Change Your Image
info-15989
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Renegade Nell (2024)
Very nice family series, but why the historical inaccuracy?
Having watched episode one with my family I can testify that this is a nice and enjoyable series. I like the supernatural, magic touch that (literally) empowers the main character in her struggle to find justice in a male dominated time.
However, knowing that the story takes place in England in the early 1700's (1704 to be correct). We all are taught in history lessons that these were times that were in many ways completely different, not to mention full of inequalities: between classes, between men & women and based uon heritage. The 18th century was first and foremost a time when white people exploited and enslaved large numbers of African people, especially in Western Europe and America. In this series this terrible social crime is completely disregarded, as it never even happened. People of African heritage are presented in prominent social roles we all might have wanted them to have: ladies, magistrates, high class people regarded as socially equal to their white contemporaries.
Okay, I fully understand this is a family show, suitable for all ages. But even so, according to me the writers could have found ways to remain historically accurate in this respect and still give people of different class and race their dignity. I believe that it should have been their obligation for future generations!
The X Files: Mulder & Scully Meet the Were-Monster (2016)
Come on! Such a poor joke
I don't know what happened to the resurrected series, but I completely miss the point here. This episode looks like a Saturday Night Life parody on the X Files, instead of a genuine episode. The humour in the X Files used to pop up once in a while and usually only surfaced once in a while. In this episode the makers went all out with weird plot twists, over-the-top characters, bad acting, bad special effects and baaaad dialogues. Although I notice the intended comedy, the effort is a complete failure because it is so far away from being funny. Probably only huge fans of everything that bears the X-File label were the ones that cast their votes because in my honest opinion this episode is a complete failure and a waste of time. I remain stupefied, why the series made this ridiculous change of direction.
The Curious Case of Natalia Grace (2023)
Waste of time: everyone lies and manipulates!
With 4 stars I am being generous because I became intrigued with finding out the truth. This documentary series will do anything but reveal what actually happened.
The beginning of season 1 is sheer manipulation of us viewers, as you predominently hear the adoptive family's point of view with all its raunchy details. Nothing is questioned or double-checked with physicians nor dental photos are being shown (they kept all that for season 2!!!). The viewer is manipulated into believing that Natalia is an adult that pretends to be a child and has malignant behavior disorders.
The documentary film makers find the biological mother of the adopted girl but then refrain from asking that burning question: when was her daughter born? In season 1 she also does not give details about her own life. This proves they are not after finding the truth of this case. They only reveal a selection of facts in order to maximize the dramatic effect and create cliff hangers in between the episodes.
The end of season 1 and the most part of season 2 you then are made to see the opposite side of the truth, being Natalia's point of view. And then just when you think ok, this is a peaceful closure of it all, near the end a new cliffhanger is introduced. I have lost any faith that the truth will ever be told, because not a single person can be trusted to tell the full truth. Everyone will always have some kind of reason to at least partly lie about what happened and the film makers eagerly move over to the next season of this real life soap.
Jerry Springer, in his time would have loved this bunch on his show. But nowadays there is always Dr Phil for this type of sensationalism. I am left with a bad taste in my mouth after watching this.
The Russell Murders: Who Killed Lin & Megan? (2023)
Disappointing documentary
On one side I was intrigued by this 3 part series on the investigation and trials of the horrific crime that is the subject. While watching it was quite irritating to go through all the repetitions (partly by recaps after commercial breaks) of what has happened and what actually has been secured as evidence. And in the end there are too many questions that remain unanswered. Not only is it disappointing to notice that the British press played such a toxic role throughout the years, pointing out the guilty one before the trial and buying false testimonies. The filmmakers chose not to discredit them in any way.
I would have preferred less repetition and overlapping information from one episode to the next. Why didn't the filmmakers put down all forensic evidence in perspective and point out what was done with that. They pointed out that at the time of the crime DNA tests were not that well developed still, but one could have expected more information on that part to come out in the 23 years that followed. What about the fingerprint on the lunchbox? I missed the filmmakers dedication to find out the truth from experts that were introduced. Near the end a forensic expert was supposed to look into the matter, but after that there is no clear report on what she discovered or not. I also found the way they showed the current status particularly disappointing. No more voice over, no people talking about what happened, just a simple set of short titles on a black background depicting the (open) end conclusions, as if the time and money had run out.
This terrible crime that was followed by such an appalling investigation and trials deserve a more clear and structured conclusion.
Peter Pan & Wendy (2023)
Disney, what happened to your spark of bold imagination?
In the 1940s and 1950s Disney studios were masters of innovation and imagination. They brought stories to the big screen, told full of fantasy and heart. Those classic animated versions still resonate with children across the globe.
The latest decade the original high standard of innovation has crumbled down into a sinkhole of creative block as they primarily release live action versions of their old hits. Peter Pan and Wendy does just that, just with the obligatory whiff of political correctness and inclusion. I greatly miss the spark, spirit and humour of the animated original.
People of Disney, let the public disappointment of this movie make way for a new era of inspired original stories instead of delivering the mere expected remakes. Hire original writers and moviemakers and let them once again cooperate to create bold, unexpected, spirited marvels that challenge the viewer's imagination.
Rescue your sinking ship and astonish us all, once again!
Jack Ryan (2018)
A gripping season 1 / Downhill after that
In general the series was quite enjoyable. Especially season 1 kept me on the edge of my seat because of all the twists and in general good acting.
Season 2 and 3 however to me were not as gripping and spellbinding. Season 3 being all about Eastern Europe and America's relationship with Russia has become bluntly unbelievable in the light of what has been going on since February 2022. Russia's Nazi-like invasion of Ukraine in this series is only mildly hinted at, in this parallel world in which there is no Putin (wishful thinking). Therefore it is kind of ridiculous that the producers of the series decided it is okay to launch this "product" to the backdrop of the war in Ukraine.
Probably the writers finished their work already before February 2022. Otherwise they could not have come up with this "rather peaceful" representation of the Russian government.
Update after having seen also the final season: still unconvincing plot (now in Mexico and Asia), full of the most unbelievable coincidences and involvements of the main protagonists. Also tired to look at John Krasinski himself, playing Jack Ryan, with a frown of seriousness on his face throughout the series. To me his performance lacks charisma and it is good series 4 marks the end of the series.
Kaleidoscope (2023)
Not flawless but worth watching
I liked the overal series and it is a nice gimmick to be able to watch it the episodes in random order. I loved the production value, the music and the general idea of the series, so I had enough fun watching it all to the end.
However I found the heist episode somewhat disappointing, mainly because of the twist that was a major option in the back of my mind from the beginning. The series were obviously inspired by the brilliant Spanish counterpart "La Casa de Papel" but did not have the ingenious amount of surprise twists and turns.
My main concerns throughout were:
Why did Roger Salas not better hide his past, being in the high level security business? And why did he ever decide Leo's daughter would make a trustworthy VP in his corporation considering Leo's and Roger's common history and how that turned out?
The characters had flaws as well and could have been better defined. The most stupid choice was Bob Goodwin. Why put such a loose cannon in a team in which precision matters that much?
Nevertheless I remain positive in my verdict. I had fun watching and recommend other viewers to check it out.
The Weekend Away (2022)
Bad acting / boring dialogue
There is drama, a conspiracy and a murder. However no matter what happens, the "disturbing discoveries" that the main protagonist has to deal with totally fails to really get me involved. It has to do with the rhythm of the editing and the slow paced and tedious conversation. The acting also does not convince at all. Total waste of time...
Murder at the Cottage: The Search for Justice for Sophie (2021)
Gripping documentary without providing an easy outcome
Unlike the sensationalism and speed of the Netflix documentary, Jim Sheridan's series is more contemplating and filled with heartfelt sadness. In that way I prefer this documentary, even though I was very hesitant at first.
The director in person, carefully sheds light on all the facts, the testimonies, the mistakes in the research, the need to find justice.
During my visits to West Cork with my family I have come to fall in love with the beautiful country. It is heartbreaking to find out about the dreadful event that took place over there and realizing that true justice is still not served.
One man claims he is innocent, many say the opposite but the irrefutable evidence is lacking. Nevertheless the documentary remains gripping to the last minute. All the details, the conversations, the emotions. I loved its attention to detail, the background information, the facts, the doubt, the beautiful landscape that was once the silent witness of the crime committed.
In The Netherlands (my country) recently a well-known research reporter was killed. Peter R. De Vries was very famous for overlooking all the facts and using modern forensic research methods to solve cases like these. I would have liked to hear his opinion on this case and if there would be a way to find true justice.
Whiplash (2014)
Great as a movie - But jazz without improvisation?
First of all I greatly enjoyed this movie. The actors were very convincing and so was the story telling and cinematography. Ever since seeing it last night, this movie has haunted my mind. And of course that is a great thing a movie can achieve, right?
I loved Whiplash because it raised many questions about art education and about teaching jazz music in particular. As a jazz lover I adored the music that was played. Unfortunately not all questions that were raised were actually answered within the story of the movie. Mainly because to my idea Whiplash displays an extremely limited view on what jazz music is about. And while being involved in the story I kept hoping that different approaches to music would be introduced... Too bad that did not happen.
The main theme is all about dedication: Andrew wants to become a jazz legend so much, that he practices until his hands are bleeding. In his view the ultimate way towards success is to earn his teacher's approval. This professor (Fletcher) however, only exploits the student's ambition and keeps bullying him into raising the bar without end.
But are talent, dedication and discipline the sole ingredients for achieving true greatness in music? Is fear of failure a good motivation? What about inspiration, the joy of creating fantastic music together with other musicians? In the school orchestras all students are trembling of making a mistake and in blind awe of their professor. Don't they have a mind of their own? In the movie Andrew also does not have any friends to create music with, not within nor outside of the school system. Does he really love music at all? He is only focusing on equaling the excellence of very old classic jazz (of half a century ago) and there is not even a spark of joy in the music he is making.
Several times Charlie Parker is set as an example to Andrew by his teacher. He was supposed to have benefited greatly from his initial failure and humiliation. Why didn't the student question the truth behind the legend of Parker? Parker developed his technical and artistic talent by playing TOGETHER WITH many different other musicians in clubs during endless jam sessions.
And very importantly: Charlie Parker's success was based on IMPROVISATION. How could a writer miss the opportunity to illustrate this huge thing by which jazz music is different from classical music? Why did Andrew allow himself to be degraded into a wind-up monkey, performing only the notes that are on the sheet music, within the tempo his teacher wanted to hear? Why did Andrew not get the insight that there is more to jazz music than this narrow path? It all remains a mystery.
Even in the end of the movie his vision stays exactly the same: in the finale Andrew set off into a manic, everlasting drum solo, clearly intended only to wipe his teacher off his socks. In the end Andrew only starts to smile when Fletcher at last reluctantly approves of his performance. End of story...
Music making as an equivalent to a boxing match! Play faster than Rocky Balboa's punches and the world is at your feet? Too bad the movie missed the opportunity of making clear that there is way much more to music.
So, how about a sequel in which the ambitious student at last finds true artistic joy of playing REAL IMPROVISED JAZZ by playing WITH other musicians and by learning to actually LISTEN and INNOVATE music? That would have been the ultimate victory!
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)
High expectations leading to deep disappointment
Birdman is supposed to be an "absolutely outer-worldly brilliant" movie according to so many critics. When being rated so highly at this site, nominated for 9 Oscars my expectations were raised sky high. Especially when knowing that it is a movie that is aiming for 'more' than cinematic fast-food.
In all honesty, I would have loved to admit I totally fell in love with the brilliance of Birdman. I would have loved to join the choir of those that praise the movie's cinematography, the fantastic performance of the actors, etc.
But I simply cannot! It only left me wondering, what is it about this movie that just did not grab me?
I wasn't even remotely interested how the movie would end. Should I doubt my own judgment? I certainly started watching with an open mind. Even twice I tried to sit it out and both times I already wanted to stop the self-torment of watching after about 30 minutes. The continuous (no edit) cinematography, the claustrophobic feel of it all, the acting (and acting to be playing a part) irritated me terribly.
I simply failed to see the necessity of it all. No point, no passion, just a sequence of random events gradually escalating into nothing. And when reading the other reviews, I can see I am not alone. Clearly it is a 'love it or hate it' kind of movie, but with the large difference that the low ratings largely outweigh the very few good ones.
Why this is not reflected in the average ratings of the movie to me is very questionable. Is this the result of some rating scheme?
But then, who cares? See it for yourself if you can stand the torment and cast your honest judgment.
Room 237 (2012)
Loving attention to details but far-fetched conclusions
Being a fan of Stanley Kubrick's movies - including the Shining - I very much wanted to watch this film about a film. It is a dockumentary in which several people are testifying of their own (different!) opinions that this movie is about a whole lot of different things. In every door knob, screw and window pane they seek and find evidence for their theories.
Because sometimes it is all so far-fetched, I have very mixed feelings about the result. I love the maker's attention to so many details, also because I am convinced that Kubrick intentionally was responsible for many of them. My idea is that Kubrick used all of those details to create a disturbing, evil-dominated environment.
The makers of the documentary however, blow up those details to preposterous proportions and draw often very far-fetched conclusions. A woman testifies she sees a minotaur in a poster that clearly shows a skier's silhouette. The portrait of Kubrick is supposedly seen in the clouds in the opening sequence, but no matter how much I look it does not appear very convincingly and makes no point in the rest of the story.
To my opinion this movie is so richly filled with disturbing details that any theory what the "true meaning" is of this movie, can be supported with evidence. The makers of this film just got lost in those details and have started making up stories like a kid staring at the clouds.
But still, in spite of not agreeing with the talking people throughout this documentary, I enjoyed watching it. Mainly because it drew attention to those details and to the brilliance of the movie that Stanly Kubrick created.
My advice: watch this movie, listen to the ridiculous theories, but please... Think for yourself and consider this film to be a mockumentary that was quite enjoyable.
The Cabin in the Woods (2011)
Don't be mislead by high ratings: simply a total waste of time!!!
I do not intend to go too much into the (shallow) depth of this movie, simply because it does not deserve it! It lacks everything become even a bit convincing: complete absence of a captivating storyline, shallow stereotype characters (poorly acted), no sense of suspense or shocking effects. I just kept waiting for the next unbelievable twist in the story, which always came without any surprise. The special effects were awful and I wonder why fine actors like Richard Jenkins and Sigourney Weaver ever decided to embark on such a disastrous project. Or was it only for the money?
If you love great cinema: do not be mislead by the majority of review ratings (like I was). It is an absolute waste of time.
I guess the majority of positive reviewers were just having a good time drinking beer and had a good laugh because of the stupendous and disastrous story.