jrjasonrussell Reviews

Miller's Girl (2024)

5.2 on imdb think I was watching a different movie

[7/10 · 21 April 2024]

First off hands off to the entire cast. They are quite good in this film and the script especially when the main characters quotes dialogue is really well written. I was expecting something rather poor from the 5.2 review on imdb but I honestly think most people who watched this didn't get the point the director was making.

Jenna Ortega plays a fairly unbelievable character let's get that out there not only is she a siren but she has a plan and is incredibly clever, well if you know anything about 18 year olds this is quite far fetched. Martin Freeman is the naive muse in an Luke warm marriage flattered by the attraction and attention of a young good looking fan and it spirals in a rather prectible way but what makes this better than most fatal attraction movies is his conduct I don't want to mention spoilers in my reviews but he got burned for a thought.

Road House (2024)

It's a fun movie but it's so ridiculously dumb just like most 1980s action films

[7/10 · 23 March 2024]

So I watched the trailer and thought well this isn't for me then I watched the movie and to my surprise I actually enjoyed it. The plot is mostly incredibly ridiculous but so was the original movie when Patrick swayze goes full on commando in the last twenty minutes. I put headphones on and watched this on a large 4k TV I must admit I really loved the sound track whoever the multiple singers are in the road house bar capture the spirit and are awesome they knocked it out the park. Conor McGregor plays himself an annoying individual, but Jake Gyllenhaal throws in everything such charisma, turns in such a fantastic performance in low grade movie that he actually elevates this into enjoyable and whatchable perfect comic timing and he looks like he could actually knock u out if u cross him. Questions need to be asked at Amazon this movie should have had a cinema realise the bee keeper made 150 million, this might not have done huge numbers but I think the budget would of been paid back.

Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One (2023)

Upping the action and stunts does not make a great movie

[7/10 · 4 March 2024]

Tom cruise has been knocking out mission impossible movies for 25 years. 7 so far with a final 8th installment to come. And fair play Tom Cruise he is the last real movie star. But like most modern franchises particularly the fast and furious films the bond movies John wick films each instalment concentrates on upping the stunts and action till it turns into a unbelievable video game plot.

I personally think the best action set piece in the entire mission impossible franchise was Tom dangling from wires where his sweat would set off alarms in the very first movie not only was this beleaveable it was possible and intense. Fast forward 25 years and he's jumping off a cliff on a motorbike parachuting onto a moving train crashing into it and saving the damsel about to be shot to the train crashing off a cliff, and no spoilers here it's in the trailer and the money shot. But Tom's in his late 50s when this was actually filmed this, Tom easily deserves his pay day just for this stunt. Yes he did it most of it for real and it's filmed gloriously but it sums up this movie, style over substance epic action set pieces after the other but ignoring how to make a real gritty spy thriller to something borderline realistic which the first film had. It's such a shame Tom cruise is a fantastic actor at one point in his career he was begging to be in movies that proved how well he could act in movies like born on the fourth of July to magnolia please bring back the old Tom Cruise making a movie for it's dialogue not how well a stunt looks in short not a bad film but a disappointment it's not memorable at all.

Dredd (2012)

Ingnored on cinema. But found it's home on streaming the ultimate cult movie experience.

[9/10 · 3 March 2024]

How does a faithful adaption of the source material to one of the U. Ks most beloved comic strips costing in Hollywood terms a sort of indie mid movie budget fail completely to inigite the box office. Well for one there was little marketing the film is a hard R or 18 in the U. K it was in 3D in some releases and literally was available to watch on the cinema for a few weeks. True fans of the comic books may remember the 1995 90 million dollars tame version of the source material with Sylvester Stalone that tried to add humour and drastically cut the violence down and yes he took off his helmet I personally never had a problem with this and I did at the time enjoy Judge Dredd l actually watched that on the cinema.

But this is the definitive version not only does it capture the tone of the comic book it actually is one of the best experiences I've had watching a 3D movie and I like most people I am to blame for it's box office failure I didn't go and support this film on the cinema. I watched this at home. Everything about this film has what you would want from the violent comic strip adaptation action suspense, a simple story perfectly executed for a follow up that unfortunately will never happen which is such a shame because this is up there with the raid and die hard who both had sequels and similar premise the bad guys control the building.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

You may not see any science fiction film this good in the next decade

[10/10 · 1 March 2024]

I went to the midnight showing to watch this movie on opening night here in the U. K so it's very fresh in my mind, i went with my Mrs who's not a great fan of these movies and actually found part one boring. But she was won over by the completion of the first book here in Frank Herberts masterpiece of novels. She actually came out the cinema and said suppose there will be a part three? And I think there was a gleam in her eye of anticipation. Unfortunately she hasn't read Dune messiah. She also looked at me and said the film trailers were kind of rubbish, and you may think this has nothing to do with my review of Dune part 2 but it has everything to do with it. When the rest of Hollywood biggest films this year in the trailers for the next few months are another Ghostbusters another Godzilla Vs Kong another Deadpool another mad max film and weird looking over the top borderlands movie.

I haven't seen a single one of those movies yet but I can guarantee not a single one of those films mentioned will have better visuals, better sound, better script, better acting, better cast, better score and a perfect runtime than what I witnessed last night watching Dune part 2. This is a spoiler free review like all my reviews. And if you liked part one well part 2 just ups everything on screen.

Being a huge fan of the novels and a movie lover I understand there needed to be characters cut dialogue cut, events altered and changed but as a film adaptation it's a solid adaptation. If you want the full unabridged version read the book if you want both versions like I do read the book and watch the film. I've rated this film a 10 but no film is perfect I think it's sits around 9.5 just because I've read the books and was expecting some important things in the novel to be that weren't.

I must give an honourable mention to three stand out performances. Rebecca Ferguson played with awesome mannipletive intense intent her portrayal here is the unlitmate weaver of plans within plans.

Austin Butler, wow I could of watched a full movie on his demonic villanery easily as memorable as the first time Darth maul turned on his double sided light saber when he's finally introduced. Javier Bardem excellent comic timing and a true believer in the cause. My final word is well people if you want more films like this support this in the cinema or you will end up with more films I mentioned in the trailers.

The Terminator (1984)

The best movie of the franchise

[10/10 · 14 February 2024]

Like many great film franchises the first is often the best. And there is a simple reason character development. Because like star wars, alien, ,the matrix, Halloween, what do these films have in common? The director was forced in a situation where they had to tell a great story on a budget and improvise to get the best out of everything from the score to the acting which made a tight script and not spectacle.

The terminator has it in spades great action story all filmed on a small budget with great care to make every dollar work. Yes T2 is a better movie and more entertaining but the studio had to spend a hundred million dollars while the budget of this was mere 6.8 million dollars so in theory T2 should be at least 10 times better. Well it's not. But it certainly raises the bar and is more real. But T3 is literally is a remake of the terminator if James Cameron had the budget, time and special effects to truly put his original vision on screen it would be T2. This is also the only film in the franchise to be a horror movie in most aspects the glowing eyes firing Lazer beams killing people eating rats the unstoppable killer taking every one out in a police station to muffled noises of people dying and groning in pain, to just plain brutal murder of everyone who gets in the terminators way while he scrolls through the phone book for his next victim. Then there's the damaged hero clearly suffering shell shock. Then there's Linda Hamiltons performance as a side bit let down by men turned into a survivor and true hero of the story. They just don't make these movies anymore.

The Batman (2022)

Another reboot imaging of the source material so is it any good

[8/10 · 9 February 2024]

The Batman follows on from Tim Burtons films to Chris Nolans excellent take on the source material to Zach Snyder's take to now. Matt Reeves answer to what is the Batman is well, he's gone all out, the question has not only been asked and told multiple times by multiple great directors to this sort of remake imagining going a bit more hard core. And I say that because It was rated a 15 in the U K while the other adaptions flirted with the idea and then back tracked to the more mainstream commercial 12 rating. I though would personally say Matt Reeves version is more in tune with what the Batman is supposed to be an intelligent hero using his brain not muscles to solve crimes. Tim Burtons batman begins is just plain mean and is truly deserving a 15 rating I just find that film more edgy for instance nose bitten off child disowned and a woman pushed out of a building due to her bosses advances. Clearly more edgy than this 12 rating it got on theratial release. But unlike Tim Burton who hams up the alure of a fantastic fantasy film and flirts with epic comedy timing from the cast this a much more adult approach to the source material. It's possible this is what Batman should be. The only problem is the run time and lack of great action set pieces yes the car chase is epic but Tim Burton had the factory explosion jockers fall in acid the balloons over gothem with gas the flying bat craft the epic fight to the top of the church to name a few. And I don't even need to mention Nolans epic action or synders action set pieces because they are just superior compared to whats on display here. It's close to a masterpiece it's just not as entertaining as what has come before which is a great shame because it's more adult and tries to be better but fails I would watch the the Nolan trilogy or Tim Burtons batman movies any day of the week and be more entertained.

Saturn 3 (1980)

Needs a modern day remake or imaging

[7/10 · 4 February 2024]

There are some very nteresting ideas here. There's not many films I've watched where I think a rebooted movie would work. But dam a smart intelligent remake of the source material is ripe here for a remake.

Taking certain pills to enhance one's mood and a robot linked to one's brain taking on all the charristics of a psychopath are excellent ideas. The sets are gorgeous. Farrah Fawcett is also gorgeous and has a naive nature here knowing little of the outside world while the creepy Kirk Douglas character has seen it all and controls the leading lady playing his love interest, he was certainly far too old for the part but it works. But somehow he was cast maybe the film needed a name to get made and there is a troubled production.

Thus the movie is never predictable. There are some excellent horror aspects. Harvey Keitel confronting the robot for the first time is pure horror and filmed really well. The close confined quarters in which the film is set is a masterpiece in confined horror. This film deserves more credit than it's due. And I think a intelligent remake is ripe for the picking.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

Sets the mood for the better movies in the franchise but unlike most film series

[8/10 · 4 February 2024]

I remember watching this in the cinema when it was realised and walking out underwhelmed. Baring in mind lord of rings the fellowship of the ring came out one month later and is a far superior fantasy movie experience. Looking back in hindsight after re watching this film many years later I realised it does a fantastic job at world building and settings things up for the better darker sequels in the series. The main problem here is the young cast, it's not their fault especially Daniel Radcliffe his personality is more wooden than a log cabin he's young and it's his first film. Although their acting abilities improve over time they are mostly incredibly irritating here, what makes this film truly work is the incredible adult ensemble cast, which with the fantastic sets, costumes, special effects really makes this movie work. It's also a complete enigma that if I had to rate this and champer of secrets I would rate them the worst in the franchise. But by no means that makes them bad films they are just not as good as the later films which is a complete rarity in any movie franchise.

Harry potter films are great and special because they get better with each instalment. With the latter films everything from the special effects to the young cast finding their acting chops not only improves on what has come before but adds great weight in telling one of the best fantasy stories of all time.

Dune (1984)

At the time it was a complete miss fire but there is a great movie here

[7/10 · 30 January 2024]

How do you adapt a highly complex book over 400 pages long with with a similar apendex to lord of the rings with well over 20 important characters all integral to the plot with multiple worlds giant sandworms interesting technology and a history spanning thousands of years to just over a 2 hour run time in a entertaining mainstream popcorn movie. Not to mention spice, the book has huge dialogue said in the characters minds. Well the simple answer is u can't do justice to the source material with this runtime.

But for all the faults this film as I remember back in the day being passed to me via a VHS recording off TV some of us still remember those days I was blown away I had never seen anything like it as a teenager the sets the costumes the visuals, the action, just strangeness of it all and that opening score wow, got me to read the novels and what novels they are each one different from the other with profound statements on what a hero is, and if you haven't read Dune you will certainly be confused by the sheer mass of strange names and fast moving plot. Was David lynch the wrong captain to steer this ship?, I'm not too sure he greatly respected the source material and wanted final cut making a three hour plus movie but the studio wanted a 2 hour star wars clone and Dune is nothing like Star wars although there are minor aspects George Lucas might of been influenced from for his famous space opera.

One will either be confused by the complex plot or intrigued to search out Frank Herberts masterpiece of a novel.

Then there's the cast easily as good as the modern version and in some respects more faithful to the book. A miss fire of adapting the source due to the length but if David lynch was given a 5 hour runtime I shudder to think he might of just of nailed it. But the better version of Frank Herberts novel is adapted to the screen is the 2001 Denis Villeneuve part one and the much anticipated part 2 with reference to length both will clock in together around the 5 hour mark.

Gladiator (2000)

1999 to 2001 was a special age in cinema and this is one of the high lights of those years

[10/10 · 25 January 2024]

First off this has one of the best movie opening in the history of cinema it starts off truly epic and unleashes sheer visual brilliance that does not let up for over 2 hours. Russell Crowe is just perfect casting he's no eighties buff action hero but you know he can hold his own in a fair fight and commands respect every minute he's on screen even by his enemies. Then there is the supporting cast Oliver Reed, Richard Harris, Connie Nelson, Djimon Hounsou and Joaquin Phoenix. They hold their own and add to the story but give some some of the best lines ever said in a film. It's a rare film because everything from the cast to the costumes fit perfectly.

Wow what can I say I've seen this film a number of times and it's a rare beast they just don't make these anymore or never did. If u want to watch a film about the Roman empire set in the gladiator arena of the ancient colosseum there is nothing like it or as good in over a hundred years of cinema. Better than spartacus and Ben hur well I salute u I was truly entertained.

Spiderhead (2022)

A great idea let down by the last half of the film

[6/10 · 24 January 2024]

First off I can't fault the cast they try here and work their best on a film that doesn't know what it wants to be. I say that because it starts off interesting, intriguing, smart etc. The idea you pull a group of random people together that have little choice to be part of the experiment inject them full of drugs with a whole span of different effects with varbilbe results controlled by a dubious scientist who wants to see how people react could be a fantastic start for a movie which it is. No spoiler in my review here but after a certain character kills themselves the film bottles it's dark intriguing premise and turns into a run of the mill action b movie. It goes rapidly from being a smart interesting film to a low grade espionage film and it just gets more silly with every act. The first 30 40 minutes is a solid 8 score the last thirty is a 5.

The Matrix Resurrections (I) (2021)

Even the fight scenes are tedious to watch

[6/10 · 16 January 2024]

The original matrix movie was ground breaking cinema. And had one of the best tag lines ever said in a trailer. What is The Matrix? Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. Superb marketing.

Due to the huge success of the first film the world of the matrix was expanded to video games comic books anime. And two direct sequels. Then nothing for nearly twenty years to this odd miss fire of a rebooted sequel. Where do I start well it's with the cast neo, trinity and agent Smiths story began and ended twenty years ago to a solid conclusion they had a beginning middle and end. Yet their plucked from the abyss and resurectcted.

The first forty of so minutes are ok but the film keeps showing flash backs of the original trilogy which just reminds the viewer how superior they were to this mess of a sequel.

There are some good ideas here and it looks gorgeous in 4k but the most interesting plot point is wasted a machine civil war less than thirty seconds screen time. Wow that really should of been the plot of this movie with a new generation of protagonists not relying on old characters that told their story. Then there's the action you can say what you like about matrix reloaded and revolutions but dam those movies had exceptional action sequences I was literally bored watching neo take on agent smith again here. Then there's the runtime the most bloated of them all. It's a miss fire and a complete waste of the source material. Disappointing is a understament.

Napoleon (2023)

Oliver stones Alexander 2.0

[8/10 · 14 January 2024]

First off I am comparing this adaption of Napoleons life story to Oliver stones 2004 film Alexander. There are clearly a lot of similarities a large budget great short violent battles an actor playing the lead role who never really ages and is clearly much older than they should be at the start of the story. A really good oscar winning director, great visuals lavish sets impressive cinematography, a good not great script and good supporting actors. And both films failed to be box office hits.

So where does this film fail you might ask or does not work. Well like Alexander there just is too much story here to cram in the lengthy film runtime. Both these need a really good six to ten hour mini series to do real justice to the story to both historical figures instead these films spend minutes on really important events and try and get as much of these in the film as possible, the battle of Waterloo for instance is possibly the most important battle in Europe for hundreds of years because it was so decisive. Yet it's barely ten minutes. So for me to give a ratings it is very hard it's a fantastic achievement in film but it's no Ben hur or braveheart. Less history would have been better. Instead of trying to get as much historical information as possible in this film both directors should have looked at the runtime and concentrated on a few big historically accurate events.

Napoleon should of fleshed out four major events his rise to power during the French revolution which to be fair was done really well in this movie, the invasion of Russia, the battle of Waterloo and Napoleons last days. Just with that material is a real three hour epic.

Rebel Moon - Part One: A Child of Fire (2023)

I enjoyed this for what it is a Zach Snyder movie what are you expecting?

[7/10 · 27 December 2023]

First off it's common knowledge the script was dropped off at Disney for a Star wars movie. But they wasn't interested they are more interested spending the entire budget here of rebel moon on she hulk or marvels or eternals for instance. It's typical Zach Snyder over kill on slow mo and action little on expedition. I was thoroughly entertained watching this, but you do need a 4k TV with surround sound to really appreciate what you're watching. It's not meant to smart or interlectal. It's meant to be eye candy and entertaining this is where it works wonders this film is ridiculously entertaining but you have to switch off the grey matter and enjoy it for what it is a space opera with little logic. This film is here to enjoy and I am looking forward to the next part. I hope there is some more fleshing out of the world with a definite ending.

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

Bloated runtime and budget but good movie

[7/10 · 25 December 2023]

I'm a huge fan of Martin Scorsese he really has made some all time great movies. But his very best films even the longer ones like gangs of new York and wolf of wall street work because even though they are long the dialogue is fast paced and tightly edited. While the dialogue here in this film seems to have a slow pause between each line there are far too many pauses, while this might be the case in real life as a film to engage the viewer some if not all of the extended talking needed just a little bit a speeding up less pauses more of getting to the point. While that is my first gripe the second is the budget where was 200 million spent. A period piece like Oppenheimer cost half this and has better cast filmed on the very expensive IMAX format for a mere 100 million half the cost.

If it was a 4 part TV mini series it would be an expental piece of work. But it never really worked as an event movie for me just the length put me off watching this on the cinema. At home watching this with the ability to pause the film works far better. Yes it's well acted filmed and directed the story is engaging and interesting but it's just not as engaging as it should be. Major plot points seemed to be skimmed over and the story comes to a random end even though great length has been spent building the story up. I'm knocking a point off this movie because it's too deliberately slow and self indulgent because no one seems to have told this fantastic director he should have cut his darling.

Pulp Fiction (1994)

Q.Ts best movie

[10/10 · 25 December 2020]

First off it's a perfect movie well acted with a quotable script that just flow's so kinectly on the screen. Q.TS second movie is his best nothing since has matched the sheer brilliance of this film every character is memorable even if they are on screen for less than five minutes. Nothing in pop culture comes close to replecacting the quintessential brilliance of the tight script wonderfully acted film that just flows so well. Q.Ts most powerful directoring achievement is his second film. Not only does it launch stars but it gives life to failing stars revetlising failing acters and giving them a shot of life who would go on to command bigger salaries in bigger budget movies. Unlike Quentin's latter movies that have much more bigger budgets and bloated runtimes the modest budget used on pulp fiction helps the director to sculpt a script and runtime to perfection within the limited budget. It's a masterpiece and lots of films have tried and failed to replicate the Quetin standard formula of his first two movies but failed terribly.

Once Upon a Time in America (1984)

The perfect masterpiece

[10/10 · 25 December 2020]

One of the best gangster films ever made period. From the opening to the final credit it's never dull or boring and it's 4 hours long. I have also never seen a cast of young characters who perfectly fit the older ones as time moves on. It's brutal and some of the violence to woman is very disturbing. It's not a movie u can digest in a single watch it needs to be seen on multiple viewing to understand the sheer epic vision the director had. Plus it's ambiguous was it all a dream? or one man's downfall told in a sweeping score and epic visual style brutally told from a protagonist u love to hate. A fantastic movie that failed on its thertical realise but stands the test of time with an outstanding score matched only by outstanding achievement in acting from the entire cast.

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (2018)

Not bad for kids

[7/10 · 25 December 2020]

First off 5.5 on IMDb is a disservice to this movie it looks gorgeous is well acted and is the perfect family movie for adults and small children. It's not perfect by a long shot the story is very thin. but I must talk about loads of 1 star attention seeking reviews on here. I can understand u not liking something but to rate it 1 out of 10 means it's one of the worst movies ever made which it is not. I really don't understand the hate it's not memorial or one of those films u would want to watch again I give it 7 out if 10 meaning an above average movie nothing special but worth a watch with young children if u have them.