Change Your Image
mbdinger
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Control (2022)
Not based on the video game of the same name
A very basic story of a woman with memory loss who wakes up in some sort of secret research facility and is forced to use telekinesis.
Obviously very low-budget, but nonetheless reasonably well-produced (it never feels super cheap) that takes place almost entirely in a single room, with just two main actors.
There is surely(?) no way that the title is coincidental with the 2021 Remedy video game "CONTROL" that has a similar premise (about a woman who has to use telekinesis to escape/liberate a facility). The protagonist here even looks a bit like the video game counterpart. Clearly wasn't officially licenced though, since the connection is not in the credits.
The acting is fine for the most part, although there are only three cast members (wife, husband, daughter). The special effects are serviceable and do what is required without being flashy.
It's a take it or leave it type of rating here; for most people there will be much better things to watch than this.
Quarantine Girl (2020)
Ratings for this film are indeed fake
With about 90% of people rating this film 8-10/10, I was curious to see if the ratings really were fake (especially since there are about 1,000 of them of this writing). So with an hour burn, why not - I mean how bad could it be, right?
Big mistake. While only clocking in at just over 1 hour, this boring, poorly acted and scripted movie feels twice as long. Worse yet it doesn't really go anywhere - despite what the (disingenuous) cover hints at. Written by, directed by, and starring Nicole D'Angelo, the blame rests solely on her shoulders. This is a zero budget amateur movie that isn't worth the hour it takes to watch.
Monsters of Man (2020)
Obviously a lot of people aren't into this, but I liked it (minor spoilers)
So as of writing this film is at 4.3/10. More than a little unfair imo. Look it's not high-brow entertainment, and premise is pretty dumb. The notion that the US would do a field test on AII killer robots in Cambodia and have them massacre (mostly innocent) villagers (including kids) and a group of young US doctors doing humanitarian work is indeed pretty sketchy - even if you think the "US Military Industrial Complex" is a heartless killing machine.
But the execution of this goofy premise I think was pretty well done. Of the four killer AI bots that are supposed to be "semi-controlled" by operators (who inexplicably weren't aware of what the military was planning), one of the bots goes "rogue" and becomes "self-aware".
So we have multiple moving parts here, the doctors and villagers fighting for survival, the robot operators trying to figure out the morality of their orders, and a rogue AI bot trying to come to terms with sentience. The pacing is mostly fine, despite a very long (for this type of film) 2 hr 11 run time (tbh 15 mins could have been trimmed), the action and robot effects are well done, and the characters generally behave in a believable manner.
So an eclectic combination of 80's action movies - think Predator, Commando, and especially Terminator blended together in a semi-high-brow action movie.
Shithouse (2020)
Bog standard college rom com
Everything this movie offers has been done better before. e.g. Before Sunrise has better romance and chemistry, Old School has better comedy, and Goodwill Hunting has better drama. Probably a little unfair, but it is what it is - especially when you attempt cross-genre like this one does.
The film is written by, directed by and starring Cooper Raiff. He spends most of the film moping and doting on a girl (played by Amy Landecker) who is almost never nice to him. The lead character often comes across as "soy-based" (for lack of a better descriptor), and if either of these lead characters accurately represent the "snowflake generation" (again for lack of a better word), then I'm seriously worried for the sensibilities of the current youth. Cue old man shaking fist "it wasn't like this in my day".
Still, it's not an outright awful movie - it's generally well-acted and shot, and some of the writing is solid (the film apparently strives for a naturalistic tone - i.e. almost like unscripted improv and it works).
Overall, I don't think it's worth the time, but based on the imdb rating it seems to resonate for some viewers.
1pm Daily Update (2020)
Hopefully the 2nd Season delivers zombies
Let's be honest here. After the conclusion of the first season, we all expected a looming zombie apocalypse cliffhanger. The one we've all been prepping for since The Walking Dead aired. What we got was a giant fizzer. Season 2 started off strong, with a rapid resurgence and spread of the virus the survivors thought had been eliminated. So far there are no hints that the virus is mutating and causing zombiefication. If zombies don't arrive soon, I'm probably not going to bother watching the rest of the season. Weak sauce, despite a strong cast.
Zimna wojna (2018)
Black and white done right
Stunningly beautiful black and white film with compositions reminiscent of the great Ingmar Bergman. The black and white cinematography isn't used as a gimmick and, unlike Roma which looked mostly "grey" imo, I can't imagine this film in colour.
The story, revolving around a "Cold War" Polish singer who finds a life in Europe, is slight but nonetheless engaging given the short run-time and consistently jaw dropping photography.
Replicas (2018)
Hilariously bad
Replicas is easily one one of the worst films I've seen this year (and I watch a lot of movies). That said, I laughed till I cried (and I wasn't even drunk) - yes, it's one of those - so bad it's enjoyable. Keanu is at his wooden worst, the dialogue is atrocious and the story-line doesn't make a lick of sense. There are more "wtf?" moments here than in any film I've seen this year. Could easily become a cult classic.
Star Trek Beyond (2016)
Entertaining, but still not quite there
** CONTAINS SOME MINOR SPOILERS ** I was never much a fan of this "rebooted" franchise, especially aggrieved at the both intellectually insulting and creatively bankrupt way Abrams shoehorned the original Star Trek canon into it (courtesy of the parallel universe he "produced" from from his "mystery box"). Despite that, I found the first film superficially passable as a solid bit of entertainment (maybe 6/10). The second one, however, was a step back for me. Needless to say, I wasn't particularly excited about this third outing. That said, as a sci-fi nerd, I feel an irrational obligation to watch these things regardless of my feelings towards them. Fortunately (for me), number 3 is possibly the best in the series so far. The first two acts, especially, while the crew and villains are chasing the McGuffin (an ancient artefact, no less), for the first time in this franchise I was actually getting pretty into it. Should have known good things almost never last in Hollywood movies. During the third Act director Justin Lin seemed hell-bent on reminding us that he also directed Fast 5 and Furious 6, with some incredibly lame sequences involving a dirt bike (that Kirk somehow knows how to ride like a boss), the face-palming cringe of hill-starting(!) an old space ship by dropping it over a cliff, and finally defeating a massive alien attack squadron by blasting it with Beastie Boys' "Sabotage". None of those scenes make any contextual sense, and Lin frustratingly undoes so much of the solid work he had achieved earlier from the indisputably charismatic cast. Newcomer Jaylah (Sofia Boutella), especially, is excellent. The film ends with Spock forlornly staring at a photograph of the Original Star Trek crew. It's supposed to be touching, but it only served to remind me just how much better some of those films were than this. Maybe the 4th will be the one where this series finally finds its own footing, although I have a sinking feeling we'll somehow see William Shatner or Patrick Stewart turn up next time.
Loose Change: Second Edition (2005)
Don't automatically dismiss movies like this as crazy conspiracy rubbish
It seems to me people are too quick to dismiss a movie like Loose Change as crazy conspiracy rubbish. Opinions contrary to widely held perceptions are always met with resistance. In this case, to accept what Loose Change suggests is to acknowledge that your government doesn't serve the people after all, but only its own secret agenda, and that voters are just a necessary inconvenience in some sort of twisted Orwellian world we never knew we were part of, that need to manipulated to bring them around to accept the rhetoric of the day. Crazy? In all honesty this is similar to most religions that also require blind obedience. For whatever reason there are many who think their leaders deserve their unquestioning, unwavering faith and trust, to accept everything and anything that is thrust upon them as necessary and true. The path of least resistance is always the easiest and most secure, but, alas, not always right.
That said, the fact is that much of what Loose Change describes probably is crazy conspiracy rubbish. What it offers is merely an alternative explanation that fits the facts - something that the "official account" doesn't seem to do all that well. Even if 99% of the material in Loose Change is utter garbage, what about that remaining 1%? Doesn't that deserve your attention? Alternatively, if you feel 99% of the official account is true, what about that last 1% that just doesn't fit the data? Like all theories (including scientific ones), Loose Change will undoubtedly need to be tweaked or even completely overhauled to fit any new or contradictory information as it comes to light. Why is that such a problem? Does the official account offer that sort of flexibility?
Who knows what really happened on 9/11, but it seems fairly clear that certain parties besides the hijackers knew what was going down.
The Patriot (2000)
Flag waving at it's best/worst (depending)
This movie is yet another example of blatant American flag waving (perhaps ironically, the lead role is played by raised in Australia Mel Gibson). Instead of giving a remotely balanced view of the war and why is was fought (it is very briefly mentioned it has something to do with taxes), the English are made out to be brutal savages, executing children, burn people alive in a sealed church, and numerous other atrocities. The reason for this cheap plot device is simple enough - it makes us hate the English, and root for the American's. That's all fine if you're an American, I suppose - "USA, USA , USA" and all that. As a non-American, I can say I wasn't convinced. Actually it's the much same stunt (in fact much the same movie) Gibson also gave us in his own "Braveheart", again an anti-English propaganda film. It's all entertaining to sure, but balanced? I don't think so.
5/10
Snow Falling on Cedars (1999)
Beautiful, but boring
This is truly one of the most beautifully shot films I'd seen in a long time. The cinematography is stunning, as is the art direction, acting, production. In fact everything you _see_ on screen is brilliant. Nonetheless, none of this makes up for the boring storyline. Perhaps if you're a Japanese American or an American that lived during WW2, the movie might seem very poignant and relevant. But for those of us, born years after the war, all this is decidedly ho hum (even if it shouldn't be). I acknowledge, that perhaps I'm being too cynical, but this movie didn't move me at all and I found it boring to the point of it becoming an endurance contest. The only thing that kept me interested was the stunning imagery on screen, and this alone is not enough to earn it a recommendation.
6/10
The Last House on the Left (1972)
This film really shows its age...
If ever a movie shows its age, this is it. The film is strictly speaking a thriller, although people might be fooled into thinking it is a horror due to its association with director Wes Craven, and it's title which somehow implies something sinister (but the house actually has nothing to do with what transpires during the film).
The scenes of violence are surprisingly unmoving - including rape scenes, and brutal cold-blooded executions. A chainsaw even makes an appearance. But it's all decidedly ho hum, and it shouldn't be. The terrible music doesn't help. One could also argue that the film was made in a much more conservative time, where the horror of death transpires off screen rather than in your face. There's nothing wrong with that (e.g. Blair Witch Project) - but it doesn't seem to work here. The character building scenes are also non-functional, and I found myself not caring what happened to any of the lead characters (good or bad).
This film fails really to work at any level. If you were out for old school horror films from the 70's, then I suggest Dario Argento's which are truly much more disturbing than this disappointing effort from future horror maestro Wes Craven.
Signs (2002)
Good until the crap alien appears
While the movie offered it's fair share of suspense and intrigue for most of the running time, the terrible ending completely ruins this film.
SPOILER WARNING
Are these the dumbest aliens ever to appear on the big screen?
In the first place, why does a super intelligent species need to make crop circles in order to navigate earth, when they are capable of the mind boggling navigation feat of interstellar space travel? Perhaps they made "dust circles" on asteroids en route.
Why, when you presumably know the planet is abundant with water, not wear a simple space suit to protect yourself?
Where are their weapons to defend themselves? They have their special gas squirter, but no guns? That alien at the end just stands there taking a beating, and does nothing to defend itself, despite displaying incredible athletic abilities earlier in the film.
The end of this movie is so rife with contrivances, that, for me at least, it ruined the relatively enjoyable sequences leading up to it.
3/10.