Change Your Image
PaddyGarcia
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Napoleon (2023)
In cinema fun is not a handicap
Reviews seem to be mixed, and it is not entirely difficult to see why some reviews are negative, though mine is not. I greatly enjoyed the movie and I think I owe that to sitting in my seat awaiting entertainment rather than a deep character dive into Napoleon and those surrounding him, which this movie lacks but something I suspect might be done with more prompt in the director's cut. Nor did I worry about historical accuracies either. These things matter a great deal for a number of people and not without reason. And often in truth they matter for me. Perhaps it is just the mood that took me at the time, but I cast all such concerns aside.
I'll start with the negatives for me. It does feel rushed in parts, and seismic events are sort of swept along or ignored to keep the film moving. Again, something I suspect the director's cut will not suffer from but that isn't the movie I watched. Napoleon himself I'm not sure is played in a way that is respective of the image we have of him from history. This is and it isn't a problem. As I will keep repeating, I was here to be entertained so seeing an occasionally humorous, comically horny, astute and serious man all melded into one was of great interest to me. It will not be to others.
Phoenix is Phoenix, as you would expect. A man who can do so much with a little. With just his eyes. Kirby's performance has drawn some questions but I enjoyed her and the dynamic she shares with Phoenix. Kirby portrays extreme vulnerability and great power over Napoleon. The exact same qualities he displays with his other great love in the form of France. And among the truly fantastic battle scenes (making a compelling and atmospheric battle scene is one thing, making multiple in one movie is another) there are two love stories at play. Napoleon and Josephine's, plus Napoleon and France's. They both betlittle and destroy him. They both construct and inspire him. And it is for both he will die for.
Some find these scenes in between the war a little flat. I found them sincere and particularly toward the end especially touching. I would like to add also that Martin Phipps does a tremendous job with the soundtrack. Worth a listen on its own accord, with or without film. This also has one of my favorite ending shots in recent memory.
The film is fun. It is entertaining. Yes, it has its flaws but I think you have some control over how much that can bother you, whereas some movies take that decision away from you
The Good
- Fantastic battles with great music
- Excellent cinematography
- Phoenix
The Not So Good
- A little rushed with the story
- Historical discrepancies
This is not a documentary, it is a glutton of war and love. Treat it as such and you will enjoy yourself.
The Lighthouse (2019)
There is a light that never goes out
I ambled into this movie without really knowing an awful lot about it beyond who the two actors involved were. I am not sure if that is a good or bad way to approach this film, but I can say without contradiction I left my seat impressed at what I had just witnessed.
Now evidently if you've read any other review of this movie you'll know there are some surreal elements to it. Some people hate that sort of thing. If you're one of those, I'd say continue to watch it anyway. These scenes do not dominate the movie and they are not without context. This isn't a Salvador Dali special.
Given my fledgling Greek knowledge and the hints from the movie itself, this appears to me to be a retelling of the story of Prometheus. Or at least the last third of the movie is with the attempted stealing of the light from 'the gods' (in a sense of it being high in the sky and Wake playing the role of God in his way) and the very obvious way Howard find his demise. Prior to that it is or is at least portrayed to be a battle in maintaining sanity in hostile and insecure conditions. Howard's mind deteriorates gradually - or does it? Crucially, we are never quite sure of that ourselves and the fantastic audio of this film adds to the viewer's own anxiety and confusion.
The acting as you would expect is excellent. Dafoe really nails his part, leaving you unsure if he is just a cruel taskmaster or something more sinister before a more jovial and human side is delivered to you. Pattinson too gives a beautifully sincere showing that is initially easy to empathise with before you lose your trust with him too.
There are some fantastic shots in this movie too. They've made great use of the location afforded to them and the bleak tones this is filmed in stir up the brooding and ominous mood quite perfectly.
This style will not appeal to everyone and perhaps at times the monotony of tasks may seem dull. Intentional I suspect but the viewers themselves need to decide if this is worthwhile for them. There indeed lacks much in the way of gripping plot but again, this is not what the film is supposed to be.
The Good
- Great acting, great characters
- This unsettles without losing course
- Well directed, some interesting shots
The Not So Good
- May be too 'experimental' in parts for some
- Very small example of a story
An arty movie with brilliant acting and visually impressive feats. For some, not for all.
Boiling Point (2023)
Largely good, though overcooked in parts
Was a little unsure of how this would play out having only recently watched the movie; the character direction wasn't immediately clear but they all become mostly fleshed out in this.
Yes, at times the script is a little predictable. The first episode is a culprit of this but the drama itself is well orchestrated and feels real enough. I've seen complaints that a kitchen could never run and be successful like this but 1) it is a drama! And 2) they literally get closed down at the end...
Aside from Liam, it is very well cast and acted. Robinson puts in a terrific performance and the cast add plenty too, especially Ogg on his eventually introduction. Nice to see him play someone other than his archetypal psycho character.
It is a BBC production, so it IS a bit BBC-ified. Not egregiously so but just a touch. Let's use the non-binary character, whose name I genuinely don't know as an example. There is nothing wrong with having an NB character! They exist. But the biggest scene given for this character was just one where staff overuse the correct pronouns during an argument. It's just very on the nose look at us being progressive writing, rather than actual progressive and interesting writing. Or Freeman being on the end of very unlikely seeming casual racism during a business meeting. It just didn't feel sincere.
On the flip side, the writing of Jamie's mental struggles are exceptionally well done and the development arc of Jake was enjoyable too. Gary Lamont's portrayal of Dean was also a lot of fun, I suppose he is something of a stereotype in this but he reminds me a lot of someone I know which again added sincerity to the performance. Emily managing to not totally descend back into a drink issue was a shrewd move to and a reminder that falling off the wagon once does not spell the end of a journey.
The road is open for a second series and it could well work, though I wonder how much more can we get out of the current characters given the intense levels of drama already displayed. The series largely delivered, especially on the drama front. The writing at times could be better and the episodes could feel a little cramped with such seismic events constantly happening.
The Good
- Very well cast, realistic acting
- The drama hits home
- Characters well developed
The Not So Good
- Lacklustre writing at times, some subplots not really wrapped up
- Episodes can feel cramped.
Boiling Point (2021)
Technically excellent, in parts mixed
Let's start with the obvious, the movie is shot in one breathless take that encompases flawlessly the pace and intensity a respected restaurant kitchen operates with. The battles, the cameradoire, the coverings and the blaming. All of it captured wonderfully and the realistic dialogue that remains gripping is a key driver here. It feels like a documentary that has gone awry and you're living in the reality of the kitchen.
Graham is superb in his role. A down on his luck chef in a difficult situation; without reliable shelter and in debt to a famous chef 'friend'. The support are also well cast, Robinson in particular really delivers.
You follow through the evening as they grapple with an overbooked evening, influencers, rude guests, the usual ensemble. Drama hits as the man whose is due to propose to his partner makes a note of mentioning a nut allergy. This - in a clever way - of course goes wrong and has the staff questioning their leader. Once it happens you can spot the incident that causes it if you look hard enough, but it is executed in a realistic style.
One complaint, albeit a minor one, is that a lot of this side stories just get forgotten about or go nowhere. Perhaps this is the point in the sense of how life is for the staff there. Some of it seems necessary to the illustration of kitchen life, some of it seems like filler. The only true palpable let down for me was the ending. I can see the sense in it taking this direction, however it did feel like something of a cop out to me. Not that everything need necessarily be tied together for an ending to appease me, but it is something of a get out of jail free card being deployed once the path of redemption has been chosen.
The Good:
- The one shot works tremendously
- Well cast
- Engaging throughout
The Not So Good:
- Didn't love the ending
- Subplots meander to nothing
Well crafted, well performed and ultimately just outright entertaining.
Broadchurch (2013)
One of the stronger offerings from this genre
Typically not the type of show I much enjoy due to the ease at which they fall into effortlessly into tropes, however this is a very well made outing that largely delivers across its entirety.
It is true, Alec Hardy himself is a well trodden type but Tenant's acting lifts it beyond that shell and really gives a brilliant performance. Matched by Coleman, who is herself exceptional. There are few characters across all three series where the acting leaves anything to be desired, but I'd like to give additional plaudits to Whittaker and Buchan for their parts. Also to, to Julie Hesmondhalgh for her part in the third series. There is something about seeing 'just' a soap actor showcase that they can deliver when offered a more dramatic and sincere role.
The first series is probably the best. It is well paced, it is interesting and not an easy ending to call. Now it doesn't give you real hints that Joe is the culprit but he is portrayed as being the perfect doting husband which in itself is inherently a clue that something is amiss with him, which is great, love that. The whole premise of what transpired to be the truth is plenty harrowing. A few slips here and there however, the psychic for example, added nothing beyond a weird plot device.
Series two was poor, for the first half at least. It began to feel more like a soap. Too many of the minor characters had larger roles and it was difficult to really care about them. The magic of the show is the chemistry between Tenant and Coleman and these little elsewhere narratives dilute it somewhat. The court scenes were a mix too, in part a bit silly but not without genuine drama. Joe being found not guilty was a bold move and it pays off down the line.
Series three was better form. Whilst the reveal is one you can't see coming, it feels a little cheap when a show makes it absolutely impossible for you to potentially figure out the person and then just throws it at you after making you spend 6 episodes of deep diving potential suspects. I still enjoyed it, and it was nice for the show to end with a showing of township and womanship solidarity, it was a little irritating in its way. Again, the (admittedly smaller) side stories were of no interest. It is difficult to care about the local rag turning into clickbait, though perhaps had I watched this at the time of release rather than now it might have hit with a little more substance.
The pacing is for the most part spot on and the acting is for the whole part spot on. Some really lovely shots and it doesn't shy away from the brutalness of the world. It's a good show, though not a great one.
The Good:
- Stellar performances from some of the UK's best talent
- Difficult to guess plots
- Moving and devastating
The Not So Good:
- Weaker middle section
- Occasional plot hole
Even for those generally adverse to this genre, it is still an enjoyable ride that doesn't overstay its welcome.
Threads (1984)
Harrowing
Sincerely, harrowing. I'm not one easily displaced emotionally by cinema and it is for that precise reason that I sought out Threads. I figured the effect of a movie from the 80's must well have diluted by now, but I was sorely mistaken. I felt bleak watching this unfold. I felt hollow and at times frustrated with the political on-screen decisions which resulted in mass destruction. The level of detachment one ought to feel toward the state and its eagerness toward war.
The decision to not cast renowned actors was a risk but one that largely pays off. In parts the script or delivery of the odd line can be a little ineffective but given the budget that is perfectly excusable and of minor detriment. The film does a fine job in making you feel part of the local community and inherently like you're forming part of this lost society. Their future is lost, it is futile and it was tragically wholly avoidable. The ultimate tragedy.
The Good:
- Visceral feeling of dread
- Delivery feels realistic
- Doesn't wander into the comedicly unrealistic
The Not So Good:
- Occasionally subpar dialogue, but a minor gripe
A must watch for those who feel impervious to dread. A must avoid for the anxious.
The Outlaws (2021)
Doesn't match the early promise.
I'll preface by adding I only made it through the first few episodes; my patience wore thin and my interest totally faded at that stage. It isn't a terrible show. It isn't without positives at all. It just isn't very good.
The story is extremely tried and tested, which is fine enough if you're just doing a comedy but this show tries to be different things with varying levels of success. The drama misses. The well trodden social discussions miss. The comedy generally hits (it is no shock, but Merchant's scenes are comfortably the best for this). If the episodes were not around the hour mark and it focused its energy into a more singular mode of being it would likely benefit.
I was greatly surprised to see Walken here and his level of acting is always a welcome watch. Actually, to be fair to the main cast they all put in pretty solid displays. Typically I find in a mid range show there's one or two who are just significantly off the pace, but that isn't the case here.
Now, one of those most irritating parts for me. The two extremely worn out tropes of John and Myrna. A typical conservative type and a left wing activist. Their discussions are all painfully predictable and tedious. The show isn't able to look at social nuance in the same way The White Lotus was able to, for example. It is heavy handed, woefully contrived and banal. Lefty as I am, I even found the leaning toward Myrna's points being the 'correct' ones aggressively tedious. It's just not entertaining in a contemporary world where these discussions are commonplace in a much engaging manner. The same can be said of some of the scenes around Christian too. They just do not feel organic at all. Very much as if some likely well meaning Exec has force fed those scenes in.
The good
- Solid acting, Walken is never not worth a watch
- Occasionally funny
The bad
- Vapid story
- Cringe at times
- Episodes too long
- Slow paced
It just isn't very good. Offensively bad? Not at all, it has redeemable aspects. Just another bang average show with high ratings that baffle me.
Man on the Moon (1999)
Best not to go in blind
I went in vaguely knowing who Kaufman was but not to any real extent. That is to say, I couldn't tell you much other than he was in Taxi and considered both unusual and talented. On reflection I think that worsened the experience for me considerably.
With subsequent research I can confirm that Carey performs remarkably here. He continuously surprised me with his acting ability (though I do not enjoy his comedic ventures), and I'll also mention that - though a much smaller role - Love is pretty solid too.
What the film lacks is context of Kaufman's absurdity. And some of that lies on the audience's shoulders. This is a movie, not a documentary after all. It was at times an annoying watch, likely intentionally. It was also at times quite touching and sincere. The mystery to Kaufman's madness be it perceived or genuine remains with me and I suppose that's the whole point of his work. What is real? And if I'm entertained, does it even matter?
Again, had I known more about him perhaps I'd have enjoyed the movie more. I was interested throughout but not necessarily entertained. Some scenes linger beyond their welcome. Likely this is to create a longer testimony toward Kaufman, but it weakened things for me. That's my fault, I accept.
The good:
- Carey's acting
- A fascinating character
The bad:
- Hard work in parts
- Lacks context of personality
An interesting movie rather than a good one.
Roma (2018)
Aesthetically brilliant; regrettably arduous
The opening of Roma encapsulates the movie perfectly. It's a stunning visual of water flowing across the ground from a maid's weary mop, which begins to reflect the home around it inspiringly. It's a lovely shot, truly. You do however, sit on this shot for longer than necessary before you move on, which is unfortunately how noticeable segments of the movie felt to me.
It really is wonderful to look at, as has been noted by any pair of eyes that have glanced at this movie. The artistry behind the cinematography is wholeheartedly commendable and alone worthy of award. This, however, is where an element of subjectivity creeps in. The look and feel of the movie is excellent but you're waiting something approaching 70 minutes for any sort of 'thing' to really begin. And that is OK if your movie features captivating dialogue but it sadly lacks lines of note. It hosts characters which are largely really quite flat. The children for example are main dwellers here but you'd do well to be able to adequately distinguish them by any sort of adjective. Sofia threatens to have elements of personality as the movie proceeds but only fleetingly so. Cleo herself is portrayed perfectly well by. Aparicio (even more so considering this seems to be her first acting gig of note) but it isn't a role that requires a sprawling range due to the limitation of the character.
That said, there are two truly worthwhile scenes: the hospital scene and the water scene (of course, with alluring nods back to our opener). Both these scenes are both striking and memorable for more than just their visuals. With see Cleo's courage in both manifesting in different ways, as well as a love for her family; both blood and employed. The loss of Cleo's child enforces a change over Cleo, but for the most part that change is speaking less than she already does. The scene in the hospital really is great though. The devastation is palpable, as is the professionally detached manner of the staff in the background. This is a singular point of extremity to Cleo and indeed any mother. For the hospital staff, this is simply Tuesday. Cleo restores some kind of redemption to her loss of child by rescuing the kids from the vengeful waves in a scene which drives anxiety. It is obvious they will drown. And then it is obvious they will be saved. And then it feels obvious they will all drown, in fact. It is a masterclass in suspense.
Outside of that however, there's mostly pottering around to set a scene which is already set (her role within the family is pretty clear from the first 10 minutes, the rest is superfluous). This time could have been better spent focusing on items it should have beckoned toward us rather than waved away. For example,why and when did Fermin join Los Halcones? How could he react so angrily toward Cleo? What was Cleo's story before working for this family? What was happening within the family to tempt Antonio away? What was the point of the forest fire? I've seen suggestions that some of this is to illustrate that someone in Cleo's position would often be unaware of certain things herself but I refute that as an indolent defence frankly.
I understand this is essentially drawn exclusively from Cuaron's memory and the movie no doubt reflects that experly. If you wish for that to avoid parading down a hole of self indulgence then I think the audience could be offered a little more in terms of output or perhaps a little less in terms of filler. Art need not entertain and entertainment need not be artistic but for me - and of course this doesn't apply to everyone - I like at least a serving with my main course.
The Good
- Strong debut performance from Aparicio
- Genuinely remarkable cinematography
The Not So Good
- Character Development
- Pace
- Sidelined subplots
Conclusion Incredibly well crafted but ultimately dull.