remembervhs Reviews

Luz (II) (2018)

Underrated

[9/10 · 28 March 2021]

Low budget, great acting, great suspense. Most of the movie takes place in a single location. A lot of reviewers seem to dislike the lack of overt exposition. Something has been after Luz since events that occurred in a Catholic School for girls in South America years ago. The movie shows what happens now that that thing has caught up with her in Germany. You have to pay attention to understand what's going on here, it isn't spoonfed.

This director is one to watch.

The Rise of Jordan Peterson (2019)

Fascinating

[13 November 2019]

What a fascinating person. Jordan Peterson is like a fictional character. He feels things so intensely that he trembles.

Is he doing good or bad? The documentary is sympathetic but balanced and critics get plenty of time to speak. The movie takes them seriously and some of the accusations stick.

For my money, it isn't possible to know if you're doing good or doing bad. We are all acting into uncertainty. Narratives are penciled in after the fact. My hope is that Peterson stays away from the nasty, partisan point-scoring.

Galveston (2018)

Just alright

[6/10 · 22 October 2018]

Stories like this are tired: violent criminal develops sensitive relationship with teenage girl and their lives are changed as a result.

The acting here is better than passable, but it's not extraordinary.

The ending was powerful, and took me by surprise. It elevated what felt like a perfunctory movie.

Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017)

this is one weird movie

[5/10 · 13 October 2017]

Vince Vaughn is great. Don Johnson is great. Jennifer Carpenter is horrible. Everyone else is fine.

The writing sometimes hits the mark and other times comes off as corny (the cream metaphor had me wincing). There was only music playing when the characters were in a car, and I thought that worked well. The plot doesn't make much sense.

The main thing that distinguishes this movie is the brutal violence. Besides that there's not much going on. If you like that kind of stuff, this is for you.

My opinion is that some movies have a structure and plot that can support extreme violence. Here it just felt weird, bordering on comical. It may be that the movie was going for some kind of retro-exploitation angle that I just didn't appreciate.

Oasis (2017 TV Movie)

Intriguing, so I read the book

[6/10 · 2 October 2017]

I saw this pilot a while ago when it came out. Afterwards, I noticed that the series is based on a novel by Michel Faber, author of "Under the Skin" (adapted into an interesting art movie).

I read "Under the Skin" years ago and enjoyed it. It was an interesting novel: entertaining but interested in discussing big ideas in an accessible manner. I liked it quite a bit, so I picked up "The Book of Strange New Things" (the source material for Oasis).

What's the verdict? The novel was very good, but I'm worried about the show. I don't think TV/film should adapt the source material slavishly, but so many plot elements seem to have been removed in the show.

-The relationship between the main character in his wife is central to the novel whereas she appears to die in the pilot.

-The planet (Oasis) in the novel is humid, with constant rain and an oppressive atmosphere, not a desert. Food is the main concern for the human colonists, not water.

-Alien life on the planet is a key element in the novel; the protagonist is brought to Oasis to deal with the aliens, not the humans on the base.

Could the series turn out okay? Maybe. But it seems like the more challenging/interesting aspects of the novel have been removed in favor of a more straightforward mystery. That's not a good sign.

It's a pity in a way, because I believe the plot of the book would have been suitable for a closer adaptation.

Tin Star (2017–2020)

Not good.

[4/10 · 14 September 2017]

I like Tim Roth, but he was not convincing in this. Christina Hendricks was likewise unimpressive, and her character and its arc felt shoehorned in. The rest of the cast was good, but the plot was a huge mess.

I would describe this series as "History of Violence meets Michael Clayton." I'd be okay with that (I like both movies) but there's way too much going on here in terms of plot.

The entire "evil oil corporation" aspect (the Michael Clayton half) serves as a kind of a red-herring; there's something to it, but the real focus tends to be on the History of Violence half, which comes into focus as the series progresses. The transition and interplay between these two plot lines is frequently awkward and annoying. I found myself wondering why the series didn't slow down and focus on one plot line.

The beautiful scenery and excellent supporting cast are mostly wasted. The series also has pacing issues that show up early.

The Survivalist (2015)

surprisingly conventional

[9/10 · 26 March 2016]

I loved this movie, but not for the reasons that other reviewers have mentioned.

Yes, the film is dark, gritty, and it breaks taboos about what it shows on the screen.

But at its heart, this is a very conventional story about the moral transformation of the main character. The brilliance of this film is this: it manages to maintain a cynical, ultra-realistic tone while at the same time weaving a straightforward, hopeful tale concerned primarily with questions of morality.

The ending has been interpreted by some as depressing. I found it uplifting and optimistic. Watch it and see for yourself.

Just Jim (2015)

David Lynch meets Paul Thomas Anderson

[8/10 · 10 December 2015]

This movie is a lot of things.

It's an homage (or a rip-off, you choose) of Punch Drunk Love, Mulholland Drive, and Rebel Without A Cause.

It's a teen coming of age film that takes every genre trope and exaggerates it to bizarre extremities.

It's a comedy and, in certain segments, it's fairly unsettling.

It has an extremely pronounced tonal shift around halfway through that totally caught me off guard.

The camera-work is quite good, and the film looks great. The soundtrack is fantastic and it ranges from jangling ambiance (Punch Drunk Love) to deep drones (Mulholland Drive).

For a movie that copies so much, it all feels very original. Look forward to Craig Robert's next.

They Look Like People (2015)

good film

[9/10 · 23 October 2015]

This is an excellent film.

I won't get into specifics, but the plot revolves around the platonic relationship between two male friends for a couple days in New York.

One of them is utterly unsure of himself, so he overcompensates. The other has a healthy amount of confidence and seems totally at ease with himself. One of the two also suffers from a mental illness, and it's probably not the one you would assume based on my brief description of their personalities. Over the course of the film their relationship is examined and tested.

The film establishes an atmosphere of dread very effectively, though this is punctuated by sporadic humor. The plot did not go in the direction I expected and I was happily surprised by the conclusion and the lack of ambiguity (I'm fine with ambiguity, but ambiguous horror movies about mental illness are a dime a dozen).

Ashby (2015)

seen better, seen worse

[4/10 · 26 September 2015]

Ashby borrows a lot. There's almost nothing original here; except the performances, which were good.

Additionally, much of the plot seemed underdeveloped or only partially sketched out. Ed, the main character, is new in school and this plot point is presented to us in the second scene. Yet this fact has no bearing on the rest of the movie in any way. It seemed tacked on, probably because "new kid in school" is a high school movie trope.

Ed's character too seemed like a standard high school movie hero. Bits and pieces taken from classic high school films. Nothing made him stand out in particular.

The performances are good, minus Sarah Silverman who seemed totally out of place. Nat Wolff appears to have been chosen as the newest lead actor for high school movies. He starred in the absolutely unwatchable "Behaving Badly" (seriously, try to watch it), as well as in two John Green adaptations. He seems like a talented young actor, but this material isn't the best.

The film isn't unpleasant, merely perfunctory. If you're looking for a more challenging (and better) recent coming of age movie I recommend "The Goob" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3009070/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Uncle John (2015)

excellent

[9/10 · 24 September 2015]

There's a lot to like about this movie.

Its deliberate pace will alienate some viewers. Others will appreciate the artful way the back-story is unveiled and the lack of up-front exposition. The performances are all excellent, but John Ashton steals the show as the title character. The direction and photography are fantastic as well.

I found the structure interesting, and was surprised at the some of the choices that were made. Many films follow different story lines and bring them together for a definitive conclusion. In Uncle John, the two story lines do pass by each other but they don't merge. And after their brief meeting, they go their separate ways.

I found the story following Ashton's character to be the more interesting to of the two and I believe a movie could have been successfully made using that storyline alone. Still, this film works and I will definitely check out Steven Piet's next.

If you do enjoy Uncle John, I would give this film a try:

Small Town Murder Songs- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1429392/? ref_=nv_sr_1

Overhill (2012)

good horror film, some flaws

[8/10 · 23 January 2014]

This was a rather good thriller/horror/comedy film.

The shots of Cornwall were nice, and a few in particular were quite beautiful. Most of the film was build-up, and it was quite well done. The first part of the movie is a mix between creepy and funny, a good mix. The townspeople were absolutely excellent.

There are a few problems with the film. Most of this review will be criticism although I really did enjoy the movie. I feel like criticism can be valuable and I'll give mine for whatever it's worth.

At times the camera was "too indie" in what the cameraman decided to frame. Sometimes it worked well, other times it struck me as trying too hard. There is a technique used in the film where the camera cuts to a shot of something in the room where the characters are for a moment, and then back to the characters. This, I liked a lot. Other times it was too much.

A second problem was the music. I liked the music, but there was too much of it. The intro has a song, the opening credits have a song, and there are several more songs throughout the movie. Again, I liked the music, but it seemed like too much to me.

Finally, the ending was a little problematic. I couldn't see much. At the same time, I understand why it was filmed that way. So a minor complaint, I suppose.

If I had to draw a comparison, it would be to Trigger Man, a Ti West film. There are many differences, and this film is more polished, but both films build suspense well and are worth seeing for fans of lower budget thriller/horror.

Long review, sorry. Good movie. Go see it.

Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy? (2013)

totally unique, surprisingly compelling

[8/10 · 6 December 2013]

One of the other reviews here is very negative. That review's author uses terms like "self- indulgent" to describe this film.

That term is totally accurate. This movie is the definition of self-indulgence. A series of edited interviews is played while hand-drawn animations form and transform on the screen. That's the film. It sounds ridiculous.

But it drew me in and captivated me. The topics range from linguistic theory, Noam Chomsky's views on various things, and musings about his childhood. Gondry's own thoughts and interpretations, also included, seemed to miss the mark fairly often. But I felt like Gondry's voice ended up adding something to the movie. He is someone trying to understand complex concepts: sometimes he gets it, sometimes it doesn't seem like he does. From what I've written so far, this movie may sound like a nightmare to you.

However, the whole concept was so original, and the drawings were engaging and interesting - - like a hand-drawn kaleidoscope with patterns that change depending on the topic being discussed. Gondry's thick french accent might distract some viewers, but I found it intelligible (there are also hand-drawn "subtitles" when he speaks, although I found them harder to read than I did to understand Gondry's accent). Chomsky has always struck me as a compelling speaker. He is soft-spoken but knows his lines (speaking figuratively) and makes his points well.

All in all a unique and surprisingly entertaining experience. 8/10

Blackbird (I) (2012)

cliché material treated well

[8/10 · 2 December 2013]

A cliché story. Lots of cliché moments. The lack of a feel-good ending where one might be expected is itself being cliché these days (although the film does end on a high note, just not a sickeningly sweet one).

Good direction. Adequate cinematography. Rather good cast.

That doesn't sound like an 8 to you? Well, it's an 8 to me. Compared to the other movies I've seen recently this was a breath of fresh air. The cast really is excellent. The script is mostly understated with a few slip-ups. The characters aren't believable, but hey, they do a good enough job being unbelievable.

This movie shows what talented, meticulous filmmakers can do with a good cast and without much money. The result is more entertaining than explosions and special effects. Too bad more people don't feel that way. I'd love to see more movies like this. To me, they're much more absorbing than what's being made in bulk these days.

Praise aside, I feel like there was a definite missed opportunity to explore some interesting or unique elements. The jail scenes were begging for some psychedelic flashes or a breakdown of reality in some way. Think the ant scene from Oldboy or the rabbit dream sequence from Sexy Beast. That's just my inclination though. Either way, I can't rate what wasn't in the movie, only what was. This one is good all the way around.

McCanick (2013)

good intentioned but top-heavy

[6/10 · 1 November 2013]

In regards to Corey Montieth: I saw that the other review focused almost entirely on Montieth's performance. In truth, he plays a supporting role without much screen time (although it is an important role). He does an adequate job, but I was not blown away by his performance. I will say that he was completely unrecognizable to me, which is a positive thing.

In regards to David Morse: A underrated actor who I have always appreciated. He carries the burden of the film on his shoulders and makes it look easy. Morse has a way of being menacing and is absolutely believable as a cop approaching retirement age who can still scare people shitless.

The movie as a whole: A mixed bag. Rather than being the gritty character study that it wants to be, it feels like a ripoff of some other superior gritty character study. The dialogue is just barely off the mark, but enough so that it feels slightly odd. Some plot points are naggingly unrealistic (For example, the idea that Morse's partner could be unaware of a robbery/rape that occurred the previous night. Believe me every cop in the city would be aware). The camera-work and direction are competent but bland. Morse raises my score from a 4 to a 6.