alexandrajade Reviews

AEW: All Access (2023– )

It's an enteratining show

[7/10 · 9 August 2023]

You're kidding yourself if you think this show is truly an "unscripted, peel back the curtain look at places cameras were never allowed to go." It's still very much reliant on characters and storylines just like "normal" pro wrestling programming. But that shouldn't be a turnoff; if you've even heard of this show, let alone are watching it, you probably like characters and storylines in traditional pro wrestling programming.

It's mostly focused on two of AEW's "power couples" - Sammy Guevara/Tay Melo, and Adam Cole/Britt Baker, with some additional appearances by people they wrestle or interact with backstage. Case in point to how this show is still about characters and storylines is the episode involving Ruby Soho. Do I feel the personal animosity between her and Tay is invented from whole cloth? No. I'm sure they genuinely don't get along. But what *is* invented for the show is stuff like Ruby asking her point-blank whether Tay giving her a broken nose was an accident. But even though they don't get along, they still do business with one another. (Do you have to get along with all of your coworkers?)

The best parts of the show are the ones that lean the heaviest into genuine realism, like Adam Cole (alternatively referred to and addressed by his legal name Austin) getting medical clearance to return to the ring, or Sammy getting a visit from his mom at a Dynamite event.

So is it truly an incisive documentary by a filmmaker eager to uncover hidden secrets? Not a chance. But is it fun? Sure it is.

Black Mirror: Loch Henry (2023) Season 6, Episode 2

I really don't understand all the positive reviews

[3/10 · 29 June 2023]

Are people just giving this episode bonus points because it's set in Britain, when ever fewer Black Mirror episodes are? I don't get it, this episode is really not good. For me, it's a contender for worst episode of the series (largely depends on whether I disqualify "The National Anthem" and "The Waldo Moment" for, essentially, being nonfiction nowadays).

The "twist" was unsatisfying, yet wholly necessary. Without either the barman's dad or the protag's mom being revealed as a collaborator of the killer, there would literally be no story. It would just be a tall tale about a fictional killer. And the central theme is, what, "true crime documentaries indulge voyeuristic tendencies" ? C'mon, next you're gonna tell me water is wet.

No insightful commentary. Absolutely threadbare story. Just a waste of 54 minutes.

Outlast (2023– )

This show was trash

[1/10 · 18 March 2023]

Heavy spoilers for "Outlast" and light spoilers for "Physical: 100" in this review.

First of all, I've seen some people say that they believe this show was scripted and carried out by actors. I won't say anything for certain that I don't, but that seems unlikely. If it should happen to have been the case, it'll negate a lot of what I'm saying here (though I still think the show is trash).

I'm a big fan of "Alone," the show this one so desperately wishes it was (players regularly refer to voluntary self-elimination as "tapping out," parlance lifted directly from that show). I like it for the same reason I like professional sports or online streams of skilled video gamers or Bob hecking Ross - it's compelling to watch people do something they're very good at, especially if it's something I can't do myself. It's escapism in its own way, just like scripted shows are. I could never survive six weeks in the wilderness with only my wits and determination to keep me alive, any more than I hit a baseball 450 feet, win a round of Call of Duty, or paint anything that doesn't look like a 3 year old made it. It's fun to watch people in their element.

And for a few episodes, this show does sort of manage to be that. I'll give it this much - it's got an inventive concept. While "Alone" is clearly the inspiration, this show may as well have been called "Not Alone" as the only rule of the game was you had to be in a team (of 2 or more people) to win. They started off by separating themselves into 4 teams of 4, and from the initial pool of 16 contestants about six or seven self-eliminated ("tapped out" for want of a better phrase) because of illness/injury or unpreparedness for the conditions or other reasons same as one might see on "Alone." The show also had as a minor element structured challenges, like one might find on other "reality" shows, such as a race to secure crab pots vital to providing the protein players had been sorely lacking.

But then the Alpha camp, peopled by three true sociopathic scumbags in Jill, Amber, and Justin, got the "brilliant" idea to get ahead by sabotaging other peoples' camps. Justin stole the sleeping bags from Delta camp, which due to a medical evacuation and a defection (explicitly mentioned as a possibility to the players themselves) was down to two people. This left Joel and Dawn without any substantial protection from the elements and at risk of developing hypothermia. They bravely soldiered on, but a few days later they quit the game in disgust at how it was playing out. So too did Brian from the Bravo camp, leaving Javier (clearly the most skilled outdoorsman in the cast) without a teammate, so he too was eliminated. The squeals of joy from Jill and Amber show what a total lack of empathy they have. It's true that this is a zero-sum game, but to celebrate making being there so unbearably revolting shows real ugliness.

Even as Javier, Dawn, and Joel tried to unite and form a new camp together, Jill and Amber bullied and terrorized them, stealing and destroying their belongings and using psychology and intimidation to try to weaken their spirits. I've seen some people say this is okay because "there are no rules" (the show's opening titles say this explicitly), well, let's take that to its logical extreme. What if Jill took the bow (every camp was provided one) and just shot every other contestant in the heart? I guess that would have been allowed because tHeRe aRe nO RuLeS. Part of me thinks the only reason she didn't is because she didn't think of it.

And the absolute gall of Jill and Amber claiming that "good wins" when Javier had to "tap out" and calling him a psychopath for torching his camp so they wouldn't be able to raid it....it makes me give a modicum of respect to Justin (don't get me wrong, a scumbag in his own right) for at least owning what a scumbag he is. Late in the game, when only Alpha and Charlie teams were left, Justin defected to Charlie team, and on his way out he admitted to destroying some of Jill and Amber's gear. They claimed he also stole their food, which he denied -- and why would he admit to sabotage but not theft? -- and in an act of unmitigated hypocrisy the two women sent a note to Charlie camp saying "Is this the game you want to play? Are these the rules you want to live by" AS IF THEY HADN'T STARTED THIS KIND OF GAME THEMSELVES!

I don't know why I kept watching, because I didn't even care at this point. Losing the game (which they did, at least) was not going to be the comeuppance Jill and Amber deserved. In one last and final act of tone-deaf sanctimony, after they lost the final challenge a confessional cam from a weepy Amber stated that they were the underdogs and the underdogs are supposed to win. Underdogs don't bully, cheat, and torment other people either.

This wanton display of the depths of human depravity just made the show hard to watch (I burned through the last several episodes on background while using the computer.... I guess I wanted to see who won? I'm not sure), especially as it came so close after another Netflix competition show that emphasized respect, admiration, goodwill, sportsmanship, mutual support, every person doing their best and letting that (and only that) influence the result. I'm talking about "Physical: 100"

If you saw the show, think back to the "Fire of Prometheus" challenge, where competitors had to scale a small obstacle course then sprint to grab torches, with this repeated four times and one fewer torch each time, each heat eliminating one competitor. Imagine if instead of each competitor simply putting forth his (all five contestants happened to be male) best efforts, one competitor had tripped another and then stomped the back of his head while he was face down. That sure would have kept him from grabbing one of the torches, right?

That's how Jill, Amber, and Justin played "Outlast." The only difference among the three of them is Justin would own up to it while Jill and Amber would claim they're actually the victims. I imagine "Physical: 100" probably had explicit rules to prevent such despicable behaviour, but it probably *never needed them*. Instead of trading on fear, terror, and intimidation, its players shone through hope, inspiration, and courage.

It's not hard to guess which I'd rather see get a second season.

For as much as this show emphasized there was no voting anyone off, that all eliminations (even medical eliminations) had to be voluntary, the closest comparison I can give this show is "Survivor." And hey, if that's your game, fine. "Survivor" is, to my unending loathing, a massive hit. But don't try to take your show that's all about backstabbing, dirty-dealing, and the absolute worst in people and try to make it out like it's a wilderness survival show. It's not.

The 100: Welcome to Bardo (2020) Season 7, Episode 5

More than a little hard to follow

[8/10 · 19 December 2020]

The action in this episode is great and it certainly fills in a few of the blanks from season six (and to an extent, this season as well). My problem with it is all the time jumps and action taking place in different areas where time moves at different rates. This necessitates a nonlinear narrative, and whoo boy is this episode nonlinear. Perhaps when I go back and rewatch older episodes everything will make a little more sense but it's hard with only onscreen cues like "PLANET BARDO - 35 DAYS AGO" to place what happened before this scene, what happened after, and how what we're about to watch informs the actions of either of those.

So it's good; it certainly introduces some exciting new characters (and a new setting). You just might have to take notes while watching.

Wentworth: Resurrection (2020) Season 8, Episode 1

It's great but like, one thing

[8/10 · 2 October 2020]

This episode plants a marvelous number of seeds for future episodes, but one thing bothers the hell out of me about it. Why wouldn't Boomer understand the nuances of being in a relationship with a trans person? She and Maxine, while not romantic partners per se, were incredibly close, and Maxine talked about her relationship with Gary often. So that really, really didn't wash with me. Otherwise the episode was excellent.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Shattered (2010) Season 11, Episode 24

I'm of two minds

[4/10 · 27 October 2014]

It's hard to peg a review score for this one.

The real meat and potatoes of the episode come in the last two acts, which take place in the morgue. The SVU cops have arrested a mother (played all but impeccably by French actress Isabelle Huppert) for events leading to the death of her son. How we get to that point is pretty basic Law & Order fare. You can fill in the blanks in the broad strokes.

The mom seems to think her son isn't dead, so Dr Huang suggests they go to the morgue to "make it real for her." Detective Benson and ADA Jo Marlowe are on hand with Dr Warner. As the scene appears to be reaching some kind of conclusion (though precisely what is well less than clear), the woman's estranged husband enters with a uniformed cop. She somehow gets his gun, shoots Warner in the abdomen (by accident) and spends the rest of the episode holding Benson, Marlowe, and the husband hostage (the beat cop slips away).

On the outside, Detective Stabler studies blueprints of the building and there's this very cool sequence where he infiltrates the morgue -- including stepping past some 'stiffs' in a freezer -- to enter the scene.

The resolution is that the dad is really the one who set the events of the episode in motion (Stabler actually gets a text informing him of this while he's crawling through an air duct, his vibrating phone leading to a wild shot his direction). A hallmark of the predictable (yet kind of nonsensical) SVU writing this season. I was originally going to rate this episode a 5, but I think that ending revelation knocks it down to a 4.

Other reviewers aren't wrong. There are holes in this plot you can drive a semi-truck through. The mom's seeming delusions and unimaginable pain are played expertly -- but it never really seems to be going anywhere.

But I do really love the high tension of the entire final act. Except for Marlowe. What does an ADA need to be there for? She accomplishes nothing and sure takes her time to do it.

And from a production point of view, Sharon Stone may have accounted for what's conspicuous by its absence in this story. For an episode with a prominent French guest star, how about a term borrowed from French -- this episode badly needed a dénouement.

Many (if not most) episodes of SVU have them. A dénouement (also called "falling action") for a TV episode is a 30-second (or so) scene at the very end to just tie up all the loose ends. And there were a few at the end of this episode -- most notably what happened to Warner (just have Benson say "the docs think she'll make it"), but also what charges the dad (and the mom) may face, what becomes of the mom, maybe even what happens to Marlowe.

But no. Sharon Stone's face time took care of that, most puzzlingly in a drawn-out speech about a radical mastectomy that turned off a never-seen and never-before-mentioned lover. Why.....do we care about that? So while I enjoyed being on pins-and-needles in those final few scenes, it sure took a lot of hoop-jumping to get there.

Beautiful Creatures (2013)

Charming leads and A-plus supporting cast elevate a so-so script

[6/10 · 20 April 2013]

My local theater has really really cheap tickets, so I tend to see nearly everything that comes there. I bought a ticket for this movie completely blind, not knowing it was a "Twilight clone" (having never seen Twilight, I can't directly address that, but I'm betting it's not really true).

Mostly I was intrigued by the 'supernatural romance' as mentioned in the little synopsis. Alden Ehrenreich and Alice Englert are immediately likable as the two leads, showing a chemistry that goes further than what was on the page. In one scene, Ethan (Ehrenreich) tries to recite a poem for Lena (Englert) but fails to do so correctly. Nothing to it, but it's played off so genuinely you almost can't help but 'Awww' at it.

Of course, the film's true high point is its supporting cast. Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, Emma Thompson, and Emmy Rossum are all pitch-perfect in their roles, none of them phoned in.

They go to uplift a kind of meandering and disappointing script -- Ethan at one point is some kind of amateur philosopher and aficionado of books banned in his backward Southern town, but that aspect of his character just kind of disappears after a while. There's also overtly sexist elements to the story, and well-posited (and well-executed, on-screen) themes of sacrifice for the greater good are abandoned in favour of a happy-sappy ending.

But at the end, even though it's not exactly the sort of movie I'd camp out for, I thought it was worth my time.

Star Trek: Voyager: Faces (1995) Season 1, Episode 13

Terrific performance piece for Roxann Dawson, terrific examination of the character

[9/10 · 2 March 2012]

This episode has one of the shortest cold opens in Star Trek history, merely showing a voice calling to B'Elanna Torres and a....fully Klingon woman raising her head to answer?!?!? Three Voyager lieutenants have been kidnapped by the Vidiian Sodality, but Torres gets special attention. A Vidiian scientist believes her Klingon DNA could be the key to curing the terrible phage that afflicts the Vidiians, and with their advanced medical technology he is able to separate her Klingon DNA from her human DNA and constitute them into two separate people.

With the different bodies come radically different personalities. Eventually Klingon B'Elanna and Human B'Elanna meet up and try to team up and escape. They don't seem to agree on much of anything. Klingon B'Elanna simply wants to kill everyone she sees, while Human B'Elanna is more tactical and strategic. Through their combined efforts, they are able to make it back to Voyager safely, though Klingon B'Elanna dies on the transporter pad.

It wasn't the ending I expected, and it was quite poignant. I expected the two halves of B'Elanna would be reconstituted together in the transporter, whether accidentally or intentionally. Instead, there was quite a nice scene with Human B'Elanna in Sick Bay. There's some Treknobabble reason why the Klingon DNA must be reconstituted back into Human B'Elanna - after all, they can't very well just change the character. But the scene with Human B'Elanna and Chakotay in the Sick Bay was very poignant, with Human B'Elanna saying that even though she feels more at peace with herself than ever, she is incomplete without her other half. Anyone who's gone through a major life transition can identify with that feeling. There is a comfort in familiarity, but it's an illusion. You're not yourself unless you're yourself.

The episode does come off as a tiny bit racist, but when you're racist against a fictional race of aliens, that's not a big deal (when the Klingons make their own TV shows, they can be racist against us~!). B'Elanna is described as having her Klingon DNA "extracted," with Human B'Elanna seeming to retain all of the memories and life experiences. The ending certainly establishes Human B'Elanna as the baseline, with Klingon B'Elanna as some sort of cohabitator. However, this is also explained away by details of B'Elanna's childhood (which themselves were interesting to hear).

A great performance piece for Roxann Dawson to play the same character two drastically different ways, and a great psychological examination of those characters. Easily the best episode of Voyager season 1.

Star Trek: Voyager: Cathexis (1995) Season 1, Episode 12

An engrossing mystery that falls flat in the final act

[4/10 · 2 March 2012]

Tuvok and Chakotay return from an away mission injured. Tuvok has a simple concussion, but Chakotay is braindead. Oh no! Captain Janeway decides to take the ship back to the site of where Tuvok says they were attacked, but strange things happen on the way there; various crew members seem to sabotage the voyage by turning the ship around, but without knowing that they're doing it. The Doctor investigates, and finds evidence that these crew members have been temporarily possessed by an alien intelligence, one which migrates from person to person.

Engaging setup, no? Unfortunately, the big twist is that the "alien intelligence" is CHAKOTAY. Oyyyyy. Tuvok has been possessed by a noncorporeal creature throughout the episode, and the two of them have been fighting to keep the ship from returning to the nebula where "Tuvok"'s people live. The bridge crew successfully overpowers Tuvok, the noncorporeal creature leaves him, and all is well.

Even Chakotay! The Doctor just, um, re-integrates his consciousness. Isn't that something! I know you have to push the reset button at the end of the episode, but geez this takes WAY too much suspension of disbelief, even in freaking Star Trek.

I loved the setup with a mysterious being taking control of crew members to do its bidding, but it didn't end up paying off with much at all.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Smoked (2011) Season 12, Episode 24

Out with a bang?

[3/10 · 7 December 2011]

Yeah, I'm gonna spoil the ever loving crap out of this episode, so don't read it if you haven't watched it and intend to.

The episode starts with what I figured was the discovering-the-body scene, but it's actually the witness-the-crime scene. I was delighted to see Hayley McFarland, who I adore, in the scene. Hayley's character and her mom are walking from a store after just having gone dress shopping, and there's some adorably cute mother/daughter gushing, before a masked stranger runs in and snatches Mom's purse. She struggles with him for a moment, before Jenna (Hayley's character) tells the Mom to just let him take it. Sensible. So she does. The masked man responds by pulling out a gun and shooting her point blank in the middle of the forehead.

My jaw just hit the floor when this happened. I'm not sure what I expected of the scene, since purse-snatching isn't the sort of crime that would require Benson and Stabler, but I was definitely sucked in here and man this really worked well. It felt like a giant punch to the gut, and, well, grain of salt since I already said I LOVE her, but I credit Hayley McFarland for that.

So it turns out the Mom was the complainant in an upcoming rape trial, one the SVU cops figured was a slam dunk. They investigate her rapist, which leads them to a homeless man who lives at Sister Peg's shelter. Ah, good ol' Sister Peg. Haven't seen her in four seasons. She's sporting an interesting hairdo for a nun, but it's easily explained by the storyline (the accused rapist is a barber - and yes I am using that term correctly - who provides haircuts and styles for the homeless).

Then the story takes a bizarre turn when the man they connected to the accused rapist turns out to be an informant for the feds. After a botched sting operation (which...what the sh*t?), he's in the wind again. But they track him down and are able to tie him to the murder which started the episode. It even turns out that the federal agent for whom he was working supplied him with the gun he used in the murder (for "protection"). The federal agent, the murderer, and the rapist are all arrested, and justice appears to be served.

And then Jenna shows up in the station house. She talks to Benson for a moment, and Benson reveals the identity of her mom's killer and the federal agent who gave him the gun (which...what the sh*t?). Jenna stares them down and walks away, thanking Benson and saying she's as good as she'll ever be. This seems like a suitable ending buuuutttt...

Right as I'm thinking "well, at least they didn't have her shoot up the place," she totally freaking shoots up the place. This is crap. They've done the whole "vigilante justice" thing several times before. She shoots the rapist and the agent dead. The murderer survives his first shot, and she poises to shoot him again, but Stabler shoots Jenna first. He runs over to her, kicks the gun away, and holds her, but she dies in his arms talking about how easy it was to get the gun. She just bought it on the street (really? I mean, _really?_). Oh, and she kills Sister Peg, too. I can't even remember why she was in the station house. And don't station houses have metal detectors? They do in pretty much every other episode of this series.

I'll say one thing for this episode - it succeeded at what it wasn't actually trying to do, and that's to give Stabler a send off. This WAS his last episode, but only because Christopher Meloni wouldn't sign a new contract. It wasn't really planned ahead of time, and this episode likely would have been written just as it was even if it weren't his last. But....shooting a kid to death in your own station house. That's gotta suck.

This episode was hyped as Stabler's last, and for featuring a fatality. But where CSU Tech O'Halloran's death in the season 10 finale "Zebras" was a legit shock moment, this barely registered with me. Probably because O'Halloran had been in over 50 episodes and Sister Peg hadn't been seen in four years. Also because what was she even doing there? I'm sure there was a reason, but I should be able to remember it not 24 hours after watching the episode.

And such a cliché ending. I'd say I'm at least happy Hayley got to play a different sort of role than usual for her, but really, it was only the least bit different for the last two minutes of the episode. The rest of it was weepy victim. There was even the uber-cliché "I trusted you and you let me down~!" scene. Poor Hayley. She's now 20 but totally still looks 15. I hope she doesn't mind playing high school kids for at least another five years. If she ever gets a role any more interesting than that, I'll be all over it.

So see ya, Stabler. Wish you could have had a better episode see you off.

Love My Life (2006)

Upbeat little slice of life among gay/lesbian youths in Japan

[8/10 · 11 May 2011]

(I'm a little paranoid about that "unmarked spoiler" warning that goes on comments, so I _always_ mark spoilers, but I'm actually trying to keep them out of this review)

This is a very nice film that certainly left me with a smile on my face. This is the story of the (almost) irrepressibly bubbly Ichiko and her seemingly-older, more staid girlfriend Eri. There's no denying that they make a cute couple - if they didn't, they wouldn't be on the poster. Ichiko's friend Take, a gay man her own age, is another main character, though he has far less joie de vivre than does Ichiko. One of the main aspects of the movie is the reaction the respective fathers of Ichiko and Eri have to their relationship. Ichiko's father is understanding, and even goes so far as to unveil a personal secret that, in a bit of a roundabout way, makes father and daughter all the closer. Eri's father, however, is not just a homophobe but a misogynist, and how she deals with him is also a major story thread.

While there isn't a whole heck of a lot as far as actual dramatic conflict (the reason it fell to 8/10 for me), this little snapshot of life for these young people is really enjoyable and really immersive. You can't help but get drawn in. The atmosphere is very lighthearted yet at the same time true-to-life. You almost forget you're reading subtitles in order to follow the dialogue. This, unlike basically all other foreign-made LGBT-themed films I've seen, could easily have an American adaptation made (I'd certainly pay to see it). And while the film definitely is gay/lesbian-themed, there's virtually no explicit content (so don't get it if you're hoping for a softcore porno). Ichiko and Eri are shown from behind, fully nude, while sitting in bed. They're in the bathtub together once. They do have sex in the final scene of the film, but it's tastefully shot and no naughty parts are shown (just nips).

This is a story about being happy with the life you have, whatever it may be. And that's something everyone can relate to, and enjoy. I thoroughly recommend this film to anyone. It surprises me a little to learn it's based on a manga, something I've often derided in the past. Time to revisit that, maybe.

Breathing Room (I) (2008)

Dreck!

[2/10 · 26 January 2011]

This movie falls under my emerging favorite microgenre of "X number of people locked together in a room who have to escape/kill each other/figure something out/some combination therein." There have been very good movies in this microgenre (Cube, Exam, the original Saw), good movies in it (Cube 2), fair/decent movies in it (Nine Dead), and terrible movies in it (House of Nine). I'm not sure any have been truly great, but this microgenre is more of a guilty pleasure than anything. And there are more movies in it that I've not yet seen (Fermat's Room, Unknown).

This movie has a somewhat ambitious group of gameplayers, numbering 14. We start off over the shoulder of the 14th player, the drop-dead sexy blonde on the poster (yeah, that didn't really hurt as a reason why I wanted to watch this, either :) ) They're wearing metal collars, and are housed in a stripped-down warehouse with placards attached to the walls that give them "rules" that they're meant to follow, like "players must keep their hands clean" and "players may not adjust their collars." Stashed throughout the warehouse are "hints" such as "player 5 is not telling the truth" or "player 14 is the key" or cryptic ones like "piece the pieces together" or, most tellingly, "there is a serial killer, rapist, and pedophile in this room." Eventually, a host comes on a video screen and tells them that the game has begun, and one player will win the best prize of all - life. This already is nothing we haven't heard before many a time. At irregular intervals, the lights go out and someone is killed. Others are killed for breaking rules.

Then, when there's only three or four left, a new person, player zero, is added. Already I'm wondering what the point of this is. They succeed in getting his collar off, which means he's allowed to break the rules. They put together that a box of bullets, a bottle of alcohol, and a cigarette lighter are meant to blow up an obstruction at the end of a hallway behind the door. OK, now we might be getting somewhere. Except oops, we're not. Time for player zero to die. Sure hope he enjoyed his ten minutes in the film.

The big twist at the end is that the sexy blonde is the killer. While fairly predictable, it's not the worst decision they could have made with the story. Unfortunately, they followed it up with the worst decision they could have made with the story.

The movie essentially doesn't have an ending. After everyone else is dead, Blondie casually removes her collar and goes into some kind of back room, where a dude behind a computer terminal sits working. He asks if they got what they needed, and she says they always do. Then she goes to her own terminal, looking over the files of the people she'd just murdered (I...guess?) and suits up to do it all again.

So...it's a group of scientists who.....murder people? That's the closest we come to any kind of an explanation of what's going on. The movie builds toward "Ok, they're gonna figure it all out, they're gonna escape, they're gonna find out what this was all for," but...no. Not even close. Not even a whiff of it, like the ending to Cube. And of course, there's some false-protagonist goofs (Blondie listens to an audio tape while alone in the bathroom that does not speak to her as the killer, but as a "player." Why, if she's in on it, would she need to listen to that tape while she's alone in the bathroom? Only to fool the viewer, which is LAZY). Piece the pieces together? There was NOTHING to piece together! There was no game at all - the 13 "players" were automatically dead the whole time.

But worse yet, it's just a very cheaply made movie. The Foley for the lights-out attacks is just laughably bad. If you've ever been around someone who's lost their balance and taken a tumble, you know what it sounds like when a body hits the ground. Apparently, that's not the case with whoever did the Foley for this movie. It was just cartoonish and cheesy. It was sort of confusing during the murdering that the characters seemed to react like they were in pitch blackness, but a very clear red emergency light was on. Was that just for the viewers? Again, lazy.

The acting, believe it or not, is by and large okay. It gets the movie its second star. I thought about bumping it up to three, but those babbling old women take it down a notch. Really, they're horrible. I wanted to personally stick a knife through the eye of...number three, I think (the one who screams and stutters after the host first appears on the screen). But everyone else does okay. Number five, the rapist, exudes EXTREME creepiness when he's just talking about his favorite kind of candy, so you can imagine how skin-crawlingly disgusting it is when he goes in for...well, trying to go in. The sexy blonde, the dashing male lead, the guy with the gun, (he reminded me a lot of Gael Garcia Bernal's character in "Blindness," which was quite possibly the only good thing about THAT movie, but that's a story for another time) all solidly performed, along with the supporting roles who didn't stay as long. But while a solid/good screenplay can lift so-so acting (I refer again back to Cube), the reverse doesn't really happen.

To put it simply, this movie sucked. Recommend steering clear.

Nine Dead (2009)

Acceptable, if uninspired

[5/10 · 12 January 2011]

(spoilers marked as a courtesy and a precaution, but I'm actually trying to keep them out of the review) I'm a sucker for a good survival horror, so I queued this one up on Netflix instant stream the other night. The concept sounds intriguing - a masked gunman captures nine seeming strangers and locks them in a room together, promising to kill one every ten minutes unless they can figure out why he has brought them together.

The shooter certainly has a creepy vibe to him (even beyond the vibe you automatically get as a masked gunman) and his appearances are like the entry of death itself. Totally creepy and chilling.

Little by little (meaning the bodies pile up in the meantime), the pieces start to fall into place, and eventually the whole truth is discovered. And then...a decidedly bizarre ending. And not a good kind of bizarre. Just an ending that leaves you saying "What??" Many of the reviewers before me have pointed out Melissa Joan Hart's acting as a serious downfall of this movie. And to be sure, it's pretty bad. But two points: it's not the worst in the movie. The worst has got to be from Chip Bent, or whatever his real name is, as the gangster Sully. Every time he said "five grand?!" I wanted to pull my ears off the side of my head.

Further, the bigger problem than Ms. Hart's acting is her very presence. Upon noticing that the film is produced by "Hartbreak Films," that gives us a pretty clear indication of who's not gonna be the first one to die. Or the second, or the third, or (as it so happens) at all. Even if her name weren't literally attached directly to the movie itself, she's easily the most recognizable face (though viewers probably could recognize William Lee Scott {Jackson the cop} and maybe James Victor {Eddie the pharmaceutical rep}, as they've had notable roles before as well). Same result.

There are some good performances. I thought William Lee Scott was OK. Lawrence Turner as the pedophile/rapist/killer Coogan was love-to-hateable.

But the movie's best actor was either only in one scene or hidden behind a mask for all but one scene. When the movie loaded and the credits rolled, I took notice of John Terry's name, because he's a fine actor (perhaps best known as the father of series protagonist Jack Shepard in LOST, though he has an extensive filmography). By the time the killer unmasked himself at the end and John Terry's face was revealed, I had forgotten he was credited in the movie. So if that's him throughout, it was lost on me, and John Terry's talents were likewise lost. He makes one speech about his motives for capturing everyone and killing those he kills, and that's the extent of his face time. Bad, bad, bad. He would have been much better playing one of the victims.

One of the biggest flaws this movie has is a flaw which dogs the entire survival horror genre, and I'm therefore willing to largely overlook it here. We have characters facing life-and-death decisions and situations.......and these are characters we know nothing about. Characters we don't and can't (yet) feel anything for. Certainly, when the shooter kills the first victim after the first ten minutes expire, it's hard to really care or even notice that that victim is gone.

Less forgivable is the omnipresence the killer would need to have to personally know all the connections his nine victims have. One of the victims is a priest, and his connection to the others is something which was revealed in confession - what, did the killer have the confessional stall bugged or something? That's just one example.

So Nine Dead. A passable way to pass an hour and a half. Don't expect brilliance. It's a very minimalistic production (90% of it takes place in a single room), which is as appealing a gimmick as the story concept (which by the way, is not aS unoriginAl as some Would have you believe. Sorry, my caps lock got stuck on there for a second). I give it a 5/10 and move on with my life.

Whip It (2009)

All hail Ellen Page

[7/10 · 5 January 2011]

In many respects, "Whip It" is not that great a movie. It's horribly predictable, both in plot and pacing. The supporting characters (Bliss' parents, best friend, rival pageant queen, some of the other roller girls, the love interest) are drawn staunchly from stock. There's some pretty bad acting, too (Juliette Lewis is downright cringeworthy, and Drew Barrymore's funny but more than a little over the top).

Really, it all comes down to whether we, the audience, care about Ellen Page's character Bliss. And the tiny Canadian shines. It's meaningless and banal to directly compare one performance to another, but I'll say that this performance of Page's is as impressive and engaging as any in her career, and certainly made me an (even bigger) fan of hers. She succeeded in creating a character around whom the story really works well.

There's other good points, to be sure. I enjoyed Kirsten Wiig as Maggie Mayhem. Andrew Wilson as the 'zen master' of roller derby and play-by-play man Jimmy Fallon were both an absolute stitch. But without Ellen Page, this movie probably falls flat on its face. And with her, it's a good, solid 7/10.

Saw 3D (2010)

Saw 3D was hands-down, without a doubt, the single worst piece of garbage I have ever sat through in a theater

[1/10 · 4 November 2010]

And I say that as a fan of the series and general apologist for the last several mediocre films. It's a shame IMDb has to force me to give a 1/10 to this piece of trash movie, because it doesn't even deserve that. I can't believe Cary Elwes agreed to come back to *this*. Oh god, where even to start? The "game" of the movie centers around a man, Bobby Dagen, who claims to be a Jigsaw survivor, but had never actually been in a trap before. The execution of this story was so unfathomably bad. It copied the plot of III, IV, and VI wholesale (central character encountering people tangentially related to him in perilous traps, and he either saves them or not). But gone are the morality lessons, gone is the suspense, gone is any past theme of "appreciating your life." Hoffman just kidnapped these people to watch them get killed because they p*ssed him off. Bobby fails to save his publicist, lawyer, and best friend, who all die horrifying deaths. Then he gets to the end and has to pierce himself in the chest with hooks and climb up a chain to save his wife, connecting two ends of an extension cord. He tearfully confesses that he'd never played a game before, but he sees his redemption in this final trap. She forgives his lies, he pierces himself with the hooks and begins to climb. I'm sitting there watching this thinking the correct ending is for him to save her. No one cares about his meaningless handlers, but he's seen the light, he knows what he needs to do, he can save his wife. But no. The hooks tear through his skin as he gets to the top, he falls down, and she burns to death in some kind of ridiculous oven that builds itself. And this was gratuitous. There were several repeated shots of her, in varying stages of burning-to-death, screaming in agony. This was sick, pornographic, and it was wrong in every sense of the word. In past Saw films, if someone died a gory death, it either didn't linger on screen or was done in kind of a cheesy way (limbs being pulled from what is very obviously a dummy, for instance). This was way too real. And the worst part is, it didn't even make sense in terms of the story. The wife was not complicit in the lie. Her only sin was knowing him. And she gets to burn to death for it. She didn't not appreciate her life or anything, she was just a wholly innocent victim. And the liar was never in any mortal danger. In the storyline, this would be a total perversion of Jigsaw's legacy. And EVEN THAT would have nearly approached a redeeming quality in a film that had none had it been addressed. But it wasn't.

The new cop character is somewhat interesting. So let's just kill him in a meaningless scene, how about that? In retrospect, he's not nearly as smart as he seems - is that doll in the background behind Hoffman in the video the only one that ever existed? Shouldn't he know that Hoffman wanted him to find the site of the game, giving such an obvious clue? What's more, ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE DIES. Except Bobby, and I guess Dr. Gordon, but that was the most predictable twist ending in the history of twist endings. Cary Elwes is a fine actor, but why in the freaking world did he come back for this? There was no need to resolve Dr. Gordon's story at all, but if they wanted to, having him at the survivor's group was sufficient.

The multi-person traps, in general, are a load of crap. They, like I touched on earlier, don't honor Jigsaw's legacy of showing someone the value of life. Many of them guarantee that at least one person will die. In the first three films, it was always possible that no one would have ever gotten killed in one of the traps. Not so anymore.

I even have to criticize Tobin Bell. He was only in about 5 or 6 minutes of the movie, but boy did his performance seem phoned-in. So much for only staying in the series as long as the movies are good. And then there's Hoffman basically becoming a zombie as the movie went on, killing anyone and anything within seconds with nothing to stop him, and the not-at-all-innocent Jill becoming a screaming damsel in distress. WTF was that?

There are about a thousand more things I could say about why I hated this movie so much, but there's a character limit. I legitimately feel like this may be one of the very worst movies ever made. The 3D was totally pointless, by the way. It added absolutely nothing. One thing that surprised me at the time, but makes total sense now, was that at my showing, in a 120-seat theater, there were about 10 other people there. I feel like I owe James Wan and Leigh Wannell an apology for supporting the franchise for so long that it made it to this steaming pile of POOP as a finale. The first Saw, at least, doesn't deserve to be connected to this. And it wasn't even a "so bad it's good" sort of thing. I left the theater angry and offended. And as I said, I am (was) a big fan of the franchise. But no longer. I want to know how the hell the people who wrote and directed this thing are able to sleep at night. Even if you made it to Saw VI as a hardcore fan of the franchise, steer WELL CLEAR of this one. The series ended at VI (frankly, it ended at III). This movie officially never happened.

Lost: Across the Sea (2010) Season 6, Episode 15

Pretty disappointing

[4/10 · 13 May 2010]

For a season in which answers were promised, the series' antepenultimate episode poses three questions for every one it answers. And if it ''weren't'' the series' third-from-last outing, that'd be just fine. But it is, and the answers we get in this episode aren't really even answers (Jacob and the Man in Black can't kill each because their fake mother said so....um, what?). The genesis of the Smoke Monster is no clearer now than before we actually saw it took place.

Mark Pellegrino and Titus Welliver did a great job with what they were given, and Allison Janney was pretty delightfully creepy in an important one-off role. Definitely the high point of the episode.

I have confidence that the series will go out with a bang and leave everyone mostly satisfied, but this episode was a pretty big dud all in all.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Crush (2009) Season 10, Episode 20

One of Law & Order SVU's signature tricks kind of results in a dud this time

[5/10 · 22 September 2009]

One move that SVU seems to pull quite frequently as part of its regular MO is to have its A story, the story that's advertised, run for around 35-40 minutes before a surprising B story that is tangentially related to the first comes in to fill the rest of the time. This often can make for a fulfilling episode - certainly it was a good decision in the previous episode "Selfish."

Here, though, it takes away from a compelling and true-to-life seeming story for something that is goofy and over the top. They could have done a lot more with the A story of a girl refusing to name her attacker, which could be one of two boys she'd been linked to. Less is often more. Instead, we get a ridiculous and cheesy B story about a corrupt judge. The climactic scene with Stabler, Huang, and the guest ADA du jour putting on a fake trial to ensnare the judge *was* well done, but ultimately I think the episode would have been better sticking with the A story to the end. Save the over the top stuff for another episode when you've got such a strong and true-seeming A story.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: 911 (2005) Season 7, Episode 3

A real tour de force for Mariska

[10/10 · 5 August 2009]

An amazing episode all around, but especially so for the acting prowess of the unparalleled Mariska Hargitay as Detective Benson. With nothing but a voice to play off for most of the episode (and I kind of wonder if she even had ' 'that' ' - it could have easily been dubbed in later, with a script supervisor reading the lines during filming for timing), we see every side of the Benson character in this episode - sadness, compassion, pleading, rage, hope, relief, and about a million micro-emotions it's hard to even describe with words.

Formula TV can be great fun - goodness knows the Law & Order franchise depends on it - but this show really achieves its highest heights when it tells a story in a different, unique sort of way. This episode definitely constituted taking a chance, and it paid off big time.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Ballerina (2009) Season 10, Episode 16

Fairly lightweight and performance-driven

[7/10 · 27 July 2009]

This episode is clearly a vehicle for Carol Burnett's guest appearance. And that's not so surprising, Burnett is a television legend. But what it does mean is a fairly out-of-the-ordinary SVU episode.

There's really not much in the way of twists and turns in the story, which are hallmarks of the Law & Order franchise. Even though we don't know who the killer is until the end of the episode, we meet him or her (no spoilers) very early on in the episode and stay with him or her for almost all of the episode.

Probably 95 out of every 100 episodes of any show from the Law & Order franchise are story-driven rather than performance-driven. It's what the fans of the show come to expect, and any divergence from it constitutes taking a definite chance. I wouldn't say this episode is bad, because it isn't, but it's not the strong, overwhelming hit that a divergence from the norm ' 'can' ' be when it's flawlessly executed.

The story of the episode didn't necessarily need an hour to tell, and unlike other episodes such as "Rage" that have that characteristic, I was literally saying "That's it?" when the end credits came up.

So, a fair episode, but despite the guest appearance of a TV legend, not one that's likely to endure in my memory.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Raw (2005) Season 7, Episode 6

Don't miss the last five minutes

[10/10 · 27 July 2009]

I'm not sure that I've ever actually watched a TV episode in first-runs that was advertised with those words, but my goodness are they ever applicable to this episode. Its last five minutes instantly added probably three stars to what was already a pretty good episode. 8/10 becomes 11/10.

Now, of course, the way the episode gets there is dependent on a few patented "Law & Order" contrivances that'll bug you a little if you think about them too much, but if you're any kind of a fan of the franchise, you've long since learned not to - I know I have! I didn't mark spoilers, so I won't give any, but if you happen upon this episode in syndication, don't you dare turn away from it. This IMDb pages gives a specific enough synopsis to identify the episode, so in the interests of spoilerlessness (isn't it fun to make up words?) I won't even go that far here. Just don't miss the last five minutes.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Rage (2005) Season 6, Episode 17

Less is more

[10/10 · 9 July 2009]

This is a very minimalistic episode. 80% of it takes place in the SVU squad, and most of ''that'' time is focused on a single interrogation room. The story of this episode could have been told in five minutes. What that does is give way for an amazing back-and-forth between Detective Stabler and a suspect who knows just how to push every one of his buttons.

As the episode begins, Stabler has some 21 hours to get a confession from Gordon Rickett (Matthew Modine) for the rape and murder of a young girl. The cops have no hard evidence tying Rickett to the crime, but Stabler is certain of his guilt. He collared Rickett 14 years earlier for a similar crime, but the jury acquitted him, and Stabler's never forgotten. He tries numerous classic tricks to rattle Rickett - he shortens the leg on one of his chairs, turns the heat up in the interrogation room, switches out a fluorescent light bulb with one that buzzes and blinks, orders smelly food from a deli to try to get Rickett to need to ask to use the bathroom, yells at him and even spits on him at one point, messes with his sleep, and more. But Rickett refuses to be rattled, and the 24 hours since his arrest pass without a statement - the cops have to let him go. Just before Rickett is released, a visibly defeated Stabler bares it all when talking to Rickett about the titular subject - rage. He admits that without the controls of his family and his job, he'd be Rickett, a murderer.

The next morning, Stabler culls from the night he spent with Rickett some information that leads him and Benson to Rickett's girlfriend and, eventually, the house where he murdered the girl 14 years before and the one he was arrested for at the beginning of the episode. They arrive just in time to save another girl from being killed. There is a tense moment as they draw down on Rickett. Benson shoots him first to keep Stabler from killing him, and after he falls, Stabler stands over him with his gun hand shaking wildly as Benson talks him down from letting his rage make him do the unthinkable. Stabler cuffs and mirandizes Rickett, and we all exhale.

The episode ends with Stabler releasing his rage in the locker room, screaming and pounding his fists bloody on the steel doors.

The interplay between Modine and Meloni is just incredible. I'm not nearly doing it justice with this meager review. This is an episode that draws you in and keeps you coming back. As I mentioned at the top, the episode is very minimalistic. Chief example of this is the story - it's very straightforward, with no twists at all. The production, though, is also pretty minimalistic. From memory, only six scenes take place outside of the SVU squad, and there are really only two or three guest roles outside of Modine. Even the music is simplistic; I can only remember one music cue in the episode, and it was a misdirect (Rickett appeared to break down and be on the verge of confessing, but he was really just messing with Stabler). The chilling ending is mute of any sound but Stabler's cries and the sound of his fists against metal.

This is one of my absolute favorite episodes of this show. The first time I watched it, I kind of wanted it to end in the interrogation room, but now I think it's just about perfect the way it is.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Doubt (2004) Season 6, Episode 8

Interesting experiment, but ultimately it just doesn't work

[4/10 · 9 July 2009]

This episode revolves around a simple question - who do you believe? Myra Denning claims that a teacher of hers, Ron Polikoff, has raped her. She's got the scars to support the claim, but Polikoff freely volunteers for a "suspect examination" and claims the two had consensual "bad sex," and that Myra demanded he hurt her.

There are a lot of patented 'Law & Order' twists and turns in the story, and it's engaging enough. At the beginning of the story, Benson sides with Myra while Stabler thinks Polikoff is telling the truth, but as it goes on, they each begin to have the titular doubts in what they believe.

There proves to at least be enough evidence to go to trial. Each side presents their case, and at the end, the jury as reached a verdict. But we don't get to know what it is. The jury foreman stops mid-sentence as the credits roll.

A few things - endings are good. We want closure. We want to know who was right. Yeah, it's cute and all to let the audience come up with their own ending, but in all frankness, what the hell do we know? Open endings are really hit-or-miss, and this was a miss. Second, the outcome of the trial should be obvious. The title of the episode gives it away. There is considerable doubt as to Polikoff's guilt, so given that the jury reached a verdict, they had to find him not guilty. A hung jury would have been a realistic ending, too (and a LOT more fulfilling on the viewer's end), but what we're given in the episode is that the jury did reach a verdict. Not a chance they convict him.

Points for innovation and taking a chance, but it really doesn't work.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Manic (2003) Season 5, Episode 2

Kind of weak for an SVU story

[6/10 · 28 June 2009]

only minor spoilers included, don't fear reading on Most episodes of SVU have something about their story that makes them fit with that particular show. Obviously, that's most often going to be some aspect of sexual assault being part of the episode's case, but not always.

This episode really doesn't. The only thing that's close, and it could easily have been a half-assed attempt to TRY to get something "SVU-esque" for the episode was the victims being stripped of their clothes before being killed.

This story could very, very easily have been told on the "flagship" Law & Order. It even seems to have an exact half-and-half between the detectives and the courtroom, like the flagship does. It also includes a cameo appearance from Fred Thompson as Arthur Branch and he, of course, appeared on the flagship most frequently. As such, this seems to make for a kind of fair-to-middlin' episode of SVU. I mean, it's not BAD or anything, but it's an incredibly missable episode. With the especially notable episode that comes two spots later, this one feels like it was designed from the outset to be a filler.

Just Cause (1995)

Good performances all around, but an awfully predictable story

[5/10 · 12 June 2009]

Happened to catch this on cable a few nights ago, and it's pretty much a cable-caliber movie. Ed Harris and Laurence Fishburne turn in great performances, while Sean Connery is, well, Sean Connery. Not bad or anything, just pretty much the same as he always is. Certain actors just seem pretty much the same regardless of what role they play, and at least for me, Connery is one of them.

The story has numerous twists and turns in it, but they're all of the kind you can see coming a long way away. I didn't mark spoilers so I won't give any, but I'll just say that really nothing caught me by surprise, and I think they were supposed to be big, jaw-dropping surprises. They weren't, and that leaves the performances to be the merit of the film. The performances were, on the whole, pretty good, so I'd say the film is worth watching, but don't run to go see it - it'll be on cable again soon enough.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Remorse (2000) Season 1, Episode 20

Easily my favorite episode of SVU season 1

[9/10 · 8 January 2009]

I recently bought the season 1 SVU DVD set. It's a show I enjoy, but since I was 13 when it first went on the air, I didn't exactly know about its beginnings.

It's probably the show's weakest season, though if you think about it, it really ought to be. The hard-hitting plots are all there, but it took the actors some time to really settle into their characterizations, particularly for the then-brand new characters of Benson and Stabler (as opposed to Cragen and especially Munch, who had been around before). Through the season, there's some definitely awkward moments as the characters do or say things that they'd never do later in the series. Even the photography isn't really quite there - the "feel" of the show just isn't quite the same. Now, that said, it definitely hit its stride around half to 2/3 of the way through. Being that this is episode 20 out of 22 in that first season, it's definitely in that "good" range.

This episode has a nicely creative teaser; reporter Sarah Logan (Jennifer Esposito, who is excellent in the role) is doing a special report about herself, describing the now cold-case of the rape she suffered some months earlier and imploring her viewers to offer the police whatever help they can. You can already tell this has a "last resort" sort of feel to it. A woman watching the telecast in a hotel room realizes, based on Sarah's descriptions of her two attackers, that she's having a one night stand with one of them. Benson and Stabler arrive and arrest him, and the bulk of the episode is spent searching for the second attacker.

The better part of this episode is more or less told from Detective Munch's point of view. Sarah befriended him during SVU's investigation of her case, and the two have a mutual trust as well as a comfortable, almost playful rapport. Esposito, as I mentioned, is terrific in this role - she goes from frustratingly asking Munch for details about the man they arrested to almost tearfully identifying him in a lineup to having that playful back-and-forth with him, and she makes it entirely believable.

The episode turns when Sarah is killed by a bomb blast in her apartment. The viewer is compelled to feel at this point very much like Munch does, upset and frustrated. It speaks to Esposito's performance that with maybe 15 minutes of screen time she was able to craft a character that the audience can easily care about and actually be upset at "losing." Through hagglings in trial, some gumshoe work, and an emotional climax when the final suspect is apprehended and interrogated, the viewer is right with Munch in his agitated pursuit of justice.

The only real complaint I have with the episode is how neatly everything comes together in the last two or three minutes. It's as if they simply ran out of time and kind of had to rush the final resolution. Yes, this does tend to be a hallmark of the entire Law & Order franchise, but it's directly contrasted in this episode, when SVU has a suspect in custody after only the teaser and can do much more with him. I do think it was better to do this than to have no closure at all, but it did still irk me just a tiny bit.

All in all, a terrific, infinitely re-watchable episode with a great guest star (actually, two - Reiko Aylesworth of '24' fame appears as an Assistant District Attorney) and reasonably creative storytelling (something you don't always see in Law & Order). It all adds up to a great viewer experience.