Change Your Image
brent-27849
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Oppenheimer (2023)
Oscar goes to
Most likely another over rated, over hyped movie by another over rated, over hyped director. A three hour movie and the fact I knew Oppenheimer was the main architect of the first atom bomb going in is about as much as I knew going out.
Not a moment spent on his childhood, where he grew up, his parents, what kind of student he was. Instead it's basically divided in three, one leading up to the bomb, one leading up to some sort of investigation and one about some senate confirmation hearing. Now doing a movie in flashback is a time worn tradition, but how about some actual context. Instead it's a bunch of scenes, one after the other and for what reason? To come up with some big revelations at the end?
Well let me jump to one of the last ones, showing the same consideration this movie shows to the viewer. There are three comeuppances in this movie, one of them where Downey Jr doesn't get confirmed and one of his people takes some kind of pleasure in it, because as we learn, it was all a set up to get Oppenheimer. Here's a fact, didn't care, don't care.
And the supposed reason? Because Oppenheimer embarrassed him once? Are you kidding me, some childish vendetta?
Which takes me back to the investigation and what exactly was the punishment, he got his security revoked? Which is also the second comeuppance, when Blunt gets into it with the lawyer and I guess she gets the better of it. Again, don't care, didn't care.
May as well do the third comeuppance while we're at it, at some ceremony, which indicates nothing really bad happened, again Blunt who refuses to shake hands with a guy who bad mouthed her husband, what, decades ago. You guessed it, don't care.
But that is the problem because I don't care about any of these characters, not least of which Blunt. I'm not even sure why she's still married to him, or in fact married him in the first place. They meet, they marry, suddenly she's a drunk who could care less about her kid and all she does is complain, every scene. And she's the most developed character of the bunch.
Some girl Oppenheimer really loved who is a girl with an attitude, who doesn't like flowers or clothes for that matter. Wow.
The rest is a joke. Damon? Every time he shows up it's like, oh, there's Matt Damon, looks like he just got his costume off the rack and showed up from taking his kids to soccer practice. And Affleck, who I don't like at the best of times, gee, has he paid for his sandwich yet in Bawston? And Malek? Wondering what he was even doing in the movie, until his great big speech, oh yeah, now I know why.
Which leaves the bomb, and even that gets it wrong. The whole tension in the dessert is supposed to be whether the test is going to work or not, but the cruddy music is designed to create anticipation of the big boom, they're entirely in opposition to each other, which is a test of how lousy the characters are, that Nolan won't trust them to create the tension, he has to overlay it.
As a side note, then Blunt gets the call about bringing in the sheets; newsflash, you can do it one of two ways, either you don't show the explosion and just make the call, or if you do show the explosion, there's zero reason for the call.
Which leads finally to Oppenheimer himself and the last movie revelation with Einstein, oh we might have just started the chain reaction. Well we're still here so no. Plus it's one thing to show Oppenheimer as conflicted, but this movie tries to have it both ways. He's at least partly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, (I'm not getting into the right or wrong of it), but that's actual reality, and he's talking about the theory of possibly the end of the world? Get that garbage out of here.
But that's how this movie constantly plays it, oh he invented the bomb but golly gee, it was Truman who dropped it. Oh, he invented the atom bomb, but he didn't want no part of the hydrogen bomb. Oh he invented the atom bomb but he was all about stopping nuclear proliferation. Oh he stopped the war but he wasn't really one of those war mongers types cheering him on (btw, why does he see a white woman having her skin melted, it was the Japanese who got hit). Oh, he might have had communist sympathies, but not too much, just enough. I'm not denying any of that might be true, but that doesn't make him complex, all I see is a movie that wants its cake and eat it too. I understand this isn't a documentary, so some creative license is allowed, but I can't think of another biopic where in the end, I felt like I knew less about what happened or the people involved, and much of what I am told. I'm not sure I believe for a second.
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)
Where has Indy gone?
Unlike some other reviews, I was actually underwhelmed by the opening and the de-aging of Indy. I found it more distracting than anything as the emphasis seemed to be to show him young as opposed to making a truly exciting and memorable sequence of events. I wasn't even sure what the real goal was, other than trying to not get caught of course, as it goes from the knife to the time device, from one bad guy to the next, to some idea about stopping the train that only happens when the bridge gets blown up of which Indy has nothing to do with anyway.
Again unlike some, I was actually happy to see old Indy, even the grumpy, uninterested version - I was okay if he has to get dragged into one more adventure, as long as he gets involved once it starts going. I was even okay with Helena, at least at the beginning, as she was the one who had to bring him in. And it seemed to be working okay, with good old Indy riding a horse and escaping the bad guys with some flair. So she got away with the dial, of course she would or what else would be the point of the story?
Unfortunately as the movie progressed, it got worse and worse as I began to realize good old Indy was really just old and that he was playing second fiddle to her. In scene after scene, she's smarter than him, knows more about archaeology than him and is even the one leading the action. Scene after scene, I kept wondering why isn't Indy the one doing that? Why is she the one driving with Indy sitting in back like Miss Daisy? Why is she the one throwing caution to the wind and jumping to try and get the device back? Why is she holding out her hand to him underwater? Why is she the one reading the code and describing everything? Why is she the one who has the stick of dynamite and the plan of how to escape? Why is she the one taking all the bugs off Indy, which is to say now it seems like Indy is scared of snakes, eels, and bugs, not to mention climbing? Why is she the one riding the motorbike and making it onto the plane while Indy sits there weak and wounded? And why is she the one knocking him out because he's confused?
I know why of course, we all do, but the entire idea that you can just interchange people is absurd. It actually matters who is doing what, believe it or not, the person playing the part. In the original Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indy tells the story of the staff and how the Ark is to be found - it's a small scene but absolutely crucial as it sets the entire stage for the movie to make people say yeah, I want to go along for this ride. After listening to Helena drone on and on about the dial, I'm thinking, just give it to the Nazi guy already, and shut up. The bug scene would have been a perfect time for her to entirely freak out and for Indy to say he had seen worse, in reference to Temple of Doom and the spiders in Raiders. For one small moment, when they're trying to gain entrance to the tomb, Indy is Indy again, figuring out the puzzle, and I'm thinking good, finally, maybe a reference to the beginning of Raiders or the end of Crusade as he has to go through a series of obstacles, but nope, it's a one and done as the dial is just sitting there for whoever wants it. Big disappointment. As for who should get their clock cleaned at the end, I'm thinking of someone but it definitely isn't Indy, not least of which it was done before in Temple when he becomes bad Indy for a while, and in Last Crusade when Indy tries to get the cup and it's his dad who has to bring him back.
Which is the point. It's one thing to reduce Indy to the role of the father as in The Last Crusade, played impeccably by Sean Connery as the loving yet disapproving dad for whom Indy can never seem to impress with his daring do. It is quite another to reduce him to the nice yet completely incompetent Marcus Brody who would get lost in a phone booth without directions.
Some might say so what's wrong with that anyway? Simple, because I didn't pay to watch Helena upstage Indy, I paid to watch Indy be Indy. I know he's a senior citizen now so I'm not expecting him to escape rolling boulders any longer (though if it's all CGI nowadays anyway, I suppose why not?), but I do expect him to still carry the action and save the day. Assuming a ten dollar average ticket, I can honestly say I pay eight for Indy, a dollar for Marion and another for Saleh, a decent Antonio cameo and an okay villain. I can also say I didn't pay a single dime for Helena and that's pretty much exactly what she's worth.
Lorelei (2020)
Worse than fake
I was kinda, sorta willing to give this movie a pass for most of it. True it was kind of boring with characters and a story that has been done plenty of times before. Still it seemed to have its heart in the right place about people doing what they have to eke out an existence. One movie that kept coming to mind is Terms of Endearment, a movie I actually don't like because it traffics in faux realism. This movie at least seemed to be more realistic.
That is until I got to the ending and this movie turned out to be fakier than the fakiest thing out there. I got really annoyed as I felt that I just got played by this movie, that it isn't about realism, it's about some selfish, self absorbed person who thinks it's all about her. It's not even a moral question of her being a bad mom, it's the fact that she doesn't care if she's a mom or not. Introducing Lorelei, yeah, no kidding, she goes from being a maid to a mermaid, well isn't that deep; maybe she sprouts wings too and becomes a water sprite.
There's some question about the ending being unclear. I don't see why. Guy has to go back either way, he's on parole, even if he can make a deal later where he can stay in California, he has to go back to his home state, though why he would come back is beyond me.
That's because we know she ain't going back, that's for sure, she's already made her decision, she's a mermaid for goodness sake. In fact I was a little disappointed that she didn't look a little disappointed that they found her, that would have been more realistic at least.
For starters, if it was such a big deal for her to go to California, then why didn't she do it years earlier? Seems like all she had to do was pile the kids in the car with a full tank of gas, and voila, she would find her dream job.
Speaking of California and the great big ocean, I'm not sure where the bulk of the movie is set, but it's a place filled with trees and mountain vistas and lakes and streams, doesn't exactly seem like they were starving for natural beauty or being a part of nature. Now she's living in LA, surrounded by smog and concrete, with maybe a few trips to the ocean and beach a month, hardly a step up.
And speaking of her job, what does that pay, minimum wage, in a way more expensive place to live? So she gives up a house, run down and a rental to be sure, but guaranteed the best she'll be able to do is rent a run down apartment surrounded by other run down apartments. Though I suppose if the guy does come back, he can have a much more lucrative drug dealer operation.
Also speaking of her job, kidding right? That's what she's potentially giving up her family for? Well how long before actual reality hits this fantasy movie and she nearly drowns a couple of times playing mermaid, or catches some disease in the too cold, not clean enough water or just moans about the fact that after a few weeks swimming in tepid water, her skin will no doubt look like a wrinkled up catcher's mitt?
But of course why ruin a total fantasy, right? Maybe the real open ending is a question of whether or not the kids stay with her in a cheap, too small apartment, exposed to even more potential violence, or go back with the guy and live their lives with him. Can't say as I would blame them if they went with him and if he decided to accept them as his family. Because as already stated, know for a fact she's not going back because she's certainly found her life in LA, and that's what really matters. After all why do a realistic movie about family with all of its ups and downs, all of its sacrifices and heart ache and compromises, when you can just do a movie about one person doing exactly what she deserves and wants. Introducing the Amazing Lorelei.
Congratulations! It's a mermaid.
When You Finish Saving the World (2022)
Being kind
I am no doubt being very generous in my rating, but rather than focusing on all the lousy aspects of this movie, I'll focus on the couple that are decent. I also need to preface this by saying I can't stand Jesse Eisenberg as an actor. In almost everything I've seen him in, I wish someone would punch him in the face. Having said that, as writer and director, and thankfully not in the movie, it was not as bad as expected.
Mostly the positives stem from the ending. While not entirely earned, at least it doesn't end up with some happy ending where the boy gets the girl and the mom "saves" the poor family and everyone learns a lesson about social justice. In fact she gets told in no uncertain terms that hey, guess what, you don't have to go to college in order to have a good and successful life. Nice.
As for Finn, sure he's a whiny smart mouth most of the time, but I actually prefer the fact that he's wrapped up in his own little world without a clue as opposed to the alternative. Unlike the girl he's interested in, who is wrapped up in her own little world as well as completely full and sure of herself. Actually that's being a little unfair to her but the point I like is that he tries to virtue signal, only he has no idea how to do it, he's just some dumb kid trying to fit in and get a girl to like him. Unlike those who are good at virtue signaling, who are either just as idiotic, hypocritical, or in most cases, both.
Again I know the ending is sentimental and not entirely earned. But what I appreciate about it is that it shows the importance of family. Maybe it's meant to be ironic, or maybe it was unintentional, and given movies today it's hard to say. But taken at face value, what it shows is that in the end, no matter all the ups and downs, or the pain love and family might mean, it still has more value, more purpose and more happiness in it than all the SJW crap put together. For that I salute you.
Bullet Train (2022)
Oops, I did it again
I can't believe I just watched this movie in direct succession after watching Ambulance. I could pretty much write the same review, at least the part about it being a soul crushing, life sucking experience that made me wonder what is the point of anything. I swear I need to watch something truly cleansing, maybe Singing in the Rain, or at least Raiders of the Lost Ark. Hell, I'll settle for watching Happy Gilmore again. I mean, Brad Pitt better not talk to me about bad luck. I figure I'm being truly punished for something I did in another life time. All I know is if I watch a third movie like this in a row, I'm very likely to jump off the nearest cliff, happily and gratefully.
I have no doubt everyone associated with this movie thinks they're being real clever and smart - I just have no idea why. It just makes me sad. Nuff said about that.
It's funny, and perhaps counterintuitive, but I used to watch way more movies when places like Blockbuster were still around. I would regularly rent two or three movies on the weekend, and if I had some time off, I could watch 12 or 14 movies in a week's time span. I used to really regret when Blockbuster disappeared. Now all I can say is thank god. I can't even begin to imagine the pain and suffering I've avoided over the years since then. I have access to anything I want, all at my fingertips, but I find it so easy to simply scan on by without finding a single thing worth watching. I still pay at least some attention to what comes out and sometimes certain movies make it onto my radar screen for whatever reason, but I am now truly glad that the vast majority escape by attention and interest. Even a few of these in a short time span and I can go months without wanting to watch another new release. Sometimes I'm a little sorry about that, but mostly, it's just whew! What a relief.
Ambulance (2022)
Title says it all
I suppose on some level all movies, no matter how good, are nothing more than a waste of time. But even movies that aren't very good generally at least have some point for existing, some idea they're trying to get across, whether worthwhile or not, whether well executed or not.
Then there's Ambulance which is not only a waste of time, it's a waste of life. That is to say it made me start to question my own life, as in what the hell must I be doing with it to waste it watching this total piece of crap.
The plot, guys try and rob a bank, screw up, then drive around in an ambulance. That's it. Now I know it's easy to reduce any movie to it's most basic - sometimes I do this, in some cases perhaps a little unfairly, but usually it's for a particular scene, just to illustrate how silly or stupid it is. But in Ambulance, nope, that's it, and that's being generous. The Cannonball Run, also with some people driving around in an ambulance, deserves more description.
But then, that's the point, the title of the movie says it all - Ambulance. Uh huh. That's exactly how lazy it is. I imagine if Bay had directed Speed, he would have called it Bus. Or maybe Taxi Driver, he would have called it Taxi - as in, why isn't it stopping, I'm waving my hand.
Still, I have a couple of other ideas for what the movie could have been called. Maybe, Guy Eats a Piece of Sushi. Or maybe, Girl Talks on a Phone. Or maybe, Bunch of Non-sensical Chase Scenes. Or maybe best of all, Stupid. Says it all.
By the way, just to note, yeah I'm sure the less bad guy doesn't go to jail for the rest of his life for murder. No, just the next fifty years for let's see, armed robbery, shooting a police officer, kidnapping, grand theft auto, reckless driving putting the public at risk, conspiracy with the drug lords which leads to the captain getting killed, and I'm sure various parking and speeding tickets. Also by the way, the only reason he so called saves the police officer's life is because they steal the ambulance and don't take him to the hospital right away, wow, what a hero.
Anyway, back to life.
The Descendants (2011)
As bad as the first time
Not sure why I watched this movie a second time. I didn't like it the first time either. All I can say is it's the dead of winter and for some reason I like watching movies with tropical locations with people wearing shorts and flip flops all day long. Well, so much for what I liked about this movie.
It starts by saying people in Hawaii or any paradise location can have just as many problems as anyone else. Now I don't know anyone who didn't think that anyway, but really this movie should have said rich white people can have as many problems as anyone else. Now I don't usually complain about this because as far as I'm concerned, anyone can make any movie they want with anyone they want and for whatever reason they want. However I have to say it's pretty ironic because while the movie is set in Hawaii, from what I can tell, all it is was an excuse for a bunch of rich white people to go to Hawaii and make a movie. In fact the only believable scenes are when the characters are actually on the beach or eating or staying at some hotel resort. And while it is mocked at the beginning, my guess is all anyone on this movie was doing when they weren't shooting was drinking Mai Tai's, surfing, staying at fancy hotels or beach houses and doing all the touristy things that every other tourist does.
As for the actual locals, who supposedly have as many problems as anyone else, not so much. They are barely backdrop and mostly annoying, and I'm including the idiot boyfriend doing his best Spicoli impersonation. Now I know some will argue, there were white settlers as well. No doubt, but that's hardly an excuse for an entire movie to be about nothing other than rich white people in Hawaii. Including Judy Greer, who while I like in a general sense, her, along with her husband, have got to be two of the.whitest actors in Hollywood, yet they too are presented as locals, along with Beau Bridges doing his best version of his brother's "the Dude". Supposedly Clooney is half native Hawaiian in this movie, yet all the other cousins and friends are completely white, not a native cousin among the bunch. I mean, this movie couldn't have been any whiter than if it was set in the Nebraska in the middle of winter.
As for the movie, just a dull slog, jokey without being funny, dreary without being meaningful. Sure it's depressing to watch what happens but that in no way makes it deep or compelling.
As for the characters, couldn't stand a single one. Supposedly realistic, but all this movie ever goes for is the most melodramatic and over the top reaction and response. The most realistic character was the one in a coma. And I didn't like her either.
As for the storyline, utterly pointless. Wife is dying and Clooney is trying to find the guy she was having an affair with. What? As one character says, what does it matter now and instead of agreeing, the movie just drones on anyway. Not to mention, oh I hate you but I still love you, yet how about the most obvious response, if the wife was awake and since she wanted a divorce and was in love with someone else, she would see him as nothing more than a pathetic fool, which he is regardless of the fact that she doesn't wake up.
As for the other storyline, talk about rich white people again. Should he or shouldn't he sign the land deal? Who cares? But this movie obviously does. Now I'm sure there is ongoing debate, especially among the true locals, about the balance between keeping the natural beauty and economic development, especially of resorts. For one thing it's not exactly as though Hawaii is nothing more than trees and people living huts. Yeah, million dollar huts with air conditioning and golf courses and tennis courts and snorkeling tours. Again I'm not saying there isn't debate as to how much is too much with some thinking any is too much while others see the economic advantages to building more. But that debate is no where in this movie, where it is just assumed not signing the development deal is heroic and that every local person is onside with that. I only bring this up because again of how this movie should have just been about rich white people. The point is I like how when the movie needs to be about Hawaii, suddenly Clooney has true Hawaiian blood in him, but when it comes to the idea of selling the land for development and making a fortune in the process, suddenly it's all about of rich white cousins trying to cash in without any thought to the island's history or culture. Again funny how none of the cousins seem to have any true native blood in them. Makes it so much easier to have any kind of true debate about the advantages and disadvantages when the only debate is between the rich white people and the great Hawaiian hero, George Clooney.
All My Puny Sorrows (2021)
Self pity party
I wasn't sure if I should bother reviewing a movie with at the time of writing, twelve reviews, but then I thought, why not, I'm not above punching down on garbage
To paraphrase one of my favourite scenes from "Roseanne", from Becky to Darlene,, oh, school is too hard, my friends don't like me, well do something about it then you little wimp.... Oh no one understands you because you're so complex, well that's crap, you're just a whiny little basket case who's milking this depression thing for all it's worth.
The problem with this movie is I'm not really sure which sister should say it to which. In general it follows every cliched beat from the mother blaming herself so the daughter can tell her not to, onto the sister who didn't try and kill herself telling the one who did that her life ain't so great either and she's mad at her to her oh so smart daughter saying smartass things, oh but she cares too you know - oh yes, such tough love because its such a tough, uncompromising movie - as Becky said, well that's just crap.
The flashback scenes are pathetic, yeah, I know, they were sisters as kids too, I kind of figured so, though half the time I couldn't even figure out which was which and cared even less to find out. Is there even a scene between the suicidal sister and her mom? Or between the husband and wife? Window dressing at best, especially with the husband, no I'm sure he had no reason to care if she lived or died. And after she does die, having her character still show up is way late, very lazy and completely at odds with the so called tough realism this movie supposedly wants to show.
But what really bugs me about this movie is represented by the title All My Puny Sorrows. Now I know it's supposed to be ironic, take the big stuff and make it small and take the small stuff and make it big, I get it, because see, her sorrows aren't puny at all, or at least not supposed to be. But see, the real reason it's ironic is My. What I mean is supposedly it's about how caring and empathetic she is, but she's not, neither of them are, they are just two self pitying whiny basket cases who only care about themselves and their feelings.
This movie is all about picking sides with as many villains as any James Bond movie. Standard attack on the religious guy. Now I am far from religious myself but it is such an obvious and easy target. He goes to see her but god forbid, pardon the pun, it's treated as though out of generosity or caring, so much easier to just go for the religious judgemental stereotype. The guy in the garage, of course just some Neanderthal who cares only about his car, forget the fact he has a wife or kid. The lady with the extremist kid, presumably, well just another evil person who should be derided. And of course the lawyer boyfriend, how dare he describe her sister's suicide incorrectly and of course he would never even think of suicide himself, which by definition must make him, along with the rest a bunch of unfeeling, uncaring losers.
Yeah, well here's the response, they're not, its the two sisters who are. Because all they give a crap about is themselves and their own gigantic sorrows, at least to themselves. Because of course only they have feelings, only they have problems and only they care. Once again we'll that's just crap. Especially the lawyer guy, considering who he's seeing, I imagine he must know what it feels to want to kill himself. But the other cute examples she gives of people who would never even think of killing themselves, not arguing the truth of that, but you know what, I can think of a whole lot of other people for whom that's true, not least of which the person her father had an interesting talk about, you know who I'm talking about, only I mean the son and you better believe every one who happens to be on his side of the aisle. I have zero fear that any of them would try killing themselves, though if they did, I imagine they would fail anyway.
Sorry I digress. The simple fact is it is rather hard to feel empathetic towards people who have zero empathy for anyone they deem undesirable and who only seem to have empathy for themselves and their own crap sorrows. Long story short, I'm pretty sure we all have our own puny problems and sorrows, so all I can say for the people in this movie, yeah, have a nice life, long or short, I don't care, because none of it is my problem.
Where the Crawdads Sing (2022)
faux realism is the phoniest of all
Start with the ending. That is to say after a very tepid so called murder mystery and a perfunctory courtroom setting that was incredibly dull. The entire defense case rests on the idea that Kya is not a murderess because the plan is so utterly stupid and outlandish that she couldn't possibly have done it. Of course realizing that she did do it doesn't change that fact, it just illustrates how utterly stupid and outlandish this movie is.
But in hindsight, it's even worse than that. Now I kind of guessed the ending anyway, only I thought she did it in the moment out of self defense. So I kept waiting for the actual killing to be shown, except it never happens. Why? Because it would have shown she killed him in first degree cold blood premeditation all the way. And for anyone who wishes to disagree or say it was ok anyway, sorry folks, self defense means in the moment, not cause she kind of thought he might try something sometime in the future. Or maybe not. But why take chances, right?
Now skipping back, what a total fantasy crock this entire movie is. It's hard to know where to even begin, except I kept wondering why is she even the marsh girl? What difference did it make if she lived in some high rise on the east side of New York with a snarky attitude? She supposedly has been on her own since she was a child, living in nature, except she looks and acts like she just came off a modelling shoot.
All she does is sit and draw pictures all day. Where she even gets the material, I don't know, I guess she orders it on-line. Again, it's such a complete and total fantasy. Never got sick, never had a fever, never had a cavity, never accidentally cut herself and gotten a staph infection that most likely would have killed her in three days without proper treatment given her surroundings. Never sprained an ankle or broke a bone or got appendicitis or needed her tonsils out. And that's just stuff if she was in the regular world, because she also never had to worry about snakes or bugs or maybe eating the wrong mushroom or just living near a swamp, no, I'm sure no diseases around there, or maybe just being a scared little girl alone in the dark, of course not. Or maybe just smelling like the swamp and sweat nearly 24 hours a day, I'm sure she always made sure to use the delicate cycle for her clothes in her washing machine out by the guest room. I'm sure when her time of the month showed up, she understood what that meant and just started using the endless amount of tampons she must have had, or maybe she ordered those on-line as well. My only question was, did she make an appointment to get her hair done in town, or did her hairdresser make house calls?
Not to mention, never had to worry about dry rot or a leaky roof, but then she read books, so she was probably a journeyman carpenter who could fix all that, just needed to use her supply of hammers and nails and treated wood and shingles. Or maybe order that on-line. Same with a water pump that never had issues and a motor boat that required zero upkeep, never had to service the engine or worry about rust or it seizing up or maybe it just stopped working one day because things like that actually happen in the real world. Of course there's always on-line.
Oh, but see, that's where I'm wrong because it's set in the 1960's. Yeah, the 1960's. The civil right's movement. The Vietnam war. But that passes by this movie and town as only a fantasy could. Her brother shows up in an army uniform in 1969 and all I could think was where was this guy stationed, the Bahamas? And as for the kindly couple, first of all, they use her as child labor in case no one noticed. And supposedly they are good, god fearing people, and in their mind it makes sense not to get child services involved, get her in a home with other children, get her in school, no, just leave her out there, sure she'll be ok. Oh, but she would have run back home. Well, not if the home was deemed a health risk and leveled, the boat was confiscated, and she was sent to another state.
Oh but what a big meanie I am to poor little Kya. Which is the other problem, she's in nearly every scene, and all I felt like I was watching was paint dry - you know it must be drying, it must be doing something, but after a while you just get up and go do something else. No sense of what living alone in that way would actually have on her character. Nothing. Perfect manners, perfectly quiet. Perfect. I'm not sure why no one wanted to take her home to meet the family, I'm certain she knew which fork to use. Not a single hair out of place, or even that she might have had a slightly more animalistic view towards food or sex. Instead her paint drying first boyfriend stops because he really respects her, uh huh. But I'm sure her response would be, oh yes, thank you for respecting me as a human being, and you're right, given today's mores regarding sexual behavior, non-marital sex is highly frowned upon.
But of course she would know all that because she knows how to read. Right, so she goes from mis-spelling leaf to knowing everything because she reads every book in the library (dripping sarcasm). Right, of course, she's a marine biologist, just like George from 'Seinfeld', because you know he always wanted to pretend that he was an architect. I got news for you, I took grade 12 chemistry and physics with a book and even a teacher, and I knew within 3 tests that I wasn't never gonna be no chemist or have anything to do in the field. Oh, but not Kya, because if you can read, well, you must be a doctor then - maybe she googled it. Oh, but she did learn from her boyfriend, right, a high school student learning it for the first time himself, yeah, sure makes sense, why would he or anyone even have to go to college. He probably just went there, read a book, never attended a class, got 100% on every test and wondered why are there even any professors, he already knew it all cause he knew how to read.
But of course she's really a future renowned published artist, don't want to forget that. Able to sit and paint and publish and kill and have the perfect family and life. Which is the one other sub-text of this movie that really bugs me. Her first perfect boyfriend is of course college educated because he could never dream of being a fisherman. Her evil, abusive uneducated second boyfriend is happy with a promotion at some go no where job. Similarly, I'm pretty sure her abusive drunk father wasn't attending Harvard. Is that done on purpose? I believe so and that absolutely disgusts me. And Kya, while not attending college, is of course whip smart, but the question is why is she whip smart? Is it because she has a very good understanding of nature because she lives in it, and is she whip smart because she has a pretty good understanding of people and society and what they're all about, or is she whip smart simply because she read a bunch of books with graduate understanding of every topic without setting foot in a classroom? Easy to say, well, it could be all 3, but somehow I doubt it, and I have a sneaking suspicion that the only reason she is given a pass is for one reason alone. And before anyone wonders, this is coming from someone university educated, and not just that, but with a degree in English Lit. Admittedly a pretty useless degree. Oh, except when I'm reviewing trite, cliched movies and books with boilerplate storylines, characters and dialogue, then it comes in incredibly handy.
Don't Worry Darling (2022)
3 fantasies, 0 reality
The first fantasy is of course the one that takes up the majority of the film. Basically it's me the writer, me the director, me no like the 1950's. 1950's bad. Odd that most of the characters seemed to like it, even the ones who weren't supposed to, at least until they started breaking empty egg shells. But of course they must not really like it based on the fact that the 1950's bad. Why else would she saran wrap her face or get squished against the glass - see, get it, because it was so suffocating. Yet it's a superimposed decision. That is to say, why this movie doesn't have the guts to have the characters begin to question the entire set up of the 1950's, or at least the straw man version that is created in this movie, the roles as they were, maybe even get the counter argument (I know, I know, I'm sure there aren't any but just to play devi's advocate, and evil it must be) - instead it's left to simple comments like it's strange, and something's not right here and the creator of it is a jerk and we need to leave and you're nuts, no I'm not, yes you are, kiss my butt.
Still it was obvious where this movie was headed, the so-called twist. Now in fairness I figured it was just because all the women were kidnapped and brainwashed in the present time; that is to say I was willing to take the movie at face value, that this world while the obvious fantasy of a certain cliched group, it was an actual reality that was created. I say this because how it actually plays out makes no tangible difference, is in no way creative or new or interesting, except to say it is even more annoying because all it does is create some very serious plot holes and inconsistencies.
If it's a program, why don't they just tweak it a little to deal with anyone getting a little frisky? Why would you need a bunch of guys in red suddenly show up suddenly to take people away? Away from what, if they're all hooked up to some machine anyway? Why even allow people to get hurt or injure themselves in this world? And how is that giving her supposed fantasy shock treatment actually causes her to remember things that she's not supposed to remember, kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
More importantly, it begs the question why does the guy actually need her anyway? I mean, you don't get to have it both ways and if it's all a computer simulation where who she is, is completely altered, then what reason would you need an actual physical version of her? Oh, the program can make her completely different, but it still needs her body, as opposed to just some creation in the fantasy world? Not diggin' it. Not to mention why if he can become whoever he wants as well, why does everyone else have the same exact back story and they must all come from only a few places in the world? Even if they all are in Philadelphia for real, why would they all need to think they come from the same place and meet the same way in this fantasy land? Others have mentioned the other movies this movie has, uh, well borrowed from to be nice about it, from Stepford Wives to Truman Show, but you might want to include Total Recall, at least Arnold got to decide if he wanted to be a sport's hero or a spy and that his girl was going to be both demure and a little cheap (not the actual word).
Just a few more issues before moving on. Gotta let you know, the big sex scenes, if this was his fantasy, kind of thinking it has the roles reversed. Just saying. Why the woman kills Chris Pine at the end, not a clue. One of the dumbest conclusions to a car chase I've ever seen, three cars in the middle of a desert, a desert, miles and miles in every direction, again just saying. And really, why is there even a portal, not even sure what that would result in since the first time she touched it, she just ended up back in her 1950's bed anyway, but again, just create a Dark City Shell Beach (you can never get there), or if it's virtual, a Truman Show dome only without the stairs and door. Just saying.
But as I said at the beginning, this was only the first fantasy of three. In the second, it's reality, and she comes home from a long day of very important work and he's there, has no life of his own, seemingly has difficulty in even feeding himself, wants her, but she doesn't need or want him, has no need to shower and is headed back to her important work in a few hours. Now, it is not a pure fantasy precisely because it's reality, supposedly, but if you read between the lines, you know exactly what the fantasy is. That is to say the above is all true, only he should be completely happy about it. Because there's nothing wrong with her choosing work over him. There's nothing wrong with her showing absolutely no consideration for his feelings. It's wrong of him to want her and of course she doesn't need a shower because either she never stinks or he should be happy with her stinking - I'm sure she doesn't sweat, she glistens. And if he can't handle that, well that's his problem isn't it?
Now does that mean it justifies what he does? Of course not. But consider it, his biggest problem is because he wants to spend time with her, he wants her, and he wants his feelings considered. Oh my god, what a monster, no wonder he forces her back to the 1950's. Even the I'm hungry moment, what would happen if he had actually made, or at least ordered a nice meal for them, I assume he knows how to order on-line, could you imagine that, of course not because in this fantasy world she might not have come out looking so hot.
The crazy thing is if this movie had actually been honest, it might have been interesting. That is to say, he feels neglected, so he sinks further and further into a fantasy world where he's the boss, while she keeps on doing what she does in reality, a question of if all life is about is what makes you happy, no need to compromise or think of someone's else's feelings, then what do you need with anyone else anyway? Instead it's easy to think that she actually would have treated him better if he was her dog, at least she probably would have fed him, asked him if he missed her and walked him before not taking a shower. Even back in 1950's fantasy, when she finds out what he did, funny how it's how dare you do that to my life, MY life, no mention of their life, that maybe if he was having problems, they should have discussed it together and tried to work something out. Nope, it was her life only of which it seemed he was there to serve some part. A bit of extrapolation but one wonders what would have happened in the fantasy real world, if he said he wanted out, she would have just said yeah, go ahead, take a hike, and he probably should have been happy with that too, or at least cried himself to sleep. A very rich fantasy life some people have.
Finally the third fantasy, and this is a little tougher because it's only in the briefest of images. That's the one with the nice lighting where they're in bed together and tell each other all that matters is each other. Ha! Now there's a fantasy. For one thing, in terms of how things play out in the reality fantasy, she was pretty much lying through her teeth. But then, maybe she really did believe it. Because maybe in this fantasy, they had no reason to work, maybe they just got paid for sitting on their asses doing nothing. Or maybe they worked from home in a job that obviously by definition meant it could be eliminated but maybe they got paid anyway and could feel important. Or even better, maybe they worked in a world where only they did matter, where everyone else was silenced, even their voices, where everyone had the exact same opinion and everyone who didn't, even millions and millions of people who disagreed, could just be silenced. Like a website that only gave this movie 10 stars; there were no 1 stars, not because there were no 1 stars, only because 1 stars weren't allowed. And all the 10 stars could just believe that everyone agreed with them and they were right about everything. I mean could you imagine a world like that? Thank god that's just fantasy.
Dark Water (2005)
Mostly the same as I remember it
I remember watching this movie when it came out some 17 years ago and decided to watch it again, thinking 3 basic things on the first go around, that nothing much happened in it but that it had an interesting atmosphere, that Jennifer Connelly was amazingly hot and that the ending was pretty good.
Well 17 years later. It still has an interesting atmosphere and yeah, nothing much happens - which is actually kind of why I wanted to watch it again, sometimes it's nice to watch something you know is kind of boring but passes the time, kind of like vanilla pudding. Actually I liked the first twenty minutes as she apartment searches from a realty sort of perspective. I also found John C Reilly fun as the the slumlord. And Tim Roth was also quite good, as was the ex-husband and maintenance guy. The kid too was good as they had the decency to have her act and speak like an actual kid. This is way more like a family drama than a horror movie and in that sense is pretty good.
As for Jennifer Connelly, well yeah, she was still amazingly hot, and in fact is still amazingly hot, as Maverick would attest. Have to be honest, in both my viewings, that was a major driving force in watching. She gives a nice performance as a loving mother on the edge. Over the years, sometimes I've felt that she tries too hard to prove that she's a good actress, that in order to overcome her hotness, she goes out of her way to be depressing. Still this was a nice, mostly understated performance with a good central relationship between mother and daughter.
So why the below average rating? I guess because I'm a little less enthralled with the ending on second viewing. I actually find it to be rather manipulative and emotional blackmail. I mean, first of all, the other little girl could have done what she did at any time in the movie in order to force what she wanted. It wasn't enough just to show what happened to her in order to get her closure? No, instead she does something completely violent and selfish to get her way. Maybe what happened to her and how life treated her was unfair, but to be cold about it, dems the breaks. Just because she had a crappy mom don't mean she gets to steal someone else's. And the way she does it, well who couldn't do that? Hey, give me all your money or I'll do you know what to your kid. Hey, give me your body or I'll do you know what to your kid. It's really kind of sick how that plays out and it's hard to suggest she deserves sympathy even if she did have a sad life. All I can say is if I agreed to be her parent after that kind of awful behaviour, first place we would be headed is out to the woodshed for a very serious talking.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)
May include spoilers of a bunch of movies I can't stand
In fairness, I'm not a huge fan of fantasy based movies. That is why I don't ever review superhero movies because I have long given up on that crapfest. I say this because I would hate anyone to think I don't review them because I have no reason to, or worse, because I actually like any of the ones I have seen. The term rom-com has often been used derisively, and well deservedly in the past few decades, as they are all the same and bad, though I have no idea how anyone who watches all these superhero movies cannot with a straight face say the same about them (and that includes the oh so serious ones, they're even worse).
As for Afterlife, it is a pathetic, long, boring retread of the far superior original. The only reason I give it 3 stars is because of the last fifteen minutes or so when we see much of the original cast, especially Sigourney Weaver, showing a sad glimpse of what it used to be when it was done right. Not sure if showing Harold Ramis is in great taste, but it's handled pretty well and I guess if any movie has the right to show his ghost, it would be a Ghostbuster's movie.
The main reason for this review is a question to myself as to why I constantly allow myself to get suckered time and time again by all these sequels and prequels and reboots, all of which can't hold a candle to the originals.
Simply stated, the only good Ghostbusters is the original Ghostbusters, which is not only a good movie but a classic great comedy full of wit and creative invention. The only good Jaws movie is the first one. The only good Jurassic Park movie is the first one. The only good Silence of the Lambs is the first one with Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster. The only good Halloween is the first one, though I actually do consider Halloween 2 to be somewhat under rated.
Yet still I come back time and time again like a moron. This has caused me to watch at least 3 too many Terminator movies. As well as way too many Mission Impossible movies; while some are ok, the only one that really had any vision and style with an interesting though convoluted storyline was the first one; the rest all blur together and quite frankly the only memorable scenes was when Ethan Hunt/Tom Cruise rock climbs in the opening of the second one and scales a building in Dubai in whichever one that happens in.
Also caused me to watch 2 very bad It movies, and yes, I mean both of them. The original miniseries, while far from perfect, at least had a way better clown and children I actually gave a damn about. The kids in the new version, I could barely tell apart, and it screws up the most important character, Beth, by having the rest of them ogle her. I don't know if that makes it closer to the book, but it totally misses the point as not only is Beth part of the loser club in the minseries, she is the total heart - she is not separate from them, and she is certainly not a Mary Sue, her courage and strength comes precisely from the fact that she is a scared little girl, but who will do anything to help and protect her friends.
Not to mention one too many Star Wars, aka The Force Awakens. Ironically the reason I even set up an IMDb account was to say how much I hated that movie. But because I finally got the bad taste out of my mouth and have zero intention of ever watching it again, I never did review it, except to say it is the worst, and I mean the worst Mary Sue movie ever done - I didn't even know the term Mary Sue until I saw it and had to go research it.
Also way too many Meryl Steep, oh but isn't she a great actress, no, she ain't, lousy movies. Plus way too many Dicaprio, oh but isn't he a great actor, no, he ain't, lousy movies. As well as way too many Robert Deniro, oh, but he must be a great actor, yeah, he was, a long, long time ago, but he sure ain't any longer, lousy movies. And too many Tarantino, oh but isn't he a great director, maybe, but honestly he's only ever done one truly great movie, Pulp Fiction, lousy movies.
But I am getting better. I have not, nor will I ever watch the latest Jurassic movie, or any that come after. I will never watch another Star Wars movie, (the first trilogy was the only good one btw), and not even Luke Skywalker himself was enough to tempt me. I did not watch the last nor will I ever watch another Halloween movie because while I think Jamie Lee Curtis is Aces, please just stop for the love of god. I will not watch the last James Bond movie, and from where I understand they plan to take the series, there is a good chance I will never watch a new one again.
Finally I hear they're making another Ghostbusters movie, but I guarantee I won't be watching that either. And I don't care if it, along with all the others have 90% plus on RT, or 80% plus on this website, I am just going to assume they all suck. How can I be so sure? Call it past experience.
Coda (2019)
Not very good
Isn't really fair to call it long and dull since I kind of knew what I was getting myself into before it began. One of those beach movies/books, whether there's a beach or not, where characters take long walks in the rain and think about every detail of their annoying lives and say profound things about the meaning of life, every five minutes or at least once per chapter, depending, and where nothing else happens.
Actually my complaint is a little more basic. Patrick Stewart is reasonably believable as an aging pianist. Katie Holms is reasonably not believable as a journalist. But the two of them together, it's hard to believe they're even in the same movie. Zero chemistry to say the least, but it's worse than that, because as the movie unfolds, I became more and more depressed as it became clear that it was going to be a May/December romance (sex or no sex).
It's just not set up properly to begin with. She's a journalist wanting to do an article on him. Okay, fine. So why would I think "sparks" should fly between them? You would think she would be trying to create professional distance and you would think he would be just a little bit wary just in case she plans to do a hatchet job on him or at the very least show parts of his life he doesn't want anyone to know about.
Instead they're going on bike rides together through the countryside and long walks where she immediately puts his arm through his. And while she "saves" him at the piano, there's absolutely no resentment on his part that here is one of the world's greatest pianists having to be saved by some wannabe. And then, when he doesn't want to go back onstage, only she can soothe the savage beast by telling him to just go play for the audience. If she actually had a long term relationship to him, if she was his niece or something, maybe, but some girl he met three days ago, get lost. And as for the just play for the audience, again get lost, anyone with any talent at anything isn't just out there for the audience - not to say people shouldn't be aware of an audience, god knows the number of movies being made today where that might be slightly helpful, but as though that's the only driving force, that would pretty much make him a dancing bear for people's amusement.
Again back to the journalist, she wants to do this big story on his entire life, and she hasn't even done any background work to know that his wife killed herself? Kind of an important detail one might think and one which could probably be learned with two clicks of a mouse.
Again back to the pianist. If he don't want to do it anymore, then why the hell does he do it? Again, for young generations, and again, get lost. I mean, everyone begins to lose the touch, no matter what they do, as they get older. Yet I'm supposed to believe he's as good as when he was in his prime, the only real issue is because he's not sure he wants to play in front of an audience anymore. Again, if he don't want to... but more than that, it would have been more interesting to see someone who knew his time, and more importantly, his talent, was on the wane. That it wasn't just stage fright or a one off, but a true and real decline where the playing itself, even if he hit every note, just wasn't the same anymore, either for himself or for those listening. The realization of ones mortality as anything, that it will never be the same and it will never get better. Not just that he needs the proper inspiration and motivation.
Which again brings them back together. To think that the relationship with Katie Holmes would be anything in comparison to the relationship he had with his wife. Not a chance, especially not considering how his wife died. So yeah, I know what happens to Katie, which first of all is incredibly superfluous and still doesn't compare. Might it be sad, yes, of course, but to think it would be the same life altering event as his wife, not possible. He even says it at one point earlier, that as you age you become a pragmatist. Might it be sad for the old guy to lose the pretty girl he just met, sure, compared to the loss of his first true love which he has carried around his entire life? But that's what this movie is saying, as though Katie is the reason he's able to do the last performance in London. This after her article of him is published and of course it must have been just brilliant, not an obvious puff piece or one which dissected him for the entire world to see, no of course not.
On their own, bad enough, but together? Nothing, no music here.
X (2022)
Not everything goes together
It's funny, I like porn. I like slasher movies. But when this movie put the two together, well, it's not like the person who first decided to put peanut butter and chocolate together, that person was a frickin' genius.
For one thing, it's not exactly cutting edge. Pretty much every slasher movie in the 1980's have a certain element of soft core porn in them anyway. As for the 1970's look and shooting style. Again not overly impressed. To have actors who look like they could be from the seventies, the feather hair, the clothes, but the more I think about it, it feels like it's because of movies made in the 1970's that I think people looked and acted and talked that way than because they really are from the 1970's.
The point is there wasn't one character I was particularly interested in. They all seemed to be cliches of cliches, the blond, the Linda Lovelace wannabe, the guy with the gasoline pump in his pocket. And most of that seemed to be cribbed from movies like Boogie Nights (not to mention When Harry met Sally), they're not just doing porn, they're doing art movies and of course they have their own little world in which they look out for each other, they're like a family with a little church mouse too.
Again it's one of those movies where as soon as a character disappears for more than two minutes, I completely forget they were even in the movie. Oh yeah, I forgot about the one in the cellar, how's her hand again? What happened to the blond, she still alive, oh yeah, there she is sleeping.
Which is the point, first they do the porn stuff and then they do the killing stuff, one by one, off the go. Which as another reviewer mentioned, I guessed absolutely every way they were going to be killed. Not even one was a surprise. The only thing I messed up on was the order in which they were killed. After the first guy got killed, I figured it would probably be the blond, boy, girl, boy, girl. But no, they killed all the guys first. Which really makes me wonder about this world, whatever happened to ladies first?
As for the one who survived, yeah, pretty much figured if any of them were going to survive, it would be her. Only problem is I have no idea why she did survive. I mean, she is exactly the same as all the rest, not one thing different, so I can't for the life of me figure out why she lived. Not that I really cared except in a mildly disappointed way.
But of course that leads to the reason behind the killing. I've seen some pretty bad reasons but I honestly can't think of one more stupid. It appears to be because granny ain't gettin' any. That's it. My first thought was well, maybe she should bake a few more pies then, find a hobby. Then I thought, well, it's kind of ironic, they're making a porno movie and it never occurs to the old lady to take matters into her own hands, sort to speak, maybe do it the way porn intended. I suppose in the 1970's they didn't have quite the same technical advances but they live on a farm, it can't be that hard to figure it out.
Of course none was more interesting than wondering why she didn't ask if she could join in. I mean, the movie was called the Farmer's Daughters, and they already made room for the church mouse to join in, so they could have called it the Farmer's Daughters, plus one, and Granny. They were trying to make an art movie, well it don't get any more artistic than that. The great thing is it would have shown what cheap hypocrites they all were. Yes, they have one big scene where they talk about the hypocrisy of prudes and religious folk. Ok, well open minded people that they supposedly are, I would have loved to have seen old granny show up ready to get down to business, ready for her close ups. My guess is their open minds would have closed pretty darn fast, about as fast as they're knees.
Top Gun: Maverick (2022)
First thirty were good
It does well enough for nostalgia. I wasn't one who thought there was much need for a sequel, but the opening did put a smile on my face as it was nearly a duplication of Top Gun. Then to see Tom Cruise again as Maverick being, well, Maverick, was fun, with the iconic jacket and sunglasses and bike and being the same cocky guy.
But after that, it starts to go downhill, first slowly, then right off a cliff until it reaches about mach 10 in terms of being a really stupid movie
It starts to go off the rails right about the time Jennifer Connelly shows up. Here I always thought there wasn't very good chemistry between Cruise and Kelly McGillis in the original, but this movie makes that seem like Romeo and Juliet. At least in the original, McGillis inhabited her own space, that is to say she was call sign "Charlie", she was a civilian superior to Maverick and all the rest. In the sequel, Penny is such an absolute throwaway character. I mean supposedly they have this complicated history, but from the first scene it looks like she's pretty much ready to jump into bed with him from his first grin. If it had at least shown like she had been hurt by him or had moved on with her own life, but no, it's not even close - I mean, you can't have a meet cute with him having to buy drinks when the assumption is they already met a long time ago with a lot of hurt feelings in between. Just bad.
Then the rest of the team starts to show up and it's worse. I mean Hangman and Rooster, as I said I'm all for nostalgia but not a total re-tread. How are they not supposed to be Iceman and Maverick from the original? Just a really bad version of it, perfunctory and phoney.
Then the whole thing between Maverick and Rooster. Again so phoney. Hard feelings because he held him back? Give me a break. Yeah, I get it, can't be because Rooster blames him for his dad's death, because that would be so cliche and obvious, so instead it's just some tepid and pathetic excuse, may as well just have said Maverick gave him a frowny face on his report card.
It does pick up a little with the training sequences, an ok moment with Iceman, and then of course Maverick showing he is Maverick by doing the practice mission better than anyone.
But man, does this movie get stupid in a hurry and pretty much stays there. First it's Star Wars with the canyon and the missiles (laser cannons), and the two meter target (a bunker buster wouldn't have worked?). Forget about talk to me, Goose, I was expecting Obi Wan to show up and say, use the force, Luke. In fact during the training, I could swear Maverick becomes Darth Vader for a moment, trying to kill Luke and his wingmen - the force is strong with this one.
Then the mission happens and it turns into Rambo. Oh look, Maverick has to take on a super duper helicopter, I was just waiting to see the Rusky behind the wheel. If that isn't enough, then it turns into Forrest Gump as Maverick runs about ten miles through the snow in about two minutes, run, Maverick, run. Then it turns into some version of Spies Like Us, as Maverick and Rooster steal an old plane, I was just waiting for Chevy Chase or Dan Ackroyd to show up.
Yes, again there is a pretty cool air fight, even though the enemy plane was way cooler. But then it turns back into Star Wars again. Yeah, I was wondering when Han Solo and the Millenium Falcon was going to show up and I didn't have to wait long, I can't remember, does Hangman yell Yahoo! As he gets rid of Darth Vader, I mean the bad guy?
Again the nostalgia was the best part by far. It's not that the original Top Gun was a great movie, but there are certain movies and tv shows that just perfectly capture a moment in time, and I certainly would say Top Gun is at the top of the list in terms of the 1980's. It's iconoclastic in that sense, it captures the zeitgeist as well if not better than anything else done in that decade. Perhaps a few more examples for me would be Wall Street or Breakfast Club or Family Ties for a tv show; not saying they were the best of the era, but there's just something about them that captures the thoughts and feelings of the decade. Maverick, on the other hand, is a mild diversion at best, a movie that might bring back a few memories of that time but unlikely to ever create memories of its own.
The Lost City (2022)
Beyond bad
I guess I better try and review this movie before I forget all about it... uh oh. As others have said, it's kind of like Romancing the Stone, only it has no romance, no stone, no interesting characters, no plot, no good dialogue, no Danny Devito.
I'll leave it to one comparison between the two movies which illustrates what is wrong. The dance scene. In Romancing the Stone, it's about two people engaged with each other, having fun, growing closer, falling in love I suppose. In Lost City, no, it's about two people each trying to show off, not even to each other, it's just to prove their own ability at dancing, at their own moves, they may as well have just taken turns in front of a green screen. Perhaps a small point, but that in a nutshell is what is wrong not only with this movie but so many movies and shows nowadays. Nothing to do with anyone else, just themselves. It's the, "wait, what?" of the world, one of the most pathetic, grotesque, over used lines ever created. Anyone who thinks when they say that, it's about what the other person said or did. Not a chance. It's hey, look at me, see how I'm reacting to what the other person said or did, aren't I being cute and funny, entirely self centered and entirely about making the joke about themselves. Heck, maybe I do that a lot in my own reviews too, including this one, but that's just an individual reaction to what's on screen, it's not a supposed attempt to try and create a connection between characters that is actually the exact opposite.
Nightmare Alley (2021)
All show, no go
This movie is slow, boring, overlong and ultimately pointless, but then I guess the great mentalist, Bradley Cooper, already knew I was going to say that.
The problem is for a movie about the psychology of a character, it does one bad job. For all of it's deep themes and obvious symbolism about fathers and sons and guilt and sin, I would have traded all of that for some characters who weren't completely one dimensional.
Start with the story opening, if not the movie opening, which is to say Cooper causing his father's death. So? For one thing, it looks like all he did was speed up the process by a few weeks anyway. But more than that, why didn't he just leave? I guess he must have really wanted the old guy's watch, but I'm sure he could have wrestled it off his wrist. I assume he had his reasons for hating him but I'm not sure the movie ever bothers to explain why or why that would haunt him his entire life. Even if the police were after him throughout, then that would have made some sense, but nope.
So then he goes and joins a carny. Again, ok. Of course we find out it's all a bunch of various cons, but there's just something off about it. No sense of wonder at all, just straight to it, as though all the the spectators are just a bunch of stupid rubes. But is that really true? No, everyone knows it's a show, willing to pay for some entertainment, a willing suspension of disbelief.
Then he strikes out on his own with Rooney. Ok. So it's a higher class show, but it's still just a show. As though people go to magic shows because they really think people are getting cut in half. As though the audience, after isn't saying, I wonder how he did that? Oh, well, she was giving him cues, or the blindfold was fake or the people he chose were in on it. I mean, what are movies if not the modern day version of the carny show, full of sight and sound, unless everyone out there thinks that super hero movies are really documentaries.
The point is that the so called con is pretty weak anyway, just people paying to be entertained. That it goes further in a couple of cases, I'm not sure even counts as a crime. I mean people pay for what they get and he basically gives it to them, to give them some peace of mind. That one of them blows away her husband, then herself, well, no refunds.
Agiain it's the fact this movie is slightly off in everything. I don't even know the point of Cate's character, or how different her profession is in this movie. I mean, if it helps people, great, if not, well, is she giving anyone their money back? Don't think so.
So again, some of the carny people show up for like two seconds, but I don't even know why, other than so Colette can give Cooper a bad tarot reading - did she even believe in them, I thought that was part of her con. Then gone with the wind.
Which is hardly different than Rooney. The movie can't even get her leaving right the first time. By the time you read this, I'll be travelling east? Uh, I guess not. Too bad Cooper didn't read it five minutes earlier, he could have at least saved her a cab ride. Or the second time. I mean, such an important character, love of his love, something really bad just happened and it's a slap in the face and walk and that's it, gone like she was never there.
Then back to Cate, again no idea why she's even here. Some major scam, but what is it? It's not about the money. So she plans, I think, to have him arrested, except he should get arrested, then she shoots him with really bad aim, calls security, he tries to strangle her, fails, and goes on the run, except isn't he supposed to be on the run anyway for already killing two people, not to mention his father?
So then he goes back to a carny and becomes a geek. Now I know that's supposed to be some fitting and ironic ending. But I disagree which is again why I find this movie off. I mean I get it's meant to be circular, but it's not, it's just a continuation, because the geek thing was Dafoe's con, it wasn't Cooper. Plus I'm sure every other victim of that con figured out at some point that they had been conned so big deal If Cooper does too. Plus he should have been arrested anyway and sent to jail so I don't really see how him becoming a geek instead is any worse. The point is since he's a mentalist, who knows the con of getting people to believe only because they want to, a true fitting and ironic ending would be if he came across another mentalist who told him all the things he wanted to hear about himself and his own father and realizing himself that it was a con but that he had no other choice but to be willingly conned himself.
Finally back to Rooney for just a second. This is why this movie is such a fail, especially at being so one dimensional. It's not her as an actress. But she supposedly is the one thing Cooper cares about. Really, for this movie to even come close to being any good, meant he had to lose her, but again I don't mean by some stupid slap. Really, by his own actions, he should have gotten her killed, to lose the one thing in his life that he cared about, other than himself, while not keeping this movie from being utterly boring and too long, would have at least shown a little depth.
But as I've indicated, this movie always seems to be missing something, goes through all the right motions, but never once actually gives me a character I even remotely care about or want to know anything more about.
House of Gucci (2021)
Quality bags, lousy movie
I remember walking by a Gucci store in Vegas once and thinking, oh Gucci, I've heard of them before. After watching this movie, I'm pretty sure if I ever walk by another Gucci store, I'll think, oh, Gucci, I've heard of them before, and keep on walking.
I would have been interested in seeing a movie about how Gucci became Gucci. Two brothers, how it became an empire, were they both designers or was one the creative one and the other the business man?. I would have been interested in a movie about the two year investigation that led to the arrest of the band of idiots. Unfortunately this movie is about everything in between and dull as dirt.
The only thing I found even remotely interesting in the time captured was the knock off bags. I wouldn't have minded seeing a movie about that, as it made me question the process that went into producing the line of Gucci, that would have been interesting too, was great care given to each detail, or were they simply just as mass produced as the knock odds, only at a 1000% markup? Even the time in the store, it felt like they were allowed to shoot the exterior and maybe 5 minutes inside, but I never felt like I was inside what it really meant to be in this family dynasty, okay to look but don't touch.
One problem is the acting. Lady Gaga simply cannot carry a movie any more than I can carry one of her songs. To paraphrase, I have seen Elizabeth Taylor, I have watched Elizabeth Taylor, you sir, are no Elizabeth Taylor. It's ironic that Salma Hayek is in this movie because I kept thinking if this movie had been made 20 years ago, she would have been in the lead role and probably would have nailed it. But then, it's not just Gaga, Adam Driver is just as bad; he seems to have two expressions in this movie, smiling and not smiling . Boring, both. I won't even get into Jared Leto, except to say, who was going for, Mario or Luigi?
But really it's the direction and focus that's the problem. Again I would have been interested in a movie about the two lions, Irons and Pacino, nearing the end but still not wanting to let go. Watching as their idiot children destroy an iconic family business, along with a harpie wife trying to take over, it could have been a fun soap opera. But there is the problem, while Leto is an obvious idiot, Driver is little more than a cypher, trying to appear as though he is smart and honourable, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. He accuses Gaga of wrecking the family ties, turning son against father, Yada yada, but even after she's out, he's the one who conveniently connives to get his uncle and cousin out. Again he's supposed to be smart, yet he runs up huge bills, slowly runs the company into the ground and finds a way to get himself kicked out of the business. If the movie just would have went with that, Leto a moron, and Driver equally so, someone who wanted the lifestyle but no more capable, with two fathers watching a great family business being ruined, it would have been more fun. The movie needed the Cohen brothers leading it. Even Gaga, I mean, why does she put the hit out? It wasn't money, because she was still being taken care of. It wasn't for the business and power, since Driver already blew it. The movie goes for jealous love, I guess, but it should be so much more over the top, as in, you think you can get away with treating me like that, guess again. Even her motivation to get control of the business only seems to be for her husband anyway, in other words like the rest of the movie, tepid. Maybe it's true to life or maybe it's a desire not to offend someone murdered, but it all just comes across rather banal. Maybe like inside a Gucci store, though I wouldn't know, because even though I think I might be able to afford the second cheapest item on the rack, I'm not interested in any of it.
The 355 (2022)
Dull, long and cheap
Not much to say about the characters or the plot. It's about a bunch of people I don't care about doing stuff I also don't care about. I believe they were trying to save the world from something really bad happening. I assume they succeeded so thanks I guess. Whew, that was a close one, or maybe it wasn't, but they meant well.
Though I have to say, I'm pretty sure whoever had the doomsday device at any given time was pretty much the dumbest people alive, and since it changes hands so many times, I'm certain that make them all equally stupid. From sending one bad guy to get the device, to anyone being able to track it, to a good guy tossing it in his briefcase with his lunch, to a bad guy not actually checking to see if he didn't just buy a toaster instead, to a good girl pulling it out to show all her friends, boy I bet they were really impressed, to all the other good girls, I don't know, destroying it every time they get it, like about an hour earlier, well, it's a good thing no one gave it to a chimp to play with just to see what might happen.
Besides that, a whole bunch of people die, yet sadly like so many movies nowadays, it was none of the people I wanted to see die. One of them does get shot, in the shoulder, because of course every other bullet that is fired is a kill shot except the one that just wings her. Even the bad guy behind everything who I actually forgot all about until another bad guy comes and shoots him, and it was, oh yeah, I forgot about that bad guy, which I'm sure is also true of the writers of this movie. Then that other bad guy who I kept wondering why is this bad guy still alive gets a promotion and plans to hunt down all the good girls, except they all show up at his house instead and poison him to death, only they decide, nah, it isn't poison, because he should get shipped somewhere. Of course it's only fair since earlier he could have killed them all, and except for one, there is absolutely no reason he shouldn't, they serve no purpose any longer, so of course he lets them go for absolutely no reason, except so he could hunt them down after he got his promotion, only they show up at his house instead, and poison him with something that isn't really poison.
Finally, I know it's been decades, but what is this, like the crib notes version of the original Mission Impossible movie? For one thing, the five of them combined don't equal one Ethan Hawke. But just for clarity sake, camera glasses are like so last century, Jim faking his own death was way cooler, it isn't a fishing expedition, it's a mole hunt, it isn't a package, it's a NOC list, and you didn't get erased, you got disavowed. Just sayin'
Deep Water (2022)
You had me at I killed a guy....
I'm not sure if it's proof of brilliant acting or proof of just how bad of an actor Affleck is, but after the second time he said I killed so and so, I said yeah, ok, I'll just go with that as my working thesis. That pretty much explained the rest of this insipid movie. I don't know, maybe I was supposed to say oh no, I'm sure Ben Affleck would never play a sociopathic murderer, but then I figured, why not? He's pretty much as wooden as any movie he's ever been in. Again that might be proof of good acting, since I think he actually was supposed to be a wooden post in this movie, but then maybe it's simply the material finally matching the talent, not the other way around. I guess I don't give much credit for a post acting like a post, since that's what posts do.
As for Ana, well. One telling moment, after Affleck drowns some guy, and she says she's not scared because he did it for her. Uh, no, I think he did it because of her, which is an entirely different concept. Why he doesn't just kill her instead, or divorce her at least is beyond comprehension. It would save everyone so much bother. Sure she's good looking, but so what? He's a multi-millionaire, I'm sure he could find someone else who isn't a total... oh, what's the right word, there are so many possibilities, each of which I know will automatically cancel my review... well, let's go with an oldie, trollop, I hope that passes muster. I mean, I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers, but I guess I would if she wanted to turn me into a cuckold serial killer. I'm funny that way.
There's not much point going into much detail of the movie itself, other than it is for the most part boring and completely unbelievable.
The ending though is in a class by itself of stupidity. Besides the question of a guy on a bike catching a guy in a car, what exactly was the plan when he caught up to the car, either shake his fist angrily or slam into the car and become a pancake? Oh, but have no fear, better he should just fall on the road and instead of the car, oh, I don't know, running over him and popping his head off like bottle cap, instead we get a total rip off of Toonces, the cat who could drive. And if anyone asks is it really that bad? Yes, it really is that bad.
I know what they're going for of course. It's supposed to be your standard mind f. But when stupid characters do the most stupid thing possible at every possible moment, it just doesn't count, it might be infuriating but only because of how stupid it is. Yeah, he's a terrible person who gets away with murder and she's a total, oh, what's the right word again... who knows what he's done and actually likes it. K. Got it. Now go away.
I know this movie doesn't even deserve to be mentioned with something like Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, except to say it's like that movie, if you took away the acting ability, the direction, the wit, the intelligence, the characters, the dialogue, the plot, the desire to say something, anything. Maybe it's more like Deliverance, if you remember the ending, only I don't mean Burt and his friends, I mean the other guys in Deliverance, you know the ones I'm talking about, though I think they might be rightfully offended to even suggest that they would be in a movie as lousy as this.
My apologies.
Deep Water (2022)
You had me at I killed a guy....
I'm not sure if it's proof of brilliant acting or proof of just how bad of an actor Affleck is, but after the second time he said I killed so and so, I said yeah, ok, I'll just go with that as my working thesis. That pretty much explained the rest of this insipid movie. I don't know, maybe I was supposed to say oh no, I'm sure Ben Affleck would never play a sociopathic murderer, but then I figured, why not? He's pretty much as wooden as any movie he's ever been in. Again that might be proof of good acting, since I think he actually was supposed to be a wooden post in this movie, but then maybe it's simply the material finally matching the talent, not the other way around. I guess I don't give much credit for a post acting like a post, since that's what posts do.
As for Ana, well. One telling moment, after Affleck drowns some guy, and she says she's not scared because he did it for her. Uh, no, I think he did it because of her, which is an entirely different concept. Why he doesn't just kill her instead, or divorce her at least is beyond comprehension. It would save everyone so much bother. Sure she's good looking, but so what? He's a multi-millionaire, I'm sure he could find someone else who isn't a total... oh, what's the right word, there are so many possibilities, each of which I know will automatically cancel my review... well, let's go with an oldie, trollop, I hope that passes muster. I mean, I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers, but I guess I would if she wanted to turn me into a cuckold serial killer. I'm funny that way.
There's not much point going into much detail of the movie itself, other than it is for the most part boring and completely unbelievable.
The ending though is in a class by itself of stupidity. Besides the question of a guy on a bike catching a guy in a car, what exactly was the plan when he caught up to the car, either shake his fist angrily or slam into the car and become a pancake? Oh, but have no fear, better he should just fall on the road and instead of the car, oh, I don't know, running over him and popping his head off like bottle cap, instead we get a total rip off of Toonces, the cat who could drive. And if anyone asks is it really that bad? Yes, it really is that bad.
I know what they're going for of course. It's supposed to be your standard mind f. But when stupid characters do the most stupid thing possible at every possible moment, it just doesn't count, it might be infuriating but only because of how stupid it is. Yeah, he's a terrible person who gets away with murder and she's a total, oh, what's the right word again... who knows what he's done and actually likes it. K. Got it. Now go away.
I know this movie doesn't even deserve to be mentioned with something like Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, except to say it's like that movie, if you took away the acting ability, the direction, the wit, the intelligence, the characters, the dialogue, the plot, the desire to say something, anything. Maybe it's more like Deliverance, if you remember the ending, only I don't mean Burt and his friends, I mean the other guys in Deliverance, you know the ones I'm talking about, though I think they might be rightfully offended to even suggest that they would be in a movie as lousy as this.
My apologies.
Forever My Girl (2018)
Awful from start to finish
Hard to imagine a movie that could be this wrong from start to finish.
Just a couple of examples. For instance I've never seen a movie where a funeral is used more as a plot point. Her best friend has just lost her husband, and at the burial, she walks up and punches her old fiancé in the stomach, oh wow, that is like so funny. As for said fiancé, I couldn't tell if he was sad about losing his best friend or was just hung over. A friend who I assume he hasn't seen in eight years either, not one mention of what the friendship meant, not one memory shared, oh but he can certainly use it to make his manager feel bad for giving him a bad time, and then do the same to make his publicist feel bad too, I mean twice, in one movie - frickin tone deaf awful.
Guy is just an a-hole and she's pathetic with zero pride. BTW, you have to ask for forgiveness in order to actually get it.
Hated the kid, as a character, annoying and not believable for a second.
Finally, unless I'm mistaken, the problem isn't actually that he left her standing at the altar, it was that he didn't take her along so she could be a rich trophy wife on tour and their kid could be on stage too.
Just bad, every, and I mean every step of the way.
The Virtuoso (2021)
Offensively stupid
The fact that it's stupid is obvious. What makes it offensive is that it wants to pretend it's smart.
Anthony Hopkins - pretty much offensive in his grotesque little story that is both stupid and offensive.
Abbie Cornish - pretty stupid. Let's see. If he doesn't invite you to the motel. If he doesn't let you in. If it doesn't snow (god, that is stupid). If he doesn't come back because one of the other stupid idiots kills him first. If he doesn't leave all of his guns lying around. Oh wait, maybe that proves just how unbelievably stupid they both are.
Anson Mount - yeah, way stupid and way offensive.
So shooting out a tire on a normal street to kill a guy and figuring that the guy either won't maintain basic control, that there's almost no chance hitting the building will kill him anyway and instead he goes in the opposite direction and hits the other vehicle, causing it to explode.
Oh yeah, forgot to mention, the movie is also offensively stupid. Unless it's meant to be a comedy. I'm thinking Frank Drebin in Naked Gun myself, I can't remember which scene it was but I know it had to be one of them.
Continuing on with Anson, so some stranger on fire makes him lose all ability, but uh, shooting a guy in his happy place, no problem? No nightmares there.
Walks into a restaurant to kill someone but doesn't know who. So has to ask everyone about white rivers. Have you seen my baseball, have you seen my baseball? Frank and beans, frank and beans.
Still doesn't know who so proceeds to track down and kill everyone. Guess it's a good thing he didn't end up at a packed football game. The movie could have taken days to get done. Wants to give guy a fake heart attack so he'll talk but accidentally gives him a real heart attack so he doesn't talk. Walks through a house on hardwood floors in boots. Wants to know what white rivers is so completely blows away the fake cop before finding out.
Back to the restaurant, so smart, he knows everyone's game. All except the waitress who he's never met before, yeah, her, he believes completely, the one whose entire story is the one that's most suspect. Master of detail, too bad he only notices after he's about to get his head blown off.
Back to the plan, go to the restaurant because there's a hit to do, except you don't know who. Except it's not very hard to figure. Simple as the saying goes, if you're at a poker table and don't know who the sucker is, guess what, it's you.
Duh.
Land (2021)
Well, it's a cure for insomnia
I think that's a line in the movie. I'm not sure because I might have been asleep when she said it. Either that or I must have been dreaming.
I guess I don't fault the movie, or Robin Wright as director, for showing scene after scene of mountains and streams and trees. I imagine if I was a first time director I would be tempted to do the same, thinking that I must be the first person in the entire world who ever noticed these things and then wanting to share it with everyone.
Still, I have to say, as inappropriate as it might be, the movie that popped into my head as I watched her laying there freezing to death, was National Lampoon's Summer Vacation. The scene where Clark Griswald just flew the station wagon 60 yards, 60 yards, and then he sets out through the desert to look for a gas station. I couldn't help thinking of the two guys on horseback watching him from a distance and one of them says, what an A-hole.
Then when the Native American woman is treating her, the look on her face said it all, yeah, great, another stupid white woman.
And then the savior man of color, I wonder why more critics don't take the movie to task for this, but nonetheless, what exactly doesn't he understand about ok, fine, give me some food, teach me to hunt, now get lost? Instead he's in just about every other scene going forward. With a woman who doesn't want to be around anyone. Did I miss something while I was asleep? I'm sure there's supposed to be a passage of time but there's a difference between real time and movie time and the fact is he's in the movie so much I thought he must be her next door neighbor, popping in every five minutes. Besides not respecting her wishes, like what, he doesn't have his own life to lead?
Then he does leave, of which it is so entirely telegraphed as to why, who leaves his dog unless he ain't coming back? But then she misses him, this person who doesn't want to be around anyone, so she goes on a search for him. To thank him for making her want to live again.
Oh, baloney. Just because she ran out of trees and mountains to take pictures of, or realized that maybe not everyone was interested in watching her chew deer meat again, is no excuse for such cheap melodramatic tripe added on that completely undercuts the supposed reason she went off the grid to the cabin in the first place. What, she couldn't have just stayed in the city, taken the phone off the hook and waited until she found some sensitive guy with his own sad secrets they could share over some brewskies?
And all built on what I have to say has become nothing more than a movie trope. Perhaps it is unfair to hold this movie in particular responsible but it has become so annoying. Dead kid, dead spouse, yes, yes of course, naturally, what else would I expect? Is it all handled respectfully? Of course, but it has become such a cheap short hand, a replacement for actually developing a character. And almost always the same. Supposedly there are many ways to deal with grief, but I have to say watching it time and time again, it seems like there's only one way in movies. It's like they all go to the same support group and there's one reaction available, it's only my pain and I'm going to be alone and miserable by myself. I'm not discounting that as a very definite possibility, but it kind of goes against the idea that there are many ways people deal with tragedy. I'm not saying get up and dance, but people do find a way to move on, to heal and live. How do I know this? Because if they didn't, then the woods would be filled with people just like her.
I know I'm being harsh and the movie means well. Of course they all do. But I found it especially annoying that they give some big reveal at the end as to what happened to her family. Again such melodramatic crap. I can only imagine that they figured the audience was on the edge of their seat to find out what happened that the usual just wouldn't do, disease, an accident, no, it had to be something off the charts. Has stuff like that happened in the world? Yes. But that doesn't make it any less cheap in this movie which supposedly wants to be some quiet reflection on loss and healing. Not to mention I can only assume since she didn't want any news from the world that everything had been resolved. Caught the killer? Sent him to jail? Found out the motivation? Not exactly a back of the page story after all.
Stowaway (2021)
Round peg in a square hole
I liked it a lot better when it was done in Apollo 13. Not only was it based on real events (not certain how much), but it was only one of the problems that very smart people had to work out with reasoned solutions. In other words I will never confuse that movie with Stowaway.
Start with the obvious, other than some cheap surprise, what was the point of even having a so called stowaway on the ship? They could have just as easily had the same problem without resorting to some cheap gimmick. Like what, the ship could only be damaged because he was hidden? Why not just start with four crew to begin with, the damage occurs for whatever reason and then they have to decide which of the four is most expendable? As Swaggert once said, maybe he should just stop breathing.
But what if none of them were expendable? Or what if other factors came into play, like maybe one had a family, or another was only needed for the Mars portion of the trip, or maybe one of them was just a jerk? Or if they began to team up based on reasons different altogether? That actually might have created a moral dilemma, instead of this grade school philosophy gnashing of the teeth. It would have been more interesting if it came down to cutting a deck of cards or one potato, two potato.
Small point, they were twelve hours from earth when they find him and they're already past the fail safe point of return? Possible, maybe, just not very believable. Or the fact that they don't have a back up system in case damage occurs to what would seem like a pretty important piece of equipment. Forget about the people even, does anyone think some faceless corporation is going to let their billion dollar space ship turn into a hunk of junk floating through space without having a single contingency plan?
As another reviewer asked, what was even the point of this movie? I had to agree, until the end and the best I could come up with was pretty much so Anna Kendrick could play a heroic character. I guess she can tick that one off her acting bucket list now. Start with that annoying beach story. I suppose it was designed to foreshadow her future action, but no, all it showed was how self involved this movie was. May as well have had a sticker on her saying I'm the selfless hero, lean over and kiss my butt. Of course there are countless movies with heroes doing heroic stuff but I've never seen something so telegraphed and obvious. As the joke goes, I'm not a doctor, I just play one on tv, except I'm not sure it's a joke to those in Hollywood, maybe they think playing a hero, super or otherwise, actually counts as true heroism. Problem is when that seems to be the whole point of a movie, to make a point, it loses interest fast.
Again I like it a lot better when Mr. Spock did it in Star Trek II. Maybe because it was organic, it fit to the story instead of fitting the story around him. Guess they should have tried their plan three days earlier, oh, but I'm sure that's when the solar flares would have happened, I guess the sun just really had it out for her. I might have found it a little better if after losing the first canister, knowing the flares were all around, she just turned and went back to the fetch the second one, instead of taking time to sit there with everyone and talk and cry and everyone could realize just what a terrific person she was. Again, that was the difference with Mr. Spock, saw the problem, went and fixed it, not hey everybody, I'm now going to selflessly save everyone, including the guy who was expendable to the mission, by giving up my life to show how meaningful my life now really is, please don't genuflect as I walk by.
And no, it's not because she's a girl. Ripley in Aliens and Sarah Conner, in both T1 and T2 (though for very different reason) are amazing heroes. Ripley because she takes on the Queen B and saves the little girl. Sarah in T1 just by her ability to survive so humanity survives, in T2 because she's a badass ready to change the entire future of humanity. The point is they don't ask to be heroes, they are put into situations where they have to find courage and strength, sometimes and especially when they don't even know they have it. Not oh goody, goody, I get to be a hero, look out everyone, don't get in my way, eat my dust.
Big deal. Go be a hero then. Take out the garbage while you're at it.