Change Your Image
mowasteph
Reviews
Last Night in Soho (2021)
All Spoilers So Don't Read If You Haven't Seen
Here are the good things - Really good performances by all, the set design was lovely, and finally, I want every single outfit that Anya Taylor-Joy wore. Also, the soundtrack was top-notch.
Here are the problems - First off, let's talk about the ending reveal. I'm sorry but that many deaths would be traced to the area. Also, you could not hide that many bodies under floorboards. Seriously? Next, I thought Ellie didn't get enough immersion into the glamour of the 60s until the plot turned. I think she should have had night after night of a slow build of glamour, stars, music, fashion, gangsters, etc. Everything seemed RUSHED in this movie. We know we are watching this movie for the set pieces and the music and the beautiful people so why not give us more immersion? Instead it's "oh here's Cilla Black" and then that's about all we get.
Can we please stop with the Mean Girl trope? Really? Very pretty girl comes to London from Cornwall - a place EVERYONE would kill to live in - and they are going to instantly bully her? I don't think so. I just don't believe in the whole Mean and Does Nothing But Party Girl. I'm sure there are some mean girls out there but not as many as the movies would like you to think.
Matt Smith's character was two-dimensional.
Could we have gotten a bit more - or maybe ANY - background info on Sandie? Did she just materialize out of thin air?
La La Land (2016)
As A Native Angeleno I Was Kind of Insulted
I didn't really care for this movie. It had a terrible plot. I think Gosling and Stone did an excellent job with what they were given, but they weren't given much. I didn't give one hoot about either of these people. Especially Emma Stone's character. I did not like her. Good performance but not of a likable character.
Not only was this movie not very interesting in the beginning or middle but the ending was seriously trite. She DOES become a famous actress. He DOES get his jazz club. Right.
The songs were not memorable. The only thing I liked was the small montage of various L.A. spots and at the very least they used the Hermosa Beach pier for one scene and didn't go for the over-clichéd Santa Monica Pier. But really, this movie had NOTHING to do with Los Angeles. This was the L.A. of people who have lived here for about 2 years and haven't got a clue. This was the L.A. of people in "the industry" which are, in my opinion, not real Angelenos. People who work in the entertainment industry seem to think that this is what L.A. is about and it's really a very small portion of what this city is about. Believe it or not, Los Angeles is a real place, but this movie was fake, fake, fake.
Don't Think Twice (2016)
Instead of "yes, and..." how about just Maybe?
This is a fairly decent movie (despite the use of hand-held camera...when are filmmakers going to stop doing that?!). I should say that I really liked the performances. The cast was very good, and that's what I am giving my five stars for.
The writing...not so good. It was a pleasant enough movie to watch but there was just too much of it that smacked of unreality. I just didn't believe in the way a lot of the characters acted nor in what transpired. And do improv troups always start every single show with the same exact question?
Also, did someone have it in for Lorne Michaels? I was okay with the jabs at "Weekend Live" but they really got the "Lorne Michaels" guy to play the character as the world's biggest douche. I mean, what's THAT about?
Crimson Peak (2015)
Ghosts are boring
I got to see Tom Hiddleston's butt for 3 seconds...that was the highlight of this movie. As of the rest of it....puh-leeze. It's a good thing I didn't pay to see this in the theater nor even pay to rent if from Red Box. It came on HBO or something and we DVR'd it for later viewing. Still, I wasted a good 2 hours of my life that I'll never get back.
This movie is so dull. How'd they get this cast (who are usually fine performers) to be in this dreck? Chastain is a total caricature. I figure she aspired to be Judith Anderson in Rebecca but sorry, she didn't come close. As hard as she tries, Mia W. has NO personality. None. And even Tom's butt (and fine acting) cannot save the day.
Absolutely nothing in this movie was original and there wasn't anything coming that couldn't be seen from a mile off. The siblings are after Mia's money. Big surprise!! They're poisoning her. Big surprise!! They killed their own mother. Shock! They're sleeping with each other....oh like I didn't figure that one out as soon as Tom and Jessica's characters made an appearance. Ho AND hum.
A few people here have commented along the lines of "well, at least it LOOKED good" and, true, the set design was somewhat appealing visually, but I have to say that I have never seen a movie with such hideous outfits in it. Every single thing Mia W. wore in this movie made me want to hurl. The costume designer should have gotten a Razzie.
Berserk (1967)
It's No Straightjacket
If you are looking for a cheesy popcorn flick that you and your friends can watch in the MST3K style then this will do...but go with Straightjacket instead if you can. In fact, I can't believe it ended up with the same twist ending of Straightjacket! Total ripoff of the great William Castle.
However, there is some fun to be had here. Ol' Joan had some pretty good gams for a 62-year-old and it's a hoot to watch her love scenes with boy-toy Ty Hardin (whatta name!). Also, Joan was always a good actor even when she was in a complete piece of crap like this.
Fun to watch some of the circus acts too. I fast forwarded through the elephants and lions as I don't approve of that sort of thing but the dog act was adorable!
And since when is the "woman in half" trick done with a buzz-saw?!
Joy (2015)
No joy
Remind me again why I'm watching this miserable piece of junk? Thank heaven I didn't see this in the movies, but all the same, I'd like my few hours back please.
I'm only giving it a few stars because the cast is good. Too bad Lawrence, De Niro, Cooper, Madsen, Ramirez, Rosellini and Ladd had to lend their considerable talents to this slow, wretched, boring, badly- written, miserable miserable MISERABLE excuse for a movie. I even feel bad for Susan Lucci.
Also, there's a weird lack of continuity. You're never told exactly where they live but it's somewhere snowy...and then the next minute they're out on a sailboat on the sea. And she has a son in the beginning of the movie and then for the rest of the movie the son does not seem to exist until he makes an appearance near the end.
Did I mention that watching this movie was a miserable experience?
This wins the award for the most ironically named movie EVER!
Minimalism: A Documentary About the Important Things (2015)
Misses The Boat
I have been getting into Minimalism and reading the blogs/listening to the podcasts of not only The Minimalist but many others featured in this film. So when notices came up about this movie I thought, heck ya, I'll go see it. And ,I'm sure like some others in the theater, I dragged along a loved one to see what they thought.
The unfortunate thing is that this movie gives out nothing of practical value to one who has not been researching, reading books, and watching YouTube videos on the subject. It's a nice promo and there is a smattering of interesting information...but not much.
The problem is on both ends of the spectrum. At the beginning of the spectrum is "what do I DO to be minimalist?" and the other end of the spectrum is "what is my actual end PURPOSE in becoming a minimalist?" This movie does not really address either end.
If you wanna talk PURPOSE go read James Wallman's Stuffocation. Brilliant book. Why do I and others get into Minimalism? Minimalism is the stepping stone towards clearing the way to going after what you REALLY want. Wallman's book discusses it in detail. This movie should have had a lot more of that. Especially in the case of Colin Wright. They had Colin Wright in the movie for, like, a minute. But his story is a lot more interesting. For him, Minimalism was not the end game...travel was the end game. Minimalism is how he achieved it. There should have been a lot more stories in the movie along this vein.
So how about the beginning of the spectrum? Here they failed too. Before the movie started a loud couple behind me were chatting away and one couldn't help but hear the conversation. The woman asked "does this have anything to do with that woman who wrote the Tidying Up book?" I couldn't help but inwardly smirk slightly...except in the end this woman had a point.
Some practical advice on HOW to go minimalist would have been as handy as some "other spectrum end" stuff on the why of it. There was a little bit about the 333 Project, but hell, The Minimalists didn't even discuss the famous "packing party." Numerous 5-minute videos on YouTube are going to give you more practical advice than you get here. There wasn't even any talk about psychology or your relationship to your things. This is an important aspect of the topic.
A few good things: that woman who discussed marketing and advertising...she was good. Interesting story about that newscaster that lost it on air. And Sam Harris. You can always give me more Sam Harris.
Bridge of Spies (2015)
A really good story that could have been a really good movie if done by anyone else.
What is it about Spielberg? He has turned into the King of the Banal. Or perhaps he was always thus? Except for Jaws maybe?
But let's start with the GOOD stuff first. First off, I'm okay watching a Spielberg movie because I know he's not going to be using HAND- HELD throughout the movie. I seriously appreciate the camera work of people like Spielberg or Wes Anderson because I know I don't have to take Dramamine to watch their stuff.
Secondly, Rylance probably deserved his Oscar. He's so mysterious. You always want to know what is going on with that guy! I just loved his fake befuddlement near the beginning of the movie when the CIA bust in on him. Great stuff.
Third - Hanks. Tom Hanks does a bang up job giving this character real humanity. He turns him into a real person...as much as he can, since there is not much of a real person in the way the character was written. Another one of Spielberg's stalwart heroes. Dull as dishwater - except for the fact that Hanks wrestles the human being out of the flat script.
So now onto the stuff that bugs me - let's start with the ending. Seriously, this movie could have ended 10 minutes earlier. Why oh why does S.S. have to always put those crappy endings on his movies? Hero comes home to wide-eyed adoring wife and/or children. And I'm a bit tired of these cypher-like, no-personality wives in these stupid movies.
Was the wife really part of the story? No, so it is not necessary to cram that character in there being all 50s wife-ish and yelling about what it's all DOING TO THE FAMILY and all that other trite crap. Since no women were actually involved in this story - historically - it's OKAY to not try to shoehorn a female character into it. We women won't get all offended! We'd much prefer you just leave out the doting wife crap altogether. And leave the precocious interactions with the son out too, please. Why is this stuff always in an S.S. movie? Every. Damn. Time.
Was there a point to having Alan Alda show up for 5 minutes to be a dick? And why set up this whole thing with the young man who was going to assist Donovan with the case and then the character just...disappears. Could S.S. cast someone even REMOTELY interesting to play Powers? And was all of New York really all reading the same newspaper and staring Donovan down on the subway? I really hate these dumb, made-up movie scenarios. Finally, nobody ever shot up Donovan's house. You really lose your credibility when you spice up the truth with bull-dooky incidents.
(As long as we are on that vein...did people in the late 50s/early 60s watch as much television as the family in this movie does? Wouldn't the little ones be outside playing stickball? Wouldn't the teen girl be up in her room playing 45s?)
It wasn't torturous to watch this movie. But it was just a movie. What it mostly did was spur you onto the internet to read about the real people and the real incidents. But as you are sitting and watching and getting curious about "the real story" you will find yourself rolling your eyes a lot.
Topkapi (1964)
Blah-kapi
Okay, it had some nice travel-porn and Peter Ustinov absolutely transcends the material here (he was the best thing in this)...but this flick is screaming out for a glamorous remake. Nothing too slick and I don't want everyone in the remake to be gorgeous but seriously...it needs a remake. Also, my husband came up with a much better ending than the one here.
So...nice scenery, including a ridiculously good-looking Max Schell, but Ms. Mercouri nearly ruined this movie. She was just too weird. Was she supposed to be alluring? I just found her to be scary looking and I couldn't believe these guys would be falling all over her. I don't mean to be catty...I'm actually older than she was when she made this film but I'm still calling her out on being a little too witch- like. That voice! Like a much-later Lucille Ball after a couple of packs of cigarettes. Puh-leeze.
Vanity Fair (2004)
Oh Becky, Where Is Thy Sting?
In the past year I read the novel, which is excellent, a true classic. Not long after I watched the very excellent mini-series with Natasha Little (who shows up here as Lady Jane Pitt). The Natasha Little adaptation was fairly true the book and her Becky was wonderful.
But what's with this mess? I must first start with Becky. Witherspoon is a very good actress so I do not fault her...it's the material she was given. Why was all the bite and clawing taken out of Becky? In this film she's almost a misunderstood saint and not the lying, scheming social climber she is supposed to be. Next, what's with Amelia? When did this simpering, sort-of-dim nitwit get so ballsy?
And WHAT was with that dance all the ladies did at Lord Styne's place?! I don't think so. Not in a million years. Could we have a little reality here, people? In the novel it was merely a charades tableau. Ladies did not go around with bare midriffs at this time. They would not do lavicious dances for royalty.
Let's talk about some of the fellas. Isn't Lord Styne supposed to be a bit repulsive? I thought he was supposed to be repulsive? So why was the role cast with that Irish fox Gabriel Byrne? Please. Also, Dobbin is supposed to be a complete dork. Rhys Ifans is not nearly dorky enough. Although he often plays dorks he really isn't that bad to look at (just ask Sienna Miller) and in that scene where he is in the tent with the long hair and the tan and the whole thing...well, he's downright hot! Dobbin is not supposed to be hot.
And wasn't Amelia's turn-around after Becky tells her to wise up and shows her George's letter....wasn't that just a bit too quick? In the novel she did not go "oh well, in that case..." and run off immediately to Dobbin. She wails and moans and soul searches for days.
Finally...the ending. What? What was that? First off, Joseph Sedley DIES in the novel. He does not take Becky off to India to live happily ever after and ride elephants. The only thing I liked about this film is it was nice to look at. But if you are looking for a good, faithful adaptation...well, actually you should read the damn book!...but aside from that, go with the Natasha Little mini- series and stay away from this junk.
Into the Woods (2014)
Very Good Adaptation of the Broadway Musical
I'm giving the movie such a good review because I've seen and absolutely loved this brilliant Sondheim Broadway musical. It's a genius piece of work. Funny, sad, human.
I just have to address a lot of the reviews I'm seeing here. Are you people stupid, or what? First off, there's a lot of "don't take your kids!" Well DUH! Whoever said it was a kid's movie? It wasn't a kid's musical on the stage either. Some people here are shocked by some of the themes. The whole point of this work was to address adult themes using fairy tales and dead-clever lyrics. Why don't you people do a little research before you take your kids to a movie? Secondly, there's nothing in here that kids couldn't stand to know about anyway. I didn't grow up watching children's movies. I watched regular movies. Maybe the proliferation of children's movies is what's making each generation just a bit more stupid.
Next up: the people who say it's confusing. Again, I weep for this country. What in the world in this story could possibly be confusing? Every single theme is spelled out for you in the lyrics of every song. Or are you just the type of people who don't actually listen to any words? Are you the type of people who won't watch old black and white movies because there is too much dialogue?
Anyway, I thought this adaptation was quite faithful and it was very nice visually. Good performances by all with standouts being Streep and Kendrick. My only two complaints? First, there was a reprise of "Agony" by the two princes in the play that was cut for the movie. This is a very funny piece in which the two now-married princes sing of their growing boredom and how they are now pining after two new young maidens who sound suspiciously like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. I wished they'd kept that in.
Secondly, I was a tad shocked that they used an ACTUAL little girl to play Red. (although the actress was superb) But it did make the sexual innuendo between her and the wolf a little weird. On the stage this role was always shown as being perhaps-teenaged, but nevertheless a fully-developed young woman. Therefore, on the stage, Red and The Wolf's interactions come off as a real-life situation of young womanhood and not something downright criminal!
Only Lovers Left Alive (2013)
Boring
I didn't quite GET the point of this movie or the "plot" (was there one?) or anything. Hiddleston and Swinton are great looking and great to look at but this movie went NOWHERE. BOR-ing!
And why is it that characters who've lived a very long time ALWAYS seem to have only known famous people in the past? Of course their best friend is Christopher Marlow! Right. Do you know any famous people? If you continued to live for a few hundred more years do you think you'd necessarily meet nothing but future famous people? Oh brother.
Please don't waste your time watching these useless, blood-sucking, arty hipsters.
The Glass Key (1942)
The Adoration of Alan Ladd
Saw The Glass Key this weekend, a movie I've always been curious about. Here's my rather skewed analysis. (Lots of spoilers)
I thought this would be a typical atmospheric and moody noir (it was up to a point) with a bit of a convoluted plot (it did have that) but no one warned me that it was going to be so subtly weird, kinky and delightfully perverse.
Let's start with the familiar trope of the "beautiful object." This is the Hollywood lovely who is given lingering close-ups, usually in soft focus, and we then know that this is the object that we are supposed to gaze upon and delight our eyes with. It does not matter if one is a straight woman (like me) because the object is not necessarily a sexual thing. She is lovely eye candy...something to adore and emulate. We go into this movie expecting our object to be Lake. She does have a few soft lingering close-ups and there is a moment when the nurse opens Ladd's hospital room door and she stands there PERFECTLY FRAMED in her Edith Head ensemble, but overall Lake seems to be an afterthought in this movie.
But who the camera seriously and continuously slobbers over is Alan Ladd. In fact, I've never seen a movie in which the MALE lead was pawed at so much by the camera (and thus, us) and by the other characters in our little play. Everybody is all over this guy. There's Lake who throws herself at him to very little avail. He flirts with her a bit in an early party scene (and here we get some of those lingering, soft-focus close-ups of Ladd as he flashes his wicked smile) but he also gives her a kind of kiss-off at the door when she sees him out and she gets left standing there with her panties in a bunch.
Then there's poor William Bendix who - quite literally - CANNOT keep his hands off of Ladd. Sure, it's mostly to beat the crap out of him, but he's usually calling him sweetheart and baby while doing so. Bendix seems to light up from within every time Ladd steps into his view.
Throughout this movie Ladd is always entering somebody's room or office or chambers, draping himself easily onto some piece of furniture and saying "look at me." And look they do. Mob boss Nick Varna positively beams every time he's in Ladd's presence. There's a scene after Ladd's Ed Beaumont has broken ties with his bro-friend Madvig and goes to see Varna to talk terms on a possible defection. Varna mentions a sort- of witness affidavit he has, and instead of sensibly leaving it in the safe he practically SKIPS over to the safe to get it out and show to Beaumont. One "aren't you a clever boy" from Ladd and this guy would swoon.
In fact, it seems the only person in this movie who doesn't get giddy in Ladd's presence is boss/cohort/bestie Paul Madvig...and absolutely every machination of Beaumont's is in the service of Paul. You can see where I'm going with this. This has got to be the gayest movie of this era I have ever seen. But I'm not putting it down for that. I think the whole thing is wonderfully subversive and entertaining as hell.
Now let's talk Lake. It is painfully obvious that Beaumont doesn't care two ticks for her. Most telling in this vein is a scene near the end of the movie in the Henry household when Henry finally confesses. Ladd says "I thought we'd have to send the girl to the gas chamber before the old man confessed." The girl??! It's like he's forgotten what her name is. Oh sure, he likes to flirt around with her but doesn't stick at making kissy face with the hospital nurse or flat out get busy with Mrs. Newspaper Owner.
And let's talk about that whopper of a scene! It is in this scene that we see the stunning amorality of Beaumont come to light. Beaumont goes out to the country house of Mr. Newspaper Owner in order to confront...I dunno, a whole mess of people. First off he comes in and stands there for a good 30 seconds, giving off his sly smile, so everyone can get a load of him. Mrs. Newspaper Owner then gives him the "well hel-LO!" and "come sit by me Mr. Beaumont" routine. She finds out that her husband is under Varna's thumb. Big surprise...not, and uses her (fake) indignation as an excuse to throw herself all over Beaumont. Everyone goes to bed while Beaumont and Mrs. NO start getting' busy right on Mr. NO's own couch! The doughy Mr. NO comes downstairs occasionally to ask his wife if she's coming upstairs or what. Mrs. NO just goes back to sticking her tongue down Ladd's throat. Eventually Mr. NO just goes upstairs and puts a bullet in his own head.
This scene is stunning in its amorality. What kind of dude gets his face all in another guys's wife's cleavage right on that guy's own couch in that guy's own house and just gives a bored, blank look when the guy dares to protest? Was it Beaumont's intention that Mr. NO go upstairs to off himself? This is never explained and Beaumont shows zero concern for what's happened. The guy is one piece of work.
Finally, the "Lake and Ladd run off together" ending seems a bit tacked on. I mean, I can see that they sort of dig each other. There was a fair bit of chemistry but in the long run I don't think he's going to stay interested in her. They're both a couple of evil, twisted ice cubes, and therefore made for each other, but he'll "not keep her long" to quote Shakespeare, and in this world she's just not the object of adoration. He is.
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)
This is different??
I heard a lot of squealing about this movie and expected better but it's very conventional and follows the same ol' story arc as movies it is supposedly mocking. The characters are a tad snide and make a few quips but other than that this movie is EXTREMELY middle-of-the- road.
The only lead character with any screen presence was the big wrestler guy. As for the lead, if that dude walked by me on the street I totally would not recognize him. No star power here. No screen presence. Zoe Saldana is starting to get typecast as "space babe." She should take another kind of role soon. Bradley Cooper's character was downright annoying. An angry little animated character is not new or groundbreaking.
We don't even get a dynamic bad guy! People, everyone knows that if you want your movie to be kick-ass you have to make your bad guy dynamic, weirdly sexy...or at the very least, British (this is known as The Alan Rickman Principle). This bad guy was just some weird blue dude who apparently drooled a lot while eating black licorice and forgot to wipe his mouth off. This movie is a giant ho-hum.
Interstellar (2014)
Lame-o!
Here's its 2 stars...I saw it in IMAX so I enjoyed going through the wormhole. Other than that? Well, let's get started...
It's so typical - almost clichéd! - the way billions of dollars are spent on the visuals of movies these days and zero dinero on the script. Interstellar is a prime example of this. It just might be the definitive example.
I'm not going to go into the science much because I'm a tad science- and space-illiterate but even I could see glaring holes in this tripe. For one thing, what kind of impossible tidal forces create a mile- high tidal wave out of 2 feet of water? Why weren't drones sent into the wormhole instead of people? That corn looked pretty green to me, didn't you think so? What's going on in London or Montreal or Buenos Aires or anywhere other than Kansas? Is Kansas the last place anyone is? Can't the black guy just once make it to the end of the movie? Why is NASA housed inside the Bonaventure Hotel? (okay sorry, I'm from LA and recognized it right away)
Did Matt Damon owe someone a role and that's why he's in this tripe giving the worst performance of his career? Why weren't Matthew M's grandchildren and great grandchildren the slightest bit interested in him? Who the hell cast Matthew M in this? How was it possible to relay "tapes from loved ones at home" across those distances but nobody could relay anything back? What was up with that stupid robot?
Okay, forgetting science and crazy-ass tesseracts for a moment...the human element of the script was incredibly eye-rolling. Remember that notoriously stupid moment in Armageddon when Liv Tyler screams "That my father up there!"? Well the entire "human" aspect of this story and all the dialogue seemed to be written by whomever wrote that classic line. What was so wrong with treating the audience like intelligent people and giving then a straight, highly scientific, awe-at-the-majesty-of-the-universe, harsh reality sci-fi film that didn't insult you at every turn instead of this z-grade soap opera with neat-o visuals?
All Is Lost (2013)
It's not about sailing - duh!
I can't believe how many user reviews here go on about the sailing and the technical inconsistencies in this film. Even I - an atheist - could pick up on the symbolism in this tight little film.
One post here did point out that it seemed to be a Christian allegory. Although I agree, I also think the symbolism here could work just as well with a secular world view. So everyone needs to stop talking about the details of what Our Man did or did not do wrong. It's not about sailing! The symbolism is so heavy that you could, well, drown in it.
Redford did a great job and the movie was wonderfully minimalist. I've never seen a movie before where the villain was a shipping container.
The Darjeeling Limited (2007)
A Nice Ride
I'm starting to become quite a Wes Anderson fan. Let's start with the most obvious reason - STATIC SHOTS. In these days of hand-held and cameras that bob around endlessly I am eternally grateful there are still a few filmmakers like Anderson who know what a tripod is. I almost don't care about the content of a movie anymore as long as the camera is STILL.
As for the movie, I enjoyed it. It's shallow but the visuals are stunning. This is a major travel-porn movie. Plus, I enjoyed every one of the performances. The cast was stellar, down to the smallest role. Sure it's about rich people who have the means to go "find themselves" while so many people don't, but I approached it in the same way one would approach one of those delightful singing/dancing comedies of the 1930s full of rich people who seemed oblivious to the fact that there was a depression on. Darjeeling is lovely escapism with just a touch of meaning and depth. I enjoyed the ride and was not bored. Ain't that what movies are about?
CBGB (2013)
Wouldn't A Documentary Be Better?
First off, I love Alan Rickman so it pains me to say this - why was he cast in this role? He sleepwalks through the whole thing. And I was told he was supposed to be all New York-y. He's about as New York-y as the Queen. A jew-fro, 20 extra pounds and a wardrobe of overalls does NOT make a character.
Now on to the real problem: who wrote this thing? Did YOU get any sense of the importance or significance of CBGB watching this dumb movie? Because I didn't. Mostly it seemed to be a movie about a guy who steadfastly refused to pay his rent for no particular reason whatsoever. If the real Hilly was this much of a moronic aye-hole nobody would have had anything to do with him and history would not have been made.
Now onto the "famous acts." These characters were paraded on in a ridiculous fashion. Oooo, there's Blondie. Oooo, there's Taylor Hawkins being Iggy. Oooo, there's the Ramones and the Talking Heads and a glimpse of Annie Golden and Harry Potter's friend in the Dead Boys. And why were those polished studio recordings used every time someone "played"? Where was the rawness? There was no sense of the growth of these bands or the growth of the club and there was no sense of what Hilly really meant to anyone. Remember in the final credits and they show Tina Weymouth at the RnR Hall of Fame bringing Hilly on stage with them and she talks about how Hilly FED them, and NURTURED them and blah blah blah. Did you see ANY of that in this movie? No.
Finally...what was up with that comic book style? What in the world has this got to do with comic books?
Safety Not Guaranteed (2012)
Underwhelmed
Okay, it had a surprise ending - I'll give it a few points for that - but otherwise I was underwhelmed by this "indie" film. Maybe I just didn't like the guy. I know he is supposed to be this misunderstood and charming guy whom everyone thinks is a creep....but I just thought he was a creep. Acting was good in this movie...I just didn't like the characters or the script or the story.
And one more thing - SHAKY CAM!! No movie with shaky cam gets very many stars in my book. Doesn't anyone own a freakin' tripod anymore? Luckily I was watching this at home and not in a darkened theater - but it still bothered me. Oh when are these hipster morons going to stop with this?
The Adjustment Bureau (2011)
Eye-Crossing Clichés
I don't know when I've seen such a lousy movie. I really thought I was renting a thriller and all I got was this sappy crap. Don't get me wrong...I'm a chick, but I didn't think this was going to be a chick flick. Except it really wasn't even a chick flick. A CF should be light, fun, or at least scenic and romantic. This crud had none. My husband actually liked it better than I did. Well, at least he had the ever lovely Emily Blunt to look at. She's always good in things. I don't fault any performers here. It's the script that stinks. Lousy dialogue and a REALLY lousy idea.
Don't rent this movie!
Bridesmaids (2011)
Who Would EVER Be Friends With This Woman?
What was all the buzz about this movie? What a piece of crap. First off, no one would ever act like Kristen Wiig's character does...and if they actually did, no one would have anything to do with her. I like Wiig on SNL but her character was 100% unlikable in this. Aren't you supposed to like the lead character? The rest of the characters were clichés. Only Maya Rudolph showed any class. The food poisoning scene was just stupid and gross and not very funny. I thought the Megan character was pretty funny...but on further reflection, only marginally. The guy who played the cop was good. But do you really think he'd like Annie? Run away, Officer! Run away from this loser woman right now! Everyone else...run away from this movie.