Holt344 Reviews

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Peter Jackson begins with a masterpiece in his iconic trilogy, The Fellowship of the Ring is a landmark in filmmaking

[10/10 · 23 May 2024]

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is a film very dear to me, I've seen this film and the whole trilogy multiple times, from VHS to blu-ray and now for the first time 4k blu-ray. This paragraph will serve as an introduction to the film. The Fellowship of the Ring is the first part of this trilogy and it's where the world is introduced, its characters and the many places we'll get to explore. The characters are well written, complex and overall three dimensional. Both the heroes and villains. What this film does so well is how it's the beginning of an adventure, from a writer's perspective, it's brilliantly executed. I watched the extended edition so the film is 30 minutes longer, but the pacing wasn't hurt, the pacing is one of the strongest aspects in the film as it never ends being interesting or entertaining. Peter Jackson directed the film and co-wrote the screenplay with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens. Jackson's direction and visual storytelling is fantastic, truly spectacular. The mise-en-scene is superb, every preparation like the scenography, costume & makeup work and lighting, everything makes for a perfect shot scene. There's not a single bad scene in the film, everything is handled perfectly and the actors do a terrific job. This is an epic, it never feels long because of how brilliant the editing is. Whilst the tone can be dark at times, the film is also quite lighthearted and especially in the sequence in the beginning at The Shire. Immediately, in this sequence, you get a sense of a larger world and universe. The Lord of the Rings is based upon J. R. R. Tolkien's trilogy of the same name, an author who wrote The Hobbit before LOTR, and his vast universe is all him. He was a genius, a true genius when it comes to fantasy.

A meek Hobbit from the Shire and eight companions set out on a journey to destroy the powerful One Ring and save Middle-earth from the Dark Lord Sauron.

The Fellowship of the Ring is what these nine companions call each other and they're from different backgrounds, all memorable in their own right. The cast consists of: Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins: A young hobbit who inherits the One Ring from his uncle Bilbo. Ian McKellen as Gandalf the Grey: An Istari wizard and mentor to Frodo. Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn: A Dúnedain ranger and heir to Gondor's throne. Sean Astin as Samwise Gamgee: Better known as Sam, a hobbit gardener and Frodo's best friend. Sean Bean as Boromir: A son of the Stewards of Gondor who journeys with the Fellowship towards Mordor. Billy Boyd as Peregrin Took: Better known as Pippin, an extremely foolish hobbit who is a distant cousin of Frodo and travels with the Fellowship on their journey to Mordor. Dominic Monaghan as Meriadoc Brandybuck: Better known as Merry, a distant cousin of Frodo. John Rhys-Davies as Gimli: A dwarf warrior who accompanies the Fellowship to Mordor after they set out from Rivendell. Orlando Bloom as Legolas: A prince of the elves' Woodland Realm and a skilled archer. Liv Tyler as Arwen: An elf of Rivendell and Aragorn's lover. Cate Blanchett as Galadriel: The elven co-ruler of Lothlórien alongside her husband Celeborn. Christopher Lee as Saruman the White: The fallen head of the Istari Order who succumbs to Sauron's will through his use of the palantír. Hugo Weaving as Elrond: The Elven-Lord of Rivendell who leads the Council of Elrond, which ultimately decides to destroy the Ring. Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins: Frodo's uncle who gives him the Ring after he decides to retire to Rivendell. Andy Serkis as Gollum (voice/motion-capture): A wretched hobbit-like creature whose mind was poisoned by the Ring after bearing it for 500 years.

The plot is quite simple as it has Frodo on a mission, but changes the hero's journey in one way, having the wizard and teacher there from the start and instead exchanging the person the hero meets in the second act to be the ranger we learn is Aragorn. With the film's long length, almost 4 hours long, you could easily say the first half of that is all build up for what's to come. The second half has the Fellowship of the Ring, newly formed, starting their journey and this is where most of the action happens. Spectacle after spectacle, with these nine companions each getting their time to shine and individual arcs except for Legolas who gets more of an arc in the next films. When the Fellowship is in Moria, it's clear that this film and the story it tells highlights the wizard. Gandalf the Grey meets his demise at the bridge by his confrontation with the 'Balrog Durin's Bane'. Another point I want to make is how the scenes in Moria shows the film's major theme in a more fleshed out way, about greed and how the Dwarves mined too deep for Mithril which unleashed the Balrog monster which we know is a reason why Gandalf never wanted to take this route. Saruman the White, the big villain other than Sauron, the former of them is all about greed too as he was once with the good guys and the leader of the wizards which Gandalf is part of. Through the extended edition we learn that Gandalf has known about his upcoming fate, his demise by the hands of the Balrog, which makes his sacrifice about fate. The emotional impact of his death is felt throughout the rest of the movie, that's how you write a death, that's how you write a climax and raise stakes. Afterwards, the Fellowship meets Galadriel and the world grows larger by Lothlórien after the visit at the first elf city Rivendell earlier in the film.

One of my closest friends who loves LOTR, he told me once again his favorite character is Samwise Gamgee and watching this film again I understand why. He's not as cool or adventurous as the other characters like Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli or Boromir, but simply what he represents. Sam is a character who represents the goodness in the world and honestly when I look back at his character and personality, he's the most like myself. His protective nature of Frodo comes across as a friendship which is hard to find, the actor had recently become a father during filming and thus bonded with the 18-year-old Wood in a protective manner, which mirrored Sam's relationship with Frodo. Their chemistry is amazing and so is everyones, but they are the most special. Boromir might be one of the most complex characters, a hero who would do anything to save his family and country which ends with one of the most iconic portrayals in film history, along with a sacrifice which is even more iconic. Boromir is one of those morally grey characters whose actions make him one of the most human. To understand his reasoning some more, we need to go into who he is. He's portrayed as a noble character who believed passionately in the greatness of his kingdom and fought indomitably for it. His great stamina and physical strength, together with a forceful and commanding personality, made him a widely admired commander in Gondor's army and the favourite of his father Denethor. I think his morality is one of the strongest aspects of his character, brilliantly acted out by Sean Bean. Boromir's hubris makes him prey to the malign power of the Ring, and he seals his own doom when he attacks Frodo to seize it. He speaks of using the Ring in the service of Gondor, but his talk of "strength in a just cause" indicates, writes the Tolkien critic Tom Shippey, only how matters would begin. He comments that Boromir never quite says "the end justifies the means", though the thought makes his corrupted behaviour entirely believable. Boromir atones for his assault on Frodo by single-handedly but vainly defending Merry and Pippin from orcs, which illustrates the Catholic theme of the importance of good intention, especially at the point of death. This is clear from Gandalf's statement: "But he (Boromir) escaped in the end.... It was not in vain that the young hobbits came with us, if only for Boromir's sake." Boromir was never my favorite character as a child-teenager-young adult, yet now as an adult, I've grown more respect for him in terms of the morality which he offers the film. Something which is needed in a story like in The Lord of the Rings, thus he became a standout character which might be hard to like, but in terms of writing he's one of the best characters in The Fellowship. These two gave terrific and memorable performances, I won't go deeper into any other character. But I do want to say how much I love Aragorn, Gandalf and of course Frodo's character arcs in the film. Their performances are spectacular, especially Ian McKellen and Viggo Mortensen.

Peter Jackson created something groundbreaking with his Lord of the Rings films, starting with this one. The on-location shooting in New Zealand helped make the film so iconic, a big reason for it. Andrew Lesnie received the Academy Award for Best Cinematography for his work on the film, his cinematography is truly mesmerizing, and his cooperation with Peter Jackson made for one truly beautiful looking film. The photography is some of the best with scenes that'll remain in your mind for decades to come. What else makes the film so iconic? So epic? Howard Shore's musical score. He's what Ramin Djawadi is to Game of Thrones. Shore created some truly spectacular musical cues and a score worthy of awards, similar to John Williams' Harry Potter score. Each theme song and each musical cue is truly incredible, adventurous as they're emotional, Shore brings everything to the film and created something truly special.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is considered to be a landmark in filmmaking and an achievement in the fantasy film genre. There's so many things that make it into the masterpiece it is, I've mentioned a couple of reasons here, but you need to witness them yourself to understand but I can say this, the sequels contain the same quality and even better. The visual effects were groundbreaking, truly fantastic work. I haven't read the source material but my friend has told m.

My Cousin Vinny (1992)

My Cousin Vinny is one of those memorable and brilliant comedy films which stays with you, Joe Pesci leads the film with perfection

[10/10 · 17 May 2024]

My Cousin Vinny is one of those funny movies with an excellent and smart script along with brilliant actors who're playing those well written characters. We got Joe Pesci as the cousin Vinny, then Ralph Macchio, Marisa Tomei, Mitchell Whitfield, Lane Smith, Bruce McGill and Fred Gwynne. Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei are absolutely perfect in their roles, dramatically and comedically, selling every joke and nailing every bit of dialogue. With Tomei even winning the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her performance, rightfully so I might add. Pesci won the American Comedy Award for funniest actor and if you ever thought he was funny in Goodfellas or Casino, he's even funnier in this. Gwynne is also pretty great in this. The chemistry Pesci and Tomei share in this film is a big reason why it comes across so great, they act the part and have fun in the scenes. It makes it easier for us to fall in love with their characters, because of how human they are and how real their relationship is.

Two New Yorkers accused of murder in rural Alabama while on their way back to college call in the help of one of their cousins, a loudmouth lawyer with no trial experience.

The film's director, Jonathan Lynn, has an English law degree from the University of Cambridge, and lawyers have praised the accuracy of My Cousin Vinny's depiction of courtroom procedure and trial strategy, with one stating that "the movie is close to reality even in its details. Part of why the film has such staying power among lawyers is because, unlike, say, A Few Good Men, everything that happens in the movie could happen-and often does happen-at trial".

My Cousin Vinny is one of those rare films which is great and entertaining from start to finish with no bad scenes. The trial is comedy gold. Every witness has Joe Pesci giving us entertainment and some even laugh out loud moments. This film has it all, an engaging story and great screenplay, along with a incredible cast. The film also has a terrific mise-en-scene along with direction, some truly great cinematography too. The interesting thing with this movie, this fantastic comedy film, is how they could easily have made the lawyer and trial bit non realistic but now they succeeded in both. My Cousin Vinny is truly one of the best comedies I've seen in a very long time, a memorable one too.

Ronin (1998)

Ronin offers some of cinema's best car chases but it offers more, brilliant acting and direction, with Robert De Niro in a memorable role

[9/10 · 16 May 2024]

A freelancing former U. S. Intelligence Agent tries to track down a mysterious package that is wanted by the Irish and the Russians.

Ronin begins in Paris with Robert De Niro's character Sam staking out this Diner and is supposed to meet a woman there who's meeting four other men. There's suspense throughout this scene and it's photographed brilliantly. The camera keeps the characters in focus, in the middle, overall a great mise-en-scene in that scene and afterwards. The whole film has great camera work and direction, John Frankenheimer did a phenomenal job with this film. Inside the warehouse where they all meet, we get some time to know these characters and my knowledge of this film was its action sequences and Robert De Niro, now I'm amazed by the ensemble cast. The likes of Jean Reno, Natascha McElhone, Stellan Skarsgård, Sean Bean, and Jonathan Pryce. Everyone gives a terrific performance and I need to say how well written these characters are which I didn't expect, they're all different with different personalities. As a Swede, I find it quite remarkable that Stellan Skarsgård actually starred in a film with De Niro, one of the greatest actors from Sweden with one of the best American actors. Does he hold his own? I would say he did. The first action scene just hits right on every aspect, camera work to the choreography and also having that extra punch. It was loud and chaotic, like how it should be.

Having the film set in Paris and Nice was just perfect, giving us a grounded film which is shot on location, reminiscent of what the directors of the French New Wave did back in the fifties and sixties. Having been in Paris just last year made the sequences in the capital much better thanks to me having walked on those streets. Ronin's car chases were included on several media outlets' lists of the best depicted on film, including CNN (No. 2) and Time (No. 12). One of the best car chases and action sequences is in the second act in Nice, the driving and stunt work, truly breathtaking. John David Zeik and David Mamet wrote the screenplay. Let me dive deeper into that, Zeik was the one who came up with the story and wrote the initial screenplay but it went through a heavy rewrite from David Mamet, an acclaimed playwright and screenwriter. Frankenheimer said how he didn't shoot any of Zeik's lines and went on to say a lot of other things before apologizing in an open letter. I don't think the film would have been the same if it weren't for Zeik, I'm also quite sure how flawed the script would have been if Mamet didn't step in shortly before production. He expanded De Niro's role and added a female love interest, the latter I could have been without. The dialogue is truly top notch.

In his essay, "Action and Abstraction in Ronin", Stephen Prince wrote that the ronin metaphor explores themes of "service, honor, and obligation to complex ways by showing that service may entail betrayal and that honor may be measured according to disparate terms". According to Stephen B. Armstrong, "Arguably Frankenheimer uses this story to highlight and contrast the moral and social weakness that characterize the band of ronin in his film". Frankenheimer employed a hyperrealistic aesthetic in his films "to make them look realer than real, because reality by itself can be very boring", and saw them as having a tinge of semi-documentary. He credited Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers (1966), a film he considered flawless and more influential than any other he had seen, with inspiring this style. According to Prince, "Frankenheimer's success at working in this realist style, avoiding special effects trickery, places the car chase in Ronin in the same rarefied class as the celebrated chase in Bullitt (1968)". Stephen Prince called the film his "end-of-career masterpiece". Prince wrote: "With Ronin, Frankenheimer vindicated his cinematic talents and aesthetic preferences. The film is stylistically bonded with the principles of his work as found in the earliest and best period of his career. Its aesthetic of realism places it with Grand Prix, The Train, and The Gypsy Moths, and its minimalist conception of character and narrative detail bonds it to those productions as well. Frankenheimer had not lost his touch as a filmmaker, far from it. Ronin is smart, sharp, and witty, and it shows a greater facility for visual storytelling than most films made today, by younger directors, can muster."

I can only agree with Stephen Prince's remarks about the movie, this is an excellent action thriller which offers characters and plenty of action that could today spawn a franchise. But instead, it's one film by a director who seems to truly care about cinema. Every act is terrific, brilliantly shot and written, you never get tired of what's on screen. I think the third act goes on for just a bit too long, after the sequence in Arles Amphitheatre and Arles. Yet, building up to a great ending. The film has been a slow burn since the start, using the slow pacing at times to build up so the action sequences have that depth. When the plot takes them back to Paris to the last act, the build up is more than worth it, the car chase is among the best in cinema. If you compare the car chase scenes with this film and Fast & Furious, we get realism against fantasy. Ronin shows the other vehicles on the road, reacting with headlights and waving angrily at the main characters. The musical score is also absolutely fantastic, especially in the action sequences. Spectacularly done. John Frankenheimer created something truly special with Ronin, something that'll age like fine wine when it turns 40+ years old.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes (2024)

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a thematic film with a smart script and exquisite visual effects, a great film

[8/10 · 15 May 2024]

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a great addition to the 56 year long franchise, yet not as great as its three predecessors, a trilogy which will be hard to beat. Wes Ball who served as a director and producer on the project, he did a great job, crafting a bigger world and more worthy of being called a planet of apes mostly because of the many generations after Caesar's death. It's a cooperation between him and the screenwriter (Josh Friedman) and the producers who made the film into what it is, giant spectacle and pure cinema. Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver serve as producers and they are mostly known for their work as screenwriters especially for Rise and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Avatar: The Way of Water. Having the ones who started the reboot franchise as producers make for a more coherent story, regarding the size of it and world building. It's their success in a way which made the first two reboot films so perfect. Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes had a budget of $160 million and it is felt in every scene, the massive scope of the world and attention to detail. There are a few scenes which you could say are inspired by imagery from The Last of Us, but it's the same genre, a post-apocalyptic world. The visual effects are incredible, on the same level (mostly except for a handful where you see some minor flaws in the flawless visual effects) as Avatar 2, but those few scenes are still better than anything that is being released today.

Many years after the reign of Caesar, a young ape goes on a journey that will lead him to question everything he's been taught about the past and make choices that will define a future for apes and humans alike.

The screenplay is mostly great but how much it borrows from 'War' makes it not as original as I thought and anticipated it would be, also coming out like playing it too safe, with the first and third act being too similar to what we have seen before. For example, the protagonist's community gets attacked and imprisoned to a settlement where a human/ape rule and a prison escape becomes a plot point. The difference here is how Noa isn't on the same level of Caesar in terms of his quest for revenge, Noa wants solely to find his family and get them back. Throughout the film we get to see who Noa is and him coming of age, into a leader. The second act contains scenes which are the most important ones, scenes that'll make him a changed ape at the end of the film. Raka, a bornean orangutan, is a character which ends up influencing Noa and gives him a new found purpose and bigger knowledge of the world and of humans, of Caesar's legacy. Before watching this film, I thought and hoped Noa would be an ancestor of Caesar, but after finishing the film I'm happy he's not. He's normal, only thing which is special about him is who his father is, the leader of the tribe but yet he's not getting special treatment which makes everything he earns a lot more valuable. He's the eyes of the viewer, a great protagonist, brilliantly portrayed.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes continues to explore themes of inhumanity, even in a world where humans have become extinct or regressed. The film portrays a society where the struggle for power and dominance remains, regardless of the species in control. Technological advancement is also a central theme, with Proximus' obsession with opening a sealed vault being a plot point, a Vault believed to contain the key to ultimate power, reflecting the dangers of unchecked technological advancement. It highlights how the pursuit of knowledge and power can lead to destruction and chaos. Other than that the themes of legacy around Caesar are focused upon immensely. Then there's the philosophical conflict of honoring that said legacy, to honor and the other party to do it injustice.

Although I really like Freya Allan in The Witcher, her performance in this film didn't sit right with me or it was just the character and the writing around her. There weren't too many emotions she expressed during the film, if it was intended or not, it just didn't sit right with me. The performances of Owen Teague as Noa, Kevin Durand as Proximus Caesar and Peter Macon as Raka were the opposite though, they played the Apes in the film and their facial expressions are on point, flawless acting. Getting the right actor for the role of Noa was hard, I'm sure. No one can beat Andy Serkis' Caesar, yet Owen Teague tries and succeeds in honoring the previous protagonist and actor, yet not capturing the same perfect performance. Yet, Owen Teague is absolutely brilliant in the role and beating Andy Serkis will not be an easy task. As far as villains go, Kevin Durand's Proximus Caesar is one of the best but not the most complex, like Koba from 'Rise' and 'Dawn' who was the main antagonist in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Proximus Caesar is extremely memorable and a joy to watch because of Kevin Durand's spectacular performance. I wished he was a bigger part of the overall story of the trilogy, but what we got was amazing. Peter Macon's performance as Raka is great, providing a great sidekick which reminds you of Caesar and Maurice.

There's one scene which is reminiscent of Planet of the Apes (1968) and it's the scene where the Masked Apes is capturing humans, both with the camera work and music wise I think, a nice addition which shows the viewer how different the world is now than back in 'War'. There's also another Easter egg at the third act, a baby doll which talks, a throwback to the 1968 film. The whole third act is reminiscent of War of the Planet of the Apes, maybe a bit too much at times but in a way it works because of the tension between the Apes and the Kingdom Proximus Caesar has built, a Kingdom I wished we got to see more of but it ended up feeling small as the focus was solely on the bunker and Proximus' headquarters. The cinematography was done by Gyula Pados and it's great, I loved the camera work and angles used, it just feels professional and not subpar. His cooperation with Wes Ball goes back to his Maze Runner movies. The same goes for Dan Zimmerman who edited the film, who worked on all Maze Runner films. The editing was great. The musical score was superb, also similar to Michael Giacchino's score from the previous two films but leans more into paying homage to Jerry Goldsmith's musical score from the 1968 film.

David Rooney from The Hollywood Reporter wrote this, "Josh Friedman's smart screenplay takes its cue from its recent predecessors in reflecting the politics of its time. But the movie works equally well as pure popcorn entertainment, packing its two-and-a-half-hour running time with nail-biting thrills but also allowing sufficient breathing space to build depth in the characters and story." Another critic, Tyler Bur of The Washington Post praised the film's visuals, describing the computer generated primates as "breathtakingly hyper-real". However, Bur criticized the human characters as "two-dimensional", including Mae, who he viewed as a "plot device more than a human being". All these points I agree with. The more I think about the film, the less I like about the third act and the human characters. Yet, a terrific film with entertaining story and characters, with groundbreaking visual and special effects.

Although I absolutely loved the film, the story and world building, along with its characters, the direction and production design. I have seen a criticism about the slow pacing and how boring it is, this isn't an action packed movie and the few action sequences we get to see are built up in a great way and focus more on their characters and what cinema is, not bland entertainment which can be enjoyable. I think Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes can be compared to the prequel, War of the Planet of the Apes, in its slow pacing and focus on characters instead of action. It all depends on what kind of film you're expecting, this franchise has never been popcorn movies, they have always been thematic films and Kingdom is thematic. It's spectacular.

Into the Wild (2007)

Into the Wild gives you a different look on life through Chris McCandless, Sean Penn created a masterpiece and its his passion which makes it just that

[10/10 · 10 May 2024]

Into the Wild was a film that left a mark on myself, both cinematically and on life. I watched it back in 2015-2016 and it was like nothing I had seen before, the realism of it. I took an instant liking to it and still remember specific scenes inside my head. It's based upon the 1996 non-fiction book of the same name written by Jon Krakauer and tells the story of Christopher McCandless ("Alexander Supertramp"). The film was written, co-produced, and directed by Sean Penn. He gives us a spectacular experience, both in entertainment and for fans of cinema. There's so many things the film does right, cinematography is one of them and Éric Gautier made a special and beautiful looking film. Another highlight is the musical score done by Eddie Vedder, along with Michael Brook and Kaki King. Into the Wild was nominated for two Golden Globes and won the award for Best Original Song: "Guaranteed" by Eddie Vedder. It was also nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Editing and Best Supporting Actor for Hal Holbrook.

After graduating from Emory University, top student and athlete Christopher McCandless abandons his possessions, gives his entire $24,000 savings account to charity and hitchhikes to Alaska to live in the wilderness. Along the way, Christopher encounters a series of characters that shape his life.

Sean Penn begins Into the Wild with Chris McCandless' mother waking up from an nightmare and afterwards we get to see a montage with our main character traveling across the States to his destination where he's going to live and survive in the wilderness, there's two reasons why this sequence makes us immersed and it's because of the writing and text we get to see from his journals but also the visuals with for example the landmarks and signs which makes us get some bearings where he is. It's an efficient way of starting the film, both storytelling and to engage the viewer. When the montage stops and the car ride is over, Jim Gallien remains in the car and we get a wide shot of the car to the left and Chris McCandless beside it, the camera angle switches from wide to normal as McCandless steps closer to Gallien. We then get to follow our protagonist and see the nature which the wilderness has to offer whilst Gallien drives back to civilization. That's the beginning of the film and already, Sean Penn knows exactly what he's doing, with a brilliant and intelligent screenplay, and terrific direction and visual storytelling from him. Through flashbacks we get to see more of who Chris McCandless was and his reasoning to do the trip two years later, which shows him burning money and leaving his car behind after a flood in Arizona and thus began hiking. Here, he shows signs of his belief in transcendentalism. As you quickly come to notice, it's not Chris McCandless who's narrating the film but in another way he does through his journal, I'm of course thinking of Carine McCandless who's narrating it. Jena Malone's performance is quite good, giving heart to the role through the narration and dramatic performance. It's quite possible this is how much of the information was gathered, through Chris McCandless' sister and parents. Another scene which has some great direction and filmmaking is when McCandless is inside a city during the end of chapter 2, you see his frustration and nervous behavior through the editing and performance, how he just wants to get out of there. That sequence shows the theme of man vs society in its entirety, how everything he had done up to that point was just right for him, which he later on fully embraced in Alaska.

The film stars Emile Hirsch as McCandless, Marcia Gay Harden as his mother, William Hurt as his father, Jena Malone, Catherine Keener, Brian H. Dierker, Vince Vaughn, Kristen Stewart, and Hal Holbrook. Although Hal Holbrook doesn't have a big role in the film, his Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor is well deserved and his scenes with Emile Hirsch are excellent, truly terrific. His character is possibly entirely fictional but so well written and realistic, a performance and character you can appreciate. During my first viewing I absolutely loved Emile Hirsch's performance as Chris McCandless, it haven't changed I just have come to respect it even more, most of the time he's acting beside himself and he's great in both those scenes and the ones he's acting alongside others. He captures the soul of Chris McCandless perfectly.

What film can you compare Into the Wild with? I would say Wild (2014) which stars Reese Witherspoon, it's quite a similar movie/story but the big difference is how Cheryl Strayed survived and Chris McCandless met an unfortunate demise. At first viewing, I didn't expect the film to delve so much into McCandless' background which is very similar to Wild (2014). Now on my second viewing, I'm much more grateful for the flashback chapters. If they would have solely shown us what's happening in Alaska, the film wouldn't be as 'true' because of how little is known about Chris' time there and from his other travels, yet it's what we know of him. Lots of things are probably fictional but that's alright, it's part of the experience, the events might be fictional but Chris McCandless isn't. Everything he does in the film, I'm certain he would do in real life. The "Magic" bus became an iconic location, a landmark because of the book and film, having been removed from its location and moved to a museum. One thing I absolutely love about the film is how it's shot on location, for example the Alaska scenes was filmed 50 miles (80 km) south of where McCandless actually died, in the tiny town of Cantwell. It just makes such a difference for us viewers and the actors when the film is shot on location like that. Into the Wild is a cinematic masterpiece, a film I've wanted to rewatch for many years and it was finally the right time. The film remains entertaining and interesting, making you rethink life. The ending remains heartbreaking. Sean Penn created a masterpiece with Into the Wild, its cinema. I'll leave my final words for. Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, who gave the film four stars out of four and described it as "spellbinding". Ebert wrote that Emile Hirsch gives a "hypnotic performance", commenting: "It is great acting, and more than acting." Ebert added, "The movie is so good partly because it means so much, I think, to its writer-director, Sean Penn."

Man of the West (1958)

Man of the West is a rare gem which was released in the wrong decade, a spectacular western and a worthy send-off for Gary Cooper

[10/10 · 6 May 2024]

The only film I've seen of Gary Cooper's filmography is High Noon and in that film, he set down his boot and made it known to both fans and non fabs that he's a western star, with Man of the West (one of Cooper's final Westerns) I would say he has done it again. Although not as memorable as High Noon, Man of the West is a terrific western. It is directed by Anthony Mann who is known in the genre for directing James Stewart in Winchester '73 (1950), The Naked Spur (1953), and The Man from Laramie (1955). Anthony Mann was the right choice for Man of the West (1959). The screenplay was written by Reginald Rose and was based on the novel 'The Border Jumpers'. Along with Gary Cooper, his co-stars are Julie London, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Lord, and Arthur O'Connell co-star with John Dehner, Robert J. Wilke, and Royal Dano. Man of the West, like most Mann films, is a tale of redemption.

A reformed outlaw becomes stranded after an aborted train robbery with two other passengers and is forced to rejoin his old outlaw band.

Let me dive deeper into Gary Cooper's performance, but before that let me just praise the supporting cast, they were all brilliant. Lee J. Cobb gives an award-worthy performance as the uncle to Cooper's character, with the scene at the farmstead in particular being a great example. Cobb steals the show during those scenes and Gary Cooper is mostly in the shadow, his acting is still perfect as lots of things with it are subtle thanks to Lee J. Cobb gets most of the dialogue. His performance comes full circle during an intense scene with a knife by his throat whilst Julie London's character is forced to strip, a scene I would call a hard watch but a scene full of drama and top notch acting from every single actor in the room. The film is about moments like these, how the characters respond to it, Man of the West is a character study in a way. Like I wrote before, a story of redemption, and the farmstead sequence is also where we find out Link Jones (Gary Cooper) ran with Dock Tobin (Lee J. Cobb) before and was an outlaw. Anthony Mann directed the actors perfectly and made that scene incredible. In a way, this scene and the reason it exists in the story, shows how the film has aged like fine wine. It was panned by critics back when it was released, perhaps rightfully so because of the time it was released as it was too different from what was made back then. Having the 'hero' say openly how he wants to kill every single one of them in a way which sounds like a horrible person and also the body language. This film is far from black and white, it's morally grey and better for it. The train sequence was all about introducing the characters whilst the farmstead sequence was all about showing who they really are whilst introducing the antagonists. Brilliantly executed.

At the time of release, the film was largely panned by American critics, but it was praised by Jean-Luc Godard, who, before he became a director, was a film critic. Godard claimed that Man of the West was the best film of the year. Decades after the film's release, it has gained a cult following and greater acclaim, with film historian Philip French claiming the film to be Anthony Mann's masterpiece, containing Cooper's finest performance. Jonathan Rosenbaum of The Chicago Reader hailed it as a "masterpiece," comparing it to "the grimness of Greek tragedy, its mountains and rock formations often suggesting the silent witness of an ancient amphitheater...the penultimate shoot-out in the ghost town is an appropriately eerie split-level confrontation between two wounded, supine men-one stretched out on a porch at screen left, the other stretched out underneath the porch at screen right, as if he were already buried. It's a key example of the way that landscape and architecture, people and settings, painting and drama, image and idea, classicism and modernism all merge on Mann's monumental canvases."

The cinematography was done by academy winner-nominee Ernest Haller, truly spectacular work and one of the film's highlights. What a great cooperation between him and the director, creating stunning shots with the use of exquisite camera work. From longer takes to wide angle shots, letting the viewer get even more immersed. For example, there's such brilliance in the photography inside the train and outside in the town and at the farmstead or simply the landscape. The film shows the old west perfectly. The costume department and set design are two other things which makes the immersion so perfect. Man of the West is a perfect western, a film more people should watch and experience. There are so many compartments which make it so perfect, all the technical aspects but also the editing and direction. Man of the West has everything a western should have but most importantly, it's because of Anthony Mann's passionate drive. He along with the main star, Gary Cooper, pours their hearts into the film and it infects us. Man of the West is such a deep and brilliant western, a spectacular film in its own right.

Braveheart (1995)

Braveheart is a huge epic spectacle and one of Mel Gibson's best films, exquisite from beginning to end

[10/10 · 3 May 2024]

Something I didn't think about during my first three viewings, as a child and then teen, was the historical inaccuracies and there's quite a lot of them. Then again, not a lot is known about William Wallace. Mel Gibson who directed, produced and starred, along with Randall Wallace who penned the screenplay. They could have made a more historically accurate film but for dramatization purposes and to create the story they wanted to tell, I would say they succeeded. Braveheart is a story with themes of leadership, heroism, courage, love, sacrifice, friendship, and the betrayal. With the iconic quote of freedom from the central character, it's the Scottish freedom in their war of independence. I truly get why a rating decreases heavily because of historical inaccuracies, at times they can break a film but I think lots of things in Braveheart can easily be looked over and see the reason behind it. Before delving deeper into the film, I just want to say how nostalgic and how incredible it still is after all these years. I understand why it's one of my father's favorite films even more now than then.

What a different performance it would have been if Brad Pitt played William Wallace who was the first consideration for the role, instead the producer-director Mel Gibson took on the role in what's possibly one of his best performances. Drawing in different emotions throughout the film, from the love story and innocence in the beginning to the military leader he becomes who is solely bent on revenge and getting freedom for his fellow Scotsmen, to the final scene where the iconic quote "Freedom" is spoken by Mel Gibson's character. Three hours of brilliant performances by him and everyone else, from both perspectives (the Scottish and English sides). To the main cast of Sophie Marceau, Angus Macfadyen, Patrick McGoohan, Catherine McCormack, Brendan Gleeson, James Cosmo and David O'Hara. To the smaller performances by Brian Cox, Ian Bannen and Tommy Flanagan.

As I wrote before, Mel Gibson serves as producer and director, in what might be his magnum opus. His direction to the actors is top notch and the vision for the movie is fantastic, directing each scene with brilliance in mind. Could he have made it more historically accurate, sure, but he had a vision for it all and stuck with it. For example the kilts used, the kilt originated in the 16th century whilst the film is set in the 13th century. Why did they do that big of historical inaccuracy? For the imagery and how people nowadays recognize the Scottish kilt, back to the imagery though, during the battle sequences it just looks epic and the sequence wouldn't have been as cool and epic if it weren't for them, or so I think.

The battle sequences are brutal, epic and simply brilliantly shot. The mise-en-scene in those scenes and honestly the entire movie, is fantastic. All from the village fight which begins the journey for freedom, to the different battle sequences throughout the film which was visually violent and chaotic. In a filmmaking standpoint, Mel Gibson directed all of those actors and extras whilst acting out the scenes himself, a truly breathtaking couple of sequences. I want to focus on the battle at Stirling which is the first major battle and in my opinion the most stellar one, truly cinema. The huge amount of extras and actors used, the work behind it. The scene highlights how outnumbered the Scots forces were compared to the English, how they succeeded using their wits and strength. With the battle sequence set entirely on a grassland and not by a bridge which it was in reality, the film delves deep into its historical inaccuracies. Yet, it still succeeds in telling the story it needed to, showing in partly fictional ways how the real Scotsmen succeeded. In the course of a six-week shooting process. The scene required nine cameras to film it, one of which was a computer-controlled stop-motion device that had been used to great success before in Jurassic Park. Gene Siskel wrote that "in addition to staging battle scenes well, Gibson also manages to recreate the filth and mood of 700 years ago."

In an interview back in 2016, Mel Gibson told of a 4 hour cut he would release if the studio wanted to, and that's something I would gladly watch. Braveheart is a film with a lot of passion behind it, with the crew and actors putting their heart into it. It's a film on such a big scale and could easily become a box office bomb but it went and made $213.2 million on a budget of $65-70 million. Mel Gibson is a big reason for its success and so is the big cast, but also the writer (Randall Wallace) and cinematographer (John Toll). Two other names I want to praise are the editing done by Steven Rosenblum and music done by James Horner. As you notice with all these big names, these talented people, their work made Braveheart into what it became. Technically, a masterpiece and of course cinema. Roger Ebert gave the film three and a half out of four stars, calling it "An action epic with the spirit of the Hollywood swordplay classics and the grungy ferocity of The Road Warrior.". What's also worth adding is how the film won five Oscars among other awards, winning for: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup and another award; also being nominated for other Oscars. Critics have argued if the film should have won all its awards especially Best Picture, honestly I think it's deserving. Braveheart is exquisite in lots of ways, a film for everyone to enjoy.

Face/Off (1997)

John Woo brings his gun fu and heroic bloodshed to Hollywood, with a perfect action film starring John Travolta and Nicolas Cage in memorable roles

[10/10 · 26 April 2024]

Face/Off is a film full of high octane action directed by the maestro John Woo, doing what he's best at, the genres gun fu and heroic bloodshed in the action genre which he pioneered. There are stylized action sequences and dramatic themes such as duty, honor, redemption and violence. The film is also a great thriller film, with the more quiet and character driven scenes contributing to the film and its themes, especially of redemption and loss. Oliver Wood is also to thank for the look of the film, whilst John Woo is hugely thank for it with the aesthetics and perfect mise-en-scene, Wood's cinematography is excellent. The screenplay was written by Mike Werb and Michael Colleary, truly excellent writing. Since its release, the film gained a strong cult following and it is considered by many as one of John Woo's best films.

To foil a terrorist plot, FBI agent Sean Archer assumes the identity of the criminal Castor Troy who murdered his son through facial transplant surgery, but the crook wakes up prematurely and vows revenge.

There are a bunch of action sequences that stand out, especially the speedboat chase scene which the film won an MTV award for, along with an award for best On-Screen Duo for Travolta and Cage. I think the prison escape is brilliantly executed, from direction and acting to the editing, but I think the writing could have been better and more build up as it felt too easy. The penthouse shootout is also top notch action, among the best. The same climax action sequence which begins in a church and continues with a speedboat chase. John Woo uses slow motion correctly and sparsely, making the action scenes more epic and entertaining. Face/Off won Saturn Awards for Best Director and Best Writing, it was also nominated for the Academy Award for Best Sound Effects Editing. The sound design in the film is really great, with each punch and gunshot felt by us in the audience, like how it's supposed to be.

What's interesting with Face/Off, other than what an incredible action film it is, it's the script and the vision John Woo had for it. The emotional impact at the end shows how these people succeeded in creating a film with characters you care for, how the theme of loss was handled, truly perfect storytelling. Nicolas Cage and John Travolta were truly incredible in this film, in certain ways it contained some over-acting but it fits the character of Castor Troy (the terrorist and criminal) perfectly. Sean Archer was the FBI agent and what is the main character, it was interesting seeing Nicholas Cage play that part as well with an edge of craziness to it. Equipping the face of the man who killed your son and injured oneself, it would probably make anyone kind of psychologically on the edge. Some words by Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, who gave the film three out of four, "Here, using big movie stars and asking them to play each other, Woo and his writers find a terrific counterpoint to the action scenes: All through the movie, you find yourself reinterpreting every scene as you realize the 'other' character is 'really' playing it." Face/Off might be among the best action films I've seen, with its stylized and violent sequences which makes you want more. The good thing is there is more where this came from, John Woo is one of the greatest action directors, and this might even be his best film.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver (2024)

Zack Snyder brings a lackluster conclusion to the visually striking Rebel Moon

[4/10 · 21 April 2024]

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver is the direct sequel to Rebel Moon - Part One: A Child of Fire, where Zack Snyder is back in the director chair with a screenplay penned by him, Kurt Johnstad and Shay Hatten. Zack Snyder is also the producer and cinematographer for the film, something he also was in the previous film and Army of the Dead. I criticized the cinematography in the previous film and I'll do the same here, the lenses used and flares, also the motion blur. I think he likes the sun and lens flares, it's a specific style, but his previous films (pre-Netflix) never had that which contributed to a more spectacular picture. There's nothing wrong with his camera work though, he's great at creating visually striking photos, painting like frames. Sofia Boutella, Djimon Hounsou, Ed Skrein, Michiel Huisman, Doona Bae, Ray Fisher, Staz Nair, Fra Fee, Elise Duffy, Charlotte Maggi, Stuart Martin, Cary Elwes, and Anthony Hopkins reprise their roles from the first film.

Kora and surviving warriors prepare to defend Veldt, their new home, alongside its people against the Realm. The warriors face their pasts, revealing their motivations before the Realm's forces arrive to crush the growing rebellion.

If you're going to make a two part movie or story in any medium, the first part would be where you introduce all characters and develop them, well Rebel Moon only gets the former right. With all the run time Rebel Moon Part 1: A Child of Fire had, it failed to do the story justice with Zack Snyder focusing solely on the visuals which there is nothing wrong with, back in that movie and with Part 2: The Scargiver. Some people go around saying how terrible storyteller Zack Snyder is and well it's kind of true with this duology. But the answer is more complicated than that, he's not the sole writer on this project (yes, he did come up with the story and did the world building) as there're also two others who co-wrote it with him: Kurt Johnstad and Shay Hatten with the latter of them having written John Wick 3 and 4, along with Army of the Dead and Army of Thieves. Kurt Johnstad wrote the two 300 films and Atomic Blonde. It was Snyder and Johnstad who started talking about creating the film in 1997, thus this is their vision and Hatten contributed possibly with the action sequences. I'm quite sure these two films, or film, were under cooked in the oven and could possibly have been a lot better if Rebel Moon would have been more fleshed out. There's an interesting world out there, yet extremely underused by Zack Snyder with every scene being rushed through to get to the next action set piece. Part 2: The Scargiver continues that trend, showing visuals before character development, although the film delves deeper into Sofia Boutella's Kora and Michiel Huisman's Gunnar, it just isn't enough to get invested. We also get scenes which explain the heroes backstories, which drags the pacing down and fails to make you take care of them. Having a scene before the big fight which solely offers exposition of their backstories and Snyder showing us everything in detail, should be interesting but comes across as boring. Perhaps a bit harsh but we don't know these characters and hearing them talk about their pasts makes no difference in making us like them more. There's no love poured into these characters, they're stale and it says something when a robot is more human than the other characters. Anthony Hopkins solely voices Jimmy, a mechanical knight, the extended screentime is appreciated as he is one of the film's few highlights. But where did Snyder spill his passion? The world and the attention to detail, it's quite unfortunate we get to spend so much time on Veldt as it's the most 'normal' location of them all. You could criticize Zack Snyder a lot for these two films, but the world building and his passion for the world he built is something you just have to praise.

Slow motion is a trademark for Zack Snyder and once again with this film like its predecessor, is using slow motion mostly in the wrong way, an example in this film is the slow motion used in some early scenes during farm work. An already boring sequence which would have been better in a montage, was made even worse by the slow motion. Whilst in the previous film during the meeting and epic moment of Staz Nair's character Tarak is the right moment for one of his iconic slow motion shots, an example to avoid spoilers for Part 2: The Scargiver. One of the few great slow motion shots of the duology comes when the big battle starts, that's how you use slow motion in film, to place emphasis on something that enhances the drama in the scene. One scene which consists of bad slow motion is unfortunately the action scene with Doona Bae as Nemesis, the choreography is out of the window and instead we get to see a cool moment destroyed by slow motion and poor choreography because of its use being to serve as imagery instead of choreography. Then again, the whole scene isn't like this, but it feels like we never get to see what kind of great fighter she truly is and deserves to be seen as. Like the character Lady Snowblood in the film with the same name, both characters are out for revenge and Lady Snowblood shows through choreography and action how great a swordswoman she is. Snyder focuses not on the show, but to tell how good a fighter Nemesis is. You see by her ending and lots of other characters, how they didn't have any true character arcs. Nemesis could have been a great character but like most of the characters, writing became an after thought.

Sofia Boutella portrays the main character, Kora / Arthelais and its a good performance, you see how she's actually giving everything she can with the script she's working with, something all the others did as well. But this paragraph will be about her and how she has carried this duology, I hope her career continues. In the previous paragraph I criticized the choreography, Boutella's action scenes are a lot better choreographed and I'm glad she got some good action scenes which showcases yet again how good of an action star she is. I'm of course thinking about the hallway fight at the end of the movie, where she uses her dancing career, it was a good scene except for the occasional enemies waiting until their friends get knocked down which is a flaw existing throughout the film. Then there's the rematch between her and Atticus Noble, a fight which begins with firearms and continues with the laser swords, something we got to see a lot more of in this film. The fight goes from good and entertaining to a CGI party. She nailed the character, both action and drama wise, more with this film as we got to see more emotions from the character and the death of Gunnar was the first emotional death in these two films. All the other deaths could have had the same emotional impact if the writing would have been better.

Frank Scheck from The Hollywood Reporter wrote this, "Snyder provides an ample display of the visual flair and skill for action that have endeared him to legions of fans who exhibit so much dedication that they're willing to sit through numerous versions of his films." I'm a big fan of Zack Snyder and after the first Rebel Moon, I really wanted to watch the R-Rated versions which felt more like his director's cuts but I don't know anymore, I'm a big fan of him but not of these movies. Erik Kain from Forbes, said this in his review, "Somehow, the second part of Zack Snyder's hopelessly derivative space opera manages to be even more tedious and less inventive than Rebel Moon Part 1: A Child Of Fire." and that's unfortunately quite true. Erik Kain goes to write, "Rebel Moon would have worked better as a series, with time to focus on each character and grow the relationships between them rather than Snyder's relentless overuse of exposition. The story of Kora on the run from her former adoptive father for an assassination she wasn't (only) responsible for is also a far more interesting story than this wannabee Seven Samurai nonsense." I couldn't agree more, why didn't he make a tv series where he could go deeper into the world he's so proud of? The characters he wrote which becomes nothing but fragments in the story where you wouldn't notice if anyone of them gets removed.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver and its first part, combined, is a film which I strongly believe had the potential to be great. The sad truth is how Zack Snyder has gained this huge hybris. Free rein to make exactly what he wanted by a company which is masters at shoving money into productions that often are undercooked. Zack Snyder is a visionary but Rebel Moon was not a good film, would I see the sequel? I think so, in hope of it being better than this.

Fallout (2024– )

The creators behind Fallout manages to do the near impossible in making a perfect video game adaptation, a spectacular and entertaining season of television

[10/10 · 16 April 2024]

My experience with Fallout through the years was by playing the games, Fallout: New Vegas being the game that brought me into the franchise. It's set in the same state as this show, California (which also featured prominently in Fallout 1 and 2). Lore wise, both before and after the apocalypse, it was just the right choice by the showrunners and producers to place it in Los Angeles, California. Graham Wagner and Geneva Robertson-Dworet served as showrunners for the show, penning the scripts for episode 1-3. Then there were a couple of other writers which deserves praise; Kieran Fitzgerald, Chaz Hawkins and Gursimran Sandhu. The creators and crew behind this tv show respected the source material (the games) with even Todd Howard aboard as producer, along with Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy with Nolan directing the first three episodes thus setting the tone for what's to come like Michael Mann did with Tokyo Vice for example. Other notable directors were Clare Kilner and Frederick E. O. Toye along with Wayne Yip who directed the finale. These people created something truly special and perfect, what I would call one of the best adaptations of video games. It's an original story but set in the same universe, something The Last of Us and Halo never did, these writers and producers of Fallout could have played it safe and done something similar as they would have had free rein to do anything they wanted to, without the need of involving the games and all lore behind it. They truly nailed the attention to detail, from the set design to the world building, the overall production design and everything placed on the scene. Truly incredible mise-en-scene by the directors. Visually, Fallout is spectacular. With incredible cinematography and gorgeous looking visual effects combined with practical effects, the makeup and prosthetics for The Ghoul for example along with all the sets built for the show, like Red Rocket and Super-Duper Mart which comes to mind. The cinematographers who worked on the show(season) was Stuart Dryburgh who helmed four and Teodoro Maniaci who helmed the other four, I think Dryburgh's cinematography was the best and his resume (The Piano, the pilot episode for Boardwalk Empire and The Painted Veil) speaks for itself, he'll probably get nominated for Fallout too. Maniaci was also incredible, creating some iconic shots for the last two episodes.

The show depicts the aftermath of the Great War of 2077, an apocalyptic nuclear exchange in an alternate history of Earth where advances in nuclear technology after WWII led to the emergence of a retrofuturistic society and a subsequent resource war. Flashforward to 2296, this TV adaptation follows a young woman named Lucy who leaves behind her home in Vault 33 to venture out into the dangerously unforgiving wasteland of a devastated Los Angeles to look for her father. Along the way, she meets a Brotherhood of Steel squire and a ghoul bounty hunter, each with their own mysterious pasts and agendas to settle.

Original Fallout lead Tim Cain appreciated the performances and storytelling, but singled out how the show nailed the Fallout "vibe" as its biggest achievement. "I was just looking at all the props," he said of one scene. "I realized after a few minutes went by that I had not followed the dialogue at all, because I was so engrossed by it visually." and I couldn't agree more, hearing this from one of the creators of the original Fallout games just makes me smile. The performances and storytelling are truly some of the highlights, the comedic tone combined with ultra-violence was handled perfectly as it was close to the games. The show also had a serious tone, but the important thing is how everything felt natural and never strange to the viewer's eyes. The storytelling, overall writing and narrative was completely right for the tv show; having us follow a Vault Dweller, perfectly cast and a three dimensional character in her own right, Ella Purnell as Lucy MacLean. Then there is the squire Maximus of the Brotherhood of Steel, also a great character and well cast, played by Aaron Moten. Then we have Walton Goggins as The Ghoul / Cooper Howard, a great three dimensional antagonist which crosses the morally grey on multiple occasions thus becoming a protagonist in his own right. That's the big three with stories from deuteragonists also. There's also a big mystery surrounding the season/show, of who took Lucy's father and who destroyed Shady Sands, along with Howard which is hunted by every faction and bounty hunters after escaping the Enclave with something valuable. Meanwhile there's another story, flashbacks more exactly which shows The Ghoul back before the bombs hit, when he was Cooper Howard and timeline wise this is far from anything we have seen before and it was just brilliantly executed in a way that didn't hurt the pacing, only made it better because of how it ties into the main story. With a stellar main cast of characters impossible not to like, the supporting cast and guest stars are also great with names like; Sarita Choudhury, Leslie Uggams, Matt Berry, Chris Parnell and Michael Cristofer.

The final episode (1.08) ties everything together nicely, both timelines, and well everything comes full circle in that said episode in its twists and so on. Having a lot of knowledge of the lore, lots of things weren't a shock but the show's big twist was unexpected and brilliant. The writers and showrunners deserve a lot of praise for the last episode and the whole show, the faithfulness to the source material and succeeding in telling a story in its vast universe. It would have been nice if they would have released weekly episodes, so you get to savor every minute of an episode in a day which would have felt special, but instead we got all eight episodes and honestly I was happy for it but deep down I miss the whole weekly release and socializing which comes with it. Fallout is getting a second season and I'm here to stay, for now I'm giving the first season my thumbs up, it's a spectacular season of television and possibly the best time I've had watching a TV series in a long time. It's a multi genre show and Fallout does it perfectly, nailing each genre, simply a spectacular season of television.

Civil War (2024)

Civil War might be Alex Garland's Magnum opus, it's grim and at times disturbing, incredible storytelling and performances

[9/10 · 15 April 2024]

Civil War was made and released at a time when something like it could turn into reality, that thought was with me the entire time. The film is intense, heartbreaking and emotional. Never shying away from showing the horrors of war and the documentary feeling in its cinematography only enhances the immersion. We never get thrown off the wagon, the tone is consistent. Alex Garland who directed and wrote the film is the one to thank, stellar filmmaking. The camera work is excellent and I simply loved how it goes quiet whenever they take a photo, the cinematography and direction were top notch, truly mesmerizing. The mise-en-scene is also something to praise, absolutely perfect. It has been a long time since I watched a movie which was this intense and gives a thrill down your spine. The sound design was top notch and so was the musical score along with the soundtrack used. I loved how he played with the sound, how simplistic the film would have been without this sound design. Alex Garland's "Civil War" is nothing but simplistic, it's a masterpiece both technically and storytelling wise, a great send off for his directional work as he had said how he's focusing more on writing.

A journey across a dystopian future America, following a team of military-embedded journalists as they race against time to reach DC before rebel factions descend upon the White House.

I thought the pacing was absolutely perfect, the world building we get to see and the character development that comes from the road trip kind of narrative as our journalists have to make it to Washington DC, getting into all kinds of events which often leans into life threatening territory. There's a scene when they meet Jesse Plemons' character, a scene with absolutely breathtaking acting performances by Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Cailee Spaeny, Stephen McKinley Henderson. The cast also includes Sonoya Mizuno, Nick Offerman, and Jefferson White. Chase Hutchinson from The Wrap said this about Kirsten Dunst's acting, "It is a film about journalistic ethics and, in its own way, the interpretation of images is grounded in [Dunst's] outstanding performance. It isn't an easy role to inhabit, but she does so perfectly." There are several great performances, I think Kirsten Dunst deserves all the praise and some awards for her performance, subtly showing what I'm quite sure is PTSD but also a memorable dramatic performance in its own right. The supporting cast alongside her never outshines her, but their presence is felt in every scene. Cailee Spaeny brings a great performance as Jessie Cullen, a breakthrough on the big screen.

About the scene with Jesse Plemons, Erik Kain with Forbes wrote, "But we don't know who the racist, murderous soldier Jesse Plemons' plays is, or which side he's fighting for, or whether he's even a soldier at all. All we know is that he's terrifying (something Plemons has mastered almost too perfectly). Maybe he's just using the fog of war to kill whoever he pleases with nobody to stop him. These things happen in war. That's what Civil War is trying to remind us. It doesn't matter who the good guys are, or what politics or social breakdown led to us to this place. Here be dragons." Whose side is something that often is brought up in various scenes, the film never strives to be black and white as anyone can be bad. Like in the attack on the white house we see (who're supposed to be the good guys) simply murdering people who are trying to surrender. You could call it just being war, but it's often this hatred deep inside and well, the film ends with hatred felt by every single individual inside the oval office.

The attack on the white house was absolutely fantastic, stunningly shot and really intense. The attack on DC prior to this was brilliantly executed and made for some great cinema with realism before entertainment, which made it so much better and entertaining in my opinion. The death of Kirsten Dunst's character Lee Smith at the end was something I found to be quite lackluster, but also necessary in a way for her character, but just the execution and how Jessie Cullen seemingly ignoring her death with what I found to be an abrupt ending afterwards, yet the story is finished. I think the issue lies in how it was shot, slow motion and with Jessie taking multiple photos which makes the scene have less emotional depth than what it could have been.

It seems like people found this film to be wrongfully marketed and advertised, for that I only have this to say, I found the trailer to be similar to the film we got and it is a Alex Garland, who had directed Ex Machina and Annihilation prior to this along with written screenplays of 28 Days Later and Never Let Me Go. What do I mean with this? His films are not action movies or fast paced, they're often philosophical and thematical. So what kind of film is Civil War? It's a dystopian thriller. I'll quote Sammie Purcell who reviewed the film for Roughdraft Atlanta, "with 'Civil War,' Garland doesn't appear to be interested in the socio-political landscape that would lead to a national conflict, but rather how far people will go to pretend everything is fine when everything is so painfully not." and honestly, as I wrote higher up on my review, this sits well at home with our own reality. Lots of people probably pretend or would not like to know of the monstrosity wars being fought right now.

To end my review I thought this paragraph would give a good conclusion, from Matt Zoller Seitz at RogerEbert.com, "Civil War is a furiously convincing and disturbing thing when you're watching it. It's a great movie that has its own life force. It's not like anything Garland has made. It's not like anything anyone has made, even though it contains echoes of dozens of other films (and novels) that appear to have fed the filmmaker's imagination." Civil War deserves to be seen on the big screen in a cinema with a great sound system and picture quality, the gunfire for example was enhanced with the surround sound. It was hard to watch but an unforgettable experience.

Wild Bill (1995)

Walter Hill's Wild Bill is flawed around the edges because of plot and pacing issues, other than that a very enjoyable and good western

[7/10 · 10 April 2024]

After The Long Riders and Geronimo: An American Legend, Walter Hill came back to the western genre with Wild Bill, being the director and writer for the project. Having seen the show, Deadwood, and read about the historical figures of Wild Bill and Calamity Jane, this film has been on my radar for quite a while. The film is based on the 1978 stage play Fathers and Sons by Thomas Babe and the 1986 novel Deadwood by Pete Dexter (the novel I own but haven't read). It stars Jeff Bridges as Wild Bill Hickok, Ellen Barkin as Calamity Jane, John Hurt as Charley Prince, Diane Lane as Susannah Moore, Keith Carradine as as William Frederick "Buffalo Bill" Cody, and David Arquette as Jack McCall, along with other actors in the supporting cast.

The early career of legendary lawman Wild Bill Hickock is telescoped and culminates in his relocation in Deadwood and a reunion with Calamity Jane.

Walter Hill is a special kind of director, an auteur of sorts, yet his movies aren't for everyone. But one thing he's always great at is the camera work, how he uses the camera and the medium shots he often uses, letting the audience see a lot. There's always a lot going on in his shots, from extras to actors, his mise-en-scene is quite great I must add. For the first act I have to admit I really found the editing to be great, I'm pretty sure Walter Hill supervised Freeman A. Davies who edited the film. Lloyd Ahern II served as cinematographer, truly magnificent work and cooperation, something they would continue to do for the mini series Broken Trail. Although I'm praising the film a lot, I think the pacing is too fast as the film never slows down to dig deeper into who James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok were, and with the runtime of solely 98 minutes you just wish it was a little longer. The plot could have been better, as the film has a great first act, then it stumbles before coming to a good final act. Better pacing and removal of the dream sequences would have improved the film I believe. The whole plot with Jack McCall thinking Wild Bill is his father, is by the playwright himself a big lie, so having that in this film was just off, an interesting idea on paper but didn't work at all. It does bring suspension and tension to the film, having McCall serve as a bigger antagonist/villain than he was, McCall was nothing but a coward whom sought nothing but fame to be the man who killed Wild Bill Hickok. I would have liked if the plot focused more on the characters of Deadwood whom Bill surrounded himself with. Roger Ebert gave the film two stars out of four, criticizing its pacing and plot. He recognized the film's ambition, aiming for "elegy" and "poetry" in its final act, but ultimately described it as flawed, writing, "We can see where it's headed, although it doesn't get there." I think for example the dream sequence could have been removed and something else like more backstory or other important aspects of his life, who Wild Bill was. The voiceover of John Hurt's character, Charley Prince, helps the film tell more of Wild Bill's story but as the saying goes "Show, don't tell". Yet, the voiceover works thanks to the screenplay. John Hurt is absolutely brilliant in the role, many in the film are great, but it's Jeff Bridges and John Hurt who deserves most of the praise. I believe Jeff Bridges nailed the role. I think Jeff Bridges had chemistry with everyone, especially with John Hurt and Ellen Barkin and Keith Carradine (who played Wild Bill Hickok in the tv series Deadwood). Bruce Fretts of Entertainment Weekly wrote that the movie "succeeds as a character study of a man whose idiosyncratic code of justice eventually catches up with him", and complimented Jeff Bridges' acting as vital to the film's success.

Who was James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok? In this film we see him as a lawman, gunman, actor and a western legend. Various friendships get explored like with Martha Jane "Calamity Jane" Cannary, Charley Prince and William Frederick "Buffalo Bill" Cody. There is much information about him but how much is true? I'm sure this take on him is quite correct. The eye sickness is something I completely buy, yet I have no idea if its true of not. Just seem true if you think about it, this western legend comes to Deadwood to almost solely drink and gamble. That's something anyone in that age with his status would get depressed about. I think Walter Hill did the legend justice. Walter Hill does something interesting, showing once again the native americans and americans of other ethnicity like Chinese and African-Americans, everyone is three dimensional and these scenes might not have happened in reality but as dramatic license, works well and adds depth. Walter Hill's Wild Bill has ambition and could have been a great western, it just doesn't get there, it's also unfortunate how the film bombed at the box office. I watched that trailer Walter Hill spoke badly about, it's truly a different movie they marketed. The film aims for elegant and philosophical storytelling, Roger Ebert wrote of how Walter Hill aimed for elegy and poetry, this was a passion project of some kind of Hill's and his personal reflection of the sudden murder of a western legend. This film is absolutely worth your time, but bear in mind, it might not be to your liking. I thought it was a good western though, I hope you do too.

Pig (I) (2021)

Nicolas Cage gives one of his best performances and among the decade's best, Pig is a quiet drama about loss and a beautiful film

[10/10 · 10 April 2024]

Pig was one of the films which got critical acclaim and earned Nicolas Cage his second nomination at the Critics' Choice Movie Award for Best Actor, his career launched back and were once again seen as a respectable actor. I only knew of this film because of Nicolas Cage and his mesmerizing performance, which it is, he's utterly perfect in this role. He's also a producer on the film. Richard Roeper of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film a score of four out of four stars, writing: "The unpredictable Cage delivers some of his best work in years." Pig wasn't made for the commercial audience, it's an independent film and one with such a strange premise, an art film and 'well made film' at heart. Noel Murray, in his review of the film for the Los Angeles Times, wrote that, "Though its plot follows the same rough outline of a John Wick-style shoot-em-up, Pig is actually a quiet and often melancholy meditation on loss, anchored by a character who wishes he could shake free of the person he used to be."

A truffle hunter who lives alone in the Oregon wilderness must return to his past in Portland in search of his beloved foraging pig after she is kidnapped.

Pig is directed by Michael Sarnoski (who directed the upcoming A Quiet Place: Day One), from a screenplay and story by himself and Vanessa Block. It won the Independent Spirit Award for Best First Screenplay. The film stars Nicolas Cage in the main role, it also stars Alex Wolff and Adam Arkin. I've written how brilliant Nicolas Cage is in the role and although Cage is almost solely alone to thank for the acting, the director/writer helped a lot. With a movie that could have been extremely strange, Sarnoski intelligently kept this film grounded and you see throughout every scene how much heart went into making this film. "Pig" takes time to develop, both the story and characters, Michael Sarnoski does it brilliantly. There are so many incredible moments and brilliantly written dialogue scenes, and it's the characters which make these scenes so interesting, for example the scene at the restaurant with Rob, Amir and Derek. Though its short run time, this 90 minute film has stronger writing and characterization than any commercial 120 minute film. That takes skill and Michael Sarnoski shows just that. His writing fleshes out all its characters, which combined with fantastic performances, makes them feel all the more real. Sarnoski's use of long takes throughout the film also adds to this realism. The camera work is excellent and so is the editing, great direction and cinematography. The film is shot with this slick color, focusing on different color palettes for the different Parts. Cinematographer Patrick Scola is absolutely perfect in his craft. Pig has been cited as among the best films of the 2020s and the 21st century. I agree. It's a film full of heart, full of drama and simply a beautiful film in a certain way. It's the philosophical nature and how the screenplay delves into its themes, like loss. It's magnificent.

The Kid (II) (2019)

The Kid is a great directional debut from Vincent D'Onofrio and a great western, focusing on an original story with Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

[7/10 · 9 April 2024]

The Kid has Vincent D'Onofrio in his directional debut, I don't agree with its rating on IMDb, this is a very good film, a great western. The screenplay was written by Andrew Lanham and although I really liked the film I think his script is my least favorite part, it's quite all over the place but works. It's completely fictional with only the characters of Pat Garrett and Billy "The Kid" Bonney being historical, what can be interesting with stories like these is how you use the characters, they're used quite well in my opinion. With scenes like the dinner scene and the Mexican ranch before it, these scenes along with that great gunfight is a great way to start a plot. You learn of the characters and their characterization. The film stars Ethan Hawke as Sheriff Pat Garrett, Dane DeHaan as Billy "The Kid" Bonney, Jake Schur as Rio Cutler, Leila George as Sara Cutler, Chris Pratt as Grant Cutler, Adam Baldwin as Bob Olinger, and Vincent D'Onofrio as Sheriff Romero. The film is full of great performances, Ethan Hawke and Dane DeHaan are absolutely mesmerizing and perfect in their roles but who surprised me the most was Jake Schur who plays the protagonist whilst being overshadowed by the historical figures played by the former two.

The premise; The story of a young boy who witnesses Billy the Kid's encounter with Sheriff Pat Garrett. That's the basic premise, there's also a revenge story in the story, with Rio Cutler killing his alcoholic and abusive father which ultimately starts the events going forward. With Rio's uncle on their tail.

Something worth praising which many films don't get right is the bad teeth which many had in the old west, it's the opposite in this film as they nailed it, Billy the Kid is an example in this film. The guns also pack a punch in The Kid, D'Onofrio shows the destruction it makes and focuses on the surroundings like the animals which become scared of the shooting. The musical score was quite impressive as well, fitting for the period and movie, and during the action sequences the music just hits right which enhances the suspension and tension in the scene. The editing is quite great as well, really great in the action scenes like the jailbreak scene. Although the action sequences are really fantastic, the film is about the characters and the character moments, the dialogue is quite modern at times but the dialogue is quite great. Regarding the cinematography and direction, the film is absolutely stunning to look at, Richard Roeper from Chicago Sun-Times said, "First-time director D'Onofrio has as an admirable visual style, whether we get medium-long-shot takes or intimate close-ups. This is a good-looking period piece film, percolating with top-tier performances."

Joe Leydon of Variety called The Kid "a consistently involving and often exciting drama in which the two Wild West icons are presented from the p.o.v. Of an impressionable adolescent who weighs the pros and cons of each man as a role model." I can only agree with his and Richard Roeper's remarks, it's a great film and even more so a great western yet you don't have to like westerns to enjoy it, it's a compelling character drama in its own right with what I believe to be some really great action sequences with guns which sound and look good.

The Pacific (2010)

The Pacific follows three soldiers instead of an ensemble, its character driven and full of action sequences, a perfect war drama

[10/10 · 5 April 2024]

The Pacific is the companion series to Band of Brothers, once again executive-produced by Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg with Bruce C. McKenna as showrunner (who worked on Band of Brothers) among other writers like George Pelecanos who wrote one episode. Notable directors were; Tim Van Patten and David Nutter, also Graham Yost (who also wrote an episode, along with working on Band of Brothers). With truly brilliant directors on the project, what is the next thing that needs to be brilliant? The writing and its consistent, truly remarkable most of the time with "Part Three, Melbourne" containing lackluster writing. Bruce C. McKenna is a capable writer and focused on authenticity, "Melbourne" was one of few episodes he didn't write which might say something about the episode. The show also had other capable writers; Robert Schenkkan, Graham Yost, Laurence Andries and Michelle Ashford. During the Emmys, The Pacific was nominated for quite a few awards, taking home Outstanding Miniseries which was the biggest, rightfully so in my opinion. The direction, writing, acting and the whole production design, these guys knew what they were doing and it shows in every scene, every single frame. It's not as good as Band of Brothers though, but really close.

Having seen this show once before, I was kind of mesmerized yet felt like the narrative wasn't as strong as Band of Brothers. The Pacific is based primarily on the memoirs of two US Marines: With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa by Eugene Sledge and Helmet for My Pillow by Robert Leckie. It also draws on Sledge's memoir China Marine and Red Blood, Black Sand, the memoir of Chuck Tatum, a Marine who fought alongside Basilone at Iwo Jima. After my first viewing of the mini series, I bought and read Helmet for My Pillow, a must read biography which was adapted brilliantly which the writers of course took some dramatic licenses with like the Greek family and Stella in the third episode "Melbourne".

What is The Pacific about? It features the 1st Marine Division's battles in the Pacific, such as Guadalcanal, Cape Gloucester, Peleliu, and Okinawa, as well as Basilone's involvement in the Battle of Iwo Jima. Who are the Marines and actors who're portraying them? James Badge Dale as PFC. Robert Leckie, Joseph Mazzello as Cpl. Eugene Sledge and Jon Seda as GySgt. John Basilone. Other notable actors throughout the mini series are; Ashton Holmes, Josh Helman, Jacob Pitts, Rami Malek, Martin McCann, William Sadler and Jon Bernthal.

Back when I watched this show, around 2013, my favorite character was John Basilone and I thought Jon Seda's performance was absolutely incredible, along with James Badge Dale as Robert Leckie who came second. The emotional depth of Basilone's character arc was high and his demise just hit me hard, the thing I found great and original with his character arc were we got to see scenes with Jon Seda and Annie Parisse as Sgt. Lena Basilone (the wife). The same goes for Robert Leckie and his love/family life. Those scenes contributed so much to the show unlike Band of Brothers where we never got to see the soldiers wives and girlfriends thus making the show solely about Brotherhood, a theme the writers and producers along with the cast succeeded with. With one of The Pacific's leads, we get to see something else, something intimate and special, by the end leading to the theme of loss. I found the writing to be spectacular around his character, also Jon Seda who captures the real figure perfectly or so I think, and my opinion hasn't changed. The writers and producers captured the story of John Basilone brilliantly, with the key battle at Guadacanal which earned him his Medal of Honor, being one of the best scenes in the entire show. I would say that scene is as impressive and great as Ronald Speirs' heroic sequence in Band of Brothers. Although Cpl. Eugene Sledge is not my favorite character, I think he's the one I resonated with the most as he was the youngest but also someone who had a medical issue which causes him at first unable to join the army, Joseph Mazzello is absolutely fantastic in the role. Maybe in the first episode you won't notice that but throughout the show and then to the end, he shows he's one of the best. Another interesting thing about Eugene is how his father is a doctor who treated soldiers of the Great War (WW1) and then his son witnesses the true horrors of war, horrors made by the Japanese and what the Americans did to them. The thing with these characters, except for Basilone in my opinion, is how the horrors of war change them into hostile and unlikable characters which is realistic. Their anger and emotions are kept inside and they ultimately break at some point, which we see them do. Eugene Sledge is a great example of how even kind-hearted people can change into something worse. The final episode of the series is all about confronting these horrors they went through, coping with PTSD and moving on to a 'regular' life. Is a regular life possible after witnessing death and chaos, seeing friends and 'brothers' die in front of you and digging up corpses or seeing babies die in front of you. Most of these things happen in the penultimate episode "Okinawa" and it's one of the show's best episodes. The episodes "Basilone" and "Peleliu Airfield" along with the whole Peleliu arc is worth praising.

The Pacific is always and will always be compared to Band of Brothers, but the thing is, The Pacific never strives to be Band of Brothers. It's different in a lot of ways, except for the second world war and the creators behind it. It's another theater of war and the focus is on the United States Marine Corps (USMC), it's also not an ensemble series as I've addressed. Leckie meets Sledge once, their books are the source material which the TV Series is based upon. The Pacific is a must watch if you're a big fan of the war genre or simply a fan of history, or just want a compelling drama series to watch. The Pacific contains superb special effects, art direction, production design, costume and Makeup departments, sound design and musical score. If you have a good sound system, you'll feel like you're right beside the soldiers, these band of brothers in the pacific theater of war.

The Walking Dead: The Ones Who Live: The Last Time (2024) Season 1, Episode 6

"The Last Time" is an incredible season finale, a bit rushed, with some brilliant performances especially Andrew Lincoln

[8/10 · 2 April 2024]

"The Last Time" is the sixth and final episode which follows Rick and Michonne after they got out of the deserted settlement, with a high possibility of them being believed to be dead. With the episode's premise: Rick and Michonne need to perform a near impossible miracle. The season's (series) plot comes full circle with the Echelon Briefing taking front and center, World Beyond S2's plot as well.

The season finale of TWD: The Ones Who Live "The Last Time" was directed by Michael E. Satrazemis and written by Scott M. Gimple & Channing Powell, the direction and visual storytelling were excellent, and the writing was very good except for some of the dialogue. Back to the direction and visual storytelling, Michael E. Satrazemis who directed the previous episode along with countless others in previous shows, handles every scene brilliantly and makes sure there are brilliant shots as well as the actors doing their finest work, which they are. There are some truly stunning shots in this episode, the scene when General Beale gives Rick Grimes the Echelon Briefing. That whole scene was executed perfectly, direction and acting wise, I think there were too many flashbacks though. Otherwise, an incredible scene with Terry O'Quinn getting much needed screen time to show what a great performance he could give as Johnathan Beale. Outside of General Beale's office and his other scenes, Lesley-Ann Brandt had some great scenes as Pearl Thorne. Since the first episode I absolutely loved her character, how she was written and obviously how morally grey she was. The climax at the end has her up against Rick and Michonne, in an incredible piece of television with suspension and tension. Michonne drives Beale's saber into Thorne and deals a fatal blow, a fitting conclusion with the message and theme of love being exchanged between them. I felt Beale's death was unexpected and brilliant, could have been written better with foreshadowing and more build up, if The Ones Who Live would have had more episodes to tell the story. Back to the performances though, Andrew Lincoln and Danai Gurira were absolutely brilliant in this episode, mostly Andrew Lincoln because of the Echelon Briefing scene. This piece of dialogue spoken by Rick Grimes sums up why it's a great scene, "I never lost my son. I lost myself. He brought me back. My wife brought me back. We're the sword that kills. We're the sword that gives life. One life. One unstoppable life. We're not dead." The mise-en-scene was perfect for that scene.

The production design and art direction is terrific, so is the mise-en-scene and cinematography for the show. The musical score and sound design were incredible in the episode. Although I absolutely loved the episode and the execution of it all, I strongly believe the show would have benefitted with more episodes (around 10) to make sure the story is told perfectly with build up. These two last episodes have felt rushed and it clearly shows in the final fifteen minutes or so in this episode, they were unable to tie everything together revolving the CRM, a second season is needed. I don't buy that everything is "fine" inside Philadelphia and their role in CRM, everything felt too easy. What they did right was the action sequence in the end and then the reunion between Rick and Michonne with the children, a scene I absolutely loved and the emotional impact and weight was there. It was nice to see Judith and RJ again, with Cailey Fleming giving a great performance with me hoping she'll be more prominent in the universe/franchise going forward. Overall, an incredible episode! I think this was a perfect episode of The Ones Who Live and The Walking Dead.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022)

Nicholas Cage brings an excellent and energetic performance whilst Pedro Pascal steals every scene, there's a lot of talent in the film, a great comedy

[8/10 · 30 March 2024]

It has been a long time since I saw a film which stars Nicholas Cage and I haven't seen a lot of his work but heard a lot about him and his performance style along with his star persona, he's truly something special. I've had my eyes on watching a bunch of his films for quite a long time now and 'The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent' felt like the right start, it has him starring as a fictionalized version of himself. Nicholas Cage also produced the film. Tom Gormican directed the film, who co-wrote the screenplay with Kevin Etten. The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is funny and feels like Nicholas just getting the chance to act a hilarious version of himself in a story which is over the top and absolutely full of entertainment. What's interesting and kind of surprised me a little bit is how the character is complex and interesting. Nicholas Cage stars alongside a supporting cast including Pedro Pascal, Sharon Horgan, Ike Barinholtz, Alessandra Mastronardi, Jacob Scipio, Neil Patrick Harris, Tiffany Haddish and Caroline Boulton.

Moviestar Nick Cage is channeling his iconic characters as he's caught between a superfan and a CIA agent.

The improv scene at the cliff was top notch entertainment, what follows after is a scene of dialogue with so much heart which shows the dramatic capabilities of Nicholas Cage and Pedro Pascal. The dialogue is witty and the writing in the scene is excellent, nailing both genres, drama and comedy. It's a little bit later in the film when the suspense hits, the comedy continues throughout though. Something I loved with the film is how the tone is kept throughout the entire film, Nicholas Cage plays the role perfectly. This film is smart, funny and honestly really original. As I wrote before, whenever Nicholas Cage and Pedro Pascal is on screen, the film is truly great. Pascal's performance is what you call a scene-stealing performance and Cage's energetic performance is what many people might be expecting and will be equally happy with Pedro Pascal which is a great scene partner to Nicholas Cage. Something I found interesting and completely right, is what Marya E. Grates wrote on the RogerEbert website, "Filled with easter eggs for fans of any facet of Cage's career, the filmmakers don't place a judgment on which of his films have the most value, understanding that a favorite film is intimate and personal, and that what matters is that it does resonate on some level." The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is a crowd-pleaser, something that would have been amazing to have seen at the cinema. All these quotes, easter eggs and knowledge of Cage's career makes for an experience you can easily appreciate, I don't have that vast knowledge of his filmography but what I do know is of Nicholas Cage the actor and I enjoyed it a lot with that information. The director created a love letter to Cage's memorable and disappointing filmography, he have acted in countless of movies and some are b-movies yet enjoyable in their own right, I'm sure. The recurring theme of the film is of fatherhood and the relationship this fictionalized version of Nicholas Cage has with his daughter and the drama in those scenes and mostly one scene half way through the film, the dialogue is written so perfectly and comes out realistic. It isn't often you get the opportunity to watch a film with such an original story and plot. I really liked this film and it's nice to see Nicholas Cage in a film again, it's a great comedy.

Ricky Stanicky (2024)

Ricky Stanicky is unexpectedly a very good comedy with a story with emotional depth along with a energetic performance by John Cena

[7/10 · 28 March 2024]

Before watching Ricky Stanicky, my expectations were quite mid and I thought it would only be a fun movie with Zac Efron and John Cena, but what happened? I absolutely loved the film and was invested throughout the whole film. The story felt quite original, it's mostly the concept which is entertaining and interesting, but the overall writing wasn't that great, only good to average judging which scene it was. Perhaps only me but there's heart in this film, both from the director (Peter Farrelly) to the actors. John Cena plays Rod who's an actor with such a depressing life who gets asked to play Ricky Stanicky and that whole story feels so natural. Maybe at first glance you could say how crazy and stupid it is, but the deeper you get into the character of Rod the more you understand his motivations. The vision Peter Farrelly had for the movie, the comedy and story, I strongly believe he was the right guy for the film.

When three childhood best friends pull a prank that goes wrong, they invent the imaginary Ricky Stanicky to get them out of trouble. Twenty years later, they still use the nonexistent Ricky as a handy alibi for their immature behavior.

By the end of the film, you understand the good message that had been hiding behind all the comedy. It is possible to become the better version of 'you', also how bad it is to lie. Those are the themes which are brought up in the film. Ricky Stanicky is a good comedy film with a great cast, notably the actors for the three childhood best friends (Zac Efron, Jermaine Fowler and Andrew Santino) and John Cena.

Hero (2002)

Hero is by all means a cinematic masterpiece, yet the non-linear storytelling can be off putting, an incredible Wuxia film

[9/10 · 27 March 2024]

Hero has fantastical elements like the well known Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon before it, but it's more grounded because of the historical events it's based upon. It's the Chinese genre, Wuxia. Hero is directed, co-written and produced by Zhang Yimou. It's not my favorite film of his but a film I'm glad I rewatched, there's so much depth to this film and it's all because of Zhang Yimou who you understand is an auteur. The cinematography was by Christopher Doyle, and the musical score composed by Tan Dun. I also want to praise the editing and production design, truly mesmerizing work by everyone, especially the cinematography and Zhang's work. Although there's nothing special with the acting in this film, every actor does a terrific job both dramatically and with the fight choreography. There's lots of subtle things with the acting though, facial expressions and such. You should simply pay attention and enjoy the performances and choreography they do. The film was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film at the 75th Academy Awards.

The article, "Hero Retrospective: A Timeless Meditation on Art and War" explains Hero's plot like this; Zhang's film drops viewers into ancient, warring China, where the Qin empire nears total conquest of all rival kingdoms. Nameless (Jet Li), a small-town officer, is granted an audience with the king (Chen Daoming) after claiming to have slain three assassins opposing Qin imperialism. The king, rendered suspicious after previous attempts on his life, normally forbids anyone from coming within a hundred paces of his person, but Nameless's feat is enough to earn a chance to recount his battles over closer conversation. The king and his guest trade tales and plot twists, offering viewers a glimpse into the multifaceted lives of the three assassins - Long Sky (Donnie Yen), Broken Sword (Tony Leung), and Flying Snow (Maggie Cheung).

For martial arts films there's usually an action sequence after the five minute mark and Hero follows the same pattern (Crouching Tiger is the expectation) and it's the same for musicals. I've always called Chinese martial arts films, my kind of musicals thanks to the often brilliantly choreographed scenes. Hero has brilliant choreography and the first action scene with Donnie Yen as Long Sky against multiple men before going up against Nameless who are played by Jet Li, is choreographed perfectly with the weapon of his choice, the spear. The scene has this playful nature and is entertaining, but it's shot in a way which emphasizes on color palettes, something the whole film does. In the scene, Long Sky is the only person who wears a different color than grey or black, I'll be going deeper into the color palettes in the next paragraph. When Jet Li's character goes up against Long Sky, the playful nature stops and the cinematography goes for more epic shots like was seen in the first scene with The King of Qin, and the whole mise-en-scene is simply perfect. They set up the scene with the blind musician in the middle, playing, and the two fighters on opposite sides. That scene is how you begin a film, its cinema. There's plenty of action sequences, brilliantly choreographed and as you may expect from the Wuxia genre, the fighting (either hand combat or sword fighting) takes center stage. The article, "Hero' Retrospective: A Timeless Meditation on Art and War" says; In the same way the warriors' brilliant combat mirror their talents in other pursuits - chess playing, calligraphy, storytelling, etc. - the complex themes in "Hero" are informed by striking visuals and aesthetics. Zhang breaks the film into chapters, not just chronologically, but to portray different retellings of the same events. Each of these chapters is intentionally washed with a dominant color that contrasts with the king's neutral-toned palace and the grey hordes of the Qin army. For instance, the harmony and ambition of two young lovers is accentuated by a vibrant green forest home, while the same characters' impulsivity and zeal manifests as their fiery red robes.

Syracuse University wrote something about the color palette and why the film emphasizes so heavily on color, something I didn't think about during my first viewing. In the movie Hero, there are five colors as the main narrative elements: Black, White, Red, Green and Blue. Different colors represent different characters, their inner worlds and situations. At the same time, colors are also regarded as the most important logical cues in the movie. When one color is shifted, it means the angle of narration is changed, which can help audiences avoid away from being confused with different story lines. The article, "Hero' Retrospective: A Timeless Meditation on Art and War" says; The movie's exploration of color amplifies the various emotions portrayed in each description of the past, actively painting each version of history and underscoring the message each storyteller seeks to impart.

I'm so glad Hero got the recognition it got, from the western audience. Without it and a bunch of other Chinese films (Wuxia and crime for example) the world wouldn't be the same. As a westerner, I had difficulty understanding the plot and nonlinearity of it during my first viewing, and there's so much else to experience from it. Zhang, the director, has entertained us for over two decades now and going back to this film for example will always be worth it. The meaningful themes in Hero makes for a more compelling and complex story, a better film. Hero could have easily been made with only its fantastical elements and cinematic beauty, but there's so much more than ancient warriors wielding blades. Hero is by all means a masterpiece, cinematically, I just think the pacing drags down the rating a tiny bit. If you enjoy non-linear storytelling then I'm sure it's a spectacular experience from beginning to end.

The Walking Dead: The Ones Who Live: Become (2024) Season 1, Episode 5

"Become" is poorly paced and keeps you in your seat, it's a flawed episode but still great and containing one of the show's best moments

[7/10 · 26 March 2024]

What We "Become" is the fifth episode which follows Rick and Michonne after they got out of the deserted settlement, with a high possibility of them being believed to be dead. With the episode's premise: Dangerous people make Rick and Michonne's journey difficult. This episode has the iconic duo in Wyoming and the scenery, sets used and overall production design, makes for a colorful and original episode. Like Scott Gimple said, it's like a post-apocalyptic honey moon between these two, a honey moon with the duo being hunted.

This week's episode of TWD: The Ones Who Live "Become" was directed by The Walking Dead veteran Michael E. Satrazemis and written by Gabriel Llanas & Matthew Negrete, the direction and visual storytelling were excellent, and the writing changed from good to average, good dialogue throughout though. Back to the direction and visual storytelling, Michael E. Satrazemis who have directed Multiple episodes per season in The Walking Dead and then Fear TWD along with being producer, he's a perfect choice to direct an episode. He handles every scene brilliantly and makes sure there are brilliant shots as well as the actors are doing their finest work, which they are. It's the first episode which felt like the original The Walking Dead, people simply surviving, and the episode was reminiscent of episode 7.12 "Say Yes", and although I liked that episode when it aired I wouldn't call it a great episode. It had some great character moments and that was about it, this episode of The Ones Who Live had exactly that, great character moments. The scenes with suspension and tension never had me on the edge of my seat and that isn't a good thing, as throughout the whole show I've been doing just that. The writing for those random survivors was something to criticize, so was the whole showdown with them. The plot armor was quite big this episode for Rick and Michonne, something I sighed at, why not write into an injury on Michonne? That would have made the episode more suspenseful.

The production design and art direction is terrific, so is the mise-en-scene and cinematography for the show. The musical score is something I haven't commented about but it's spectacular. The increased budget makes for better production design and visual effects, overall making a better show in every department along with the actors. The episode starts with Father Gabriel with a helicopter in the distance, audible to him and us viewers. What does this mean? The Ones Who Live is getting extremely close to tying everything together, yet the pacing in this episode was just off, with the flashbacks with Gabriel and Jadis taking you away from the tension and suspension which you see in Rick and Michonne's scenes. I did like the scenes though, compelling drama and character interaction with these two characters, very nice to see Gabriel again with Seth Gilliam giving a great performance. Pollyanna McIntosh is incredible in this episode, giving the episode's best performance, and that includes both flashbacks and present day. Andrew Lincoln and Danai Gurira is also quite good but you see in the writing that there isn't anything for them to truly do, like in previous episodes. The cinematography is incredible in this episode, the shot inside the cabin is spectacular. There's countless others. To end my review, I really liked the ending and what it sets up, especially the marriage proposal which feels the right way for the two. This episode was far from perfect though, yet Jadis' death scene was perfect and brilliantly written. She has long been an interesting character and one who's been very conflicted. In World Beyond, she was the antagonist and her performance in season 2 is why I was so hyped with her being a prominent character in The Ones Who Live, with them even showing her killing Huck in this episode as a quick flashback. Her death scene, the combination of the flashback to present made for some great drama and a fitting ending for Jadis, a great scene. Both in editing and pacing along with some writing, it's quite flawed with, yet by the end of the episode it's kind of redeemed of the former two. Overall it's a quite a good episode, a bit laid back and more adventure like which can be a good thing. I liked the episode and can't wait for the finale next week.

Married to the Mob (1988)

Prepared to be entertained, Married to the Mob is a must watch, with some terrific performances from Michelle Pfeiffer and Dean Stockwell

[7/10 · 25 March 2024]

"That's very funny. You're a comedian now?" that's a quote said by Alec Baldwin's character, Frankie "The Cucumber" de Marco to his wife, Angela de Marco played by Michelle Pfeiffer. There's so many funny lines of dialogue in the film and the dialogue is written so perfectly, coming out natural. Married to the Mob is a comedy by heart and a crime drama second. The line delivery is spot on and I'm quite sure the director is a reason to thank, but of course the acting is great. Jonathan Demme's direction and visual storytelling is fantastic. Although I like the writing, especially the dialogue I have to admit how it isn't really original, yet every line of dialogue works for the film and tone. Married to the Mob is a film you could sit down alone or with friends and have a laugh, quoting the film and having a good time.

A mobster's wife hates her lifestyle, but gets a chance to change it when her husband is killed - if the Long Island mob and the FBI let her.

Married to the Mob also stars Matthew Modine, Dean Stockwell and Mercedes Ruehl. Other than Michelle Pfeiffer and Alec Baldwin. The former of them was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for Best Actress - Motion Picture Comedy or Musical, whilst Dean Stockwell was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. To just name a scene without any context or spoilers, the grocery store scene, the comedic timing and acting from Michelle Pfeiffer is just splendid. Is that scene award worthy? No, and that's the beauty of this film. Married to the Mob can be very funny, letting the actors just have fun, then the performances can also be great and you see that throughout the film with Michelle Pfeiffer and Dean Stockwell who critics loved. Anthony J. Nici plays Joey de Marco, the son of Pfeiffer's character, his role in the film isn't very big but important to Michelle Pfeiffer's character. Their scenes together were some of my favorites, he's a talented child actor, one who nails the comedic timing. Whenever she shares scenes with Dean Stockwell or Matthew Modine, the dramatic part of her performance and theirs becomes extremely great. It's said that Dean Stockwell stayed in character during the entirety of the filming, also how this is his personal favorite role. I haven't seen a lot of his films from his filmography but this performance is deserving for his Oscar nomination.

Married to the Mob is part romantic drama, part crime film and also a comedy. These sub-genres blend into one good filmtail (cocktail), it's just a fun movie and very colorful. Jonathan Demme created a good film here, offering entertainment and good entertainment is needed. He created a film for many, certainly a film for me.

Rain Man (1988)

Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise is terrific in Rain Man, a great drama

[8/10 · 23 March 2024]

Rain Man has aged like fine wine, mostly regarding the writing and the concept around the story, Barry Morrow and Ronald Bass are truly worthy of their win for Best Original Screenplay. It's a story which has been done before but with a great representation of autism and savant syndrome. Although Tom Cruise is great in the role of this three dimensional character who is arrogant and unlikable, it's hard to like him but there's character development which is a plus. Dustin Hoffman gets the MVP as he's just perfect in the role as the older brother who has autism. Regarding Hoffman's performance, Roger Ebert said, "Hoffman proves again that he almost seems to thrive on impossible acting challenges. ... I felt a certain love for Raymond, the Hoffman character. I don't know quite how Hoffman got me to do it." then gave the film three and a half stars out of four. Barry Levinson created a great film, yet not perfect.

After a selfish L. A. yuppie learns his estranged father left a fortune to an autistic-savant brother in Ohio that he didn't know existed, he absconds with his brother and sets out across the country, hoping to gain a larger inheritance.

Rain Man won both the Berlin International Film Festival's highest award and the Academy Award for Best Picture in the same year. Also being nominated for seven other Oscars, winning three others (Best Director, Best Actor Hoffman and Best Original Screenplay. It became the highest-grossing film of 1988, grossing $354 million on a $25 million budget). Both a critical and box office success.

One scene I absolutely loved was the first night Raymond stayed with Charlie and Susanna, although it was kind of hard to watch, it perfectly shows how great of a drama this film is and how the actors are truly worthy of nominations for their acting performances. Without Valeria Golino's supporting performance, the scenes with Tom Cruise wouldn't be as great, it's because a great scene partner contributes to the other's own performance. What's interesting is how Dustin Hoffman has the showy part and is overlooked, Tom Cruise has so many subtle things which makes his performance on the same level, it might even be one of his best. Overall, the film has steady drama both written and directed well. Also some terrific cinematography and musical score which only enhances the film into the great drama it is. This is a film you have to see once in your life, yet it felt just a tiny bit long and repetitive, then again every scene is there for character development and to make for a satisfying conclusion to these characters. The screenplay is what makes it all work, as a worse script would have made for an average film.

The Walking Dead: The Ones Who Live: What We (2024) Season 1, Episode 4

"What We" contains a lot of emotional moments and the impact is felt, in this brilliantly written and acted episode, Andrew Lincoln and Danai Gurira are spectacular

[9/10 · 18 March 2024]

"What We" is the fourth episode which follows Rick and Michonne after she throws them off a helicopter into the ocean. With the episode's premise: Rick and Michonne try to find the love they had. You know this episode is all about these characters, it extends beyond the writing and acting, thanks to the visual storytelling which the director and cinematographer succeeds with in this episode, making it grounded and character driven. The screenplay and writing is excellent, realistic and just heartful. The first fifteen minutes or so is simply these two characters, talking, arguing and acting like three dimensional characters who have both changed a lot with Rick Grimes having changed the most. Then the episode goes into a more action driven route with some great sequences of suspenseful zombie scenes with tension through these two characters, before going back to a slower pacing. The pacing is perfect and it remains character driven from start to finish, about these two characters. Andrew Lincoln and Danai Gurira.

This week's episode of TWD: The Ones Who Live "What We" was directed by Michael Slovis and written by Danai Gurira, the direction and visual storytelling were excellent, and with the writing I had looked forward to Danai's script as it had been hyped for a long time. The screenplay for "What We" was incredible! Back to the direction and visual storytelling, Michael Slovis who has directed the previous episode, handles every scene with perfection and makes sure there are brilliant shots as well as the actors are doing their finest work, which they are. Andrew Lincoln pulls an award worthy performance in this episode, so raw and emotional. Danai Gurira is also terrific in this episode, if it wouldn't be how heavy the episode and the screenplay leans into making Rick more hopeful, I would say her performance would be as great! The screenplay, written by Danai herself, focuses on this duo and the amount of character development which came out of this episode just shows how talented she is at writing dialogue and set pieces. When dialogue is written by someone who knows these two characters, it can't be bad, it can only be good and in this case quite great.

The production design and art direction is terrific, so is the mise-en-scene and cinematography for the show. The musical score is something I haven't commented about but it's spectacular. The increased budget makes for better production design and visual effects, overall making a better show in every department along with the actors. The prior episodes were high budget with some terrific visuals to meet our expectations of the CRM, this episode has solely two characters whom have interacted but not as much as we would want, thus not breaking the immersion with the story the writers are trying to tell. It's in this episode which Michonne opens up to Rick, information which needed the right moment and I'm so glad they did it this way. Totally the right way. In the previous episode we got information from the art guy (who makes the pictures on the phone) how Rick had forgotten what Carl looked like and that is so realistic. With everything Rick had been through, all the trauma suffered, he had forgotten what his son looked like. That's heartbreaking to hear and in this episode he tells her that, it's brilliantly written and acted with perfection. Yet, it got a little bit repetitive because of the same sets, that's my small criticism. This episode contains some of the best acting and writing in the show, yet it's so small compared to other episodes, but it still has everything you love with The Walking Dead. It's hard to rate though, but for a show about these two beloved characters, this episode was done brilliantly.

American Fiction (2023)

Jeffrey Wright steals the show in American Fiction in one of his best performances, it contains compelling writing and direction with complex characters, a must watch

[10/10 · 18 March 2024]

After the opening sequence you know exactly what movie this will be, something very original and funny. The writing is excellent from the comedic written scenes to the dramatic ones. Other than the writing and story, the direction and acting are two other highlights with Jeffrey Wright pulling one of his best performances as Dr. Thelonious "Monk" Ellison. It was named one of the top 10 films of 2023 by the American Film Institute, and received five nominations at the 96th Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Actor for Jeffrey Wright, winning for Best Adapted Screenplay.

Cord Jefferson's hilarious directorial debut confronts our culture's obsession with reducing people to outrageous stereotypes. Jeffrey Wright stars as Monk, a frustrated novelist who's fed up with the establishment profiting from "Black" entertainment that relies on tired and offensive tropes. To prove his point, Monk uses a pen name to write his own outlandish "Black" book--that propels him into the heart of hypocrisy and the madness he claims to disdain.

Going into American Fiction almost entirely blind made it such an amazing experience, with the story taking unexpected routes. It didn't take long for me to get invested into the story and characters, the characterizations were absolutely fantastic and as I wrote before, the acting is absolutely perfect. Something which I loved and found funny and original, was the scene when Monk is writing and we see the scene he's writing play out for us, that's some great visual storytelling which keeps it funny and interesting when normally they would have a montage or something like that of the sentences and writing. Well executed, Jefferson. Around 30 minutes into the film and especially half way through, the film becomes extremely funny with excellent comedic timing and witty dialogue. The ending was like the rest of the film, original and unexpected, but spectacular nonetheless. There's also a bunch of stunning looking shots, thanks to the magnificent cinematography done by Cristina Dunlap and direction by Cord Jefferson. Jeffrey Wright is joined by Tracee Ellis Ross, Issa Rae, Sterling K. Brown, John Ortiz, Erika Alexander, Leslie Uggams, Adam Brody and Keith David. Having seen Sterling K. Brown in This is Us among other films I can gladly say he's still on the roll after This is Us, giving a performance worthy of best supporting actor.

What do a couple of critics say about this brilliant drama-comedy, about American Fiction; Peyton Robinson writing for RogerEbert.com highlighted Jefferson's writing as the key takeaway from this film, stating that his "attentive lens" to the film's "concept and themes is what will be remembered". Robinson goes on to identify the distinguishable legacy within the script, emphasizing Jefferson's "sharply pointed finger at the many institutional factors that keep (Black art), and its creators, restrained." Whilst Sarah Lyall of The New York Times covered Jeffrey Wright in a feature about his career and his role in American Fiction, claiming that Wright's "exquisitely calibrated" performance demonstrates "(Wright's ability) to elevate any movie or TV show simply by appearing in it." Lyall goes on to celebrate that Wright "has a way of burrowing so deeply into his characters that he seems almost to be hiding in plain sight.

American Fiction has Jeffrey Wright in one of his best performances, such a complex and well written character with a director who truly knows what he's doing. The screenplay might be one of the best in this decade, truly worthy of its win. For its genre, this is a masterpiece, and it's also cinema.

Rustin (2023)

Colman Domingo's portrayal of Rustin is spectacular but the film would have benefitted if the story would have focused more on the political aspects, a good biopic

[7/10 · 12 March 2024]

Colman Domingo, what a brilliant actor. He was nominated for an Oscar for his performance in this film as the title character, Bayard Rustin. There's lots to say about his performance but first of, I've seen him in Fear The Walking Dead and during the first three seasons he really shows how capable an actor he is. Other performances worth noting are Ma Rainey's Black Bottom and his recurring role in Euphoria. If you have seen him in those, then you'll know this role was made for him. The Guardian's Benjamin Lee appreciated the film's intersectional coverage of Rustin's struggles and concluded that Domingo "nails the charming persuasiveness that would explain how Rustin achieved so much in such a short amount of time and as he slowly starts to experience a level of acceptance for his whole self, rather than handpicked parts, there's a genuine poignancy to watching him crumble in front of us, a weight we can feel being lifted away. Honestly, Colman Domingo is an actor with great range, extremely charismatic and as a dramatic and theatre actor, he got it all and with a playwright as director (George C. Wolfe) we know it will be great. The dialogue is brilliant and aunthetic, just watching these actors and especially Colman Domingo, is just amazing. The film leans heavily into its scenes of lots of dialogue and monologues but it makes for the actors plenty of time to shine. Colman Domingo, Chris Rock, Glynn Turman, Aml Ameen and Audra McDonald to name a few. The supporting cast is incredible, full of well known African American actors like; Chris Rock as Roy Wilkins, Glynn Turman as A. Philip Randolph, Aml Ameen as Martin Luther King Jr., Gus Halper as Tom Kahn, CCH Pounder as Dr. Anna Hedgeman, Jeffrey Wright as Adam Clayton Powell Jr., Da'Vine Joy Randolph as Mahalia Jackson, Johnny Ramey, Michael Potts, and Audra McDonald.

Activist Bayard Rustin faces racism and homophobia as he helps change the course of Civil Rights history by orchestrating the 1963 March on Washington.

Produced by Barack and Michelle Obama's production company Higher Ground. The production design and various of the technical aspects of the film is quite great, keeping the historical accuracy throughout the film. There's actually some really great cinematography in this film, direction too. But it's the acting I find to be the best. Along with his Oscar nomination, Colman Domingo was nominated for a BAFTA, Golden Globe and SAG Award for Best Actor. I do think his performance could have been a lot better if he got more freedom with the role, then and only then would he be fully deserving those best actor awards as there were some who were a lot better. Another director would have offered him more freedom, I believe. So what's my final opinion of Rustin? It's a good historical drama with great performances and writing, could have focused more on the political side and not as much on Rustin's love life, something which felt like filler half of the time. I do understand fully why the scenes was there, they were good and some even great, yet I believe the film would have been better if it leaned more onto the political side which is the film's stronger points.