Change Your Image
logaandm
Reviews
Edward VIII: Britain's Traitor King (2022)
Hack job with no real evidence presented.
Edward was obviously a Nazi sympathizer. He was self absorbed, not particularly politically astute and more than likely a 'useful idiot'. There is, however, no credible evidence presented in this film that he was a traitor.
A letter from the Duke to The Chancler of Germany in 1937 (Hitler) thanking him for the hospitality shown to them during a visit is taken as proof positive that Edward was working with the Germans. Or course, Royals, before the war, during the war, and after the war and to this day are supposed to write polite letters to the Leaders of the Countries they visit. So the idea that this is evidence of collaboration is simply idiotic.
In 1940 Edward was a military attaché in France, where he lived. He inspected French defenses and reported to the BRITISH government that the defenses were weak. Subsequently the Germans took advantage of those weak defenses to defeat the French. It is implied that Edward leaked this information to the Germans - WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE PRESENTED. Of course, the film makers disregard the fact that German Generals and military planners are not complete idiots and probably knew about the weak defenses all on their own is never considered by the film makers.
Finally, the bulk of the evidence has a single source, which is German communications concerning the Duke from a Nazi 'agent' in Lisbon. There is no direct evidence of Edwards thoughts or actions, just what the agent reports to the Germans and they are taken as absolutely factual.
The thought that the Portugues Banker was giving the Germans exactly what they wanted to hear so the Banker could become trusted and very rich does not occur to the film makers despite the fact that the Banker became trusted and very rich working with the Germans.
That Edward was at all times surrounded by spies and observers from many countries and yet no supporting evidence is presented also speaks to the narrow and limited investigation the film makers did to support their thesis.
In the end, a hack job without any real evidence.
Bliss (2021)
Any film that makes me think as much as this one does is definitely a 9 out of 10.
I don't think the reviewers understood this movie at all.
In my opinion this is an excellent film and a great exploration of trying to deal with the stress of the modern world. I am no expert in either homelessness or drugs, but at a minimum it made me think of the problems these people face and the exceptionally difficult challenge of navigating life when your brain is telling you things that are not real.
It may seem like science fiction, confusing, jumbled and fantastic. That is the entire point. This is a look inside the head of Greg, an illustration of how he is confused and stressed and how he deals with it and the apparent choices his brain presents to him. Even at the end, when it appears he is getting his life in order.
Owen Willon gives an excellent performance and Salma Hayek is outstanding in her role. Well directed, well edited. Applause to all who made this movie.
Hitler: The Rise of Evil (2003)
Cartoonish
I guess the most polite thing one could say is the order of the main events is correct. I suppose that's history. But the portrayal of Hitler and the Nazi's is shallow, cartoonish, one dimensional and devoid of reality. If this had been done as a dark-comedy, then maybe it would have worked.
The book and phase "The Banality of Evil" sums up the lessons of Hitler, the Nazis and the insanity that took Germany for those many years. Understanding how and why people like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, and others can guide their societies down the path towards evil outcomes is the role that movies like this are supposed to take on. This movie fails miserably.
It can happen to anyone, it can happen to any country. That is the warning. Instead this movie shows Hitler as a cartoonish, creepy, unlikable lunatic at every turn from his youth to his inglorious end. Hints of an emotionally defective, failed, youth with sexual inuendo, implied incest and other factors are not just historically inaccurate, they are not even explored but childishly and shallowly hinted at.
This isn't only historically incorrect, it is rationally incorrect. Hitler was not a Jack the Ripper, he was not a Ted Bundy for whom these characterizations might be believable and relevant.
Hitler was an astute Politian who became the leader of one of the most powerful countries in the world. A person who was elected to that post by one of the most educated and sophisticated populations in History.
That is a very scary thing. That is what this movie completely buries and ignores with a script and direction which is shallow, childish and cartoonish.
I watched this movie in the hope of gain insight into how such movements arise. What types of events and personalities could have led to this tragedy. Instead, I got a shamefully simplistic portrayal of what evil looks like that would embarrass the most elementary of Sunday School. They could not have been more obvious if they had Hitler just parade around with tail, horns carrying a pitch fork.
Why the long review? Because this is important. We have to learn so we avoid this sort of thing happening again.
Nothing to see here folks. Just give it a miss.
Star Trek: Discovery: Coming Home (2022)
Farts and Math
That is how they communicate with species C-10. Bright lights are used to put the farts in the right order and out pops the math. It is the height of irony that the farts represent emotion.
So grab a bowl of raw beans, boiled eggs. Poorly brewed tea then you too can be a writer for Star Trek Discovery.
Honestly, I didn't mean that to rhyme.
I still have more to type before my review will be accepted, so shall I list all the characters I wish had died in the last episode? Oops that's not PC so perhaps better, and shorter, to list the characters I would like to see return in any future Seasons.
1. Emperor Phillipia. One of three characters who actually act like a man. She is the best thing to come out of this series.
2. Pike was pretty good.
3. Saruk is Star Trek most of the time.
4. Spock of course. I suppose the writers feared for their lives to screw around with this character.
5. Book. This is a tough one but the actor is good and can take badly written dialog and make it believable without whispering.
6. Admiral Vance most days.
7. Lt. Owosoken. Good believable actor. I would like to see more of her.
8. Lt. Reno. Any one else want to see her take Phillipa down a notch? A rare breath of sanity.
There are probably a few others deserving to return, but generally they had little screen time and really bad dialog.
All the other main characters, send them on a fart-finding mission in the next galaxy over.
Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
Sometimes the needs of the one is greater than the needs of the stupid.
The only characters worth a damn are Emperor Phillipa and Commander Saru. Burnam has her moments, but when each episode's themes are Burnam breaking all the rules, putting the entire universe at risk and being ultimately vindicated by some unlikely magical plot device, it just becomes tedious.
I get it. We need more inclusivity. No problem. We need strong female heroes. No problem, agree completely. But I have yet to see a slight female charter lose a battle with an eight foot hulk. I have yet to see a dweebish emotionally crippled character without any thought or regard to the bigger picture lose an argument against cold hard reality. It is a teenage fantasy written into corners without restraint or purpose. Seriously, not only are universe threatening problems solved in each episode, they are done in real time. All in a days work and I still have time to text all my friends about it.
As other reviewers have noted this is (the very worst of) Star Wars with a Star Trek name. As another has said, I am coming to intensely dislike all of the main characters.
I am not certain I will be able to watch the remainder of Season 4. I have to pause so often and go vomit. Honestly, I'm shocked there will be a season 5, season 4 is so bad.
Under the Skin (2013)
Engaging and Disturbing
I don't think this film (I can't use the word movie) is faithful to it's origins, but it is disturbing and thought provoking on many levels. It will take you most of the film to figure out what is going on, and that is part of it's charm.
If nothing else, it is different and pushes the boundaries.
Dexter: New Blood (2021)
Watch all but the last 15 minutes.
My oh my. The entire Dexter series is an excellent look into the mind of the sociopathic serial killer. This latest series carried on in that tradition. Some parts uneven, but mostly a continuation of the excellent story telling.
The last 15 minutes, however, is a Hollywood cope out. The purity, and the entire point, of looking at the sociopathic brain is thrown away for no good reason other than somewhere in that Hollywood food chain someone thought we couldn't handle the truth.
My advice is turn it off during the last 15 minutes, pretend a meteor hit the writers and as a memorial they didn't finish the season. You will be more satisfied.
The World at War (1973)
The documentary all other documentaries are judged by.
Mostly to remind people that this is a Thames Television production. Most think it is that great British public Broadcaster. Easy mistake to make I suppose, but credit given to where credit is due.
Normally I like documentaries that focus on facts and figures so I can draw my own conclusions. However, as you learn more about WWII you realize the scope and gravity of the war cannot be conveyed by facts alone. The enormity of the war and it's subsequent impact on the modern world cannot be understated. The impact on those who lived through it massive.
The use of emotion, music and gravitas is necessary and falls short of the horror that war involves and a warning that the industrialization of killing is still the greatest threat to humankind.
Foundation: The Leap (2021)
Not as bad as Episode 9. But not much better either.
First, this series has almost nothing to do with Asimov's books other than using the title. It is just about as opposite of what Asimov intended as it could possibly be. I don't think Asimov is spinning in his grave, because he stopped watching after the last episode.
As exemplified by the last episode, the plot lines continue to be implausible and disconnected, even within the context of the world that has been constructed. With often random events and actions who's only purpose seems to be to move the plot to the next implausible random construct it isn't so much a mystery as mystery meat. Unlike episode 9, which seems to have been written by a five year old, this is a bit better and may have even been written by a teenager.
The one tolerable and interesting plot line, that of Cleon, wasn't even part of the original books and has a character completely at odds with Asimov's vision for the story. I suppose that only indicates just how wrong the decision was by Apple in choosing the show runner. The man has no idea what Asimov's Foundation was about and he has enough hubris to think he can change it completely and make it better. He is wrong.
Since I am a typical SciFi nerd and will watch all the shows no matter how bad, I am honestly hoping Apple will cancel the series.
Failing that, please Apple, leave Asimov's name off the credits and change the title to something else. Then maybe it won't hurt my brain so much.
Foundation: The First Crisis (2021)
Horrible.
Not only is this not Asimov's Foundation, this episode in particular is poorly acted, poorly directed and incredibly poorly written.
Even within the context of the showrunner's story the plot of this episode is unbelievable. I can only think that the writers and show runner simply is giving a big finger to Apple this is so bad. Consider how the Huntress miraculously gains control of a space craft. The mind boggles that anyone got paid for this.
And that doesn't even cover the fact that this show is completely the opposite of what Asimov intended.
It is garbage, even if you don't like Asimov.