Taz Goes to the Cinema 2020

→ in
Tools    





Over the past 5 or so years I've been going to the cinema at least once a week, and usually make a day out of it by sitting through 3 or 4 films.

Because I'm blind, I do depend on AD, however there are times when either it has not worked, not been available which has required a second sit through of movies, and even if it is available sometimes does require more than 1 sit through, and sometimes just want to enjoy an encore of that film. Obviously these are not on the same day.

Anyhow, as the new year has just begun am going to keep track in this thread of the films that have gone to and keep tabs of here. Literally a week into the new year and have sat through 6 so far.

I don't know if they have this where others are, but here in the UK there is a cinema chain that for a subscription fee of £17.90 a month can go to as many films as you want to. Began doing this because my daughter, especially when she was younger we couldn't exactly go ice skating or go-cart racing etc, so going to the cinema twice a month made this a no brainer, as it costs about £10 for a ticket for a single film. So having the card may as well make the use of it.

Obviously that is before IMAX. Screen X, 4DX. VIP etc which are extra, but unless it is something special that my daughter wants to go to, I don't bother with any of these, but we do occasionally go to a 4DX screening, once in a while.

Anyhow that is all preamble.

Here I go...



Accumulative Post.


* - denotes an encore
^ - denotes required 2nd due to AD issues 1st time



1. Little Women
2. Knives Out *
3. The Gentlemen ****
4. Jumanji: Next Level ^
5. Jojo Rabbit ^ **
6. Star Wars IX: Rise of Skywalker *
7. 1917 ^
8. Seberg
9. Cats
10. Just Mercy
11. Spies in Disguise
12. Bombshell *
13. Waves
14. The Personal History of David Copperfield
15. A Hidden Life
16. Bad Boys For Life
17. The Turning
18. A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood
19. The Lighthouse
20. The Grudge
21. The Rhythm Section
22. Richard Jewell
23. Queen & Slim
24. Doolittle
25. Parasite
26. Underwater
27. Birds of Prey ^***
28. Spycies
29. Like a Boss *
30. Sonic the Hedgehog
31. Emma.
32. Call of the Wild *
33. Brahms: The Boy 2
34. Greed
35. Dark Waters
36. Downhill
37. True History of the Kelly Gang
38. The Invisible Man
39. Onward
40. Sacrilege
41. Military Wives
42. Fantasy Island
43. The Hunt
44. The Photograph



Saturday 4 January

1. Little Women

I liked this retelling of this classic. The added element of the sisters becoming adults does allow for some scope for the characters to develop beyond the confines of the original novel. This was especially true of Amy, and Florence Pugh deserves credit for this, as does writer/director Greta Gerwig.

The AD worked perfect, and added to which my daughter did not particularly like it, so it is unlikely will revisit this film again during it's theatrical run, but may do so in time on netflix or some such.


2. Knives Out

This was an encore, having gone to this a few weeks before Christmas, and did enjoy it. There were a few little things that didn't pick up on the first time so felt that had to revisit this, and enjoyed it as much on this rewatch as did on the first time through. The cast is great, the story is fun, and there are no shortage of quotable lines, so all in all, one well deserving of an encore.

The AD worked perfect both times and something could easily sit through again.



Would the OP mind explaining what AD is?
__________________
Iím here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. Thatís why Iím here now.



Wed 8 January


The Gentleman

Guy Ritchie's films tend to end up on either end of the spectrum. When they are bad, they tend to be seriously awful (Swept Away, King Arthur etc) and then there are the good, they rend to be pretty damned good, qith few falling in between. After Aladdin actually surprised by being better than expected (by far the best of the Disney live action remakes of 2019, over Lion King, Dumbo etc), there was nothign that was distinctly about it that made it a Guy Ritchie film. However, the Gentlemen is a welcome return to the type of movie that he originally made his name with. It is fun, it's fast talking, there are some quirky characters. The story is far fetched but rattles along at a good clip and entertains. If you liked Lock, Stock... or Snatch, then you'll probably like this also. The AD was good and could easily sit through this again.


Jumanji: Next Level

Often action films have a lot going on in the AD that they can be hard to follow at times, and during those sequences do find myself sort of tuning out, which sometimes can hamper a film for my enjoyment. And so it was with this. The Jumanji reboot from a couple of years ago was good fun and was able to just go along for the ride. This one felt more stilted, the jokes didnt land as well, and the running joke of the old guys don't get their in a game concept got real tired real fast. You'd have thought someoen would have figured that this wasn't working and scrapped it, but anyhow.

Despite this, did feel that I required a second sit through of this - went to it originally a few weeks before xmas - to see if this helped and that there were parts of the story that I had missed, and admittedly did enjoy it slightly more this time as I did pick up on a few things that missed the first time through, but still prefer Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.


Jojo Rabbit

This is a classic example of why often need to do an encore or have repeated sit throughs. Originally sat through this as a preview screening, which did not have AD, so there were times when would hear people laughing or a gasp and I'd have no idea what was happening. So while I did enjoy it the first time through, having the benefit of this with the AD made it so much better to understand now and answered questions that I had from the first time sittign through it. With the added AD this may have now just snuck into my top 5 of 2019. Well written, the subject matter deftly handled, and strijkes a really good balance between the farcical and tragic.


As I posted in the dedicated Jojo Rabbit thread, Taika Waititi is putting together such a strong string of really good films to become one of my favourite directors and probably the pre-eminant comedy film maker currently working, such as what Mel Brooks and John Hughes were to the 70s & 80s etc.


Star Wars IX: Rise of Skywalker

Firstly, with the hole that TLJ left this new trilogy in and virtual apathy for this new storyarch, this film had a lot of ground to make up - a flaw that was the same for the prequel trilogy also. So went into this with pretty low expectations. And while there were plently of eye rolling moments... and more than a couple of 'uggh... whatever' moments, it was at least better than it's predecessor. But because of the hole that the previous film left this in, there was a lot to digest and even with AD, there are still questions that I am going to need another sit through of this to try to pick up on. But suffice to say the original trilogy is still by far the best.



Would the OP mind explaining what AD is?

My apologies. Audio Description.

I probably should have mentioned this in the OP, but I'm blind, so this is often a very important, and even crucial, element in my ability to fully enjoy and understand a movie, and can colour my opinion of a film which could considerably be different from what a sighted person would take away from the same film.

So, just as you may consider the cinematography of a film or the choreography of a fight scene, costume design etc to be crucial to your enjoyment of a film, that is what the AD is to myself, and other visually impaired movie goers, and likewise how good AD compared to bad AD can impact on this also.



My apologies. Audio Description.

I probably should have mentioned this in the OP, but I'm blind, so this is often a very important, and even crucial, element in my ability to fully enjoy and understand a movie, and can colour my opinion of a film which could considerably be different from what a sighted person would take away from the same film.

So, just as you may consider the cinematography of a film or the choreography of a fight scene, costume design etc to be crucial to your enjoyment of a film, that is what the AD is to myself, and other visually impaired movie goers, and likewise how good AD compared to bad AD can impact on this also.
That's another good argument for bringing back good radio shows or dramas. People could listen and use their imaginations, which oftentimes might be better than what would be put onto a screen. Visualization is good for the human mind, and it increases awareness and possibly even intelligence. Moving pictures are hypnotic and can dull the senses.

~Doc



Saturday 4 January

1. Little Women

I liked this retelling of this classic. The added element of the sisters becoming adults does allow for some scope for the characters to develop beyond the confines of the original novel. This was especially true of Amy, and Florence Pugh deserves credit for this, as does writer/director Greta Gerwig.

The AD worked perfect, and added to which my daughter did not particularly like it, so it is unlikely will revisit this film again during it's theatrical run, but may do so in time on netflix or some such.


2. Knives Out

This was an encore, having gone to this a few weeks before Christmas, and did enjoy it. There were a few little things that didn't pick up on the first time so felt that had to revisit this, and enjoyed it as much on this rewatch as did on the first time through. The cast is great, the story is fun, and there are no shortage of quotable lines, so all in all, one well deserving of an encore.

The AD worked perfect both times and something could easily sit through again.
Little Women is one of my favorite movies of the decade, really glad you liked it!



That's another good argument for bringing back good radio shows or dramas. People could listen and use their imaginations, which oftentimes might be better than what would be put onto a screen. Visualization is good for the human mind, and it increases awareness and possibly even intelligence. Moving pictures are hypnotic and can dull the senses.

~Doc

This is very true. As much as we all love movies, there is only one person's vision that we are seeing come to life. What the audience is witnessing is the director's interpretation and vision. So reading a book, or even listening to an audiobook/radio play does allow for people to use their own imaginations to envisage any given scene being played out.



Wed 15 Jan

Another big day at the cinema. 4 more films (well. 3 & 1 encore)

1917

(sans AD) This will require sitting through again, because the screening I was in the AD did not work. Tried switching headsets and also tried moving to another part of the auditorium, to no avail. Anyone who has seen this will know there are a number of long stretches of this movie with little to no dialogue, so without the aid of AD really was literally and figuratively left in the dark about what was happening. That said, for what I could make out, it was very well done and the comments overheard afterwards was that generally people were very impressed with it. For me, the jury remains out until have had the benefit of the AD to supplement this movie.


Seberg

A subject deserving of a biopic, Jean Seberg was subjected to intrusive observation, interference, harassment and defamation by the FBI, because of her demonstrating support and contributing financialy to various causes, including the Civil Rghts movement, NAACP, Native American Causes and the Black Panther Party. The film is set in 1969-71, at a time in which this pressure was at it's most intense.

All the ingredients that should provide for a really interesting character study of someone coming unstuck under that kind of duress are there, but the whole thing is sadly let down by clunky and cliched writing and despite there being no shortage of juicy real life events to focus on, the plot of the film still feels it has to conjure up dubious fictions, such as the conflicted survellance agent empathizing with the targeted Seberg etc. The film itself feels a bit like the old tv movie of the week and especially now in the days of streaming services such as Netflix, quite why this was deserving of theatrical release is a little lost on me, unless there was hope of Kristen Stewart's performance in the title role, with the hope that it might garner some positive notices and potential awards nominations; to which, while it was good, it wasn't that good.


The Gentleman (Encore)

This definitely holds up to repeat viewings. The writing is there, the characters are there, the performances are there. Colin Farell steals every scene he is in, as does Hugh Grant, but that does not take away from anyone else in this, all of whom it really seems like they would have had an absolute ball making this movie. Wouldn't be surprised if I catch this again before it leaves the cinema. If I had a movie of the week, this would be it. In fact that is not a bad idea...


Cats

Oh dear. Wow! Everything you've probably heard is true. I'm glad I couldn't see the screen properly, because the aural assault is bad enough. Why anyone thought that this was the musical worth resurrecting and being given the big screen treatment, I can't begin to fathom.

Tom Hooper seriously needs to be checked into NA or a rehab clinic, because an excessive use of non-perscription drugs is the only possible explaination for his thinking that so many bad ideas were in fact good ones, not to mention whoever the exec at Universal greenlit this project should have recieved his P45 in the mail by now.

It would be impossible to count the number of long sad audible sighs and eyerolls that this film induced. The irony of Ian McKellen singing a song about a once fabled star now reduced to his current situation was not lost either, amid every failed attempt at humour and every lacklustre cameo. The whole thing was just sad; a career low watermark for everyone involved in it.

Some stats from the screening I was in:

Number of people in the audience: 23.
Number of walkouts: 16.
Number that lasted the distance: 7


I know this because the AD in the screen it was shown in only works down near the entrance, so literally everyone who left had to pass right by me, so I was keeping count. There was a cheer when it was finally over, and a cry of "we made it!" from someone at the back of the theatre, and overheard 2 people sitting in the row behind me commenting there were only 7 people in the theatre at that point.


Film of the Week: The Gentlemen



Haha, I love reading Cats reviews!

Too bad the AD didnít work for you with 1917. I havenít seen it yet, but I really look forward to it!



1917

With functioning AD and in 4DX. Purely because of the timing. Having a functioning AD definitely helped understand what the hell was going on and answers a lot of what i missed and was confused by the first time sitting through this.. It is a relatively straight story, and because it is so very linear, without cutting away to sub-plots elsewhere, does make it feel as though right there in the trenches. If this is based on a true story, which is what is lead to believe, can understand the ending being what it is. However, from my understanding it is very loosely based on a true story, in which case, I wonder if perhaps the impact of the futility of war may have benefitted more from a gutpunch by an ending similiar to Gallipoli (1981).

Still it is very well done and can understand the awards buzz it has generated. Think this is a film fully deserving of being viewed while it is still at the cinema.




Just Mercy

Based on a true story and stays very faithful to that, this is quite a thought provoking film about a lawyer who seeks to take up cases of death row inmates laegely convicted because of institutionalized racism and injustice in Alabama, set primarily in the early 1990's. The performances of the entire cast are fantastic, with all of the supporting cast every bit as deserving of praise as the 2 leads, Michael B Jordan & Jamie Foxx. This is a film sadly that has been overlooked during the awards season, but that does not make it any less compelling and deserving of praise.

Highly recommended.



Another big day at the cinema, another 4 films...

Tues 21 Jan


Spies in Disguise

So ok, this was not great and pretty underwhelming in terms of story telling and horribly wasted and underutilized the voice talents of it's cast, outwith of Will Smith and Tom Holland (both of which also just seemed to be going through the motions), to the point that notables such as Karen Gillian are barely noticed and Ben Mendelsohn, as the villian, I would be astounded if he had 20 lines throughout. Can't comment on the visual aspects of the animation obviously, but the story has pretty much been done before in various formats. It's ok for what it is, but nothing special.


Bombshell

Even before the film begins there is something of a disclaimer because of the non-disclosure agreements does mean that elements of the film are based on a degree of supposition about what actually happened, by taking an educated guess from what is known about the case. It is a story that totally deserves to be told, because it is important and really, a watershed moment about sexual harassment in the workplace. I just wish that we could get told the whole true story that has not been prevented by the NDA's.

That said, it's interesting to note that this film is also highlighting some of the techniques that FOX has pioneered over the years which even resonate through to today. Additionally, it is a little curious that James & Lachlan Murdoch as somehow being painted as the good guys in this, when the truth is, they are anything but, though sought to use this to oust someone that they themselves wanted rid of anyhow.



That said, all 3 of the leads and the cast in general provide solid performances as you'd expect. There is one scene with Margot Robbie when her character breaks down, that is a standout moment, and John Lithgow, as the disgraced Roger Ailes, is likewise as good as you'd expect. However, with the greatest of respect to these, and I do truly love these actresses, there are other performances in other films that have been overlooked in lieu of these and this film, which considering the full extent of the details being withheld, As timely and relevant as this film is, it just leaves the feeling like we as the audience are a little shortchanged, through no fault of the cast etc, but purely because of the NDAs.


Waves

This is a film that at times seems to meander and based on the AD seems to be a very visual film, which is actually well written, with pretty minimal dialogue, about a middle class suburban family in Florida, cheifly told in 2 parts. The first half of the film centres on Tyler, while the second half centres on his sister, Emily. There are powerful themes that are explored here, including those of consequence, family and even forgiveness. A strong film, with acting that feels real and earthed. The characters don't come across as charactertures but like real people, and the director deserves credit for crafting his vision, often charged and surging with intensity. I don't usually give ratings, especially for films that rely so heavily on the visual aspect of the storytelling, but here it seems somehow appropriate, and a very solid 4/5.




The Personal History of David Copperfield

Armando Iannuchi's latest offering is his adaptation and unique satire on the Dickens' classic David Copperfield in a way that only he can. There are subtle moments and wry humour brinigng to life this version of a classic that has been told plenty of times before, in a way that has not been told in any way like this before. I did struggle at times though with the AD and did miss a few of the points of humour where could hear people laughing, as the AD only worked when i was leaning forward to pick up reception, but was able to appreciate enough of it to still be able to enjoy this adaptation well enough, even if it was not quite as good as The Death of Stalin or In the Loop, in my opinion.



A Hidden Life

Based on a true story of an Austrian consciencious objector who refused to swear allegiance to Hitler during WWII. It's a film that takes it's time to tell it's story, which can be a bit of a slog at times to get through. The protagonist, Franz, although a deeply religious and loving family man, as he is confronted by friends, neighbours, the local community, the church, and increasingly the Nazi authorities, with the subplot of what happens with his wife, Fanny and their family in his absence.

Everything in the film centres entirely around either Franz and/or Fanny, with barely any other character mentioned by name and even their children not really being focused upon; rather even in the AD it is the Mayor, the Widow, the neighbour, the miller, the priest, the lawyer and so on and so forth, so that it depersonalizes everyone else aside from Franz and Fanny, as the narrative dovetails between them, which is an interesting approach and can see why, as these characters are more representative of their institutions and places under that regime than they are of actual individuals, but this choice does definitely contribute to the film as being a bit too drawn out.

Overall, it is one of director Terence Malick's better efforts in recent years, probably since The Tree of Life, and does bare many of the hallmarks that he has employed previously, such as in The Thin Red Line and even reaching back to Badlands.


Bad Boys For Life

Will Smith has clearly made a career decision in the last year or so - to forgo the increasingly bland and meh films intended to be Oscarbait that he had been churning out year on year, and seemingly trying to turn back the clock to the 90's. Gemini Man was an attempted throwback to 90's style actioners, such as Face/Off, The original Aladdin was from the 90's and now the resurrection of Bad Boys. But dont let that fool you... this is not a two hander... just like in those oscarbait efforts, this is designed to all be about the Will Smith show.

After the weight of A Hidden Life, I was looking for something much lighter to have a few laughs and just go along for the ride. What this is, is cringey, with terrible writing that is not particularly funny and amazingly convenient plot points, all building to the reveal moment that is just eye rollingly lazy. The 2 leads still share some decent chemistry, even if it is not as fresh or crisp as it was way back when, and Martin Lawrence mostly used as the comic relief while everything revolves around Will Smith, which is a bit of a shame. This is a checklist movie. It has the explosions, it has the plot points for dummies and makes every effort to make you feel dumber walking out of the cinema than whe you walked in; in other words, this may not be a Michael Bay movie, but it may as well have been.



The Turning


This latest adaptation of Henry James' novella Turn of the Screw is a complete mess. Doesn't start out too badly but instead of ramping up the apprehension, tension and fear, it spirals in the opposite direction and undoes any of the good that it had built up early on. The ending especially deserving of criticism. Perhaps it is the director & writer's attempt to have that ambiguity left in - is the house really haunted or is Kate just going insane? By hedging it's bets, it fails entirely, not to mention it is not in any way scary at all. I love films that leave a feeling of ambiguity. My Cousin Rachel is a relatively recent example of how this can be successfully accomplished, but here it just never works. Points for Brooklyn Prince, who is already proving to be a very good young actress after impressing in The Florida Project, but there is little else to commend this film for. Better sticking to The Innocents for a superior telling of this tale.



Additionally, took in another encore of The Gentlemen, as well as sitting through Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker again.

The former just to appreciate and enjoy the ride once again, and so far is the movie I've probably out and out enjoyed the most this year so far. Guy Ritchie's best in quite some time. The latter to see if it explained some things that I was left confused by, if it was just things that were described or things left unanswered, and not only did I still walk away feeling the same, but there were entire sections of the movie I had no memory of from the first time sitting through, which kind of underpins how needless some sections of the film were and still left unexplained. Perhaps its a visual thing that the AD doesn't cover, but I still have questions, yet despite these, such is the apathy that Disney's SW is at now, I've little appetite to find these out conclusively and just leave it with a meh.



Went yesterday, Saturday 1st Feb. Was too tired to update this last night.



A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood


Just to preface this by saying I did originally find an online stream for this some months ago online and sat through it then because for a long time it didn't seem like it was going to get a theatrical release here. However, now that it has finally been released theatrically here in the UK, went to catch it again and have the benefit of AD, which has slightly changed my perspective on the film. Additionally, I should note that, while I'm not entirely ignorant of who Fred Rogers' was, it is far from the same level of awareness as what generations of American kids would have grown up with. This film is obviously targeting an American audience, so just wanted to preface this accordingly.

The narrative of the story is done through the vantage point of a journalist who, when we first meet, is something of a prickly personality - a self described 'broken' character - who among other issues is having troubles adapting to fatherhood which is further emphasized by his estranged relationship with his own father (Chris Cooper), and by the film's end is able to mend these fractures with those close to him, through his interactions with Rogers and his example.

This is suitably charming, humourous and uplifting, as you'd expect. One thing that I didn't pick up on through first sit through is the extensive use of the 'toy world' to set the scenes from New York to Pittsburgh etc, incorporating the use of the toy cars etc as an integral part of the film, which was much better utilized and seamlessly than in 'Welcome to Marwen'. There are aso some populist tropes such as the diner scene or the subway scene where passengers join in on a sing-along of 'Won't You Be My Neighbour?', which is much more in keeping with the character (and according to an anecdote in the article the film is based on, it is a version of an incident that actually happened, as opposed to the complete fiction of Churchill's commute in Darkest Hours. Hanks is a natural fit in role of Rogers (although can imagine Jimmy Stewart in days gone by that could have believably filled those shoes), but overall my impression, is that it is decent and feelgood, which is fine, without going too in depth, nor being something that is going to live long in the memory, although that opinion potentially could be different for an American audience.



The Lighthouse

This is a very bleak psychological drama, bordering on horror, and a damned good one. Through the week, I went to a screening of The Turning. The Lighthouse is everything that film should have been. The tension and apprehension continuiously ramps up, right to the end as perspective is increasingly lost, and the central question of are they cursed or simply going mad is left ambigious and a case could be made that it could be either or both. This movie does everything that The Turning abysmally failed to.

Robert Eggars direction and vision is brought to life with both Willem Defoe and Robert Pattinson give it their all as the 2 'wickies' left on their own to man a 19th century lighthouse and follows their twin spiralling descent. Really the movie would not have worked nearly as well with either giving less than a complete committed effort. The writing is filled with elements of Samuel Coleridge and Edgar Allen Poe-esque images and themes (although is not the same as the Poe short story of the similiar name) and while I cannot comment on the visual aspects, the sound adds so much, with long recurring, mournful foghorn for example, adding as much as it's cinematography (the fact it's been nominated for an Oscar for this is testamony to the quality of this). Definitely worth checking out.



Tues 4 Feb

The Grudge

Although horror is not my genre of choice in any way, shape or form, I've sat through a lot of them, especially when I was a teenager, as my 2 best friends back then were obsessed with this genre, so naturally any time was at either of their places there was always something on. The point being, despite not liking the genre, I've sat through enough of these films to know when something is half decent and when something is a dud.

I do remember the original Japanese movie and the American remake that Sarah Michelle Gellar was in, but am aware that both the Japanese and American films had a number of sequels. These I don't remember ever seeing, so that all being said am not entirely sure how this film fits into the whole timeline, even though there is a link made in this film to the original Japanese version. However, this movie did not srtrike me as anywhere near as creepy as that one was (even though none of the Grudge movies were ever particularly scary. The storyline here also is set over a number of years, flitting back and forth and whilese these are reconciled by movie's end, tying in what happened in 2004 with what followed in 2005 with the occupants and visitors to this house. Yet, despite this there is a much more obvious flaw as to why this movie didn't work. There were a few flickers that this film might have something but the formulaic nature of thr structure ensured that none of these went anywhere. The cast is decent but that isn't enough to salvage this either, again, because of the highly predictable nature of both the story and the structure... talk, talk, walk, walk, quiet, quiet... SCARE! walk, walk, quiet, quiet... SCARE! talk, talk, quiet, quiet... SCARE! The thing is, none of these were actually scary and as this goes on and on pretty much for most of the movie, it just made the exercise a bit of a bore to sit through.


The Rhythm Section

This whole film felt like such a missed opporunity. The pieces were all there to make someone unique and really interesting; the notion of a revenge-seeking would-be assassin who is just not very good as an assassin, the mysterious mentor, the poorly defined villianous entities, pretty much everything. And yet, the way this comes out is like an underwhelming Red Sparrow (not that that film was all that good, but it just goes to underline just how underwhelming this is) or a female Bond in the making... only it just... isn't. If you want to see a serious baddass female badass Bond flick, check out Atomic Blonde. That was great. This... isn't. Because it doesn't know what it wants to be.

Three years after her family is all killed in a plane crash that killed hundreds, we first meet prostitute and junkie, Stephanie (Blake Lively, who is actually pretty decent), who seems to have given up on life when she is approached by a journalist who has been investigating the crash, that it was in fact a terrorist bombing, and so begins her quest for revenge. The thing is, Stephanie is just not very good at revenge - she wants it, but actually doing it is another matter entirely, and after an initial botched effort gets some training to both get clean, get fit and get deadly, yet even then never really gets any better at it.

The pieces are there to have made this story and this movie work, and with better writing and direction this could have been something really interesting, but what we get instead is a film that doesn't know what it wants to be. At times feels like it could have made for a decent mystery, only to try and force it's action that never is enough to sustain it, it doesn't know it it's trying to be a thriller or a drama, and in the end this muddle leaves it entirely unsatisfying mess and walking away with the feeling that the pieces were there, but just never put in the right places to make a coherant narrative and if the fikm doesn't know what it is trying to achieve, what chance does the audience? Instead left just wishing something more had've been made with the pieces of the puzzle that were given, dwelling on what could have been instead of what was ended up with.


Additionally...

Sat through Bombshell once again, which left more of an uncomfortable feeling than the first time. It left a kind of a gross feeling, which is actually kind of good and fitting because of the story that it is telling and the behaviour of Ailes et al, is absolutely gross, not to mention the almost cult-esque institution Fox News was (and sexual inappropriateness aside) and still is now, and if anything has continued to double down on. I get that much of this is fictionalized because of the NDA's mean that whilst some facts are known and are beyond dispute, some is open to conjecture. I still don't like the way that the Murdoch brothers are made out to be the good guys in this, even if it was simply to remove someone that they had issues with anyhow, and there are problems with the writing and direction, with some choices that really were not necessary and could have easily have achieved the same effect without taking the path that the director did.



I was hoping for something promising in the Rhythm Section, but most criticism seems similar to yours. It has the elements of potential, but it just didn't pull together