Change Your Image
adamnixonNE
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Napoleon (2023)
American version of Napoleon directed by an Englishman.
American and English actors speaking English, and an English director. What did you think was going to happen? The Robespierre scenes could have taken place in Westminster such was the farce. You could not find a single French speaking actor? We are big boys and girls, we can handle subtitles.
One of the greatest and charismatic leaders in history reduced by botched amateurism. You have the lead actor and director who give the impression that they based their respective performances on the opening paragraph of a Wikipedia article. Phoenix seems to be wondering how long he can keep the pretense up. He does not have a clue who Napoleon was, and has no idea how to play him.
It also fells like a cheap made for tv movie.
Bert Kreischer: Razzle Dazzle (2023)
Drunk at a party that everyone is trying to ignore.
This is so bad. It's not so much that this one prop pony(you take off your shirt, again, well done) is using rehashed jokes that were not funny in the first place, it's that instead of being edgy and hilarious like a Chappelle, Kreischer is just crude. It feels like he's trying to play to a frat house audience. None of the bits are even polished. Did he try this material out in clubs first? Were these just the jokes he used on his own tour? He should have done open mics instead to get proper feedback and he could see where the bits flatlined rather than going to the well of existing fans. I could not get over the feeling that this is the old guy at the wedding, who is drunk, and doesn't realize how loud he is, while prodding and pushing other guests who don't want to know him.
Hannibal (2013)
It's Saw with Debussy.
The show's selling point is gore. Torture porn. The Texas Chainsaw massacre and the Saw 'franchise', but this is hidden with an air of pseudo sophistication. The show keeps trying to up the ante on how vile a human being can be to another human being. The scenarios become increasingly bizarre and frankly ridiculous. Mads Mikkelsen plays the same character he always plays because he's a model not an actor. This should be contrasted with the always brilliant Laurence Fishburne, and the underrated acting ability of Gillian Anderson. The same can be said for Izzard. With all her genuine causes and good works, we sometimes can forget what a good actor Izzard is. Harris struck gold with The Silence of the Lambs but never ending series of sequels/prequels, offshoots etc is tedious.
The Matrix Resurrections (2021)
Congrats to the Wachowskis.
Congrats to the Wachowskis. You took the genius of Baudrillard and a zillion dollars, and still managed to make a dog heap of films under The Matrix banner. Baudrillard gave you the first film. An amateur, with the amount of money you were given for the first film, could have made it a success. Audiences were intrigued by the idea. Baudrillard's idea. Your work is seen in the sequels with this film taking the prize of most useless. It feels like an arts undergraduate trying to be clever and covering up a lack of intelligence, and worse, talent, with a blanket of money. No amount of studio trolls on IMDB is going to change this wrecking mess of a film(and series).
The Grand Tour: The Grand Tour Presents: Carnage A Trois (2021)
Lots of Five star reviews on the Amazon owned IMDB for the Amazon owned Grand Tour.
A lazy show cobbled together in five minutes. It's now more boring than current Top Gear which is quite a feat. The presenters are going through the motions, and like some of those awful British sitcoms, it's the same gag they've used thousands of times previously.
Tom Segura: Ball Hog (2020)
Not a single laugh never mind a belly laugh
Segura is better than this(I think). His podcasts are great. You'll be roaring laughing listening to him. Over an hour, and I didn't laugh once at this garbage. It's so lazy. Did he even try out these bits in clubs? it felt cobbled together at the last minute. Even the dog bit is a reverse of the old Billy Burr joke without the joke.
Patrice O'Neal 101: If it's funny, there is nothing off limits.
Frankie Boyle 101: If you're not funny, make it appear offensive to cover it up.
Segura(and lately Burr) have moved from the Patrice O'Neal school to the Frankie Boyle comprehensive.
Maybe it's because he has so many other things going on that Segura does not have enough time to work on his act. His shtick now(and those of some reviewers) is if you don't like it, it's because you're easily offended. This seems like hipster nonsense. Or fanboy stretching. There was nothing offensive in it. There was nothing funny in it either. Can you even break it into bits? Would you watch any of those bits again?
If he's making more money from podcasting, then there's a legitimate incentive to shift his time there. However he needs to remember that his podcasting took off from his skills as a comedian.
Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Amateurish Story, Acting, and Dialogue.
The special effects and sound teams get a pat on the back. Everyone else should hang their head in shame. Story, script, and acting was infantile. Muddled, amateurish, and rushed. You can feel the panic at the executive level as at least one exec noticed how awful this film and the sequels in general were.
Story:
So they resurrected Palpatine to try and save the abysmal story. A story that seemed constructed by a committee. Zero innovation, imagination, or even basic storytelling ability. Just random gibberish.
Acting:
They then threw in a good actor, Richard E. Grant, to try and rescue the feeble acting skills of the rest of the cast. Domhnall Gleeson was a notable exception. Harrison Ford was not there long enough. Even Grant, because of the script, was driving in first gear and yet still lapped the non existent skills of everyone else. The main actors looked like high school actors overacting because they believe that's what acting is. There was nothing there. Not a spark of talent.
Script/Dialogue:
Was the script for the entire three films written by Dan Brown? That's how predictably bad it was. Unintelligible and unbelievable.
Conclusion:
Throw a lot of money at an established money making franchise and you can't lose financially. Yet Abrams and Disney still managed to make a dogs dinner out of these films which compete with each other for the title of garbage film of the decade. The big studios have a near monopoly on the film industry and have given up on the old values of artistic creation. Fast and Furious 47, Jurassic Park 35(plot twist, the dinosaurs get loose.....again), Star Wars Something Force Jedi Sith 73. Welcome to the future.
James May: Our Man in... (2020)
More James May, less James May's crew.
I love Japan. James May gives a lovely knowledgeable tour of this unique country and people. The series does not go through the motions of travel channels because it's not aimed at tourists. It's more of a documentary. Oddly this makes Japan even more appealing to potential travelers. Each episode was delightfully different, and James May's way of looking at the world is a joy.
I found the crew to be irritating. The show was about May and Japan. They are the stars, not the cynical cranky crew.
As I say, more May, less May's crew.
And more episodes.
Star Trek: Picard (2020)
I'm out. Star Trek is finished to me.
I tried to like it. I wanted to like it. After 3 and 3/4 episodes, I've given up. The writing is atrocious. It's someone who tried to write an essay the night before they had to hand it in to the professor. The storyline is desperately trying to be clever but is muddled and all over the place.
Jean-Luc Picard is not in this show. Patrick Stewart is. The acting is terrible. Local town charity production terrible. The settings and tech used is worse than it was nearly thirty years ago. How is that possible. Think Cats special effects. LCARS would have been better. The camera work and lighting are dire. Are they trying to be artistic in being this bad with the production values?
There is the other elephant in the room. One of the great things about the first two series was their effortless depiction of liberal values. I became an engineer because I wanted to be Georgi La Forge so bad. The fact that he was African-American did not even enter that ten-year old's mind. Tasha Yar was security chief. Of course she was. She's a tactical and close combat expert. I nearly because a medical doctor because Beverly Crusher was awesome. Dr. Crusher was an awesome doctor. She was not an awesome woman doctor. Her gender and race were irrelevant. The TV series is so blatantly virtue-signalling, cry bullying, and obeying the rules of woke, that my wife got up and walked out with a "Oh beep off" at one pathetically contrived political statement. The only thing that might get me to watch the remainder(I won't) is to see how they will work in an anti-Trump statement(I'm not American, and I couldn't give a hoot one way or another about Trump).
I've officially given up on this franchise. Roddenberry would be turning in his grave.
Jiro Dreams of Sushi (2011)
An 80 minute ad, and the Japanese, yes the Japansese, complaining about overfishing.
It felt like a commercial. No questioning, no attempt to get the full story or even a shrimp like glimpse behind the curtain. The documentary makers did not seek a single counter point of view. All you have to do is look at the reviews from many different review sites to know that this restaurant is not all sunshine and roses. One of the jaw dropping level's of sheer hypocrisy, that left anybody in the know angry, was the Japanese complaining about overfishing and the eye watering drop in fish supplies. There is more than a hint of the Emperor's new clothes about this documentary. The restaurant just felt nasty, and they used one food critic. How about chatting to the store next door's owners? How about finding past apprentices rather than one who approves of Jiro. How about asking the people who said the restaurant is not worth $30 never mind $500. Poor.
Doctor Sleep (2019)
Kubrick was better than King's novel. Flanagan was not.
There's Kubrick's 'The Shining' and King's 'The Shining.' That Kubrick outshone, by some degree, King's novel incensed King so much to the point a remake of 'the Shining' was done in 1997. Kubrick's version is completely different and much better. He achieved a level of artistic creation that King could and can never reach(yet gets credit for.) They should be treated as totally unconnected. Therein lay the problem for Flanagan. The film uses Kubrick's version as canon which is fine, but King's novel Doctor Sleep, could have been much more closely followed without violating Kubrick's version. McGregor is horribly miscast. He's not Danny Torrance. There is little to no character development with regards The True Knot. Snakebite Andi for instance is not the one dimensional man-hating character she appears in the film. Crow Daddy is completely different. And while Ferguson gives an adequate performance of Rose the Hat, the novel's Rose is far more menacing with a much different personality and relationship to her clan. The Stone family is where there is an infuriating disregard for the novel. Abra's mother and grandmother are far more formidable and involved. Her father and the Doctor who goes to the AA meetings, in King's novel, are real heroes. This is completely ignored by Flanagan. The use of the Overlook makes sense in the novel. It is tacked on in the film. It's one of the best bits in King's novel while it makes not sense in the film. There is no logical reasoning to this in the film, while the novel's connection to the original is crystal clear. Again, Flanagan did not need to violate Kubrick's masterpiece to align the film and the novel. For once, sticking to King's novel would have made this better. I've watched the Shining a number of times. I doubt I'll watch Doctor Sleep again.
The Vanishing (2018)
Sad, depressing film that's worth the watch.
The performances and location gives this film seven stars. Gerald Butler performs in a type of role that he should play more often rather than the cliched typecast work that he does such as 300. His character is strong yet vulnerable. He does not have all the answers. Søren Malling and Ólafur Darri Ólafsson are quite wonderful as well. We are not given any sort of backstory about them or their gold. Are they bigger villains than the keepers? Their tattered rags and weather beaten faces tell a tale of a hard life, and like the keepers, they see their chance at a better life away from the see. The fact that one their children(an assumption on my part) is on board the boat make these guys as vulnerable as the keepers. James is seen telling his wife that if she cannot make ends meet, she needs to get an advance. This story is about all people on the edge. As we don't know how the Nordic sailors acquired their gold, we cannot blame them for wanting it back, although does that stretch to justifying violence. The keepers are trying to take their gold from them. If a thief steals your gold, can you use violence to get it back. Olafsson's character attacks James, the most able bodied of the group, yet does not kill him. Same with Donald. He is attacked, but not killed.
The three keepers, when they come upon the lifeboat, classify it as boat. As they discuss their plan to escape with the gold, they did not conceive that the lifeboat came from a bigger boat, and that said boat would come looking for them on the island. So when the Nordics' boat appears, they are caught on the hop.
James' decent into madness of PTSD is never clarified and seems at odds with the character's build up. He had a family. The director hints at mercury poisoning. Could a drop of mercury cause that in such a short period in time. If it's a type of PTSD, why kill Donald? That was a bit of mess.
Lastly, the performance of Peter Mullen, as the experienced and grizzled old sailor and keeper, Thomas, is wonderful. In a cast of really good performances(as I said, Butler is superb), Mullen is excellent. Throughout the movie, you keep screaming at the other characters to follow Thomas' advice. He was right to open the chest, as not knowing what was inside would have caused him to be at a disadvantage as to the situation they would find themselves vis-a-vis the Nordics. Even if he had not opened it, after the third nordic tried attacked Donald, there was no way they were going to hand it over. It was either hold it until the authorities arrived or keep it for themselves. The radio not working was a let down for the film. It was too convenient.
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (2010)
Watched again. Skipped forward for Douglas and Brolin/Wallach scenes
The Winnie Gecko character was, frankly, annoying. Whinging, self righteous, and sulking. It was painful to watch. Was it about the global meltdown, the '08 crash, or was it about a grown woman with daddy issues. LaBeouf was equally annoying. There is not an ounce of acting or character formation.
Given that these are two pivotal characters, the question is not why is the film only a 6 star, but how did it scrape out the 6 stars. The answer is Michael Douglas, Josh Brolin, Eli Wallach, and Frank Langella. All their lines were crisp and they held an air of gravitas. Why was Brolin 5th/6th choice for role? He fit the role like a glove. The Douglas character was still fascinating. The way the character adapted, evolved and took the new world in his stride was great scriptwriting and acting.
I disagree with the Sarandon character. They could have cast better, but her character was necessary to show a microcosm of the madness of '08. The lesson re moral hazard and a junkie(debt) coming back for more was good. The contrast between the Government bailing out the banks, and Jake bailing out his mum was quite good. If people physically had to write out a check to their local bank it would feel more real than the same amount coming out of your taxes/more taxes.
The Grand Tour: The Colombia Special Part 2 (2019)
Predictable, boring, and dated.
Top gear in it's heyday was so good(with the exception of the celebrity section) that each episode would be repeated over and over again around the world. The specials were just that, special.
The Grand Tour specials have been awful. I don't want to see any of them again. One colleague put this down to the three of them, especially Clarkson, getting older. I can't put my finger on it though. Is it that the scripted gags are so obvious now, or that the three and the producers have run out of creativity? The three of them are going through the motions. The production values are worse as well. Did they bring the same crew from Top Gear?
It's almost like Amazon, the Dolly Parton of commerce in that it takes a lot of money to look that cheap, gave them so much money that they don't know what to do with it, or they feel they must create a show to match the funds given to them.
If you were a Top Gear fan, you will watch.
If you were a Top Gear fan, you won't watch again.