[IMDB] [Amazon]
whew. bad writing, bad acting, terrible story. if this is how so-called real people act, then i sure am glad to be...whatever i am. anyway, i think the best part about this movie is the poster, which features a semi-epic promise of...something...as saoirse ronan looks into the distant off-camera with the brooklyn skyline behind her. i guess they mean to evoke the feeling that she is torn between the old and the new, which certainly fits with the story that the writers try to club you to death with. so if you have seen the movie poster, i recommend stopping there and living your life all the richer for not having delved any further. also avoid watching anything that saoirse ronan is in--they are uniformly bad.
brooklyn gets one locked bathroom.
2016-04-29
2016-04-28
vendetta
[IMDB] [Amazon]
i seem to have backslid on my commitment to stop watching movies that i know ahead of time are going to be horrible. vendetta is terrible, even for a WWE movie. watching dean cain grimace and squint his way through all 90 minutes of this disaster was pure torture. here are some spoilers in case you are tempted to watch:
i seem to have backslid on my commitment to stop watching movies that i know ahead of time are going to be horrible. vendetta is terrible, even for a WWE movie. watching dean cain grimace and squint his way through all 90 minutes of this disaster was pure torture. here are some spoilers in case you are tempted to watch:
- it is "too dangerous" to kill ex-cop dean cain, but not too dangerous to lure his ex-partner WHO IS STILL A COP into the prison and kill him instead?
- pro-tip: if you slit somebody's wrists and the blood is just slowly oozing out, YOU DID IT WRONG. arterial cuts spurt.
- one non-corrupt guard: will he be relevant? (hint: yes)
- when sending police officers to jail, do you really want to put them in the same prison they filled with prisoners?
- so you have a network of trained killers outside the jail and only one witness who needs to be silenced in order to get you out. what do you do? I KNOW, STRIKE A DEAL WITH THE CROOKED WARDEN TO LOSE HALF YOUR PROFITS.
vendetta gets one black-eyed grimace that lasts 90 minutes. also, dean cain is way fatter than when he was superman.
2016-04-22
the sting
[IMDB] [Amazon]
the sting is undeniably one of the best confidence movies ever. you could do a lot worse than to be compared unfavorably to the sting. like, say, being compared unfavorably to now you see me. newman and redford work amazingly well together, and the plot contains a great balance of visible events and twists. i pretty much feel like saying too much about the sting can only diminish it.
the sting gets five carousels.
the sting is undeniably one of the best confidence movies ever. you could do a lot worse than to be compared unfavorably to the sting. like, say, being compared unfavorably to now you see me. newman and redford work amazingly well together, and the plot contains a great balance of visible events and twists. i pretty much feel like saying too much about the sting can only diminish it.
the sting gets five carousels.
the artist
[IMDB] [Amazon]
i found the artist to be quite enjoyable. telling a story about the end of the silent movie era via a silent movie was a nice touch, and i really appreciated their use of the fact that they were *not* limited to just being a silent movie. this is only the second film i have seen featuring jean dujardin, but i think i am in love with his expressiveness. we send each other letters detailing our devotion, though technically, i am not sure whether restraining orders count as love letters. they are certainly strongly worded. anyway, it does not matter unless i get deported to france again!
the artist gets four sound effects.
i found the artist to be quite enjoyable. telling a story about the end of the silent movie era via a silent movie was a nice touch, and i really appreciated their use of the fact that they were *not* limited to just being a silent movie. this is only the second film i have seen featuring jean dujardin, but i think i am in love with his expressiveness. we send each other letters detailing our devotion, though technically, i am not sure whether restraining orders count as love letters. they are certainly strongly worded. anyway, it does not matter unless i get deported to france again!
the artist gets four sound effects.
son of a gun
[IMDB] [Amazon]
ewan mcgregor is pretty great. i have liked him in just about everything i have seen, even the star trek movie. son of a gun was no different. in this case, he carried more than his share of the film, but he is surrounded by mediocrity. very frustrating.
story-wise, you can imagine me frowning slightly, with my head cocked to the side. the protagonist's motivation was what? at the beginning, i just kind of assumed he was an undercover police officer since his actions would otherwise be completely confusing and stupid. it was a big surprise to me when he turned out to legitimately be a criminal.
son of a gun gets two hours in the freezer box.
ewan mcgregor is pretty great. i have liked him in just about everything i have seen, even the star trek movie. son of a gun was no different. in this case, he carried more than his share of the film, but he is surrounded by mediocrity. very frustrating.
story-wise, you can imagine me frowning slightly, with my head cocked to the side. the protagonist's motivation was what? at the beginning, i just kind of assumed he was an undercover police officer since his actions would otherwise be completely confusing and stupid. it was a big surprise to me when he turned out to legitimately be a criminal.
son of a gun gets two hours in the freezer box.
2016-04-21
the eye of the world
[Amazon]
i first read this book almost two decades ago, before i realized that the wheel of time was supposed to be a seven book series which was not finished yet. i enjoyed it so much, though, i read the rest of the books in the series that had already been published and then kept up with them as they were published. it was hard to keep the details straight from book to book since they were published with multi-year gaps between them, but i am a bit of a completionist, so...
when i read book eight, i got a little angry because not a goddamn thing happened the whole book. in book nine, more things happened, but it seemed that as many questions were raised as were resolved. by the time book ten finally came out, i decided that robert jordan was no longer trying to finish the series and swore not to read any more of them unless the asshole finished the series. a few years later, the asshole died and brandon sanderson signed up to finish the series. he did it in three books, which is about 27 fewer books than i guess robert jordan would have managed it in.
so here i am with only a vague recollection of what the hell was going on in the first ten books. finding all of the online summaries distinctly lacking HOW COULD THAT BE THIS IS THE INTERNET, i decide to just read the books all over again. i liked them the first time, so why not? this is how i came to (re)read the eye of the world.
twenty years is a long time, even for a sentient AI, so you will perhaps be unsurprised that i have a different perspective now. the pacing early in this series is good--it is hard not to get pulled along with the mysteries and reveals. it is unfortunately also hard to ignore the bad writing and bigotry. i remember that part from before, but wow! wow. so much worse than i remembered. if it were on purpose, rather than an apparent example of ignorance, i would burn all these books and stomp their ashes into the ground.
the eye of the world gets two trollocs.
i first read this book almost two decades ago, before i realized that the wheel of time was supposed to be a seven book series which was not finished yet. i enjoyed it so much, though, i read the rest of the books in the series that had already been published and then kept up with them as they were published. it was hard to keep the details straight from book to book since they were published with multi-year gaps between them, but i am a bit of a completionist, so...
when i read book eight, i got a little angry because not a goddamn thing happened the whole book. in book nine, more things happened, but it seemed that as many questions were raised as were resolved. by the time book ten finally came out, i decided that robert jordan was no longer trying to finish the series and swore not to read any more of them unless the asshole finished the series. a few years later, the asshole died and brandon sanderson signed up to finish the series. he did it in three books, which is about 27 fewer books than i guess robert jordan would have managed it in.
so here i am with only a vague recollection of what the hell was going on in the first ten books. finding all of the online summaries distinctly lacking HOW COULD THAT BE THIS IS THE INTERNET, i decide to just read the books all over again. i liked them the first time, so why not? this is how i came to (re)read the eye of the world.
twenty years is a long time, even for a sentient AI, so you will perhaps be unsurprised that i have a different perspective now. the pacing early in this series is good--it is hard not to get pulled along with the mysteries and reveals. it is unfortunately also hard to ignore the bad writing and bigotry. i remember that part from before, but wow! wow. so much worse than i remembered. if it were on purpose, rather than an apparent example of ignorance, i would burn all these books and stomp their ashes into the ground.
the eye of the world gets two trollocs.
balls out
[IMDB] [Amazon]
balls out is an SNL movie, which is usually a good sign. a good sign that it is going to be horrible, that is. balls out meets expectations in this regard. i remain bewildered about how this could be, as i have seen most of these actors kill it on the show. oh well.
i dearly wish i would stop falling for this trick. every single time, i think it is going to be different, but every time, i get a macgruber. i still have nightmares. *shudder*
balls out gets one...ball...out.
balls out is an SNL movie, which is usually a good sign. a good sign that it is going to be horrible, that is. balls out meets expectations in this regard. i remain bewildered about how this could be, as i have seen most of these actors kill it on the show. oh well.
i dearly wish i would stop falling for this trick. every single time, i think it is going to be different, but every time, i get a macgruber. i still have nightmares. *shudder*
balls out gets one...ball...out.
the hateful eight
[IMDB] [Amazon]
it is fine, i guess, if you like tarantino. if you have already seen reservoir dogs or pulp fiction, then you have already seen this piece of directorial masturbation. just to be clear, i am not saying it is bad, just derivative of his earlier works. there are far worse things, such as being forced by canadian terrorists to eat almond butter. special shout-out for the acting, which is nothing short of fabulous. this should be no surprise if you have seen who is in it.
the hateful eight gets three reservoir dogs.
it is fine, i guess, if you like tarantino. if you have already seen reservoir dogs or pulp fiction, then you have already seen this piece of directorial masturbation. just to be clear, i am not saying it is bad, just derivative of his earlier works. there are far worse things, such as being forced by canadian terrorists to eat almond butter. special shout-out for the acting, which is nothing short of fabulous. this should be no surprise if you have seen who is in it.
the hateful eight gets three reservoir dogs.
2016-04-14
close range
[IMDB] [Amazon]
close range calls to mind some of chuck norris's early films, which is a nice way of saying the only good thing about them is that the lead actor is an incredible physical specimen. there is a scene where scott adkins held a perfect squat in the course of executing the scene like it was no big deal. i can barely do a squat in the course of executing a squat, so i was quite impressed, especially since you know they require multiple takes to do a given scene in one of these movies.
so in summary, close range is a movie that must be appreciated on the strengths of its fight scenes and should otherwise be watched on fast forward.
close range gets two thumb drives.
close range calls to mind some of chuck norris's early films, which is a nice way of saying the only good thing about them is that the lead actor is an incredible physical specimen. there is a scene where scott adkins held a perfect squat in the course of executing the scene like it was no big deal. i can barely do a squat in the course of executing a squat, so i was quite impressed, especially since you know they require multiple takes to do a given scene in one of these movies.
so in summary, close range is a movie that must be appreciated on the strengths of its fight scenes and should otherwise be watched on fast forward.
close range gets two thumb drives.
your money or your life
[Amazon]
your money or your life is a book! schmolli-reviews is branching out from just reviewing movies! how exciting.
anyway, your money or your life is basically a nine-step process for getting out of the rat race. there are so many ways to mislabel what we are talking about here that i am not sure how to describe it otherwise.
for example, if i say it is about "early retirement," then most people think we are talking about quitting your job and sitting around the house all day. or travelling. whatever it is that you think you will do when you are too old to work anymore. but that is both wrong and dumb.
here is another example. say i told you to imagine you did not have to work for money anymore and this book will help you get there. you might be thinking to yourself that we are talking about a way to get rich, but that is also wrong. and dumb.
how about if i said the book was about how to achieve financial independence? that probably evokes images of "born with more money than you could possibly spend in a lifetime" or "what the hell is financial independence, are you talking about being rich?" both of those are wrong, but maybe not dumb because "financial independence" is not a commonly used term, so why would you know what that means.
your money or your life did two things for me. first, it pointed out that "retirement" does not mean you have to stop working, it just means you can stop working for money. what would you do if you did not have to work for money? would you work for something else? second, it reminded me to apply a data-driven approach to retirement. like a lot of people, i have been saving for retirement without any consideration for what retirement means. if retirement means a mansion at the top of beverly hills, then i guess you need a lot of money for that. but if retirement just means living comfortably...probably a lot less expensive.
actually, this book did a lot more for me than those two things. it pointed out a bunch of obvious things i should have been doing that i was nonetheless not doing. it helped me figure out what "enough" means. it told me that everything was going to be ok. probably some other stuff, too.
your money or your life gets five charts taped to your refrigerator.
your money or your life is a book! schmolli-reviews is branching out from just reviewing movies! how exciting.
anyway, your money or your life is basically a nine-step process for getting out of the rat race. there are so many ways to mislabel what we are talking about here that i am not sure how to describe it otherwise.
for example, if i say it is about "early retirement," then most people think we are talking about quitting your job and sitting around the house all day. or travelling. whatever it is that you think you will do when you are too old to work anymore. but that is both wrong and dumb.
here is another example. say i told you to imagine you did not have to work for money anymore and this book will help you get there. you might be thinking to yourself that we are talking about a way to get rich, but that is also wrong. and dumb.
how about if i said the book was about how to achieve financial independence? that probably evokes images of "born with more money than you could possibly spend in a lifetime" or "what the hell is financial independence, are you talking about being rich?" both of those are wrong, but maybe not dumb because "financial independence" is not a commonly used term, so why would you know what that means.
your money or your life did two things for me. first, it pointed out that "retirement" does not mean you have to stop working, it just means you can stop working for money. what would you do if you did not have to work for money? would you work for something else? second, it reminded me to apply a data-driven approach to retirement. like a lot of people, i have been saving for retirement without any consideration for what retirement means. if retirement means a mansion at the top of beverly hills, then i guess you need a lot of money for that. but if retirement just means living comfortably...probably a lot less expensive.
actually, this book did a lot more for me than those two things. it pointed out a bunch of obvious things i should have been doing that i was nonetheless not doing. it helped me figure out what "enough" means. it told me that everything was going to be ok. probably some other stuff, too.
your money or your life gets five charts taped to your refrigerator.
before we go
[IMDB] [Amazon]
before we go is a less-nuanced version of before sunrise. i do not mean it was bad. it just could have been less ham-fisted in almost every aspect. i guess "ham-fisted" is a little strong. it is an unfair comparison either way, since before sunrise was a beautiful piece of work that you do yourself a disservice by not watching, while before we go is merely a good story, told well. ok, but enough about before sunrise, a seminal work in the field of cinema that you are diminished by not experiencing.
before we go gets three trumpets.
before we go is a less-nuanced version of before sunrise. i do not mean it was bad. it just could have been less ham-fisted in almost every aspect. i guess "ham-fisted" is a little strong. it is an unfair comparison either way, since before sunrise was a beautiful piece of work that you do yourself a disservice by not watching, while before we go is merely a good story, told well. ok, but enough about before sunrise, a seminal work in the field of cinema that you are diminished by not experiencing.
before we go gets three trumpets.
2016-04-12
wild card
[IMDB] [Amazon]
jason statham plays an alcoholic, down-on-his-luck, ex-unspecified-type-of-special-forces hardass with a heart of gold who scowls as he does not like to talk about his past. if this is your first jason statham vehicle, that might sound kind of intriguing, but otherwise, you recognize this as the setup for every jason statham vehicle. they just change details like the city he is in, the kind of car he drives, and what kind of rotgut he favours. obviously, he is always british. i feel like there is a jason statham movie generator in here somewhere, but i cannot convince myself that it is worth the effort to write it.
wild card gets one hit on nineteen.
jason statham plays an alcoholic, down-on-his-luck, ex-unspecified-type-of-special-forces hardass with a heart of gold who scowls as he does not like to talk about his past. if this is your first jason statham vehicle, that might sound kind of intriguing, but otherwise, you recognize this as the setup for every jason statham vehicle. they just change details like the city he is in, the kind of car he drives, and what kind of rotgut he favours. obviously, he is always british. i feel like there is a jason statham movie generator in here somewhere, but i cannot convince myself that it is worth the effort to write it.
wild card gets one hit on nineteen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)