How did this episode get made? In general season 1 is far superior to season 2, but this episode is just awful. The main character is unlikeable and unwatchable. The camera work is atrocious, everything is herky-jerky from the dialogue to the camera work to the transitions. An absolute embarrassment that should have never made it to the series.
Reviews
13 Reviews
Aquaman
(2018)
Unfortunately, this is really just a bad movie
29 January 2019
I like superhero movies. No, I LOVE superhero movies! Marvel, DC, doesn't matter; they're fun, they're slick, good acting and action, and compelling stories. But this movie? None of the above. The acting - with talented actors! - is like a high school play, the characters are wooden and shallow, and there's no compelling story that makes you like or identify with any of the characters. The story itself is just silly. I have no idea who is rating the film highly, it really has no redeeming features.
Villa Jasmin
(2008 TV Movie)
Very weak and disappointing
16 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I really wanted to like this movie; it's an interesting subject which is not well covered (North African Jewry). However the acting is very poor, and the story just doesn't have anything special about it. It ends abruptly, giving the feeling that the author wrote himself into a corner and just typed "the end" in the middle of his narrative.
The scenery is pretty, although not enough of Tunis is shown; it's just very hard to find many positive things to say about this flick.
SPOILER: There is one scene where the Henri's mother and sister discover that his father is alive, by watching a newsreel where he is next to DeGaulle. Okay, that alone stretches one's credulity, but their actions are just not believable. Wouldn't one scream and sob with catharsis? Certainly North African Jews would react dramatically and passionately! But the director just has them smile and laugh....like one would react to finding a set of lost keys, rather than a family member all had given up for dead.
The scenery is pretty, although not enough of Tunis is shown; it's just very hard to find many positive things to say about this flick.
SPOILER: There is one scene where the Henri's mother and sister discover that his father is alive, by watching a newsreel where he is next to DeGaulle. Okay, that alone stretches one's credulity, but their actions are just not believable. Wouldn't one scream and sob with catharsis? Certainly North African Jews would react dramatically and passionately! But the director just has them smile and laugh....like one would react to finding a set of lost keys, rather than a family member all had given up for dead.
The Yacoubian Building
(2006)
Egyptian soap opera.
29 May 2007
While the film is well-acted and shot, the story line just isn't much. It's pretty much a soap opera of different characters/story lines, whose common thread involves the decaying apartment building where they live.
The Yacoubian building is an apartment building which was built in Egypt's glory days; once ornate and modern, it has fallen into disrepair. Some wealthy families occupy the large apartments there, but impoverished residents live on the roof in what was formerly servants' quarters. There are 5 or more main characters whose lives are woven together as they do their best to cope with modern Egyptian life.
Yes, the decaying building is a symbol of Egypt's decay. And yes, the film is sociologically interesting as it portrays some of the afflictions facing Egypt today - fundamentalism, poverty, lack of housing, lack of opportunities for young people, etc.
But there are so many better films; this is decent, and watchable, but really nothing too special.
The Yacoubian building is an apartment building which was built in Egypt's glory days; once ornate and modern, it has fallen into disrepair. Some wealthy families occupy the large apartments there, but impoverished residents live on the roof in what was formerly servants' quarters. There are 5 or more main characters whose lives are woven together as they do their best to cope with modern Egyptian life.
Yes, the decaying building is a symbol of Egypt's decay. And yes, the film is sociologically interesting as it portrays some of the afflictions facing Egypt today - fundamentalism, poverty, lack of housing, lack of opportunities for young people, etc.
But there are so many better films; this is decent, and watchable, but really nothing too special.
2046
(2004)
A gorgeous, poignant film.
1 January 2006
2046 was directed by Kar Wai Wong, who also directed In the Mood for Love. This film is also lyrical, deliberately paced, and very romantic.
Without giving too much away, the film takes place in Hong Kong and Singapore in the 60's. The main character, Chow, is a writer and womanizer. Part of the story takes place in his work, a science fiction tale called 2046.
The story is told out of sequence, with past and present jumbled. In a clever use of irony, we gradually understand that the future is being used to tell the past. Some scenes are presented early, in a way that is confusing until the context is presented later.
There are 3 female characters who are in his life, and the story is segmented accordingly.
The cinematography is beautiful. Interestingly, Wong uses 3 colors nearly exclusively: Blood red, sea green, and yellow. Sometimes he will use light to make those colors stand out, other times it is the objects themselves which are in that color.
I would characterize the story as one of love and loss. There is one poignant scene where, after he realizes what has been happening, he states that timing is crucial in love.
The film is well acted, the characters are understandable if not necessarily ones we can identify with, and the story gradually allows itself to be revealed, a peek here and a peek there, until all the pieces fall into place.
Turn off the lights, cuddle up with a glass of wine, and see this one. Well worth it.
Without giving too much away, the film takes place in Hong Kong and Singapore in the 60's. The main character, Chow, is a writer and womanizer. Part of the story takes place in his work, a science fiction tale called 2046.
The story is told out of sequence, with past and present jumbled. In a clever use of irony, we gradually understand that the future is being used to tell the past. Some scenes are presented early, in a way that is confusing until the context is presented later.
There are 3 female characters who are in his life, and the story is segmented accordingly.
The cinematography is beautiful. Interestingly, Wong uses 3 colors nearly exclusively: Blood red, sea green, and yellow. Sometimes he will use light to make those colors stand out, other times it is the objects themselves which are in that color.
I would characterize the story as one of love and loss. There is one poignant scene where, after he realizes what has been happening, he states that timing is crucial in love.
The film is well acted, the characters are understandable if not necessarily ones we can identify with, and the story gradually allows itself to be revealed, a peek here and a peek there, until all the pieces fall into place.
Turn off the lights, cuddle up with a glass of wine, and see this one. Well worth it.
Fateless
(2005)
Well made, well acted, well told.
19 December 2005
Sorstalanság (Fateless) is the memoir of Imre Kertesz's survival of the Shoah. He won the Nobel Prize for literature in 2002, despite being relatively unknown in the West. At the time, many thought that this was "the Primo Levi prize", i.e. making up for the failure of the academy to award the Nobel to Levi, prior to his death in 1987 (the Nobel is never awarded posthumously).
If one has read Levi's Survival at Auschwitz, or Elie Wiesel's Night, many of the details of the story are familiar. But the craft is in the telling, and the director has done an excellent job of bringing a memoir of brutality and survival to life.
A brief synopsis, without spoilers, is that this is the story of a teenaged boy in Budapest in 1944 who is swept up in the Nazi roundup of Hungarian Jewry, and his experience in the concentration camps. (Elie Wiesel was interred in the same roundup.) The story of how Eichmann tried to ransom Hungarian Jewry to the West is interesting background, for those who are intellectually curious. (The allies were afraid to provide materiel and resources to the Nazis, fearing prolongation of the war. A very sad tale).
Making a film of the Holocaust is always a challenge. A director must strive to make the scenes powerful, without being melodramatic. There is also the danger of making another movie over again (eg, Schindler's List; The Reawakening; Europa, Europa). The challenge is to remain faithful to truth, while bringing artistry to the telling of it.
One device which is used to great effect is the use of very brief scenes, perhaps less than one minute, which tell a brief vignette of the daily life in the camps. Some have very little dialog, and they seem random and unconnected, yet together they add to a deeply moving experience.
Many films of the Holocaust are shattering; a few are hopeful. This is neither, but it is a telling of the story that is watchable for most audiences, yet retains the power to affect a viewer. 8 out of 10.
If one has read Levi's Survival at Auschwitz, or Elie Wiesel's Night, many of the details of the story are familiar. But the craft is in the telling, and the director has done an excellent job of bringing a memoir of brutality and survival to life.
A brief synopsis, without spoilers, is that this is the story of a teenaged boy in Budapest in 1944 who is swept up in the Nazi roundup of Hungarian Jewry, and his experience in the concentration camps. (Elie Wiesel was interred in the same roundup.) The story of how Eichmann tried to ransom Hungarian Jewry to the West is interesting background, for those who are intellectually curious. (The allies were afraid to provide materiel and resources to the Nazis, fearing prolongation of the war. A very sad tale).
Making a film of the Holocaust is always a challenge. A director must strive to make the scenes powerful, without being melodramatic. There is also the danger of making another movie over again (eg, Schindler's List; The Reawakening; Europa, Europa). The challenge is to remain faithful to truth, while bringing artistry to the telling of it.
One device which is used to great effect is the use of very brief scenes, perhaps less than one minute, which tell a brief vignette of the daily life in the camps. Some have very little dialog, and they seem random and unconnected, yet together they add to a deeply moving experience.
Many films of the Holocaust are shattering; a few are hopeful. This is neither, but it is a telling of the story that is watchable for most audiences, yet retains the power to affect a viewer. 8 out of 10.
Los debutantes
(2003)
Pretty good erotic film noir.
27 June 2005
Los Debutantes is the story of two orphaned brothers who have moved to Santiago from the South after their mother dies. The confident and streetwise Silvio, the elder brother, gets a job working for a sleazy strip club's owner after taking the naive Victor there for his 17th birthday.
As Silvio blossoms under his boss's tutelage, both brothers get involved with the owner's sexy and manipulative mistress, Gracia. As the film unfolds, characters are redefined as we begin to see the subtle and overt ways that each one manipulates the next.
The film is well made, with good cinematography and fast pacing. It's also pretty sexy, with a lot of nudity and some fairly explicit sex scenes. It uses the now-popular technique of layering different scenes from different points of view, out of chronological sequence. Many people hate movies like this because they don't understand what's going on - Memento, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and many other good films use this device. The plot itself is really nothing new, there are elements of Body Heat, Pulp Fiction, and many other good film noir.
As the different layers are revealed, our understandings of the characters and their motivations evolve. While the plot may be somewhat cliché, it is also clever and entertaining.
I would call it an enjoyable movie, worth watching, but nothing memorable. I haven't seen many films from Chile, and it's always interesting to see film noir from other countries. Other than that, rent it if it's available but don't lose any sleep if it isn't.
As Silvio blossoms under his boss's tutelage, both brothers get involved with the owner's sexy and manipulative mistress, Gracia. As the film unfolds, characters are redefined as we begin to see the subtle and overt ways that each one manipulates the next.
The film is well made, with good cinematography and fast pacing. It's also pretty sexy, with a lot of nudity and some fairly explicit sex scenes. It uses the now-popular technique of layering different scenes from different points of view, out of chronological sequence. Many people hate movies like this because they don't understand what's going on - Memento, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and many other good films use this device. The plot itself is really nothing new, there are elements of Body Heat, Pulp Fiction, and many other good film noir.
As the different layers are revealed, our understandings of the characters and their motivations evolve. While the plot may be somewhat cliché, it is also clever and entertaining.
I would call it an enjoyable movie, worth watching, but nothing memorable. I haven't seen many films from Chile, and it's always interesting to see film noir from other countries. Other than that, rent it if it's available but don't lose any sleep if it isn't.
Deepwater
(2005)
Very good film noir.
10 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I saw the world premier of Deepwater at the Seattle International Film Festival. It's the director's first film, shot on a limited budget, and an excellent film.
In the first scene, Nat, the main character, gets out of a hospital and tells the nurse he wants to go to Wyoming to take up ostrich farming. On his way, he stops at a car accident and picks up Herman Finch (Peter Coyote), and ends up going to a small town called Deepwater.
Finch is involved with the local casino, apparently run by the mob. He offers Nat a job restoring his dilapidated motel, where the maid is his beautiful, and much younger, wife Iris (Mia Maestro, who attended the premiere).
As Nat begins to work on the restoration, he starts getting to know the characters of this Twin Peaks-ish small town. Michael Ironside, who is creepy on a good day, is great in a supporting role as a local used-car dealer and Finch's poker buddy.
That lays out the basic elements of the film noir, I don't want to say much about the plot for fear of spoiling the film for a viewer.
The film is well edited and visually very nice. Other than the lack of marquee names, it does not appear to be a low budget film. Directing and acting are excellent, the movie is well-paced, and I would recommend it to anyone.
In the first scene, Nat, the main character, gets out of a hospital and tells the nurse he wants to go to Wyoming to take up ostrich farming. On his way, he stops at a car accident and picks up Herman Finch (Peter Coyote), and ends up going to a small town called Deepwater.
Finch is involved with the local casino, apparently run by the mob. He offers Nat a job restoring his dilapidated motel, where the maid is his beautiful, and much younger, wife Iris (Mia Maestro, who attended the premiere).
As Nat begins to work on the restoration, he starts getting to know the characters of this Twin Peaks-ish small town. Michael Ironside, who is creepy on a good day, is great in a supporting role as a local used-car dealer and Finch's poker buddy.
That lays out the basic elements of the film noir, I don't want to say much about the plot for fear of spoiling the film for a viewer.
The film is well edited and visually very nice. Other than the lack of marquee names, it does not appear to be a low budget film. Directing and acting are excellent, the movie is well-paced, and I would recommend it to anyone.
Traveling Companion
(1996)
Nice but not memorable.
27 January 2005
Compagna di Viaggio is a story of an aimless, rootless, orphaned 19 year-old girl, Cora, who works odd jobs and sleeps at various friends' homes. One of her jobs is walking the dog of Ada, a woman married to a journalist.
One day, Ada tells her that her father, a recently retired professor, has begun to show signs of dementia, and will wander throughout the city. She offers to pay Cora to shadow him, supposedly unseen, so he won't get lost. Cora agrees, but to her chagrin on the second day he boards a train and starts travelling through Italy, rather than just wandering the streets of Rome.
There are some subplots, involving Cora's brother, Ada's husband's infidelity, and Cora's depression, which seem more or less random since they are not fully developed nor resolved.
The film is well acted, and while there are some very nice scenes, some of which are quite poignant, it really doesn't add up to a compelling story. The ending suggests that the writer couldn't figure out where to go, so he created something somewhat artificial that really doesn't answer the questions which are raised along the way.
It's watchable, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it. Despite the lovely scenery and fine acting, I'd only give it 6 out of 10.
One day, Ada tells her that her father, a recently retired professor, has begun to show signs of dementia, and will wander throughout the city. She offers to pay Cora to shadow him, supposedly unseen, so he won't get lost. Cora agrees, but to her chagrin on the second day he boards a train and starts travelling through Italy, rather than just wandering the streets of Rome.
There are some subplots, involving Cora's brother, Ada's husband's infidelity, and Cora's depression, which seem more or less random since they are not fully developed nor resolved.
The film is well acted, and while there are some very nice scenes, some of which are quite poignant, it really doesn't add up to a compelling story. The ending suggests that the writer couldn't figure out where to go, so he created something somewhat artificial that really doesn't answer the questions which are raised along the way.
It's watchable, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it. Despite the lovely scenery and fine acting, I'd only give it 6 out of 10.
Rashevski's Tango
(2003)
Delightful film about the diaspora experience
31 December 2004
This is a delightful film, but in order to appreciate it fully one would need some knowledge about Jewish life in the diaspora.
It tells the story about a family of assimilated Belgian Jews, how they struggle with defining their Judaism, their family, and themselves.
There are three generations of the Rashevsky family, each of which has experienced the major forces of its era. For the oldest generation, the defining event was the Holocaust; for the middle generation, growing up in wartorn Europe and being 2nd generation after the Holocaust; finally, for the 3rd generation, dealing with assimilation and modern life in a Western culture.
The performances are nuanced, the director wisely chose the "less is more" route in the actors' interpretations of their roles. The film begins with a gripping scene that can only be gradually understood as the film tells its tale. (And the final scene has a very nice, slightly ironic, way of coming full circle).
As the film progresses, the thread of the family's story slowly unwinds. Each character comes to grips with his or her angst about Judaism, family, and what he or she wants, ending in poignance and redemption. While things don't end neatly tied together so that everyone finds the same answers - a feature of modern American TV and movies, unfortunately - it does realistically portray choices made, their rationale, and how we live with those choices.
Overall, a sensitive, lovely portrait of modern Jewish life in the diaspora, and the issues we face. I hope I have done it justice. 9 out of 10.
It tells the story about a family of assimilated Belgian Jews, how they struggle with defining their Judaism, their family, and themselves.
There are three generations of the Rashevsky family, each of which has experienced the major forces of its era. For the oldest generation, the defining event was the Holocaust; for the middle generation, growing up in wartorn Europe and being 2nd generation after the Holocaust; finally, for the 3rd generation, dealing with assimilation and modern life in a Western culture.
The performances are nuanced, the director wisely chose the "less is more" route in the actors' interpretations of their roles. The film begins with a gripping scene that can only be gradually understood as the film tells its tale. (And the final scene has a very nice, slightly ironic, way of coming full circle).
As the film progresses, the thread of the family's story slowly unwinds. Each character comes to grips with his or her angst about Judaism, family, and what he or she wants, ending in poignance and redemption. While things don't end neatly tied together so that everyone finds the same answers - a feature of modern American TV and movies, unfortunately - it does realistically portray choices made, their rationale, and how we live with those choices.
Overall, a sensitive, lovely portrait of modern Jewish life in the diaspora, and the issues we face. I hope I have done it justice. 9 out of 10.
Mulholland Drive
(2001)
Pretentious crap.
4 December 2004
David Lynch is a genius.
He creates films that feature random, unconnected events, beautiful editing, and idiotic pointless stories. Nonetheless, people admire him and PAY HIM to make this pointless drivel. What a brilliant, successful con artist!
It's totally a case of "the emperor has no clothes". No one understands his films - because there IS nothing to understand - therefore all they can say is, "Wow, what a genius!" The herd mentality of Hollywood won't let anyone point out that all of his films (and his stupid TV series, "Twin Peaks") are just made up, one random scene after another, exactly the same way small children make up their games.
In point of fact, he must sit there and laugh at the idiots - sorry, I meant to say "film critics" - who praise him for his creativity and genius.
It is a travesty that this film has been listed on the "top 250", in the company of works of real brilliance. IMDb members, shame on you.
He creates films that feature random, unconnected events, beautiful editing, and idiotic pointless stories. Nonetheless, people admire him and PAY HIM to make this pointless drivel. What a brilliant, successful con artist!
It's totally a case of "the emperor has no clothes". No one understands his films - because there IS nothing to understand - therefore all they can say is, "Wow, what a genius!" The herd mentality of Hollywood won't let anyone point out that all of his films (and his stupid TV series, "Twin Peaks") are just made up, one random scene after another, exactly the same way small children make up their games.
In point of fact, he must sit there and laugh at the idiots - sorry, I meant to say "film critics" - who praise him for his creativity and genius.
It is a travesty that this film has been listed on the "top 250", in the company of works of real brilliance. IMDb members, shame on you.
Divine Intervention
(2002)
Slow, incomprehensible, and pointless.
11 March 2003
I was very concerned about this film, it was scheduled to play at a Jewish Film Festival, and was reported to be very hostile to Israel, while using clever humor and irony.
I was relieved that the film was not a diatribe, however as a work of film it was deeply disappointing. The film was full of random events, some of which eventually connected, most of which did not. Some of the events were very clever and funny, but some were merely random and pointless.
There are repeated scenes between two lovers where they sit in a car, wordlessly, and play some handholding game. Perhaps in some cultures this is erotic, but it's like watching thumb-wrestling. After the third time, it really became tiresome.
I have always found David Lynch to be gratuitously bizarre, using strange stories and images to cause audiences to think that he is SO sophisticated that they don't grasp his work; in fact, there is nothing to grasp. The same is true here, the stories do not add up to anything, and there is not much of a political point being made (in one scene a boisterous Israeli soldier humiliates Palestinian drivers at a checkpoint. That's news?)
I don't understand why this film has garnered controversy, nor why it has garnered attention. It is an inferior work and seeing it was a waste of time.
I was relieved that the film was not a diatribe, however as a work of film it was deeply disappointing. The film was full of random events, some of which eventually connected, most of which did not. Some of the events were very clever and funny, but some were merely random and pointless.
There are repeated scenes between two lovers where they sit in a car, wordlessly, and play some handholding game. Perhaps in some cultures this is erotic, but it's like watching thumb-wrestling. After the third time, it really became tiresome.
I have always found David Lynch to be gratuitously bizarre, using strange stories and images to cause audiences to think that he is SO sophisticated that they don't grasp his work; in fact, there is nothing to grasp. The same is true here, the stories do not add up to anything, and there is not much of a political point being made (in one scene a boisterous Israeli soldier humiliates Palestinian drivers at a checkpoint. That's news?)
I don't understand why this film has garnered controversy, nor why it has garnered attention. It is an inferior work and seeing it was a waste of time.
About a Boy
(2002)
Charming and poignant. 8 out of 10.
17 January 2003
Finally, Hugh Grant proves he can act. Rather than his typecast stammering, oh-I'm-so-shy-and-so-cute British fop, here he is a shallow cad, leading a selfish spoiled life and giving nothing in return.
He stumbles onto the "perfect scam", pretending to be a single father in order to seduce lonely, vulnerable single mothers. But when a date goes awry, he is sought after as a father-figure by a "loser"-type 12 year old boy. Of course, it's an old story: he rejects the kid, is grudgingly won over, and they both end up growing as a result of the relationship. About a Boy is actually about two boys.
But while the story is cliche, the mastery is in the details. Nicholas Hoult is good, and doesn't play the stereotypical sappy kid who's more mature than the adults; he's messed up. Hugh Grant plays the part well, not a Walter Matthau type-grouch, but someone who is not indecent, just astonished that other people actually have feelings and needs. The dialogue is sharp, Nick Hornby's books are terrific material for movies.
He stumbles onto the "perfect scam", pretending to be a single father in order to seduce lonely, vulnerable single mothers. But when a date goes awry, he is sought after as a father-figure by a "loser"-type 12 year old boy. Of course, it's an old story: he rejects the kid, is grudgingly won over, and they both end up growing as a result of the relationship. About a Boy is actually about two boys.
But while the story is cliche, the mastery is in the details. Nicholas Hoult is good, and doesn't play the stereotypical sappy kid who's more mature than the adults; he's messed up. Hugh Grant plays the part well, not a Walter Matthau type-grouch, but someone who is not indecent, just astonished that other people actually have feelings and needs. The dialogue is sharp, Nick Hornby's books are terrific material for movies.
Tell Your Friends