extrapolating the dichotomous consequences collateralized in scientifically genius ambition and how they must be scrutinized and dealt with within the soul, while others may put more focus on the political realities of how heroes and idols can be backstabb ed, used, and turned into the villain in the public eye, and still others may gravitate toward the successful scientific aspects and innovation. I may watch it again, not needing a thesaurus or anything, but just a rewind button and closed captions so when the rapid jump cuts occur inconsistent with the action on the screen, I fully keep up with what's going on.

This is my Best Pic of the year, despite the criticism. Good movie.

8/10.

Dirty Dancing (I) (1987)

No CGI, Just Great Talent

[8/10 · 3 January 2024]

Though corny at times, it's a classic thanks to great leads by Gray and Swayze. It's okay to be cheesy if it is quotable and humorous, and DD toes the line to maintain charm even through its cringe. The story is surprisingly layered with adult themes, class analysis, about stereotyping, and themes on the meaning of love and relationships. Many scenes are real classics, and Gray and Swayze reach that rare, elusive movie magic with commitment to their characters.

Even if this isn't one's cup of tea, if you give it a chance, you'll understand why so many people consider it an 80's classic. The soundtrack is also well known.

Edge of Tomorrow (2014)

A Little Too Drawn Out and Convoluted

[6/10 · 3 January 2024]

Eh, I followed everything, for the most part, but I have to say that by the final act I just wanted to get to the point and the end; there's only so many times it is fun watching the day repeat with a nuance to Tom Cruise's changes to show he's been here before.

Additionally, although much time is spent describing the alpha and omega and their dynamic operating functions and locations, frankly they are never quite developed in a manner to invoke respect and fear as a main villain. As such, the stakes are never appreciated, with the script instead lopsided focused on the daily repetition and characters. Blunt was very good in this, by the way. Cruise is always good, buyt he's just himself in everything, nothing remarkably different here, not far removed from MI or War of Worlds Cruise.

I don't know, like it was entertaining for a somewhat fun action movie, but I believe it's overrated at 7.9. I wouldn't look forward to viewing it again: a decent one-watch boring night diversion.

6/10.

Poor Things (2023)

Very Bad

[1/10 · 28 December 2023]

This has an 8.5 rating currently at this moment and was the only movie on the most popular list above 7 so I checked it out.

Most people I can guarantee will not like this. At best, it's an overly artsy movie, but I disagree with even heaping that much praise on it. The best I can say about it is that Emma Stone does do some good work as far as acting, but that's beside the point. What was she thinking here? Almost never does a better known actress do this kind of work; maybe before they get bigger roles when they're unknown, but she's almost two decades into her mainstream career.

This is basically truly a 70's soft porn movie akin to Lady Chatterly or something like that you'd see on late night cable back in the nineties. It has that weird 1970's vibe to it. It's one softcore porn scene after another mainly with the exception of the very beginning and one hour of it, weirdly erotic, and excessively unnecessary. For people who have a fetish for that kind of stuff, they might like it. I can't see most people rating this high. It doesn't tick any boxes of entertainment quality, but it may be artsy for people wanting something far out there.

Se7en (1995)

Almost a masterpiece

[8/10 · 21 December 2023]

I just rewatched Seven for the first time in probably about ten years. Everything's been said by now, but I had to lower the score from a 9 to an 8 for two reasons. One, although I usually like Pitt in his roles, the younger version of him here- he's not really a good actor yet, except for the final ten minutes. He was bumbling, unrealistically cocky at times, and it was hard to decipher some of his words. Juxtaposed to the outstanding acting of Freeman, it quite a bit feels like he drags some scenes down, at least until the end. Second, while I really enjoy how the script and movie overall deals with literature, sins, and philosophy, it doesn't quite dig deep enough to make a lasting mark on th viewer's insight; much like their library research, it feels more like a 101 class or cliffnotes. Now, at least they do scratch the surface, and there are two to three great conversations that go under the surface a little more, but despite these scenes the overall ending of the film makes it just equate to pessimism, which is not entirely true to life. While you empathize with Somerset's perspective, the fact is the vast majority of people are mostly good.

In Conclusion, Seven deserves lots of credit for its originality (at the time), uniqueness, cinematography, more profound material for the typical entry into the genre in terms of philosophical debate and historical literature, as well as an awesome performance by Freeman, but ultimately it just misses becoming a true masterpiece for the same reason it became so popular: metaphorically hitting the audience with an emotional sledgehammer (as Spacey's character philosophizes) with an abrupt, pessimistic ending (good final scene quoting Hemingway, by the way) without quite delving deep enough into the surface-scratching literature leaves the viewer without much takeaway despite it, other than the fact it was a good, entertaining thriller movie. This disqualifies it from being a masterpiece and its current #19 ranking on here is surprising. It feels more like a #50-80 area range film, not a top 20 all-time, but still a classic.

Gladiator (2000)

Absolutely Brilliant

[9/10 · 9 December 2023]

I love when you haven't seen a great movie in five years and then happen to stumble on it on the perfect night to revisit it, somewhat forgetting much of it, or at least the affecting impact it can have on you. That was me with Gladiator recently.

Most has already been said, so I want to just zoom in on a couple or parts and features. Before I do, it's a great and rarely acknowledged fact that although most of the story is fictionalized, in reality, Commodus was really infatuated with the Gladiator games; he also did indeed compete and corruptly fabricated his win-loss record. Outside of the Coliseum arena, he had a statue of himself enshrined that listed his record at something like 60 wins and no losses. However, he could rig any match he wanted and most historical accounts dispute he fought on that many matches- he may have been in a dozen or so, but doubtfully was he in that many. Also, while it would be cool if, like in the film, another gladiator fought him like that in the ring, in reality, it was Commodus' trainer that was supposedly responsible for his demise. This is interesting because while many of the story components are inaccurate, one might assume that Commodus' character was completely made up also, but he truly was a big fan and even competitor in the games.

The staging of the scenery and background construction of Rome is absolutely brilliant and breathtaking. It makes you really feel like you're there in many scenes. How many movies can transport you back to experience legendary Rome two thousand years ago?

Even more so brilliant is how not much has changed. Sure, our athletes don't fight to the death and now get paid sufficiently, but the relation and comparison to modern day sports events is vividly shown. The same is true for the politics- yeah, it's all in there in there. While the political components are not a deep dive, the film touches on enough philosophies and strategic realities to go a little and just enough beyond the surface to paint the picture that little has changed. There's corruption, schmoozing, contempt, grandstanding, loyalties, and nepotism.

Phoenix is so entertaining to watch playing the sick, twisted, power hungry, bloodlusting emporer, especially when he's enjoying the battle of Carthage. He is truly outstanding in this role, arguably missing out on an early career, deserved Oscar award. While many of his scenes are disturbing, he is always riveting.

This is a movie you will lose yourself in.

The Battle of Carthage is truly awesome. This was a very elaborate and complex sequence with lots of moving parts, showing that director Scott wasn't just phoning it in. When the chariot crashes through the gate, you really feel the tides turn, like this isn't what Commodus and his organizers expected. Cutting back and forth to Commodus' reactions was a great decision and likewise with all the senators' and Connie Nielson's. That was my favorite match.

My second favorite match was Tigris. What a spectacle it was having the tigers pop out from underground, and Commodus' disappointment again having thought he rigged Maximus' demise was again a great revelation.

Every scene is well acted, even the behind the action scenes with Commodus and his sulister, Gracchus, and Proximo and Maximus.

It's truly a classic and awesome film experience. Ridley Scott must have had a "no bull----" rule while making the movie because it really doesn't waste a second and with sequences like Carthage battle going right into the Commodus-Maximus confrontation, and then how quickly the film goes from battle to battle, it just feels like a filmmaker who is not screwing around. I think this has to be appreciated much more, as we know so many movies today waste time and meander.

My only complaint was that we didn't get to see the promised, would-be invasion of Rome with Maximus escaping and returning with his five thousand soldiers. That would have been epic beyond epic. Instead, we get a good showdown. But to its credit, I'll give it this: Maximus at least kept half of his promise, and the end result was much the same since Commodus could no longer rule and the sister and Gracchus honored Aurelias' final wish (no invasion necessary in that regard, still I would've liked the action and suspense more).

Even though many try to criticize the scripts simplicity, I disagree and find the dialogue and monologues to be quality drama and somewhat Shakespearean at times. Even the weaker scenes that were probably added are just drowned out in the action and serve their purpose to keep the audience informed.

And make no mistake here: this is a visual movie, and there is much more said and conveyed in the close ups of the facial expressions of the main characters, from evil glances, to vengeful scowls, to shaking jaws, tearful eyes, frightened faces, mad bloodlusting tongue stick outs, and hopeful daydream-like optimistic smiles.

We all know what's going on here, witnessing humanity at its' corrupted, animalistic worst and heroic, godly, and noble best. The end result is a masterpiece of visual, visceral spectacle and drama about one man's fall and rise by honor and heroism and another's rise and fall by corruption and cowardice, in front of the backdrop of one of the seven great wonders of the world. It doesn't get much more epic than this these days!

I hope my review is merciful and you are all entertained!

Napoleon (2023)

Amateur, But Compelling

[5/10 · 23 November 2023]

It pains me to review this in such an ambivalent light, as I was anticipating much more historical and thematic depth on the history of France, Bonaparte, and the French Revolution that could have been had in the scope of the material.

Instead, we get a mostly toxic love story between Napoleon and a nobody: his wife Josephine. Additionally, even though I firmly believe that Phoenix is one of the best 3 actors of the past two decades, he shockingly delivers his lines mostly passion less, unconvincing, and without any attempt at an accent, while juxtapositionally, every other supporting actor or actress, such as lead actress Kirby, at least deliver a European accent.

Then, there is such a minimalist explanation of an intricate 1800 Europe that the great conquerer was geographically destroying. We get snippets here and there of who's who and what's what, but it's clearly overshadowed by Napoleon's romantic relationships.

I love Phoenix's acting historically from Gladiator to Walk the Line to Joker, but I'm shocked to review that despite having predispositionally matched with historical Napoleon, it just does not meet his potential that we know.

I'm being very generous in giving this a 5/10, as I believe this is a sinkable failure of 1/10. But the pacing, scenery, and Kirby, combined with even Phoenix at 50% of his potential make it watchable at least once.

Still, wow, what a letdown, and I say that as someone who it had fully invested for the first hour.

Oppenheimer, receive your Best Picture, along with best director, best actor, and all the rest. Napoleon is amateur and Killers of the Flower Moon underachieved...This is definitely Nolan's year and long overdue.

5/10.

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

Nope

[5/10 · 24 October 2023]

I just saw Killers of the Hours Afternoon. There are so many criticisms of this three and a half hour borefest, I'll try to keep them short.

First of all, I took at least three bathroom breaks during the runtime. Not only is the film long, but it feels long too. By the end of the movie, the final act, it continues to be slow and becomes annoying.

Next, the Final Act I was led to believe by reviews was the good part. I could not disagree more. I thought the third act was just as bad as the second act.

Thirdly, what was that final scene? That could easily qualify as not only one of the worst endings to a movie ever, but also as the most annoying. I was affected by the sadness of the final line, but overall the final ten minute scene was palpably irritating on my nerves.

Additionally, what was Jesse Plemons even doing in here? He's just lethargically walking around looking like a twenty year old head of investigators while supposed to be an older leader and Columbo? All I saw was Todd from Breaking Bad. His one-note acting and tone of voice added literally no tension to any scene he was supposed to be solving these heinous crimes. I like him as an actor, but it seemed like the part was meant for an older, more serious and mature actor, and he was just going through the motions.

Fifth, some of the characters could've been fleshed out more so that when their names came up later, it was easier to understand who they are. I've seen similar movies do it worse, but still there were indeed too many minor characters to bring back into the discussion at the end to know who they were.

Finally, when the film ended, although throughout much of the movie I was thinking it was good, I had this overwhelming feeling of, "That's it? That wasn't a very good movie, certainly not a masterpiece and certainly not one of Scorcese's best." I sat there thinking of all the ways it could've been better.

Here's the thing: the story itself is insane and amazing. You would think that it could've been better culminated and played.

Here are the positives: the story is great. I really wanted Mollie to win and to expose the evil deeds. DeNiro is definitely the best part and actor of the movie. Even at an older age, he is so nuanced and on point in his glares, looks, mannerisms, and inconspicuous evil. I was impressed. Gladstone, while also excellent, could have had more lines, but her breakdown scenes were truly sad and brutal.

While Dicaprio suffices as usual and also has some good scenes scattered throughout, by the time we get to the third act, all I saw was Dicaprio doing his best to cry. He's good, but nothing special like the former two aforementioned. I actually was hoping that Mollie would catch him in the act and take him out when he kept administering the stuff. The rest of the roles were good, especially the grandmother.

Scorsese's direction throughout the first Act of the movie was excellent. The first Act, or really the first hour and a half of the movie is definitely the best part. It moved quickly, and contrary to many reviews, I never looked at my watch or time once. I thought time was surprisingly not an issue.

The directing and acting of the first half of the film is going to have many cinema lovers hailing it perfect and a "masterpiece", but it's just not. One half of a movie being great and the rest being a letdown is simply not enough, just like a couple great scenes aren't enough. You have to take the whole body of work into account.

It's just by the time we get to the third act, that's when I just couldn't take the length, thinking when the investigation starts that's when it would get good. It didn't. It was a slog and a snore, but well directed throughout. There also could've been better twists and reveals for such an intricate story.

Surprisingly, although I did not love Oppenheimer, of these two competing, overly long, budgetary powerhouses of films competing for Oscar's this year, I'd have to give Oppenheimer the edge. However, with better editing that shortened the runtime and replaced the final ten minutes and a better third act, I might have thought more highly of Flower Moon.

5/10.

Goodfellas (1990)

Easily One of the Greatest Movies Ever Made

[10/10 · 22 September 2023]

If you haven't seen it, make an effort to witness what is definitely one of the greatest movies of all time, ever made. This is a true masterpiece from start to finish. It's chilling how well it is made and delivered. Scorcese directs this on fire. It has one of the best prologues and also a great epilogue that ties everything together.

Based on a true story, half-Irish hoodlum Henry Hill aspires to climb the ranks of the New York mob in the 1960's and 70's. He teams up with an unforgettable cast of characters lead by Deniro and Pesci to establish organized crime syndicate. While their success grows, troubles begin to arise, and Hill, Tommy, and Jimmy Conway must cover their tracks as the feds, other crews, and other members close in on them.

The stylish drama contains some of the best shot scenes in history, scenes as mundane as Deniro puffing a cigarette, a celebrational Christmas party, Pesci's funny storytelling, husband and wife stuff, and one of the best filmed scenes itself where the camera longtracks Liotta and Bracco from behind as they go for their first real date to a restaurant and mobster meet up.

One of the most influential crime dramas in history, Goodfellas also has undeniable consistent dark comedy undertones, and the twists are always shocking and entertaining. It's simply one of the greatest movies ever made and probably Scorcese's best.

Red Dawn (1984)

It's Just A Good Movie, an 80's Classic

[9/10 · 21 September 2023]

Anyone who views this seriously will miss the point and judge it harshly, but this movie is underrated and contains what makes movies great and classics. It's a fantasy movie at its best. Imagine that you and your high school classmates were invaded by other countries and had to survive in the wilderness with no combat experience and fight back? And imagine you had to learn how to survive based on little hunting experience while your town was overtaken by foreign powers? What would happen? How would you adapt and form a small combat unit to try to take back your town and save lives?

Too many reviewers focus on the ideas that it's unrealistic or jingoistic, and perhaps it is, but this is a fun, yet serious, fantasy movie. The script has its flaws, but it has some unsung strengths, too. There are as many memorable and quotable lines in this movie as there are in an entire year or two's worth of movies these days. Swayze gives a powerhouse lead performance in his youthful prime, and the cast is truly star studded for the 80's; every popular 80's teen actor it seems was in this.

If you don't take it too seriously, and view it how most good movies are seen, as a flight of fantasy, it really hits the mark. And the ending is a true tear jerker no matter how many times you see it. It's nothing more than a fantasy movie about what you and your high school friends would do if suddenly invaded and how you would learn to survive and fight against overpowering forces while outnumbered and outmatched. It's a great movie and a true 80's classic.

Nobody (I) (2021)

Absurd and Ridiculous

[5/10 · 10 September 2023]

This is basically Bob Odenkirk becomes John Wick or something. I remember when it came out, many people wrote raving reviews so I finally checked it out on my rental options.

There really isn't anything good to say about it unless you are a teenager who likes seeing people get in fist fights and nonstop violence and action.

Sure some sequences were interesting, but slow motion camera work reliance and good music during action scenes doesn't make for a good movie.

Odenkirk is fine in it, but the plot is ridiculous and absurd. So we're to believe a retired tax collector can somehow take on a mob of criminals all on his own? And I don't even know where to begin with how many questions and plot holes that were never answered (or at least not clearly).

For example, why did he go from a pacifist who told his son to let the burglars go to overnight just becoming completely unhinged? Was it just when he found out they took his daughter's bracelet? So that is what triggered him to unleash fury on the entire city? Also, his disabled father becomes a standing and capable soldier basically in the end fight scene.

Sorry, this was probably not even worth a watch. I got sick of its' one trick pony fights about halfway through, but I stuck it out just to finish a mildly entertaining movie. I want to give it a 3/10, but nowadays when people seem to think John WIck movies are masterpieces (practically by rating them 8's, I uess this could at least pass for average.

4/10.

FBI (2018– )

So bad, it's good

[8/10 · 7 September 2023]

This is a case of a show that is so bad that it's good. It's a soap opera disguised as a police procedural. The performances actually aren't that bad, but being completely honest I cared almost nothing for the stories. Instead, I was so distracted by how pretty Missy Perygrym is that I found myself just watching to look at her. She has Hillary Swank's resemblance but is much prettier, and I just couldn't stop looking at her. She has an innocence about her and does have potential in the future. The other actors do a good enough job and try their best to add color to their characters. However, in the end the show meanders and quickly begins to feel like every other investigative procedural.

Back to the Future Part II (1989)

Back to the Masterpieces

[9/10 · 5 September 2023]

Both films, Part I and II are masterpieces. Zemeckis is an actual genius, as displayed by how many great (and different genre) classic movies he made. For him to make so many perfect to near perfect movies exemplifies his brilliance. How does someone make three movies in a row about time travel without hardly having any misstep (at least noticeable one), and yet all three movies are coherent, fun, and enjoyable? It's simply amazing.

While Part I will be most peoples' favorite, Part II is also amazing, especially due to the final ten minutes and the whole endeavor to bring order back to 1985 after Biff's success and crookedness turns Hill Valley upside down. The complexity of the strategy and ramifications Doc and Marty have to execute to restore normality to the future is very good writing and clever. One of the great parts is seeing all of the writing changed once Marty burns the almanac, and then when a mysterious man delivers a letter in the rain to Marty after the Delorean is struck by lightning. Also, seeing Strickland defend his house from the drive by in Biff's 1985 was funny and fun.

While not as smooth as Part I, Part II is more complex and explores the dark side of time travel more in depth, culminating in an astonishing final ten minutes that turn it, too, into a masterpiece.

9/10.

12 Angry Men (1957)

Pretty Good

[5/10 · 2 September 2023]

For its time, this movie must've been excellent. However, today it holds up as a good older movie that was filmed in black and white with many other older films in its time, shortly before, and shortly after surpassing it. Films such as Casablanca, Vertigo, North by Northwest, Gone With the Wind, Some Like It Hot, Sunset Boulevard, and many others are equally as good for this time period, and some are much better.

While I did appreciate and respect the movie and even liked it, I was very surprised at how high it was ranked on here at number five. There were no major plot twists, surprises, or even tour de force performances that you would also see in some other black and white older films. The concept was very interesting and kept my attention, but even some of the arguments and deductions that the jurors made were not truly logical. Some of them were intelligent, like when Henry Fonda measured the amount of time it would take for the older man witness to walk to the door, as well as when he proved he could purchase the weapon, but overall some of the points made were guesswork.

The truth is that at the end of the day, the director decides to paint Fonda's character as an ideal perfect person while clealry letting the culprit, likely guilty, walk free, which I felt betrayed the script's ambiguity. And to be totally honest, it would have been a much better movie, warranting a ranking of five all-time, if there was a plot twist that one of the juror's arguing for guilt was indeed the actual culrpit- a twist I was waiting and hoping for that I never got. Instead, we get a glorification of Fonda's character to the very end, ironically an antihero that wasn't truly meant to be that allowed the guilty one walk free.

6/10.

Sound of Freedom (2023)

As Good As Any

[10/10 · 23 July 2023]

I had low expectations going into it, and the only reason I even heard of it was because of an article bashing it, despite it having an A CinemaScore rating (that's the exit polls for people coming out of the theatre grading it after seeing it). I was compelled to see what it was about so I figured I'd give it a try. Here's what I found.

The movie has solid structure to it. It's easy to follow and understand, not overly complex or pretentious. Some might argue that's bland, but not here. That's because this is based on a true story and also because the performances, especially by Bill Camp and a couple of the villains are very good.

The tension builds quickly as Caviezel's Ballard is called to action after the abduction of two South American siblings. He leaves his job to go undercover on a sting mission in South America (being vague here as to not totally give it all away). This is also based on true events, and they must infiltrate an underground network led by a trafficking madam that is competently and realistically played. These bad guys have no scruples, and it is satisfying seeing them go down.

Unfortunately, Ballard doesn't accomplish his mission here. Instead, the other sibling is still unaccounted for despite some success in his mission. So the stakes are raised and Ballard and his cohorts must go to dangerous lengths to try to find them.

While the movie can sometimes have a sense of having seen this all before to it, it still has enough nuance and uniqueness to separate itself at least enough from being boring or predictable thanks to Monteverde's directing, but the final half hour is satisfyingly reminiscent of some good movies from the 70's and 80's or 90's, something you don't really see much of anymore and forget about the effectiveness of simplicity when it is wrapped in tension and suspense.

The emotional punch it packs cements it as just a good movie. While it's great many people like it more for the message, personally I liked it because it moved me, it made me feel for everyone involved, it has heart, and it is a satisfying ending to a good movie, one that brought some tears to my eyes.

Yellowstone (2018– )

Good but not great

[8/10 · 2 March 2023]

After much word of mouth critical praise, I finally sat down to watch this show yesterday and got through about the first three episodes.

It's a pretty good show, but it's very "genre" based and melodramatic, meaning that it would probably appeal most to people who already had a preference to either the western soap genre or maybe girls who develop a crush on Costner or another character. This is because although the show has its good moments, it also has quite a few "eyeroll" moments. The eyeroll moments are not all its fault, as it's mostly scenes that we've all seen before, sort of cliched if you will.

However, the show does get many things right and is good enough to take a look into and watch on a boring night before bed. I'm not sure if it's good enough for me to invest 50 plus episodes of time into though. After seeing other popular shows like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Ozark, etc, it doesn't quite hit those shows' mark (especially Breaking Bad), but it does, however, manage to create isolated storylines and material that is almost up to par with say an Ozark. Still, it's based in the west and is very "soapy", maybe even "sappy".

As for performances, the daughter has a great look and manages to be captivating in most of her scenes, and Cole Hauser is probably the best actor in the show, even slightly better than Costner's performance.

One thing I will say is that although the cinematography is very nice, you really have to prepare yourself for lots of scenes of cattle and livestock, which was already getting boring and repetetively annoying to me at times after only three episodes. Yellowstone is a pretty good show that may be great to people who for some subjective reason emotionally connect to its aspects, but I'm not believing the hype that it is anything elite or up there with the greats. It does have cinematic flare to it at times. Being somewhat familiar with the writer's work, it reminds me of their movies which have moments and baseline elements of greatness that become bogged down in anticlimaxes and cliches that are watchable but not ultimately special.

7/10.

The Batman (2022)

Disappointing

[4/10 · 3 February 2023]

After hearing raving reviews about it along with a 7.8 IMDB score, I was looking forward to seeing what the hype was all about with this new Batman installment.

I agree with some other top rated reviews that say that the first ten minutes seemed promising, but it sort of devolves into what is kind of like a Dark Knight wannabe that never quite lands, mainly because the Riddler actually surprisingly comes off as a pathetic villain, the storyline and plot is surprisingly a generic paint by numbers crime story, and the detective work never even rises above Tom Hanks' pursuit of the Da Vinci Code codebreaking.

Additionally, it is too long and the casting of the roles that have been solidified in our Batman ether never quite convince. It had some interesting bits and sequences, but ultimately I fell asleep after about two hours and have no plans to finish. It is actually very boring and felt like forced tension and forced darkness, unlike The Dark Knight, which had a great pacing, sharp editing, powerful performances, and a more organically established darker vibe surrounding Gotham and the Joker. I honestly can't even give this a 5.

4/10.

Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

Intense flight mission sequences and nostalgia make Top Gun 2 a summer blockbuster once again

[8/10 · 27 May 2022]

I was a big Top Gun fan (as was mostly everyone I knew) back in the late 80's and early 90's. It was the highest grossing movie of 1986 for a reason. So I was very excited to finally get a chance to see this sequel a day earlier than the advertised release date. We went at the very first matinee and everyone in the theatre enjoyed it. It was fun and triggered lots of chuckles and laughs with subtle humor.

I cried at probably at least five or six scenes, whether from nostalgia, heavy hearted references to either character deaths or character relationships, or the romance scenes. In addition to the humor and sad scenes, there was also some good drama and intense jet fighter sequences. The director and writers blended the concept of a difficult fighter jet mission with fun training scenes, romance, and callbacks to the original.

I'm not going to lie- this is a good movie. I'm not exaggerating that I barely blinked during the entire run time of 2 hours and 10 minutes, with which most of the time when I wasn't being tear-jerked, I had a silly grin on my face or was chuckling at the subtle humor. However, I will say that if I wasn't a big fan of the first one, I might not have liked it as much as I did. That's because it was a great as a fan of the first one to have so many references to anything in part one.

The ending was good, but it could have been even better, even though it was intense enough to have me sweating a little. But one of the biggest drawbacks of Top Gun 2 is also one of its strengths, in my opinion, in a way. I got the impression that ultimately this is a movie that is more made for kids and teens than adults, and what that means is that the content is mostly light and shies away from any kind of violence or sexuality, which would have made it feel more mature and realistic. For example, in the original Top Gun, it has heavy profanity, really intense romance and sex for a PG movie, a pilot dies depicted with a face covered in blood after ejecting, and the dialogue by actors like Tom Skeritt make the stakes seem higher and more realistic: "what we do up there is dangerous". Maverick's dad's fate in Vietnam is also discussed to paint a realistic picture of the stakes. Overall, it just felt more gritty, whereas "Top Gun Maverick" keeps it ultra "clean" considering the dangers of flying and the explicit nature of locker room talk and sexuality.

What this means is you get a sequel movie that is much more appropriate for teens and kids than adults, yet being an adult I kind of wish the stakes would have felt as heavy as they could have been. It would have been sadder, but it also would've been more mature and realistic. It is what it is. It's still a good movie, but it could have been better.

I'm glad that I saw it early. As a nostalgic, emotional, fun summer popcorn movie, it was a blast, but if you're expecting a Best Pic contender or something remarkably original and profound, unfortunately the writers and directors "had the shot, but refused to fire it", and for that the movie comes up a bit short in cliches, cheese, and yes even lacking believability at key moments. I think there was an Oscar-contender somewhere in this story, but the creators of it decided to go another direction, more into a "popcorn" and feel-good movie of the summer. That's fine and I don't blame them since the target audience was clearly younger kids, which makes it a nice, wholesome movie for a change.

Jennifer Connelly, despite a small supporting role, was the key to this movie. Other than Cruise, who does have a few stumbling moments at times, her confident experience as an actor makes every look she gives and line she says add credibility to what is an otherwise rather superficial script for supporting actors. The other good role that stands out is Val Kilmer's pleasantly surprising (and funny at times) reappearance as Admiral Iceman. Then, Teller does a pretty impressive job as Goose's kid.

At the end of the day, "Top Gun Maverick" succeeds and soars as a nostalgic, deeply emotional surprise triumphant action flick, with flight battle scenes so intense it'll make you sweat in your seat, while it also crashes into some of the mountainous cliches that have been built and established by Hollywood throughout the years. So grab a seat and some popcorn and take a trip back to the 80s and 90s, a much simpler time, with some updated special effects and tech upgrades.

Top Gun (1986)

80's Action Classic, Top Gun, Wasn't Out for Awards, Only Summer Action Thrills and Blockbuster Entertainment

[8/10 · 17 May 2022]

Top Gun is one of the defining films of the 80's. It was released in the summer of 86 and just marketed as a summer fun at the movies with cool fighter jets and cool dudes. Along with Back to the Future(s) and arguably Indiana Jones Raiders of the Lost Ark, Top Gun was another barely PG-rated hit and one of the most successful and iconic films of the 1980's. It epitomized the high testosterone, military hero-action genre that went on to inspire many similar movies that proceeded it (though none were even close to achieving Top Gun's success and popularity).

Top Gun is an underdog story. It magnifies how rebels and misfits can be ostracized from their due credit for not playing by the rules, while in the end, anyone acknowledging the truth can't deny they may be more talented than the actual winner. It's depicted toward the end when one of the pilots asks the flight instructor if Maverick was really the best (and they seem to know it), even though he had emotional problems for several reasons. This is the kind of story that people who like underdog stories can be a fan of, although it's not anywhere as stark as the Rocky underdog boxing story.

This is a movie whose only purpose is to entertain by making a cool action blockbuster that at the time was fairly impressive visually. It delves into camaraderie, brotherhood amongst military members, competition, and pursuit of being the best, as well as how thinking outside of the box can have its benefits. There are definitely some emotional scenes in it and lots of quotable lines.

Back in the 80's, studios didn't churn out as many films as they do today so when a movie hit the theatres, it was going to be one of the few for that year. It was an attempt at quality over quantity, which eventually set the stage for the 90's hits and successes. So imagine being a kid or a teenager in the mid 80s with no streaming sites, only movie theatres, and your family or friends just want to go to the movie theatre for fun one night and you went to see this. It was a cool movie to watch. It had stunts, action, explosions, cool lines, cool actors that many young kids wanted to be as cool as (everyone had their favorites whether Goose, Iceman, Viper, Hollywood, Merlin, or Maverick), and a somewhat cringeworthy sex scene.

But most of all, perhaps, it had a truly awesome soundtrack. To this day, it can be argued that this is the best movie soundtrack of all time. From the theme music to Berlin's smash hit, "Take My Breath Away" to other really classic rock hits of the 80's, it was really popular. Nobody can hear TMBA without recalling Top Gun. It was essential 80's viewing for 80's movie fans.

So it's a very iconic, successful, and nostalgic 80's summer blockbuster action flick, but don't expect to see anything Oscar-worthy in way of performances or story. It was more like an "event" where you had to be there to understand its notoriety. It also had a truly star-studded cast with Meg Ryan, Tom Skerrit, McGillis, Edwards, Kilmer, Rossovich, and Cruise.

The sequel being released this week will be nostalgic, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's hugely successful at the box office. If it really is an improvement of the first one as many critics have put it, then it would deserve to be.

Dune (2021)

Stunning Visuals, Great Stretches of Scenes, But They're Mixed W/ Boring Stretches of Scenes, Bit Uneven

[7/10 · 16 January 2022]

With a very high rating of 8.1 months after release, I had to finally watch Dune. And I was not disappointed.

The story was a little better than I was lead to believe. I was thinking the story would be paper thin, ultra-thin, or something like that. It definitely had its issues. The first half hour felt like a paint by numbers Star Wars world building cliche for the most part. Still, it rebounded and got good toward the middle.

Toward the middle was where it finally really went on a run, and as an Action movie, it was really good. That is, until it once again dipped and began to slog again at the end toward the final half hour to twenty minutes or so.

I'm not sure what happened there. It was really taking off for about an hour, but instead of keeping that quality and pace, it just seemed to backslide again to the lower level it was functioning at toward the beginning.

Endings are tricky, so I can't complain too much. The wild ride it put me on in the middle was worth the watch. However, rather than rise to the level of a classic, unfortunately, the ending made it fall into the mediocre range.

But the visuals? I mean, this is some groundbreaking visual work here, and ultimately that will be why the high scores stand. As a visual, futuristic action spectacle I would give it a 9/10, as inspirational movie making the middle would get a 10 and the rest would get a 7, and as a movie as a whole, I give it a

7.5/10.

The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

It's great, it's basically a masterpiece, but it is so creepy that it isn't my cup of tea

[8/10 · 25 October 2021]

I just saw this for the first time, and it is incredibly well-made; there's no denying that. It's basically a movie that was directed and edited with a scalpel, so it's basically a masterpiece.

But with that being said, if this isn't my cup of tea in terms of genre, I can't give it a full score of a 10. The creepiness and disturbing nature of some scenes was just too much for me to like it that much.

Even though it's a masterpiece of a thriller, I'm surprised how high of a rating it has on here because I would have thought more people would have been slightly turned off by it. However, if horror/thriller is one of your favorite genres, this would be easy to rate the full score.

8/10.

Taken (I) (2008)

One of the Most Memorable Commercial Trailers Ever

[8/10 · 10 October 2021]

When this movie first came out, for weeks before its release, the Trailer of "I have a particular set of skills.... I will find you..." was being shown practically daily. It was probably one of the best marketed and advertised films of the early 21st century considering it didn't have any huge movie star names attached to it; yes Neesom is popular now, but back then he was only popular with an older audience from his 90's movies so to see him in a lead role in an action movie was odd and not a perfect match.

How anyone into action movies wasn't compelled to watch this after the bombardment of commercials would be hard to believe. I couldn't wait to see this, but I waited until it was available for rent.

Even though it is mostly cliched, the marketing and something special and different about it made it totally unique and able to stand on its own away from most action movies. Neesom just going around simply kicking butt with his skills to hunt down his daughter's kidnappers was fun and intense to watch. It's a modern classic spin on the revenge tale.

8/10.

Wonder Woman (2017)

Review From a Non-Comic Book Fan: Surprisingly Good

[10/10 · 10 October 2021]

I don't watch any comic book movies. The only reason I watched this is because WW 1984 was hyped during the Coronavirus lockdowns so I watched that out of interest. Reading reviews about that, I wanted to see what the 2017 version was like in comparison. So let me make clear, if you are already a comic book movie fan, this review is coming from a POV of somebody who never watches any of them except for Nolan's Batman trilogy and older ones from the 80's mostly, maybe 1 or 2 from the early 2000's like Spiderman and Superman Returns, both were pretty good.

As a big fan of World War I (and WW II), I actually loved this movie's ability to converge the story of Dianna into that backdrop, and in my opinion, this is more of a WWI movie than it is a "superhero" or comic book movie, even though obviously it is also that, too. The reason why is because the way the scenes were staged and set up, it immersed you into that time period. Most of the costumes, background scenery, war scenes, and even the strategies, weapons, and geography discussed throughout the movie were surprisingly extremely accurate for that, and I was not expecting that whatsoever. In fact, my expectations were incredibly low for this movie before watching it.

Second, let me mention the also unexpected delight of the added mix of legit funny scenes/humor and a love story that was almost as poignant as something at the pinnacle of that genre, Titanic. Once again, this was totally unexpected on both levels, and I was pleasantly surprised at how well they were included. It made the film even more likable and entertaining.

Thirdly, the script is very good. It's not elite, but it is way above average and good for this genre. That was also unexpected.

I also have to mention the acting, and Pine does a very good job in his role. Gadot's exotic looks and accent work extremely well for her role since one of the main ideas of the story is that she is a fish out of water entering the modern world from her secluded island.

About the only thing I didn't like about this film was how the action sequences toward the end became a little too far fetched and cheesy, but even so, the scenes were emotionally powerful between the score, dialogue, themes, and acting so those components redeemed it just enough to save it from being really bad. It sort of devolved into an average villain cliche, and there is no denying that. However, there were some emotionally powerful elements going on while that was happening. I almost feel like I want to forget that bad part and remember the good parts of that final battle scene.

Finally, I do not usually cry during movies, but this movie caused me to shed a few tears on two levels. First, it's an absolutely beautiful movie between the scenery, musical score, and cinematography. It's brilliant. Second, Gadot's reactions to the sufferings of war and her chemistry with Pine in the love story side of it and their disagreements about the causes of war she hates were very emotionally powerful, and I also did not anticipate that either. The movie has depth, it has emotional depth, and it is hard to forget because this is what makes it a solidly good movie.

I've already seen WW twice, and I look forward to watching it again. Since 2013, there are only about 2-3 other movies I've seen more than once besides this one. So in another surprising way to myself, I would call this easily one of my top 5 favorite movies of the 2010's. It's almost a masterpiece.

Update: I've now seen it 2 more times as of Oct 2023 and my review stands. It's a modern classic.

8.5/10.