Film Reviews

Is a hot dog a sandwich? Is water wet? Is what Edward Snowden did noble? These are all questions that haunt the minds of an average American.

The U.S. government certainly performed at least a somewhat successful psy-op when dealing with the fallout of the whistleblowing. Even after this movie, it's hard for me not to see Snowden as a narcissistic actor who wanted to become world famous. But I think this framing falls apart quickly. What person would succumb themselves to a life where they can't go home? Where they put their friends and family at risk of harrassment or worse? Snowden could have continued on, not said anything, made boatloads of money, and retired early. But he took the sacrifice.

Spying like the NSA did is a very dangerous, very slippery slope once the opposition (whoever that may be) gets into power. Programs like this feel like a one-way ratchet that is extremely difficult to undo. Because of this, we should avoid the temptation of it.

Anyway... back to the movie. Certainly propaganda, just created by the we-actually-believe-in-freedom side. JGL did a good job of acting.

You're lying if you wouldn't blackmail yourself or go out in the street to kill your quantum selves. After all, it's a foolproof plan. If the real you thought of it, then... wait, of course the others would think of it! So you just gotta be fir...wait! They'll try to be first. Damn consistent behavior! The solution is to have a Schelling behavior, one that you know your other selves will follow. I pre-commit to mine being don't do shit and hold tight.

There were awesome feelings of realization throughout as you discovered who was who: the different color glowsticks, the stating of different objects, the numbers, etc. And the audience really felt like the person, despite being the same actor, was a different person.

I don't understand why the phones were breaking?

To those who have gambler friends who owe them money, let this film be the visual message that they will not pay you back. Their promises, requests for extra time, pleads for forgiveness are not them talking; it's the addict inside, the person who "enjoys" (if that's even the word to use) gambling for the thrills and excitement. I repeat, they will not pay you back.

Howard is what many in my social circles would call a fuck. Fuckhead is also acceptable. So is lying piece of shit. I could go on, but the point is probably made. Throughout the movie he lies and manuevers his way in and out of sketchy situations, yet the situation becomes clear to the viewer immediately: the guy's a fuck. He's such a fuck that you quickly start to sympathize with the mobsters who are just trying to get their money back. What sensible businessman would allow a shitty prop parlay to occur? Stop betting and pay me my money!

The tension and stress was very well done. It just kept building. Decision after decision was questionable and dug his hole deeper.

Why did KG make this random cameo..? Did the directors just like him or something and use the movie as an excuse to meet him? He did a good job, though!

Acting: Superb. Nikki killed it with the weirdness and obsessiveness. Bear killed it with his awkwardness. Ian and Sarah killed it with their vibes.

Why was killing Nikki never on the table? It was always suggested that Bear kill himself to get out of the crappy wish he had made, but wouldn't killing Nikki have done the same thing? He keeps his life, real-Nikki gets to die, and fake-Nikki stops tormenting Bear. Seems like a win-win to me!

Along with most other internet reviewers, the moment Bear said "what's so bad about being with me?" is the moment I lost all sympathy for him. And I also agree that this is rape, at least in some sense. Bear gave Nikki no choice in loving him when he snapped his OWW; he gave her no choice when he was having sex with her expressionless face (I didn't notice this, but apparently she was also crying or had tears during this, which makes it much worse); he gave her no choice when she was defectating on herself throughout the day. That said, I don't think he meant for it to be as bad as it ended up being. He just wanted her to be happy and in love with him at no expense of her own (not including personal agency); I'd bet that quite a few people would make that wish if it could be guaranteed that they (the person under the spell) wouldn't know the difference or be trapped like real-Nikki was.

I wish there was more of an explanation around what was happening with real-Nikki given the phone call and late-night convo as Bear was leaving to get water. Is she in purgatory? Trapped in the body with a demon? Somewhere else?

Lighting (or lack of, i.e., darkness) was phenomenal: Nikki in the corner watching Bear sleep; her coming to his apartment and her entire face being dark except her eyes; her face regularly being concealed by her hair; the dark, ominious vibes of his house.

Imagine being so lonely that you're willing to look past your fake girlfriend reconstructing a memorial for your dead cat with your dead cat and then having you eat the cat. Also, the note from Nikki saying "not me" made it seem like real-Nikki was the one who did the cat meat thing somehow.

When Bear saw that Sarah got into Luther after she was murdered, I thought he was going to make a plan to kill Nikki.

Some select reviews from Reddit:

If you are describing the One Wish Willow as a “monkey’s paw”, you are wrong. It is not a cursed item that can only deliver a negative version of a wish. When Ian wishes for a billion dollars, he simply receives money that falls out of the sky. The male shopkeeper also told Bear that he “already got his wish”, and as far as we can tell he seems perfectly content as well. There’s also the fake Reddit where one of the posters confirming the OWW really works excitedly says his mom used to be ugly and now she’s really hot. The problem with Bear’s wish was simply *Bear’s wish*. He didn’t wish for a billion dollars, or to become more attractive. He wished *for another living, existing, conscious human being to be changed so she loves him more than “anyone else in the fucking world”*. This wish, by its very definition, violates Nikki’s autonomy. There is no benign or “good” way to grant this wish. You cannot make a person feel that strongly about another person without literally changing who they are- indeed, changing their entire being. Nikki does not love Bear more than anyone else in the fucking world. The only way to make her do that is to replace her with another being who does, and have that being drive around in her body. The creature or entity that the wish spawned ended up being depraved and indifferent to humanity because the *wish itself was depraved and indifferent to her humanity*. The creature is not a “demon”, it is simply a reflection of the wish Bear made. An inhuman wish and obsessive desire spawned an inhuman entity with an equally obsessive desire. There is no “OWW curse”- the curse is Bear’s wish, period.

Feels like a cross between Heat (1995), Den of Thieves (2018; yes, I realize this film came out before DoT, which kind of makes DoT look like it ripped this off a bit), and The Departed (2006). But I guess there are only so many heist movies that one can do before you start taking bits of pieces of other ones. I mean how original can someone be??

Some plot armor/inexplicable parts: how did they get away from the main heist in a bullet-riddled van when Atlanta PD and such knew where they were? Why would Michael trust Jorge when he knew what a scumbag he was?

Basically a propaganda film by F1, but I'm not complaining. Action shots were awesome and it felt like you were really in the race (in some cases, you kinda were!). About what I expected trope-wise of old guy coming in and clashing with immature guy, then immature guy maturing, then them celebrating together off into the sunset. Wasn't expecting Hayes to win the race.

Yet another super entertaining early aughts movie. Corny sex jokes that result in Ice Cube eating a cheeseburger? Check. Massive monster trucks and tank hijackings? Check. Gangsters BTFOing the U.S. army on their way to storm the capital? ...check. Ice Cube doesn't strike me as the best secret agent out there given his lack of fitness and attitude, but hey, I've never saved a president before. One review called him "a chubby, surly, incomprehensible action hero". That said, I do wonder how Ice Cube got the role. His attitude? His rap music?

As with all movies like this, it has to be taken in context. There isn't supposed to be some complex plot! The craziness and insane shooting and stunts is a feature! The feature, some may argue!

This movie is actually kind of sick? Who knew pairing unrealistic stunts with hard rock or metal music would lead to 13-year-old me being reawakened? The first stunt was awesome: the theft, the chase, the jump, the parachute, the fuck-you to the video camera, the landing, Tony Hawk being the driver of the car. The snowboarding scene was my favorite. I never would've expected Hatebreed to make it into a "mainstream" film, but here we are (were). It felt like Shaun White Snowboarding, but with guns and bad guys and faster speeds. Probably top 10 bad guy kills of all time. Another top 10 kill was him jumping his motorcycle over the castle wall, doing a full-lay one-handed superman seat grab and using the other one to kill a bad guy.

I wonder how much this led to the Dom Toretto we see in the Fast and Furious franchise today. Do they exist in the same universe?

When you think about it, the premise of this movie is kinda nuts? They grab a random extreme sports star, give him a license to kill with zero training whatsoever, and throw him in with some of the worst humans known to mankind? But like most movies, I shouldn't spend so much time thinking about the logic because this movie wasn't made with any logic, only fun and cheese.

Some select reviews that do the movie justice:

this is maybe the dumbest movie ive ever seen and i loved literally every single minute of it

They knew their audience and it was a 13 year old me in 2002.

I played some Assassin's Creed 2 before watching this to have the proper 13 year old boy experience.

I'm not super sure the purpose of this movie. Was it set in the backdrop of the GFC to show how desperate people do desperate things when faced with a shitty situation? Was it to show that the Australian guy, who was the big idiot and just kinda followed along and whatnot, got away with just a bit of jail time instead of getting violently murdered with bullets? Was it to give Brad Pitt a role as a cool guy with long hair? Or to allow Tony Soprano to get back in the mob scene?

The last part—when Brad Pitt says how America is a business and you're on your own and blah blah blah—maybe drove it home. The guys who hit up the game were on their own and took it into their own hands. They were even own their own after, with Frankie really going out on his own as he sold out Johnny. All of them were on their own when they got busted. Were they ever really a team? The criminal underground was almost a team.

I didn't know that Mayans had access to watch Rambo: First Blood. Getting another guy to rub something hot or spicy on his junk stands the test of time. So does your mother-in-law harrassing you about giving her grandchildren. How the heck are you gonna listen to a little girl whose family you just murdered proclaim that you are vile and will die a horrible death and experience a solstice and see a black jaguar and continue to hunt the guy who all of this is associated with? The leader of the tribe who offered fish reminded me of Nacho Libre's sidekick, leading me to constantly expecting corn to get put in his face or him use a cob to kill one of his captors. Do these guys not know what a sunk cost is?

Set design was awesome. Did they rent out Chichen Itza? Apparently not. But they still opted to build everything instead of going the easier route of CGIs. Thank you for that, Mr. Gibson.

I didn't know that Mayans had access to watch Rambo: First Blood. Getting another guy to rub something hot or spicy on his junk stands the test of time. How the heck are you gonna listen to a little girl whose family you just murdered proclaim that you are vile and will die a horrible death and experience a solstice and see a black jaguar and continue to hunt the guy who all of this is associated with? The leader of the tribe who offered fish reminded me of A few one-liners or quips I came up with

Edward Norton is the friend who you describe as a "fuck". He's an idiot, but smart; dumb, but clever. Somehow seems to stretch his luck until he gets what he needs or just dips out when the going gets tough. Never listens to reason or his successful, smart, well-meaning friend. But Matt Damon is the other side of the coin, the friend who refuses to abandon his fuck of a friend who has been nothing but trouble since they first met out of a misplaced sense of loyalty. Both archetypes were spot on.

Of course he had to beat KGB at the end. The movie probably would've been better had he lost and owed even more because that's generally how these things go—the guy (because women just don't do this dumb shit) doubles down after an insult and get smoked by the provocateur who baited him. Get beat in the beginning, get beat in the end, end up in the same place in life. There's a lesson in there for the gamblers watching, but they'll leave with the wrong one because the ending wasn't made for the real world.

Despite all that I said about Norton, he is kind of dumb, especially for that stunt he pulled at the police poker game. Why would you give him such a good hand? Why would you not force him to lose every once in a while? Hilarious when he asked to get read his rights and the beatings followed quickly thereafter.

John Malkovich and his oreos were some sort of Chekhov's gun, but I thought there would be more backstory to it than that being his tell. I mean, c'mon! Oreos? At least choose the Pepperidge Farm chewy cookies! You are worth a gagillion dollars!

Even if you see where a movie is going early on, it doesn't mean that it doesn't hit just as hard when the moment comes. The death of the father hit me kinda hard. I liked the angle where he stops traveling as he gets older, more secure in his relationship, and overall wiser. This is probably true for most people? We get older, have fewer regrets, recognize the choices we make are generally okay, etc. Soundtrack was pretty solid and hit the tones (pun intended) and vibes very well.

I'd be lying if I said I hadn't wished for this superpower. You get to retrace your steps and learn from mistakes until you get it right and the outcome you want. There are definitely things you can't avoid, though; namely death, as the movie so bluntly put it.

Some Letterboxd reviews put it well:

this is the film equivalent of a warm hug [spot on]

Is it visually uninventive? Sure. Is it very forward and explicit with its themes, ideas, and emotions? Sure. Is it occasionally cheesy and even cliché? Sure. But i loved it so much. [spot on again. ]

What would be my go-to way of finding the bomber? I'd immediately get off the train at the stop because who blows themselves up? Base rates, people! Most bombers aren't suicide bombers (is my guess). So then we narrow it down from there. Start looking for any odd behavior and follow groups of people as best you can up until the train blows up.

I guess this is what that Reddit quantum immortality and death guy was afraid of all those years ago. Being stuck in a shitty movie with no way out, some mad scientist using you to advance his career, and having to live near Chicago.

Is this what the life of a gambling addict is like? Lying and stealing all the time from people who have done you no wrong, even the ones who've helped you? Do you make bets on everything, going so far as to determine your life choices (which often include more gambling) based on a bet? Do odds work differently in their brains? Does 40-to-1 odds really mean the same to them? Are they so fixated on the potential of winning that they're willing to look past the miniscule chance of winning? Do they begin to believe their own lies of "I'll pay you back" and "I'm good for my money"?

I've gambled on roulette a few times in my life and could feel the draw, both in wins and losses, an experience apparently most people feel. Wins made me want to keep playing, to continue winning, to get closer to the state of the paid actors on billboards who are having the time of their lives; losses made me want to get even again, so I could start at a blank slate and maybe, just maybe, begin a winning streak. There is no winning and there never will be. Both outcomes leave an itch that will always be there, neither better than the other (well, maybe having more money is better, but to continue playing in hopes that it will increase is a pointless endeavor that will end in financial ruin, lifelong or temporary).

I found it a nice twist of-sorts that Ryan Reynolds' character was also trying to (seemingly, I'm not certain) pay off a debt in a not entirely-dissimilar way to Ben. We see glimpses of it in the way Reynolds bets on small things and takes Ben up on his, but we think Ryan is better because of his ability to back off when he's up. The charisma also helps. But why did he help Ben out? Because he saw himself in him, a sense of generosity, a chance to use him to do well?

A film about doing some shitty things (one much worse than the other) and being able to forgive the other person because you love them, and as Rachel said, "find them layered and complex" (or something like that).

Does planning a school shooting merit expulsion from society? Probably? Should we forgive people for their past sins to help them reintegrate in society and incentivize admitting wrongdoing and getting help for it? Definitely! Both Robert and Zendaya exemplified this mindset: Robert for the whole *cough* school shooter *cough* thing and Zendaya for the whole *cough* trying to fuck his coworker in a moment of emotional weakness and frustration *cough* thing.

A few things I will change about myself after this movie. First, I will start pantsing my partner more because it is funny and I haven't done that since elementary school. Second, I will reconsider what my wedding dance is like. Will it be entirely formal? Probably not!

The SS confession was a welcome surprise. I knew there was something bad, but I figured it would just be something like "I had sex with my partner's brother" or "I spit in some food and gave it to a person I hated". Give me more edge in film!

I first watched this movie when I was in elementary school, probably 9 or 10. That was [redacted] years ago and this shit still slaps. Me and my sibling occasionally make references about dislocating our shoulders to get out of tight spots. We try to sneak up on each other like Jack and Riddick. And while this movie probably isn't good enough to warrant that behavior in most people, it did for me, which is all that matters *insert happy crying emoji here*.

But seriously, this movie is sick. You start thinking the title is because of Riddick and his eyesight. How can that be an issue? It's bright as a motherfucker out on this desolate, unoccupied planet. Riddick can only do damage if it's dark or he has his goggles on. Combine that with how few hiding spots there are (or at least appear to be... it becomes obvious there are plenty, even in a desert!) and the so-called good guys have the leg up. It becomes apparent that Riddick is just playing games and knows who the real enemy is.

The sense of horror you feel when the eclipse is dawning on them is unreal. The size of the planet, the slow speed at which it's moving—these two sights are enough to tell the crew it's about to get real dark for a real long time and there's absolutely nothing they can do about it. Combine that with knowing those godforsaken creatures can see in the dark and the dread washes over you like the shaving grease Riddick was using to stay bald.

DotJ is more of a show about troubleshooting (as Charles would put it!) and problem-solving than the shadowy world of for-hire assassins and the politics and messy relationships surrounding it. (I won't speak on the feasibility of a lot of the kills and methods, but as far as myself and the internet can tell, they're probably not super accurate.) Time and time again Charles is forced to solve problems, whether they are planned (how do I get away from this place after killing this guy?) or on-the-fly (how do I get away from this place now that I've killed this guy and people will be here in 20 seconds?). He consistently comes up with ingenious (albeit potentially impossible, or at least incredibly improbable) ways to accomplish his missions. A few examples (again, looking past feasibility for argument's sake):

Charles and a gunsmith figure out a way to create a two-part barrel and conceal the entire rifle in the form of a suitcase. This gets past airport security and the eyes of the authorities.
The same duo creates a polymer-based rifle that is able to be concealed in a ankle boot (the kind used for injury) and used multiple times.
Charles figures out how to access the place where UDC will be releasing River by recognizing in real-time that the employee who helped him is gay and interested. He does what he needs to gain trust, then waits there for two days (not dissimilar to the modus operandi of the team in All Ghillied Up).

This concept of "solving problems" to commit murder has many parallels to Gwern's On Seeing Through and Unseeing. Charles doesn't confine himself to physics, his appearance, or discomfort. He challenges how difficult some shots actually are, creates intricate disguises that are accompanied by excellent supporting documentation, and is prepared to wait as long as he needs to to get the job done. This is the main reason why I enjoy hitman/assassin art (video games, movies, shows)—it's awesome seeing the ideas the writers come up with!

The problem solving isn't limited to murders—it also extends to personal problems. Charles has to lie to his wife about his work, and only once she discovers his secret safe and room does he offer up some info, albeit it's still a lie. One challenge with lying is anticipating all the directions that the new reality that's been created can go. Every lie creates a new branch that must be meticulously tracked lest a slip-up occurs and the lie isn't consistent. Charles has it easy thanks to the level of isolation he designed and maintained between his family and professional lives.

Charles' moral code, or lack thereof, is confusing and contradictory. In Afghanistan, he killed his entire team because either a) they're terrible people who murdered a bunch of innocent people just trying to enjoy a wedding, or, more likely, b) to fake his death so he could operate more freely. He regularly talks about how other people are good people, yet murders innocent people for money or to get away. As the show progresses, he seems to get better about this, sparing the lives of people who have clearly seen his face. Is this because his face is already known and there's no point in racking up more bodies? Or is he developing a sense of mercy and discretion?

Now for some random checks:

The longest sniper kill ever is supposedly 4,000 meters, but I am skeptical of it as Ukrainian war propaganda—the rifle was made by a Ukrainian arms manufacturer and I'd want to make my enemies fearful that I could pick two guys off with one shot from 2.5 miles away. The first non-Ukrainian entry is 3,540 meters by an unnamed Canadian, which is much more believable, albeit the conditions under which it was achieved aren't known. See also Day Of The Jackal Vs Ballistician (3815m Shot?).
I'm not gonna do the math, but you could probably do some Fermi approximation math to figure out the concentration of security cameras in downtown Munich to see if Charles would've been caught when he kidnapped Elias Fest. My guess is they would've seen him.

This movie has the most still shots I can think of in living memory. It may even have the least number of unique shots—each individual shot is quite long, and when it's not still, it barely pans. The only crazy shot you get is when Casey is dancing like a madman in front of the car headlights. The stillness is representative of Columbus as a city: sleepy, nothing going on; her dancing is representative of her trying to break out of her shell, but failing to do so quickly and going back inside soon after.

Casey and Jin's regular staring at lit buildings from the darkness is another style of beautiful imagery. They're in dark places looking at places that either inspire or give them hope (buildings) or hurt them (Casey finding out her mom has relapsed).

Both Casey and Jin are holding onto parents that will never get recover despite their best efforts of a support system or modern medicine. There's a glimmer of hope that they will, but both know they're probably better off letting them go and continuing on with their lives. You think this finally happens at the end when they're all in the car together, but Jin decides to stay while Casey leaves, leaving them trading places.

Masterfully written and sounded (as in sounds). Ruben goes deaf, then crazy soon after. The audience goes with him, from a happy life of disgusting smoothies in the morning, fun road trips with the love of his life in the afternoon, and loud shows full of fans in the evening to one of silence and isolation. He can't talk to his girl; his musical rhythm is thrown off since he can't hear anything; he can't even talk to his AA sponsor. His life is thrown off track in a literal moment when he's standing in front of the merch table. He had a plan, he had a future. They were up-and-coming, on their way to the big leagues before this happened.

Ruben is left all alone, quickly becoming a part of the deaf addict community and the communities they're integrated into through volunteer work. The weather (yes, that weather) is nice, sunny, warm. His unfortunate, yet necessary, departure is marked by rain clouds and a return to real life in the form of a motel and eating pizza out of the cardboard box by himself, a far cry away from the comfy bed and delicious homemade meals and camaraderie felt at the dinner table.

The hearing is not as he expected. Whether that's because he didn't read or understand the brochure (meh likely), didn't hear or listen to the doctor (very likely), or it's just a plot hole is left undefined. The hype is built up over the course of four weeks, only for everyone to be let down when he puts it on. But this third act is distinct because the noise isn't beautiful like it was before he became deaf, it's now ugly and jarring and confusing and disorienting. Digital sounds zip in and out of Ruben's head quickly. He has trouble understanding people. The movie culminates in him visiting Lou, ostensibly to get her back but really to get his life back: the girl, the music, the tour, everything. He understands that she moved on in life while he was away and that there's not much he can do about it.

Sound of Metal is about trying to get back to that time in your life after you lost it. It could be begging an ex to get back together so you can feel a tinge of the same happiness; it could be going to high school parties in an attempt to relive the glory days; it could be spending egregious sums of money to pay your way back to something. It doesn't matter what it is, what matters is that it's gone and will never return. Better get accepting.

The sound design was wonderful. There were no subtitles when we were in Ruben's shoes and he didn't know sign language, but things got progressively better and with them subtitles appeared. Ahmed did a good job of "yelling" when deaf. The going in and out of silence to noise and back was superb.

Some review highlights from Letterboxd:

That's ultimately what the film spends the rest of its runtime navigating: The impact of that desire, and the consequences. When something cataclysmic happens, you can do everything you can to go back to your old life, or you can try to accept your new one.

one of the most devastating parts of life is not being able to get back to a happiness you once had, especially if it involves people you love. feeling that joy slipping through your fingers, time cannot rewind and only moves forward, and without your consent. relentlessly, painfully. adapt or die. this is a crushing look at that fight against time and change, but it's also hopeful, and eventually peaceful. the sound design was incredible and the hardcoded subtitles were such a smart move.

Bone Tomahawk isn't (just) a western horror flick. It's a story of the times, of love, of heroism and bravery, of accountability, of war, of hatred, of boredom and misery. It's masterfully written and shot.

Set in the 1890s, the plot follows of a group of townspeople on a rescue mission for three of their own who were kidnapped in the night by Native Americans (aptly called "troglodytes" in the film—nobody used Native American back then!).

Life is pretty rough in the 1890s, especially out west. They make soup that gets mistaken as tea and called disgusting, lack modern medicine (besides that sweet, sweet opium tincture), wear long sleeve clothes everywhere, and occasionally have to deal with cannibalistic troglodytes raiding their horse stables and kidnapping their people. This roughness, combined with the pervasive boredom that fills every room in Bright Hope, is a core reason why they decide to embark on the rescue mission: there's simply nothing else to do. What's worse, sitting around in a dusty, dark bar paying 10 cents for the same few shitty piano songs to be played by a drunk or making a five-day journey in three with the risk of never returning. Those with excitement in their lives may say the former, but those lacking in excitement will happily choose the latter, especially if it brings back memories of the war or gives another chance at killing some more troglodytes (shoutout Brooder).

Bright Hope's sense of community also compels the men to go. Their camaraderie, with Hunt at the helm, is quickly established through the first name addressing and obvious familiarity with one another and their backgrounds, existing conflits or not. Hunt feels both a personal (on behalf of his friend and community) and professional (as the lawman of the town) obligation to avenge his fellow townspeople, one strong enough to reject The Professor's assertion that they will die at the hands of these people:

Hunt: You'll take us to them?

Prof: I won't.

Hunt: 'Cause you're an Indian?

Prof: Because I don't want to get killed.

...

Prof: You'll get killed if you enter their territory.

...

Hunt: How many of 'em you think there are?

Prof: It won't matter, you have no chance against any number of them.

Hunt hears and understands the Professor's words, accepts them into his Sheriff-in-a-western-town-hardened soul, and proceeds to say "[fuck it, ]I'm riding out with Mr. O'Dwyer because there isn't a choice for either of us", leading us to the third reason they go: honor.

These are honorable men. They take responsibility for their actions and positions: Hunt for being sheriff, Chicory for being deputy, Brooder for getting the wife involved, and Arthur for going after his wife despite his leg being broken. The initiative is as strong amongst all of them; no one shirks from the mission despite the Professor's stern warnings. Is this common for that day and age? Or just the west? Or were the kidnapees just lucky and the troglodytes unlucky in the town and people they chose to kidnap from? I suppose a combination of all three. I struggle to imagine an equivalent situation happening now, albeit we have SWAT teams and robots to do the job.

The film isn't littered with Hunt and co. massacring their way through hundreds of vicious Indians to save the damsels in distress locked in the teepee tower, it's raw, unfiltered, and in quick spurts with long periods of boredom in between to really drive in what life is like. And even those quick spurts aren't supplemented with music or nauseating cutscenes: they're barebones, letting the brutality of the environment and people in it drive the intensity of the scene. The lack of a music is a central feature, not a bug, of the film; it enhances the violence because the viewer is focused entirely on the grotesque sights and squishy sounds (hopefully not smells!) of the kill.

Tension remains in the air throughout. From not knowing where the troglodytes are (i.e., they could be even closer than expected) to meeting and killing potential raiders in the desert, the viewer is on edge while the party tires over the multi-day journey.

The book feels like a digital companion to McCarthy's Blood Meridian. A few select quotes for comparison (for those who have watched, but haven't read; I'm trusting quotes from others on the internet as I don't have a readily available copy):

It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way.

The white man uncocked the revolver and placed it on the ground before him. Two of the others came back to the fire and stood uneasily. Jackson sat with his legs crossed. One hand lay in his lap and the other was outstretched on his knee holding a slender black cigarillo. The nearest man to him was Tobin and when the black stepped out of the darkness bearing the bowieknife in both hands like some instrument of ceremony Tobin started to rise. The white man looked up drunkenly and the black stepped forward and with a single stroke swapt off his head.

Two thick ropes of dark blood and two slender rose like snakes from the stump of his neck and arched hissing into the fire. The head rolled to the left and came to rest at the expriest's feet where it lay with eyes aghast. Tobin jerked his foot away and rose and stepped back. The fire steamed and blackened and a gray cloud of smoke rose and the columnar arches of blood slowly subsided until just the neck bubbled gently like a stew and then that too was stilled. He was sat as before save headless, drenched in blood, the cigarillo still between his fingers, leaning toward the dark and smoking grotto in the flames where his life had gone.

If God meant to interfere in the degeneracy of mankind, would he not have done so by now?

They found the lost scouts hanging head downward from the limbs of a fireblacked paloverde tree. They were skewered through the cords of their heels with sharpened shuttles of green wood and they hung gray and naked above the dead ashes of the coals where they’d been roasted until their heads had charred and the brains bubbled in the skulls and steam sang from their noseholes. Their tongues were drawn out and held with sharpened sticks thrust through them and their torsos were sliced open with flints until the entrails hung down on their chests…

I found the contrast of the troglodytes quite interesting. They get dissed on for purported lack of intelligence by the Professor during the initial town meeting:

One that doesn't have a language. Cave dwellers.

They're a spoiled bloodline of inbred animals who rape and eat their own mothers.

Yet they show decent smarts (more than I would expect given the Professor's unflattering description) in the form of being able to:

Consistently sharpen bone tomahawks and arrows
Build a jail cell with essentially no method of escape
Create a rope system to pull things and people up to their cave
Tie knots with said rope
Attribute the death of one of their members to the drink that Hunt meant for them to get
Camouflage themselves well
Perform rudimentary body modifications (the bone in the throat)
Amputate limbs without the person dying (the Indian women with only half limbs)
Become expert marksmen with bows and tomahawks

And are a formidable foe thanks to their camouflage, hunting skills, and home field advantage in the Valley of the Starving Men.

Is this a piece of social commentary? How people deemed savage and barbaric are actually much smarter than they appear?

From Reddit:

think the imprisonment can be explained by thinking about how we imprison cattle or any other animal food source. They were cannibals, so you want to keep your food alive until you can eat it, especially, when you don’t have a freezer.

[reply to above] Yeah, kind of their equivalent of a refrigerator.

[reply to above] yep, and opening the scalp is like opening a can's lid

[reply to above] Cracking open the boys with a cold one

Loved how sudden and not-telegraphed all of the encounters with the troglodytes were. Like, the heroes round a corner and get shot in the arm by an arrow. There was no loud fanfare to these climactic face-offs. Something about how close and quick they were really unnerved me. Because you realize they can happen at any time, without the usual horror movie tropes of a musical crescendo or whatever.

The emotion portrayed by all the actors, not just Murphy, was phenomenal. When Murphy made his speech after the "successful" use of the bombs in Japan, you can see him swirling around in his head, dizzy from the events that have unfolded and caused inner moral turmoil. No music is needed, no explanation. Just his face and the surroundings slightly blurred.

I think the movie was made for two reasons. First, to showcase the development of the atomic bomb and all the effort that went into it, from recruiting scientists to building Los Alamos to maneuvering through the political battlefield. Second, to tell Oppenheimer's side of his infamous story, to remove the blemish from his record that some may know about, to inform the public through a probably-beloved-in-the-future film. Nolan did a spectacular job at this. I assume most everything is historically accurate (although I never read Rhodes' The Making of the Atomic Bomb) given Nolan's reputation.

Special effects were minimal like most Nolan films, but I don't think this added much...

The flight scenes were fantastic in this movie. All the actors were seated behind real-life military pilots during the scenes and being subjected to real-life forces during the flying, hence the real-looking effects. Tom Cruise has always been adamant about doing his own stunts and making movies look and feel as real as possible. I love this mindset and think more filmmakers—actors and directors alike—should pursue and abide by this. It adds significant credibility to the movie and enhances the realness.

Maverick leading by example is also huge. Him doing the 2:15 min flight path without missing a turn or the initial missile strike (my favorite scene) when no one else could instantly boosts him up; him being mission leader and doing the exact same thing solidifies his position as the best of the best.

The action scenes were phenomenal. Most action movies nowadays use extremely fast switching to instill a sense of excitement, but this often leads to headaches and nausea (at least for me). TG:M used a bit of this, but not nearly as much—somehow they just didn't need it.

The story worked well and they did a good job of continuity from the original. Characters are still there with their own storylines, the history of everyone is recognized and implemented, and they pay homage to the previous film quite a few times (although it may be a bit too much). A few cheesy quotes here and there, but that's to be expected from a film like this.

Bale puts on quite a performance as a sociopath! The mannerisms, the speech, the thoughts. Everything works well together. Outside of it, I didn't find it that entertaining.

A key part of this movie is seeing how differently everyone takes the case: some people are serious, others treat it frivolously, others have an strong inclination to blame the kid. Those not taking it seriously share two things in common: not truly understanding reasonable doubt and not accepting the gravity of the situation—a person's life is at stake! And to think there is someone there who practically refuses to listen to the opposite side just to attempt to catch a baseball game.

Reasonable doubt is just that: any amount of doubt towards the guilt of the accused means not guilty; and not guilty is just that: NOT guilty. It doesn't mean innocent, it means they can't be proven to be guilty. It's not letting a guilty man free, it's preventing an innocent man from being punished (see Blackstone's ratio). The last few I-choose-guilty men seemed not to understand this for one reason or another.

The amount of refusal to listen to reason was frustrating as hell. The "is it possible?" is all that's really needed to instill some doubt. No one can or should be that sure of something occurring, and it is proven in the movie: they're sure about the knife, boom! Identical knife. They're sure about the man hearing the murder, boom! Slow walking and a long distance debunks that. They're sure about the woman seeing the murder, boom! Two impressions on her nose and some simple logic prove otherwise. At each one of those instances their guilty confidences should have decreased, but instead they doubled-down on other pieces of evidence, moving the goal posts further and further (at least in a sense).

I liked the simplicity of the movie: a single set (minus the courtroom itself and outside the building), the use of 12 main actors, and no gimmicks, only dialogue and raw emotion. Reminds me a bit of Reservoir Dogs. The acting is superb: I hated the Juror 3 and appreciated the jurors who changed their mind and stood up for what they thought was right.

Grunge afffffff. So grunge that Nirvana's Something In The Way was practically the theme song. So grunge that Robert Pattinson wore makeup around his eyes and rarely bothered to clean it up.

First off: Gotham's ambience. Wow. It matched Batman's character to a T. It was dark and gloomy, rainy and wet, sad and on the downturn. The sun wasn't shown once throughout the entire three-hour movie, supporting one of Batman's first assertions of being a "nocturnal animal". There were a couple of times that the sun was on the horizon and Gotham was lighting up, but still early enough that the former (maybe current after thinking about it??) vampire wasn't burned. I can't think of the specific moments the sun was coming up, although I suspect there was some type of symbolism there towards a realization or change in or of Batman.

The soundtrack also matched. Almost Darth-Vader-like, but not quite.

I do wish Batman would kill at some point. Yes, I realize that's part of who he is as a person/franchise, but classic characters are able to be reimagined and reshaped into what their original creators never intended them to be. Whether that's bastardization of Batman I do not know (but my intuition tells me it isn't). His method of knocking his enemies unconscious is unrealistic and improbable. At some point someone's gonna die. It's a movie, I know I know! But still! I thought it was gonna happen when he was pummeling that Riddler wannabe on the catwalk. I really did. And part of me was hoping that after the criminal died, a look of realization would spread across Batman's face, quickly followed by satisfaction and a thirst for even more vengeance, one that couldn't be quenched in one movie, but many. And not by one criminal's henchmen, but multiple, giving us entertainment for years to come. I'm not arguing for indiscriminate murder. The deaths should be tactful (if you can even call it that) and appropriate, not willy-nilly-let's-go-kill-silly.

So how do I propose this movie should have incorporated death? It should have started in the subway. Batman should have immediately killed the clown leader to set the tone for the rest of a freaking awesome movie.

Fight choreography and driving scenes were pretty sweet. Not sure if I'm a fan of his Batmobile... The Dodge Charger vibe is different, and to me doesn't really fit with the billionaire vigilante's badass car vibe, but it's still cool. It does fit with the angsty personality. A suped up Mustang or a Challenge if anything would have been cool(er). Same thing with the motorcycle. I thought it odd, yet interesting, that he rode around so incognito on the bike.

Paul Dano gave a really solid Riddler, almost as good as Heath Ledger did Joker back in The Dark Knight. The vibes you get are incredibly creepy while still giving the illusion of control of his actions, no matter how crazy. Apparently he insisted on shooting a particular scene at least 200 times. The laugh, the mannerisms, the look in his eyes. I haven't seen another Riddler film, but I know crazy when I see it, and Dano nailed it.

Now, onto more philosophical topics: principles. Batman's entire character and purpose is built on principles. From Wikipedia:

Bruce Wayne's principles include the desire to prevent future harm and a vow not to kill. Bruce Wayne believes that our actions define us, we fail for a reason and anything is possible.

He simply wants what's best for his city, even if that means achieving such through violence and fear. The purpose of Batman-ing is to inspire hope in Gotham citizens, to facilitate them believing that they are really able to help their city—ordinary citizens, not just the high-profile and rich! The wannabe-Riddler answers Batman's "Who are you?" in a chilling manner: "I am vengeance", the same line Batman has used time and time again when introducing himself to new "friends". It was at this moment he knew he fucked up. The viewer suddenly realizes that morality is relative, that everyone is the good guy in their story, that what those wannabes were doing was right according to their twisted moral code. And Batman just told them that it was okay. So the question then converts to a cost-benefit analysis. Is what Batman is doing helpful enough that it outweighs what the Riddler and his followers are doing? The death of city officials is temporary, but so is inspiration. New figureheads get crowned and hope wanes. The magnitude of each varies.

Another twist was that of Thomas Wayne's reputation, which was publicly tarnished (well, we never got the full crowd reaction, but I imagine it was) after the Riddler revealed Wayne's request to have a reporter killed for investigating their family. Bruce was understandably shaken by this, but soon rose above it, choosing to be his own man with his own principles, however guided by his late father they may be.

The movie ends with Riddler meeting the Joker in Arkham Asylum, a standard ending for movies teasing a sequel.

Hate to do this, but Meek Mill said it right:

Learn life, it's levels to this shit

And Margin Call makes it readily apparent. The movie portrays the entire hierarchy of a nameless investment bank, from Joe Blow analyst to his boss (who gets fired) to his boss to his boss to the CEO. An each time submissiveness to the next level is abound. Even the young hotshot partner (played by Simon Baker) appears to cower in covert fear at the possible wrath of the head honcho (played by Jeremy Irons). They point fingers behind others' backs, trying to save face while also taking care of business themselves. There is little responsibility taken as made clear by Demi Moore being scolded by Kevin Spacey for not taking substantial action the year prior when they first heard about this. Instead they veil their personal concern as one for the firm, but few are fooled. While not familiar with the finance industry, I see and have heard of this other places. People are only concerned about the company's health when it impacts them personally, whether financially, reputationally, or emotionally.

And coupled with personal concern is lack of societal concern. Irons is quick to find out how to save himself without wondering what the wider costs are to his fellow Americans (well, unless it affects him, of course!). The others are the same way, and again it is mimicked amongst real corporations today. Companies turn a blind eye to atrocities when it benefits them, while simultaneously denouncing others when the optics are in their favor. The only consistency is the desire for profit and the "best" way of achieving it.

And the levels puts into perspective wealth on a societal level. We have Seth, the junior analyst who makes "close to a quarter of a million dollars", flabbergasted at his boss' boss' net comp of a couple mil. And even that's nothing when compared to the CEO, who made close to $100MM! Baker is shown driving a Jaguar F-Type; Irons is shown rolling up to the skyscraper in a helicopter. People who made probably $500k/year are seen being worried for their future due to what I guess is an unsustainable lifestyle caused by overconfidence in their job security and the gross amounts of disposable income available.

I'm not sure what to make of the final scene where Sam is burying his dog. I take it as a reminder of what seems important out there is not so much when compared to other, more traumatic events (not to diminish the severity of losing one's job!). Sam is staring down the barrel of economic collapse, yet is torn to pieces at his dog dying.

I have a theory that most people really enjoy movies in which they are cast into the worlds of powerful and or smart people, much like the characters here. This one is no exception, although the superb acting does help!

This movie is not sci-fi action, it's sci-fi horror. Just watch the police station scene. 30+ heavily-armed policemen can't stop this guy. He rolls in and demolishes everything in his path, taking a whole hell of a lot of bullets in the process. And yet he's unfazed. Imagine that. The few people you feel truly safe around are getting killed without mercy or second thought. And this guy is after you! Hell naw. This isn't even counting the 10+ shotgun rounds Sarah witnessed him take at the nightclub. Truly an unstoppable force who has plenty of resources at his disposal: weapons, a durable body, ability to change voices.

But, like all action movies, silly behaviors are abundant. How did none of the policemen realize he was practically invincible? At 3:20 one guy hits him with a full-auto rifle, gets killed, then his buddy comes and does the same. Both of them without even attempting to get behind cover after popping up and shooting their shot!

I like the idea of Reese being John's father and think the idea is original, but have to bump my rating of T3 down a bit after they reused it with John and Kate. Do something novel, damn it!

T2 killed it. T3 didn't. Simple as that. (We'll see how T1 compares.)

Most of the action scenes in T3 were way too drawn out and inspired from T2. The car chase scene after kidnapping (read: saving) Kate was cool in the regard of the T-X being able to control cars remotely, but too long. Same with the fight directly after the cemetary.

The T-X itself was a good concept: more control of other machines (see last paragraph), a larger weapon arsenal, more intelligent. Definitely fit the bill for a new and improved terminator.

The plot holes from T2 are still there.

I really like the fact that General Brewster sent John and Kate to Crystal Peak not to destroy Skynet, but to save themselves and eventually lead the Resistance. I definitely thought that's where the computers were and wondered why there was no one guarding it (although that remains a mystery...). In the end, John ended up leading the Resistance.

Released in 1991, the special effects in T2 were insanely impressive. Now, I wasn't even alive at the time, so I'm not sure what the average SFX quality was, but knowing what late 90s movies were like, I doubt they were that good. Bravo to the team that created that. See more about T2's SFX impressiveness here. The T-1000 animation also won the Academy Award for Visual Effects.

The major plot hole I see (outside of the whole grandfather paradox aspect) is why Skynet didn't just sent a whole bunch of T-1000s back in time instead of just the single one? Arnold would've been toast had there been a single extra T-1000, much less a dozen. And knowing Skynet's capabilities, they could have easily done so. And knowing how critical John Connor's death was to the survival of Skynet, they should have. But then we probably wouldn't have a movie, so thanks, Skynet.

Acting on all fronts was good. Arnold killed it with his seriousness and demeanor, followed by him trying to learn normal behaviors, like the hilarious high-five scene in the desert. John did a good job of acting a punk kid who has a slightly soft side towards his mother. Sarah played the role of crazy woman well in every scene she was crazy in.

The crew nails it again. Most shows that carry on for multiple seasons seem to regress down a path of desperation and jumping the shark. Ozark refuses to do this and sticks to what they're good at.

The same dark vibe covers every character just as much as the past few seasons. No one has changed their ways; if anything, they've gotten more cunning and ruthless. Wendy's true intentions and capabilities are on full display throughout the season. Her manipulative techniques, her vindictiveness, her calculating, bold moves. Her power hungriness knows few bounds outside those of threats on her and her family's lives.

We are also introduced to Javi, Omar Navarro's nephew and frontrunner for assuming leadership of the cartel. Our initial introduction is that he is friendly, but about 15 seconds later he shows his true colors and intentions. He, too, is ruthless, but also impulsive and impatient. He craves power and control over what he wants, making Navarro concerned for his own safety. The character continues to develop: everyone is uneasy around him and his snooping. But I think he's what makes the season what it is. A wrench thrown in the cogs that disrupts and threatens the order, forcing others to adapt to his presence and make do.

I am surprised at Wyatt's complete change of heart despite knowing Darlene killed two (mostly innocent) men. I understand the whole baby needing a parent thing, but she is evil as can be. I am not surprised both of them were offed, although I half-expected Javi to also kill Zeke for cleanliness. And as Marty mentioned earlier in the season:

If you don't stop, their response is gonna be quick and it's gonna be brutal.

Which really got me thinking: the only people in this show who are practically untouchable are the cartel. They use fear and power over others to get what they want, and most of those under that umbrella comply accordingly. If they don't, dead. Not sure why Darlene wasn't killed off earlier.

I am disappointed that the Shaw Pharmaceuticals security guy didn't go and take care of business on the heroin-dealing hillbillies. The mood was right, the timing was right, so why couldn't we get a bit of action! I'm not asking for John Wick style, just a couple of headshots and coming out with cash and dope.

Not much else to say. The various subplots all work together and interweave seamlessly while still being independent. Great job!

The water must have made the main character stupid as well. Do people never learn in horror movies?! A few prime examples:

The scientist who warned Claire Redfield about the T-virus was locked up with a guy who most obviously had been infected. Said scientist had a gun, yet still managed to get bitten and die. (Also, he never turned into a zombie??)
Claire sent an obviously inept police officer to check out yelling and screaming in the cell room, despite her just saving him a minute prior.
At the Spencer Mansion, the two police officers (not Wesker and the girl) found a zombie, killed him, and then separated to search for another guy. You just witnessed a ravenous zombie chewing on the flesh of some dude and you decide to split up?!
Out of all the zombies killed, every single one was by a head shot. The good guys never seemed to understand this pattern.
After battling dozens of zombies, one officer found his (zombiefied) colleague and proceeds to ask if he's okay even after seeing his discolored and flesh-covered face.

As expected, gun use and realisticness was subpar (although I noticed decent trigger discipline!). They expended entire magazines on individual zombies, they used the infamous unlimited ammo cheat, they didn't aim down the sights. The helicopter ride scene to the mansion was pretty sweet.

The opportunity for a sequel is left open at the end by hinting at Wesker's origin story and showing the others as escaping from Raccoon City.

Overall, a pretty bad movie with money-grab vibes. Like the other Resident Evils after Apocalypse, this probably shouldn't have been created.

Exactly what I expected. Cool fight scenes, cheesy quotes, and some amount of unrealistic moves that help Stallone escape.

There were a few issues with the ship's prison. If this was truly a for-profit prison that abided by no one's laws, then why take them out of their cells out at all? If I were an evil prison warden, every prisoner would stay in their cell 24/7/365. Absolutely no leaving it. The only communication to the outside world would be through me. The doctor would be under strict watch at all times, as would all of the guards. Further, why not just execute the ones who aren't needed anymore? Take Breslin, who was locked up to prevent him from embarrassing other prison wardens. Why not just kill him and avoid all the annoyance that comes with containing him? As for the ones who need to be kept alive to get information, that is another story.

I really liked the plot twist of Rottmayer being Mannheim and his daughter actually being in the CIA. Was not expecting that one.

I was also surprised how Breslin literally killed two guys in the beginning scene to get to the SHU, and then was let off scot-free. Seriously?!

The mood is set early into the first episode. Gi-hun's sad, lonely life is explained through his gambling, desperation, and mother's shaming. Pity and disgust are simultaneously felt, one side saying he's sick, he's not right in the head, and the other saying he's failed his own mother and daughter, he's a weak man. A too-good-to-be-true opportunity presents itself, setting the stage for the games to begin.

The writer/director/whoever did an excellent job of making things known without explicitly saying so. After the gangster player kills the man and the prize money increases, the precedent is set and everyone, including the viewer, knows it: murder is fair game. But this fails to align with equality, the theme of the games. Players' ability to kill differs drastically. Il-nam can't stop an attack from an average adult male, nor would most women.

Two desires are examined throughout the series: that to be alive, and that to become wealthy. The latter transitions to the former as the games get more intense and deadly. The final game becomes a battle for survival first and riches second, if being considered at all.

The final twist is unexpected. I initially thought it a ploy by the organization to get Gi-hun into a private room, then thought it was a lookalike Il-nam, then came to terms that it was actually him. I took his enthusiasm throughout the games as either senility—a lack of awareness of the true stakes—or apathy stemming from his inoperable brain tumor.

What a disappointing end to such an awesome era of Bond films. There are only a handful of things that can ruin an action movie for me: cheesy quotes and plot armor. Throughout the film Bond becomes an absolute softie towards Madeleine Swann, beginning with a romantic trip to Italy and culminating in him watching an incoming missile and saying "I have always loved you". Seriously? The plot armor is equally as bad: while fighting on the island, he is standing in a wide-open space as five goons are unloading full-auto rifles at him. Miraculously, he manages to walk (not run!) to cover without being hit and proceeds to kill all of them without effort. While not getting hit is fine under some circumstances, no cover plus five machine guns is not one of them.

The action and cinematography were both solid.

The plot was confusing. It seems Safin's only beef with James was because of his relationship with Swann, but otherwise there's no real reason behind wanting to take over the world. Paloma, the Cuban spy who helps Bond kick ass in Cuba, is set up to be a contributing character, but ends up being only featured in the Cuba scene and nothing else.

Yet another detective show: a protagonist who is struggling in their personal life while having to fulfill their police duties. At this point, a plot twist isn't a plot twist. It's an expected element that's predictable. There's marital issues, jealousy, friendship conflicts, and everything that goes into a typical detective show. Admittedly, there were two plot twists, which added some amount of surprise.

I am pleasantly surprised that the good guy I was rooting for, Colin, died. That's life. The person you want to make it through doesn't always live. GRRM apparently does a good job of this in GoT. I am also happy within Kate Winslet's weight: her body was how I would expect a woman-in-her-position's body to look (and I don't mean that in a condescending, ugly way). It didn't stand out much and wasn't excessively fit.

One idea I have for detective shows is to hide both the amount of episodes and runtime of each episode, unless the viewer specifically navigates to see those. This would prevent viewers from saying "oh, this isn't the guy" when there are two episodes left and they seemingly bagged their culprit.

Another Nolan-esque film with a distinct style of storytelling and an unheard of plot. Two storylines are presented: one going forwards in time, the other backwards. They eventually converge at the end of the film, but in the middle of the story.

Is that really what it's like to have short-term memory loss? Do people not believe you, questioning your claims and testing your abilities and chastising your forgetfulness and mistakes? Take colorblind people. They are constantly being asked what color this or that is, as if they are faking and the questioner needs proof. Are people really that cold-hearted enough to take advantage of you when they know they won't be caught and there is virtually no downside to it? Do you really begin to go crazy like Leonard did, wondering what's real and what's fake and why you crossed that out and wrote that and what you were thinking at that time and what actually just happened and why you're in some random dude's motel room and why that guy's chasing you with a gun?

The viewer begins to take on the perspective of Leonard after deceit is seen and things don't add up. Guesses are made at one minute, then changed once the backwards story rewinds a bit to see the previous events, and again and again and again...

Home

See Also