Change Your Image
thefilmnotebook
Website: www.thefilmnotebook.com
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Molly's Game (2017)
Molly's Game: boisterous fun, but ultimately deceiving
Can a film have too much energy? Be too lively? Those are the thoughts that ran through my head after watching Molly's Game. It seems to have too much vigour, too much rhythm. We often complain that a film doesn't have enough, but this seems to be a rare case - it suffers at the opposite end of the spectrum. It tried to be exciting through giving too much, in too little time, and as a result, it has a suffocating effect. Even at 2.5 hours running time, the film felt rushed - as it determines to tell Molly Bloom (Jessica Chastain)'s whole life story, from her early skiing endeavours, to her first jobs, her hosting high stake/profile underground poker games and her court case. It is quite exhausting as we weren't given much opportunities to breathe, and trying to make sense of everything.
At a glance, her story is a fascinating one - enough for a memoir to be written and published. Trained to become an Olympic skier, she pulled out after sustaining severe injuries. Under the strict upbringing by her father (Kevin Costner) Discipline and determination has always been a significant part of her life, and she took this on with every aspect of her life - sometimes blindly. When the opportunity came to assist in hosting underground poker tournaments for celebrities and wealthy individuals, she embraced the idea with curiosity and enthusiasm, and eventually, starting her own company to host these games. When her clients started to include business men and mob members that are involved in illegal financial /money laundering schemes, she was arrested and charged. I think the film incites a very interesting thought - was what she did really a deplorable crime in society today? Casinos today do theoretically practice the same 'crime'.
This is writer Aaron Sorkin's first film as director. He also wrote the screenplay for 'the Social Network' - which was about Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, and he employs a similar storytelling approach here - Molly narrates her story through a court case - in this case to her lawyer (Idris Elba). And yet something feels missing. Perhaps it's the dominant focus on Chastain, and we never fully explore the story from other perspectives, causing its unbalance. We are bombarded with a poker game after another, though the games are alluring, and fun, and we are introduced to some interesting characters (in particular Bill Camp as Harlan and Brian d'Arcy James as bad Brad), the fun dissolves after a while and the characters are quickly forgotten. It seems Sorkin is determined to swiftly move from one thing to the next thing and never really stays in the present long enough. As a result, the film loses its central stability and impact. As the film progresses, I was yearning for something more delicious - the suspense is sustained well, but it's not nurtured towards something more compelling.
Both Chastain and Elba gave searing performances - it is admirable how they could both speak with such impressive speed and precision! Jesse Eisenberg gave a similar performance as Zuckerberg - perhaps that has become the norm now for Sorkin's writing - this lightning speed execution. The script is sharp and incisive, rightfully reflecting Sorkin's written acuity. Even though Chastain and Elba's intensely explosive performance give firepower and temper to Sorkin's words, it is not quite enough for an affecting film. Their commanding screen presence and passionate interactions make their scenes together quite enthralling, but it adds a little too much fuel to the film's existing zeal.
Through paying too much attention to the glamour and the thrill of poker, Molly's Game really missed the opportunity to offer us insight into Molly's mind and motivations, apart from whether she should be charged. Maybe Sorkin realised this too, and towards the end, he managed to insert a rather quick therapy session between Molly and her father where Costner tries to analyse and diagnose Molly's mental struggles and the causes for her actions. What he said about Molly wanting to exert power over powerful men made some logical sense to me, however, it was dismissive and lacked careful analysis - just like the film itself. It seemed Sorkin hastily tried to simplify a potentially complex personality, without truly revealing Molly's vulnerable side. She has for most of her life, crafted an impenetrable armour to protect herself, and to hide her true emotions. Chastain cheekily gives us a rare glimpse of her inner turmoil - but it is too rare for us to relate to her.
Molly's Game is boisterous, entertaining, but it fails to build links that bring us to the real Molly. Without being emotionally attuned to her, the film feels like a conventional poker film. In fact, it is almost like a poker game itself - on the surface, it's alluring and exciting, but ultimately it is quite deceiving. After the curiosity dissolves, we are left with its desiccated core.
The Shape of Water (2017)
Shape of Water: Strangely Poetic
There are many dimensions to the Shape of Water. Ultimately it is a love story. It is a love that seems to defy reason. Elisa (Sally Hawkins) is a janitor working at a government facility, where one day she comes across a mysterious amphibian man like creature (Doug Jones), captured by government agent Richard Strickland (Michael Shannon). Due an injury as a toddler, Elisa cannot talk, and neither can he. From the outset, this relationship between Elisa and the creature is bizarre, and difficult to comprehend. But, if you look closer, their love is the most pure, and the simplest form you could find.
They saw each other for who they are, and accepted it. To her, he isn't just a freak of nature. She is fascinated by who he is, and shows kindness and respect for him. Having been isolated and repressed for so long, she finally had someone who didn't judge for her for disability. Although neither of them could talk, they communicated most honestly and warmly. Hawkins and Jones ensured that Elisa and the creature's common language was their authenticity and their vulnerability.
Water had a profound symbolic significance for this story. The Shape of Water suggests something is undefined and has no distinctive shape. Water gave oxygen to Elisa and the creature's love. Two of the most memorable scenes in the film involved masterful, artistic use of water. Without water, he could not survive, and she shows her love through being in water with him. Water is their love and freedom and director Guillermo Del Toro lets it bring to the scenes an elegant tranquillity.
Hawkins, who was terrific in Blue Jasmine, gave another outstanding performance here. Although she didn't utter a word here, we could still see her soul. Her character and performance reminded of Amy Adams in the Arrival - the anticipation, the apprehension, and curiosity is all portrayed with heartfelt emotion. Del Toro cleverly employs a couple of side-characters to act as her interpreter for us. Through them, we get clear confirmation for what she is thinking, but really, Hawkins had already communicated what she needed to. Those side characters - Giles (Richard Jenkins) - a gay artist Elisa lives with, Zelda (Octavia Spencer) - an African American janitor who works with Elisa and Dr Hoffstetler (Michael Stulbarg) - a scientist who is also a Russian spy during the Cold War, all had something in common with Elisa, they are oppressed and have struggled through torment. Perceived as underdogs, and not really belonging to society, perhaps Del Toro wanted to show that the greatest tolerance comes from those that are already repressed.
A monster isn't defined by its appearance. Del Toro boldly contrasts Shannon's Strickland with the creature, and let us decide who the real monster is. I could always rely on Shannon to portray a villain who is despicable, yet immensely intriguing. Strickland is icy cold, and Shannon infuses him with a fierce desperation that is deadly, but relatable. He is tortured on the inside and on the outside, and is often infuriated with himself. I found it amusing that he forces himself to only have positive thoughts - it shows that he is constantly running from the truth. We can see that he constructs a façade that isn't him - a family, a luxury car. It is quite intelligent that Strickland's character accentuates the qualities we value in our protagonists - that is truth, honesty and kindness.
I could always trust Del Toro to imagine a world that is exquisitely colourful and exuberant (much like Crimson Peak, Pan's Labyrinth). I have always thought of the theatre as a very romantic place, and to have Elisa live on top of one, was the perfect setting for her romantic heart. The introduction of Elisa and the exposition was expertly crafted, with Alexandre Desplat's buoyant score skilfully complementing the vibrance of her character. The only thing I would have loved to see more of, was the development of Elisa and the creature's relationship, But perhaps it was that simple. We humans tend to complicate love. Perhaps silent dialogue is more truthful than a spoken one.
The Shape of Water has elements of many genres. It is not an extremely comfortable film to watch - there are some graphic details of violence, and for some, it will be a strange film. I'd like to describe the film was strangely poetic, and it is fantastic in that once you have a think about what the film is trying to convey - it is actually done in the most poetic way.
The Greatest Showman (2017)
Full of charm and delight!
There hasn't been that many movies where we feel its joy right away. I didn't expect The Greatest Showman to be so charming, but it had me under its spell in an instant. What can I say, I loved this film. Its happiness is immensely contagious, and it took a great deal of effort to stay put in my seat! Sometimes first impressions in a movie is everything, and Hugh Jackman leaves an extremely positive one from the very first scene. He was the life of this film. I was wondering throughout, is there anything Hugh Jackman can't do? He can sing, he can dance, he can act - and he also melts our hearts with his adorable family (Michelle Williams, and two very cute girls - Austyn Johnson and Cameron Seely). Jackman is a very lovable guy playing a very likeable character, and his amazing showmanship skills is in given ample fuel to truly dazzle here.
The stern show critic in the film described P.T Barnum (Hugh Jackman)'s show as 'a celebration of humanity' and in my opinion, it is a perfect summary of what this film is. It is a celebration of our differences, of the courage to be yourself, of love, of family, and of the simple pleasures that we often take for granted in the pursuit of what we perceive at the time to be something greater. It is a singing and dancing fairytale that will quite literally, lift you out of the shadows.
It seems that's the case for many of the characters in the film too. They are marginalised, and excluded from society for their unique features. They live in hiding and in shame. Barnum pulled them from the darkness, and gave them a chance to realise their worth and their individual strengths. Zendaya and Kaela Settle both showcased a quiet resilience that is admirable and inspiring. Their profound talents and astonishing voices gave the heart and warmth to Justin Paul and Benj Pasek's (who also wrote the songs for La La Land) brilliantly written songs (particularly 'This is me', which I have no doubt will win the best song category at the Academy Awards this year). Personally, I was so moved by the songs that I immediately downloaded the soundtrack when I got home!
It is hard to believe that this is Australian director Michael Gracey's first feature film. I could understand the approach that he decided to tell Barnum's story, and I am very glad that he chose to tell his story in a dream-like way. He captured the vision of Barnum with his own imagination, and weaved into his film the idealism and the optimism Barnum's ideas embodied. It is an incredibly uplifting film, and with the colour and magnificence created by production designer Nathan Crowley (the Prestige, Interstellar) and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey, I felt like I was right there - being a part of Barnum's spectacularly enchanting show.
It isn't easy to tell a story through music and songs, but the 'the Greatest Showman' is a great one that you shouldn't miss. I guarantee that if you go see it, you will leave the cinema with a huge grin, with your heart full, and for a little while, you will forgive the muddy troubles this world has, and that is definitely worth experiencing these days.
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
Waititi's definition of fun!
We are all familiar with the superhero movie formulas by now – the invincible hero, the big bad villain, exuberant CGI action, and clichéd one liner jokes. Thor Ragnorak proves that this formula is not imperturbable, and the formula for superhero movies can evolve. Marvel Studios have on board this time, small feature filmmaker Taika Waititi (the wizard behind warm and hilarious films such as 'Hunt for the Wilderpeople'. Waititi is very confident, and took isn't afraid to take risks, it seems here that he just wanted to bring his own interpretation of the superhero genre, and most importantly
to have some fun.
It seems that everyone else wanted to have some fun too. Apart from the usual crew – Chris Hemsworth (Thor), Tom Hiddleston (Loki) and Mark Ruffalo (The Hulk), Cate Blanchett and Jeff Goldblum has also signed on to play villains Hela and the Grandmaster respectively. I think the sentiment was the same among them all – let's experiment and break some barriers, and cut some of that serious stuff.
The story itself hasn't changed much from its usual form - we have a wicked and malicious villain Hela (Odin's first-born, thus Thor's sister), hell-bent on taking the throne of Asgard, and seeking supreme power through fear and destruction. It is therefore, up to our heroes, Thor, Loki (questionable), Heimdall (Idris Elba), the Hulk and newcomer Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson) – a tough former Asgardian warrior girl, to stop her. Part of the story takes place on the planet of Sakaar, where we are introduced to some of our new characters – the eccentric and self-indulgent Grandmaster who rules the planet and hosts gladiator-like battles for entertainment, and Korg – an adorable, inadvertently funny creature (and gladiator) made from rocks. He befriends Thor, when he was trapped on the planet, and forced to compete against his 'friend' the Hulk. Korg is literally Waititi in rock form both physically and character wise) (he was played by Waititi through motion capture) – and I think many would agree that he was a highlight.
All the characters, old and new, brought something refreshing to their identities – their own charisma and personalities. As a result, they are simultaneously familiar and unfamiliar. And that's where the fun is at. The film's temperament didn't feel like that of a typical serious end-of-the-world film, it felt more like a series of bloopers, where the camera catches all the behind-the-scenes banters and quibbles. The jokes and the humour is spontaneous, and the atmosphere is filled with good cheerfulness and bonhomie. If you've seen the film, you'll know what I mean when I say the funniest bits are the Hulk 'jumping' out of the plane and Loki and Thor playing 'get help.' There's so much chemistry between Hemsworth, Hiddleston and Ruffalo, nothing feels forced.
Another film comes to mind when I think of vibrant colours, a playful tone and upbeat music – that is, the 'Guardians of the Galaxy'. This film is similar, but with its own wit and pleasant surprises. I think the humour is more effective and genuine here, it catches you off- guard because they happen at the most unexpected moments. It is truly hilariously entertaining. The 1980s music and score (by Mark Mothersbaugh), is fitting and extremely addictive, and
extremely fun. You'll enjoy all the cameos too, I won't spoil them – but you'll definitely recognise them and smile.
I didn't expect this film to be as fun as it was. It is a harmonious symphony of humour, action and storytelling. If examined closely, there are shortcomings and inconsistencies in the narrative, but for a fun superhero film, it is easily forgivable. Because it is distinctively Waititi, it is a bit of an outlier to the other Marvel films – but you'll laugh a lot and have loads of fun. I think I mentioned fun a hundred times in this review, but it seriously is.
Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017)
Much less class than the first
If Kingsman: the Golden Circle managed to uphold the standard Kingsman: the Secret Service set, it would have been an above average movie. The elements presented in the Golden Circle are too familiar, and too comfortable. The Secret Service was exciting because it was inventive, and infused with the commanding presence of first class actors like Mark Strong, Colin Firth and Michael Caine, it was an elegant classic.
In the Golden Circle, young Kingsman recruit Eggsy (Taron Egerton) returns, along with Merlin (Mark Strong) and Harry (Colin Firth) – his return was well known before the film's release. However, Matthew Vaughn makes the fatal mistake of replacing the characters that gave the first film its gentlemanly charm and decorum with drunken American cowboys. Although this transposition provided some degree of novelty – I was intrigued at the US version 'The Statesman', as compared to the Kingsmen, disappointment does set in when you realise they just ain't as classy – not to mention that profound waste of talent to cast Halle Berry, Jeff Bridges and Channing Tatum.
I missed the iconic scenes that defined the Secret Service. There just aren't any memorable scenes in this one. Julianne Moore's Poppy Adams is quite fascinating at first – she does well embodying a dual sinister and pleasant demeanour, but once I found that she is just a loony psychopath, but loves putting people through a meat mincer, that's all that I needed to know about her. For the rest of the film, she just waits and waits, for people to get her. She also kidnaps Elton John – played by himself – who was immensely painful to watch. Why did you do this to yourself Elton?
Overall, the little freshness this movie offers wears off quickly and the pleasure is momentary. Vaughn's decision to divert focus from the Kingsman to the Statesman is catastrophic for the characters, and for the story. The magical touch from the Secret Service is lost and all there is left is excessive zest and energy, which is great for loud, mindless fun, but not so good for preserving the gravitas that kept the first one grounded. But, if you love routine action with a tad too much embellishment, you might enjoy this.
Blue Valentine (2010)
Blue Valentine: where did love go wrong?
Derek Cianfrance was a documentary filmmaker. Blue Valentine was his second feature film. Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams are Dean and Cindy, a young couple very much in love, who after a few years, seem to hate each other's guts. Cianfrance's utilises documentary instincts to tell a realistic love story that is both heart-warming and heartbreaking.
Dean and Cindy had their classic meet cute, and went from dancing and singing in the streets together to arguing with each other with annoyance and contempt. They had such a rare spark, and laughed so easily together, and yet now, they just don't seem to get each other anymore. Cianfrance, and fellow writers Cami Delavigne and Joey Curtis, presents Dean and Cindy's story in two alternating points in time. The past – bathed in warm light, which represents the more romantic, happier times, to the present – that uses cooler and darker colours to reflect the loss of love.
I was extremely impressed by Gosling and Williams exceptionally strong performances. They each have to play two different versions of themselves – and portray two images of their love. Externally, apart from Dean's obvious hair loss and glasses, the differences are minimal. On the inside, it is difficult to tell. But Gosling and Williams does a splendid job showing the changes through their interactions. They lived with each other before and during filming – their comfort and familiarity with each other really seeps through on screen.
The contrast between the before and now is handled masterfully. The last scenes where Dean and Cindy cries in each other's arms, with Dean's 'I love you so much
' to Cindy's 'I can't do this anymore
' is incredibly real and relatable. Cianfrance cross-cuts this with the scenes from their wedding ceremony, in direct contrast. It is saddening and you really have one response: how?
Blue Valentine doesn't attempt the answer the questions of why things went wrong. It gives the facts as it is, and it is open for interpretation as to the causes and the why. My interpretation is that they didn't try to follow each other in their growth, and keep up with what each other needs. Even they don't know how they came to be like this. And that is the most tragic part.
Wind River (2017)
A deeply disturbing, solid thriller
Having written brilliant scripts for Sicario and Hell or High Water, Taylor Sheridan tries his hand at directing with Wind River, of which he also wrote. It is clear now that Sheridan has a unique talent for creating harsh and isolating landscapes (both somatically and mentally), and for writing engaging narratives based on such settings.
Wind River is the setting for the film's story. An American Indian Reservation in Wyoing, this is where wildlife hunter officer Cory Lambert (Jeremy Renner) discovers the body of a young Native American woman Natalie Hanson (Kelsey Asbille). She is found barefoot and hardly with any warm winter clothes on. Upon much examination, Cory deduces that she died as a result of a condition called pulmonary haemorrhage. In less scientific terms, that is bleeding from the lungs, caused here by breathing in too much cold air too soon.
Cory is joined by young FBI agent Jane Banner (Elizabeth Olsen), who is sent to Wind River to investigate Natalie's death. She is ill- equipped and clueless about surviving the harsh conditions of Wind River but she is determined to solve the crime. Cory and Jane make an effective team together, as both can relate to Natalie's death in their own way. Cory lost his daughter a few years ago and her body was also discovered in the snow. Jane is perceived as young and vulnerable, much like Natalie. They found a clue that Natalie's boyfriend Matt (Jon Bernthal), who works as a security guard at an oil drilling site may have some information.
The film is effective at slowly building up curiosity and Sheridan finds the impeccable balance between character development and storytelling. For most of the film, it carries a pervasive sinister tranquility, which is later interrupted by sudden outbursts of violence. Despite the uncensored brutality of the violence, for us, the chilling factor lies in the profound psychological impact. As we found out what happened to Natalie through a cleverly placed flashback, it is absolutely terrifying. Having been introduced and acquainted to the unforgiving nature of the winter landscape, we wonder what could push Natalie so far that she would flee outside, barefoot. Although it is anticipated something dreadful is going to happen, I still couldn't help but feeling sick to the stomach.
Wind River is portrayed as a land with vast open spaces. Normally, this would usually signify freedom and free will, but we feel trapped and very claustrophobic. Sheridan also adds another emotional layer where he deals with themes of loss and despair. It doesn't feel entirely hopeless, as he injects some degree of warmth and sensitivity into the story. Natalie's father Martin (Gil Birmingham) is a friend of Cory's, and together they navigate through the tremendous grief of losing their daughters. Both men have been hardened by the external environment they reside in, but within, they are gentle and deeply lost. They are men who are not afraid to express their grief, and are desperately trying to scavenge enough hope to live through the next day.
What I realised in this film is that everything that happens is consequential. The unrelentingly cruel environment imposes disturbing effects on the human psyche, which in turn transforms man into unleashing terror. Tragedy strikes, and the overwhelming grief then leads man into unpredictable acts. Who here is the true evil? Is it the scathing coldness of the landscape around us or does it merely reflect our true nature? The film doesn't really answer these questions, but it is definitely some food for thought.
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
A brilliant film that manages to reach sophistication with simplicity
The more I think about Blade Runner 2049, the more brilliant it becomes. It is a film that manages to reach sophistication with simplicity.
Director Dennis Villeneuve took on this sequel to the original Blade Runner with heavy pressure and expectations. It seems that he has been quite reserved in testing the boundaries and drawing a trajectory from the path of the original. It is nonetheless a sincere and daring continuation, and it is faithful to the ambiguities and questions presented in the first film.
There seems to be polarising views when it comes to Villeneuve films. Blade Runner 2049 is akin to the Arrival, and draws its audience in with its incredible visuals and an enigmatic sense of wonder. It is easy to be immersed in a lull, and that can either be appreciated or despised. It depends on what you expect, and your opinion would vary depending on which angle your assessment is made. I have come to appreciate that is how Villeneuve paints his mysteries – the rhythm is slow-paced, the mood is melancholy and unsettling, and he uses his strong central characters to dig with willpower and grace. Similar to Amy Adams' character in the Arrival, the central character here is Ryan Gosling, a replicant LAPD 'blade runner', sent out to retire older model replicants. Along the way, he discovers clues that may change his entire perception of his own identity and his world. It is terrifying to realise that our memories can define who we are, as both our past and future can alter the present. Like the future 'memories' that influenced Adams in the Arrival, Gosling was deeply affected by his past memories.
Villeneuve's artistic talent is undeniable. Two words pop into my mind when I try to describe the visuals, majesty and magnificence, compounded by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch's extremely powerful score. Even though this film is science fiction, there are parallels between our world and this world Villeneuve (and Ridley Scott) have created – the degradation and depletion of natural resources and the emergence and development of technology, especially in artificial intelligence. There is a great paradox here, in a sense that we are now seeking realism in a world where there is a loss of realism. There are profound scenes where Gosling tries to experience physical intimacy with his 'artificial intelligence' girlfriend Joi (Ana de Armas) – he felt love towards her and wanted to express it in a 'human way'.
This leads to a very important question regarding humanity, what is it that makes us human? Do we need to know how to love and exhibit emotions? Do we need to be born? Do we have to die for a cause? Gosling's Officer K searches the answer in this film, and although he was a replicant – a bioengineered 'human', he is in many ways, just like 'us'. The fact that we are trying to humanise this world (something that we take for granted now), is very intriguing.
I really enjoyed Villeneuve's 'minimalist' style in making this film. The narrative was simple, with few well-drawn characters. It was lovely to see Harrison Ford reprising his role as Deckard, and Robin Wright and Jared Leto gave convincing performances. Much like in Star Wars: the Force Awakens, there is that familiar frisson of excitement when Ford finally emerges from the darkness.
Still, questions were left unanswered in this film and it wasn't Villeneuve's intention to do so. Ironically, by keeping the elements simple, he has achieved both emotional and intellectual depth. I much appreciated the obscurity because the true magic lies in the moments afterwards, when I slowly discover the hidden intricacies and I spend my time just pondering about it. Perhaps the answer is simple, it just takes quite a journey to get there.
The Foreigner (2017)
Lacks dynamic tension between the leads
The Foreigner is a film that rushes to its ends without putting effort into the process. This happens, and that happens, but you don't really understand why. I was curiously excited to see Jackie Chan playing a serious role, and although there is the usual martial arts involved, there is a certain energy missing.
Chan plays Quan Ngoc Minh, a common immigrant living in London, and when his daughter is tragically killed in a terrorist attack, he chases after government official Liam Hennessey (Pierce Brosnan) for information, knowing that since he was a former leader of the Provisional IRA, he would have what he needs.
The most problematic thing about the film is its weak connections – between the characters, their stories and with the audience. For a film that relies heavily on its characters' back stories, it does not devote enough time to allow us to explore and understand their psyche. What we are given is a rather bland emotional palette. I sympathised with Quan's past and present despair, but only on a surface level.
Chan and Brosnan's stories feel like two separate ones, forcibly meshed together. The most effective revenge tales requires magnetic chemistry between the hero and the villain, where one has something the other doesn't. In this film, Quan is, as Hennessey puts it, 'always one step ahead'. This hurts the dynamic balance, and it is deadly, when it comes to holding the tension. As a result, there is lack of urgency for the majority of the film, and coupled with the implied invincibility of Quan, there is nothing much left for us to guess and anticipate.
Chan and Brosnan are both capable actors, but here they are inhibited by the fixity and thinness of their characters. We see who they are too clearly. When I think about the film more, it also occurred to me that Quan's actions closely mirror that of a terrorist's, as he uses terror tactics to extract information and force obedience. An eye for an eye mentality is what the Foreigner suffers the most from, it stereotypes and lends its characters no depth.
In the end, I am ambivalent about this film. I don't like it, neither do I hate it. It is quite plain and gives me a plain feeling. It needed more pieces of the puzzle for us to solve, and most crucially, its single-minded and simplistic painting of characters caused it to be just blood and guns, leaving little for us to connect with.