RobLuvsTheMountains Reviews

Risen (2021)

interesting plot

[7/10 · 11 November 2023]

This movie is dragged down by too many slow moving scenes in which the viewer is watching something for no payoff in either the plot or mood. Also, I didn't like way the viewer was led to think the father had been abusive. However it is part of the surprise ending so I'll forgive it. The acting is ok however Stone and Trujillo being the standouts. Even with the main female lead being not such a great actress I still give the film a 7 due to an interesting plot and excellent, surprising ending. I'm looking forward to seeing what else Trujillo has been in. He's interesting and engaging to watch.

Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates (2016)

really funny and entertaining

[9/10 · 23 May 2023]

Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates is a very entertaining and funny movie. I laughed out loud many times from beginning to end. All of the actors are talented and engaging. I have never seen the movie The Hangover, which some reviewers have mentioned here. I also know nothing about the apparent real life events. So, my review is not based on any comparison to other movies or events. However, now that I've seen this movie I am pretty sure I'll seek out more of Zac Efron's movies and check them out based on his performance here. I had already seen one other Adam Devine movie (Jexi) which was funny and entertaining and why i thought I'd give this movie a try. I'm glad I did. It was a fun romp.

Cargo (I) (2017)

Martin Freeman is a good actor

[5/10 · 8 May 2023]

Viewer opinions of the movie Cargo with Martin Freeman: This movie is what's commonly called a slow burner. There is character development that i appreciated. There are also a few currently popular tropes that i didn't appreciate. The positives are that Martin Freeman is very talented and his performance here is nuanced, heartbreaking, and sometimes humorous. It is because of his acting that I kept watching. This does not mean that any of the other actors aren't good (the girl is a joy to watch) however Martin has the most screen time. I would have stopped watching about a half hour in if not for the fact that he was interesting to watch. The movie is slow and in some places just lumbers along. The scene where the girls family is killing zombies (so that they won't make it to where her people are living now) doesn't work. I can't put my finger on why. It reminded me of group zombie kill scenes from other movies but not in a good way. The final scene where we see the girl's people interacting doesn't work either. It comes across as trying to push an emotional button and feels like we are supposed to get a message.

More straight up storytelling less messaging might be helpful in making movies that are interesting to watch and more engrossing. It's growing kind of old that movie makers seem to be relying very heavily on the likability of their main actors and less on good , engrossing storytelling.

Black Summer (2019–2021)

great cinematography

[3/10 · 6 May 2023]

This is a review of season one of Black Summer. I have not watched the second season and probably won't. First: The only character's name that I remember is Rose because it is the first power point . Let me say something about the power point before each scene: I paid attention for the first few scenes. Then I quickly got the sense that it didn't matter or add anything to my enjoyment or understanding of the events so I stopped reading them. They happen before every scene and it grew tiresome. That may seem like a small complaint but I don't like or tolerate tiresome things in the real world or entertainment. (The exception being my job of course) Second: the characters do stupid things. At first I excused this because I think we all would do something stupid in the confusion and extreme unknown. My problem with it is the seemingly slow learning curve of these characters. And finally the part that I feel is an unforced error: the politics. The woman who plays Rose has been quoted as saying the tearing away of Rose's daughter reminded her of children being separated from their families at the Southern border. People say these things and are never asked questions to challenge their thinking. There are obvious differences. Rose hadn't broken a law. In this country you don't get to take your kids with you to jail. And no country can survive if they don't enforce their borders. Similar to how you don't just let anyone take residence in your house. Anyway, when viewers are talking about the clearly not well thought out politics of a show instead of the writing, acting, character development, plot, ETC. That's no bueno. Now with the good: the Korean girl and the guy who is protective of her are compelling and interesting characters. I would watch more of their story. The cinematography is EXCELLENT. So cool. It gives a feeling of being right there with the character.

Parks and Recreation (2009–2015)

self absorbed main character/ funny supporting cast

[4/10 · 5 June 2022]

I laugh out loud at least 3 times per episode. That's worth 2 stars. Most of the supporting cast are interesting or fun to watch. That's worth a couple of stars. The problem with this show is how unlikable the main character is. Some other reviewers claim this isn't Amy Poehler's fault. I beg to differ. It's the actor that makes the character. Leslie Knope is not just the character that the writers make up, she is what Poehler wants and makes her be. She is a stupid, selfish, self centered, self absorbed, ignorant, naval gazer who clearly just wants to be president to satisfy her own hubris. Dumb. Not funny. Not interesting. Just dumb.

The other thing is the weird mocking of Jerry. Very awkward. Uncalled for. Unfunny. I don't get it at all. I'm not sure what the writers were going for with that. The fact that Ron never gets involved in it and doesn't like it makes me respect him.

In summary, there are some laughs in this show if you can ignore the person who gets the most screen time. If you have nothing else to do, watch this show for the supporting cast.

Mike & Molly (2010–2016)

funny and endearing until the last season

[7/10 · 14 May 2022]

Mike and Molly has a very strong first 5 seasons. In the final season it falters. For the first 5 seasons it's funny. The characters are each endearing in their own ways. It's fun and interesting to watch the character development through the seasons. However, in season 6 Melissa McCarthy becomes unfunny and difficult to watch. I have not done any research to attempt to find out why this is the case. (Of course it's only my personal opinion and observation, so there might not be anything to find out.) I had to force myself to finish the final season. It was really rough. When I watch a series I like to watch every single episode so I stuck with it. All of the other actors stayed true to character and stayed funny and interesting. The Molly character became really unlikable. The final episode, though, was touching. I even got a tear in my eye. For the first 5 seasons I'd give it 8 or 9 stars. Season 6 gets 5 stars but is only that high because of all the actors besides McCarthy.

Save Yourselves! (2020)

Movie made me chuckle. Lack of plot and stupid gun speech brought it down.

[3/10 · 11 January 2022]

I watched this movie alone knowing my spouse would hate it (millennial speech, and their apparent inability to have rational debate on anything they say, is intolerable to him). I, on the other hand, can usually just ignore that if the movie is engaging enough. Well, unfortunately, this movie isn't. I tried watching the opening dance sequence, thinking it must have something to do with the plot. But it was too annoying so I fast forwarded through the opening dance sequence. Then I watched the movie for real. The movie does have many cute little funny moments. I chuckled many times. But what normally drives my husband nuts began also to wear on my nerves. It became an effort to watch the movie. The anti gun talk was downright stupid, unnatural and weird. Most of the movie (all their dumb clichés) felt natural except the gun talk. Some folks might find the ending to be endearing. I find it disturbing. Why would anyone assume that after invading Earth and killing humans the aliens just want to whisk us off to another planet in order to help us? I took the ending as a mass kidnapping. If you want to help people you don't start off by killing them. Anyway, here's how I decided on my rating: 6 stars for the moments that made me chuckle. (I enjoy being humored) minus 3 stars for lack of meaningful plot and stupid gun talk. So that leaves 3 stars.

I'll Take Your Dead (2018)

interesting and entertaining

[8/10 · 16 November 2021]

I found this movie to be interesting and entertaining. Each of the 3 main character were engaging. I wanted to know what decisions each would make and what was going to happen to them. The ending was surprising, a bit sad, but still satisfying.

La Brea (2021–2024)

movie quality effects in first 15 minutes

[3/10 · 14 October 2021]

The first 15 minutes of the new show, "La Brea" has movie quality special effects and is very exciting. However as soon as the show begins to focus on the stranded people (in another time and/or dimension) the viewer is immediately bludgeoned with socialism. Before any of these people even get to know each other at all, before there can be any kind of vote on how to proceed, it is instantly assumed that they HAVE to stay together and that all resources should be pooled together and divided. Our main character ("helicopter mom") appoints herself as leader of said resources. Ridiculous. Let these people get to know each other. Let the audience get to know them. How about giving democracy a try? Sheesh.

It was a real let down. It felt like a bait and switch. The characters were cookie cutter. It felt like someone had a list to check off: gay couple: CHECK; hostile extremely unlikable woman: CHECK; over protective "helicopter" mom who insists on driving her almost adult kids to school: CHECK; military guy who drinks too much: CHECK; The whole menagerie got stupid pretty quick.

Vantage Point (2008)

Each vantage point brings new information and ups the ante

[10/10 · 6 September 2021]

Vantage Point shows the same event from different peoples' experience. With each different point of view we learn new things that add to the plot and increase the thrill and excitement for the viewer. I've never seen a film quite like this and it was extremely entertaining.

Molly's Game (2017)

Entertaining up to a point

[5/10 · 26 August 2021]

Molly's Game entertained me. It also confounded me and made me feel stupid. The actors are all great. I was able to keep up with the pacing and timing of the movie even though it jumped around to different times of Molly's life. The thing that was hard to follow and left me feeling dumb was the constant poker speech and how Molly is portrayed as being able to literally remember everything she hears and sees, log it in her brain, use it to her benefit while simultaneously doing a gazillion other things. I know it's common to say that women are better multi taskers, but good grief this is ridiculous. Also, I had a very odd thought while watching this movie, " I don't remember Jessica Chastain having boobs this big in 'Mama' or 'Zero Dark Thirty'. And then when she was standing outside her car in that barely there pink outfit I remember thinking, "Why is she dressed like a prostitute? The writers haven't shown that she is sleeping with any of the men." Here's why that's a problem. If a viewer is asking themselves these types of questions while watching a movie there's something wrong. Btw, I'm female and had these questions and thoughts during the watching of Molly's Game. At times I felt highly entertained and at times I felt flummoxed. Hence I give it a middle of the road scoring.

Freaks (2018)

good movie as long as you don't know the writers' objectives

[6/10 · 3 August 2021]

This movie is entertaining, engaging and interesting as fantasy. Me and my spouse enjoyed it. As entertainment I would give it 8 stars and say it's worth a watch. However the directors/writers intentions are bigoted. They have been quoted as saying they wanted to tap into "paranoia about immigrants, Muslims, people of color, and various other outsiders who become victims and targets when a dominant population becomes afraid". In saying this they display bigoted and prejudiced views about millions of people that they obviously have never met. Also, it must take a lot of cognitive dissonance to not even realize that they are portraying the "immigrants and Muslim" as mind controlling murderers. Yet according to their quote they think we are supposed to feel sorry for the "freaks" (immigrants and Muslims) I did have empathy for the freaks for the first half hour or so. But when they start controlling and killing people my empathy waned. Of course I wouldn't feel empathy for people controlling other people's minds and actions and murdering people.

The People Vs. Fritz Bauer (2015)

a few facts surrounded my a bunch of made up stuff

[4/10 · 2 August 2021]

I have watched other (better) films about the search and/or the capture of Adolph Eichmann. I should have known from the title that this film has very little to do with Eichmann. It is mostly about being homosexual in Germany during that time period. One of the characters is complete fiction, created in order to focus on homosexuality. Additionally, the movie presents untruths regarding various governments. If you're looking for a movie about how difficult it was to be gay in Germany in the 50's you will enjoy this movie. If you are looking to see history, look elsewhere, like the historically accurate "Operation Finale".

Prodigal Son: It's All in the Execution (2021) Season 2, Episode 1

Loved the first season. This episode is a disgrace.

[2/10 · 14 January 2021]

This episode is disgraceful. Lying, no matter what your goal, is disgraceful, disgusting, and should not be accepted by thoughtful, thinking, knowledgeable, intelligent people. It's obvious that the writers were deliberately bludgeoning the audience with social justice themes. That's bad enough since any thinking person will naturally distrust someone with an agenda. What's worse is that the writers don't even have the courage to portray the truth. They portrayed the police as racist and every one of them was white. The truth is that most excessive force cases involved African American, Italian, Hispanic and Asian American police officers, not just Caucasian. The writers want to virtue signal but lack the integrity and courage to use the truth. I guess they couldn't portray all police as racist since most of the main characters are police. What are we going to do next in this country? Will we say that all men are inherently ("systemic") rapists because some men are? Are we going to start saying that all mothers secretly wish they could kill their children because there have been some high profile cases of women who have killed their children? In short, another show, another form of supposed entertainment, ruined by divisive and destructive lies.

Penny Dreadful (2014–2016)

Entertaining, gripping, and compelling until it becomes obtrusive

[6/10 · 22 August 2020]

Updated on September 6, 2020: I have watched every episode of Penny Dreadful. The first season is extremely interesting and entertaining. The visuals are exciting. The dialogue is gripping. The plot and character development are compelling. The problem arises in season two. The writing becomes needlessly obtrusive. Specifically in episode "The Nightcomers." We are introduced to the 'cutwife' a witch who performs abortions. She describes it as "helping women." She implores Vanessa to stay and take over this vital role of "helping women." The viewer is left thinking "what if the baby was a female? how does that help women?" For the duration of the episode the viewer is told over and over how important this service to women is. The cutwife tries to convince Vanessa to stay and take over the duties. When Vanessa says no the cutwife becomes verbally abusive regaling Vanessa with a string of vulgar verbal violence. It comes across as utterly stupid and caustic. Writers with better critical thinking skills might have handled this episode in a less badgering way. The other issue in season 2 is the nudity. Season 1 has a lot of sex and nudity, including homosexual sex. The problem in season 2 is that it comes across as statement of force. When the male prostitute took off his robe to reveal his naked body I literally thought , "We're Showtime! We'll give you full frontal. We're Showtime!" It wasn't sexy or alluring. It just came across as rude and self aggrandizing. I will continue to watch this show because the first season was so gripping and I hope it gets back to that. Update: The show continued to have moments and entire episodes that were entertaining, exciting, gripping and compelling. However there were also entire episodes and plot streams that were what I would classify as downright abusive to the viewer. Gratuitous to the upmost and disgusting extreme. The Brona Croft arch being the best example of this. I can tolerate almost anything if done in a thoughtful and intelligent way that serves the plot. The Brona Croft arch was downright abusive to the viewer. Another reviewer called it "man hating" and that is true but it's worse than that. There is no excuse , not even the detail that her daughter died because she was abused after selling her body and she felt guilty for not "getting up" after the assault, for the extreme man hating and disgusting level of violence she foments. As a society we must stop demonizing entire groups of people because some people do bad things. There is NO group of people in the history of the world that is all good or all bad. The other thing that annoyed me was the lie that the apache indians only killed as a response to the white man's actions. The historical fact is that there were tribes who would raid other tribes and kill almost everyone so that they could have their land and horses. This was happening before any of them even knew what a "white man" was. Again, we do not need to engage in the lie of saying that one group of people= bad and another group of people= good. It's not true and it's divisive hateful propaganda. Which leads me to my final point. Why can't shows just be entertaining, gripping, exciting, and compelling ? Why must they always try to make us believe their world views. This is the worst show I've seen in regards to the in your face, blatant, and almost abusive level of this. I still give this show a 6 out of 10 because the 1st season was so good and if I could take out the Brona Croft arch I'd most likely be giving this show an 8.

It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia (2005– )

piss your pants funny

[8/10 · 16 August 2020]

Other reviewers have given this show a negative review based on the first season. I am halfway through the 3rd season. I almost quit watching during the first season. I stuck with it though because i could see that there was real talent there in the actors and the writing. The first season was rough but thankfully all of the actors have found their groove. The result is stellar. My favorite sitcoms of all time, in no particular order: King of Queens, Seinfeld, Big Bang Theory, Last Man Standing, The Office, 3rd Rock From the Sun, Angie Tribeca, and Detectorists. Now I'm adding Always Sunny in Philadelphia. One thing all of these shows have in common, besides being laugh out loud funny, is it took the first season for everyone to settle into their roles. An interesting little surprise: Charlie Day can sing! AMENDMENT TO MY FIRST REVIEW: I have now watched through season 12. The show is still funny and I continue to enjoy watching these characters. HOWEVER, one thing that started to happen is onscreen apologies for jokes about gay people. Apologizing for a joke is a no no in comedy. (Often the best comedy doesn't follow any rules... except no apologies!) It's really weird. A bit of cognitive dissonance perhaps. This show mocks everything, including suicide, priests that molest children, religion, lack of religion, if it exists it's mocked on this show. Yet the only thing they apologize for is gay jokes? Super weird. Mock whatever you want, but don't apologize! And just for clarity: unfortunately my life has been touched by suicide but the attempted suicide scene was hilarious. This show has a knack for making anything funny. But when they apologize it ruins it.

Underwater (2020)

entertaining movie kept me and my spouse on edge of seat

[9/10 · 28 July 2020]

This movie is very entertaining and kept me and my spouse on the edge of our seats. The tension starts almost immediately and doesn't let go to the end. Kristen Stewart does a fine job carrying the film. Contrary to what other reviewers have said, Stewart does NOT spend most of the movie in her underwear. I'd estimate it's probably about 10 minutes. I don't see what the big deal is. It fits in with the plot. Needing to not wear pants under the 'space suit' is typical, I thought. This is done by Sandra Bullock in "Gravity" and likewise it was not gratuitous. The other actors are engaging and interesting to watch. Especially entertaining is TJ Miller. He's so fun to watch. His firecracker humor is such a gas!

NOS4A2 (2019–2020)

watching to see what happens to Millie..... Vic too unlikable

[7/10 · 22 July 2020]

This show has an interesting concept and the actors are very good. Quinto being the absolute standout of the show. He is exceptional as Manx. Bachrach, who plays Vic's dad, is so interesting to watch. Every time he's in a scene I want to watch more of him. Conforti, who plays Manx's daughter Millie, completely steals the show. One of the main reasons I'm still watching the show is to see more of Millie's background and what will happen to her. Her newfound interest in her childhood home and the world beyond Christmas land is a plot line I'm invested in. The problems with the show have to do with unlikability of the protagonist (Vic) and the unbelievably in plot development. For instance: 8 years have passed between season 1 and season 2. When season 2 begins we see Vic as a loving mother. Flawed (active alcoholism) and emotionally damaged (b/c of her experiences with Manx 8 years prior) but still, it's obvious that she is a loving mother. We are also shown that she has a loving relationship with the man she met in season 1 and they have been raising her child together. In the next episode we see her leaving her man , whom she just made promises of marriage to, and leaving her child who she clearly loves a great deal. It doesn't click at all. It's portrayed as if she left because she's an alcoholic and because of her obsession with Manx. However, that doesn't work at all. I was not convinced. The other plot point that is unconvincing is the relationship between FBI agent Romans (played by Tabitha Hutter, a stunning beauty) and Maggie (played by Jahkara Smith). In season 1 Maggie is an emotional wreck and drug addict who is so strung out Vic finds her sleeping near a dumpster. A plot point is bluntly inserted about Maggie's parents not accepting her homosexuality. It's not very well done at all. It comes across as virtue signaling to the audience rather than something we can empathize with Maggie about. Then in season 2 Maggie is seemingly completely off drugs, emotionally mature and in a committed relationship with FBI agent Romans. Even if the audience believes that Maggie has grown up and cleaned up in the 8 years that have passed it's not believable that an FBI agent would be interested in someone like Maggie. I'm sure that mature upstanding people fall in love with immature people all the time, but it's just not convincing here. I'm still watching the show though, even though Vic has become quite unlikable (it's very hard to root for her) and the audience is being asked to believe in some not very well done plot points. As mentioned above I'm very interested in what happens to Mille and Manx.

The Siege (1998)

weird dialogue, one unwatchable and vacuous character, and preachyness

[2/10 · 5 July 2020]

Others here have described the basic plot so I'll forgo that courtesy. The action in the movie is very well done and affecting. The dialogue in the movie is weird and doesn't "fit" somehow. It comes across as unnatural and preachy. These are not good things in a movie (or any form of entertainment or art). Washington was excellent as always. Willis entertaining as always. Shaloub is very talented and fun to watch (yes even in a movie with a plot of this gravity he was fun to watch.) I'm always pleased to see Reddick ( remember him from the excellent series Fringe and the highly entertaining John Wick movies.) Annette Benning is problematic. One reviewer called her performance "sleazy." I know that sounds like an odd way to describe her. But I agree because she really does arouse contempt. From the second she appears on screen to the moment she dies she was so yucky while, oddly, seeming quite stupid and vacuous. Benning seemed quite out of her element with someone as talented as Washington. Between the weird dialogue and the over the top preachyness this movie was a mess.

I Saw the Devil (2010)

Excellent acting, superb plot.... but too violent to receive 10 stars

[8/10 · 4 July 2020]

This is one of the best revenge movies I've ever seen. If it weren't for the brutal violence it would be the best revenge movie hands down. The writing, plot and acting are so interesting, engaging and unique. I recommend this movie but with a caveat: be ready to fast forward through the serial killer's violence. I think it's in the movie to show what a monster he really is, because the plot is that the character pursuing him is willing to become a monster too in order to get revenge. I get all that. It is really effective. However it's too much if you plan on sleeping without nightmares. I still recommend though. And for revenge movie enthusiasts this movie is a must see.

Red Sparrow (2018)

Lawrence's character is boring. Rest of movie is interesting.

[4/10 · 21 June 2020]

This movie was interesting and the twist was good. The problem with this movie is Jennifer Lawrence. Her acting in this is comparable to eating ice. No flavor. No substance. Nothing of interest. I was left wondering how this could happen. Was she instructed to portray a 'nothing' character? A person with no personality? When she beats up 2 people from her ballet troupe it was weird b/c she, up to that point, hadn't seemed like she gave a crap about anything. Like I said the movie's plot is interesting and the twist at the end was good. However, since the movie revolves around Lawrence's character , whose name i can't even remember she is so forgettable, it's a real problem that the character is devoid of anything of interest.

Puzzle (II) (2018)

feels like a lesson in naval gazing

[4/10 · 25 May 2020]

This movie is interesting enough to watch through to the end, however there are enough flaws that it ends up being an empty movie experience. Macdonald's character seems dead inside. I never really felt like we saw her come alive. Contrary to what other reviewers have said, I didn't see any "passion or resurrection to be alive." I saw a seemingly emotionless woman who inexplicably decides to do out of character things. I did get the distinct impression that I was supposed to sympathize with her plight. However I couldn't bring myself to feel for her because she is as responsible for the state of her marriage and family life as anyone else is. She's not an abused wife. She could have spoken up more and been more involved in her own life. Nothing in the film indicates that she was pushed down from the outside (for instance from abuse). I got the impression that she was living the life she thought she should. She is responsible for her own thought life and her own decisions. Then inexplicably she decides she doesn't want that life anymore. I actually felt sorry for her husband. And then the film ends and the viewer is left with the impression that we are supposed to feel like she is free now. The problem is I'm not sure what she's free from. A dull subservient life that she herself created? In the end it came across as a ponder some lesson in naval gazing.

The Wind (II) (2018)

hooks you immediately, but.....

[4/10 · 23 February 2020]

This movie hooked me and my spouse immediately. How could it not get our attention since it starts with a woman covered in blood holding a dead baby she presumably just delivered? The problem is in the constant flashbacks and flashbacks within flashbacks. The writer employs storytelling tropes and ambiguity without payoff. At some point the viewer needs to gain an understanding of what's going on. If there are 'beings' (called "demons of the prairie" in the film) then let that flesh out. Entertain us dammit! If Elizabeth is going mad then let us be in on it so that we may have our emotional response to that. But the writing kept yanking us around, giving us glimpses of what an interesting movie it COULD have been. I wanted to feel something for Elizabeth. Feeling SOMETHING for any of the characters would have been nice. But, the writing just wouldn't allow it. After watching the movie i was interested to know more about the writer. I found out that she has two other writing credits. They are both shorts. One is 7 minutes long the other is 15 minutes long. I have not watched them, however upon learning that her other writings are so short it made me realize why this movie felt like a chopped up confusing mess. One final thought, this thing that writers seem to be keen on of presenting some plot possibilities without actually settling on one (another reviewer rightly called it "You take away what you will from it and make your own decision") is in my opinion pure laziness on the part of the writer. Such a cop out. Have the courage and wherewith-all to tell a real story. And for goodness sake allow us be invested in your characters.

The Innocents (1961)

plodding and uninteresting except for the last 5 minutes.

[4/10 · 5 February 2020]

I enjoyed other mystery movies of that time, like House on Haunted Hill (1959). So, I expected to enjoy The Innocents (1961). However, I felt bored with this movie right from the start. I stuck with it to the end. An ending that I suppose is what gives this movie it's classification as a "supernatural horror." The first problem in the movie is that the governess' (Kerr) conclusions are not believable however the audience is clearly expected to buy into her theories. (I didn't) The other big problem is that the last 5 minutes of the movie are very interesting in fact the most interesting part of an otherwise plodding and boring film. The other notable thing about the movie is the fact that the child who portrays Miles was extremely talented and the character of Miles is the most interesting thing to watch in the movie. That is a sincere compliment to the actor who played Miles; but it is not enough to save the film. I would only recommend this movie to film students; sort of like some of the books one is forced to read in school. I would recommend the film Gaslight (1944) with Ingred Bergman, which is interesting from start to finish.

The Ward (2010)

Interesting movie

[9/10 · 12 January 2020]

This is an interesting movie. I never lost interest. After watching it I had to rethink everything through the lens of the reveal at the end.