NullUnit Reviews

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (2024)

Just awful...

[1/10 · 23 May 2024]

The apparent desire to anthropomorphize monsters in this is... well.. I would say "ludicrous" but that's falls terribly short of an adequate descriptor. It's just over-the-top ridiculous.

Monsters aren't monsters here.. they are monsters which behave as if they were like people.

Do writers sit down and strain themselves trying desperately to write as many hackneyed plot points as possible and cram them into a single film?

This film is trite, predicable, uninspired, and frankly stupid on a level I can not explain.

Sure CGI is good, but in 2024 that's not a feat in itself and doesn't "make" a film interesting, much less enjoyable. Hasn't been for many years now.

The next time I go on a exceptionally dangerous, life-threatening, mission.. I sure hope someone reminds me to bring along my 11 year old child.

Mr. Birchum (2024– )

.. same old, same old...

[3/10 · 20 May 2024]

Nothing really that new.

Same old jokes, tired, overused, animation style.

I really wish these low-budget "idea without a concept" animated shows would find a NEW animation studio to use. They all look exactly the same.

There's no "style" here... no flair.. Flair examples since the studio CLEARLY has no idea.... Simpson's coloring and non-human shapes.. South Park's "cardboard" characters. Rick and Morty's non-realistic human figures. Solar Opposites off-kilter characters and settings, etc. You know CREATIVE animation. Not just standard human figures and oh, throw in a talking dog, or some other animal, too...

This is one of those shows where someone (Carolla and company) has some random idea for a sitcom, but doesn't have the money or can't raise the money for an actual live action sitcom..... so they take the cheap route.. animation. But there's no real point in it being animation, since it's just supposed to be "real life" situations. Animation mimicking live action because you can't afford live action is boring and pointless.

It's more of the same.. nothing inventive or original. Including the idea behind the show.

Just a low budget way for those behind the scenes to think they can make money with minimal effort and then rendered by an overused animation studio with next to zero artistic creativity.

John Mulaney Presents: Everybody's in LA (2024)

So many comedians...

[3/10 · 19 May 2024]

.. so little humor.....

The things is.. each episode is roughly 1hr long... in that hour there's a lot of exceptionally strained attempts to be funny... unfortunately, there's MAYBE 5 minutes of actual humor in each episode. Usually any humor comes in the form of some passing comment from someone on the couch, not from Mulhaney at all. Overall, Richard Kind is CLEARLY better at comedy.

I didn't find ANY of the packaged comedy bits funny in any way. Nor was Mulhaney really funny himself.

The reality is any humor comes from the unplanned, unexpected, gaffs in every episode. Or perhaps that hairpiece on the hypnotist.

I mean an entire episode with everyone wearing sunglasses?? That seemed like a good idea???

I really wonder.. do people in LA really think anyone else in the rest of the country honestly care about LA?? It's just so solipsistic and narrow in focus. It's not about comedians or "everyone" - meaning a lot of comedians - "being in LA" it's just about LA.

It's REALLY not worth an hour of your time, let alone 6. Pass on this.

The Big Cigar (2024)

Another Apple show for Septuagenarians...

[3/10 · 18 May 2024]

I'm not a young man... I only have a vague recollection of actual events surrounding Newton and the Panthers at that time. I was roughly 5-6 years old during the time period of this series.

This show was "created" by a white man younger than myself.. I think that's important to note. The series is approached as if it took place in 2014, not 1974 - as if Newton's story was a recent news topic, not history from 50 years ago. Do people younger than 20 have ANY real clue about Newton and the Panthers? People younger than 30? 40? And can a white man really do justice to a story about civil rights rebellion figures, even if it is well intentioned. It *seems* a bit exploitive to me.

The "set up" is severely lacking here. There's no backstory, no explanation of the turbulent time period or all the social turmoil that took place in the 60s-70s. There's no telling of the "basis" as to why Newton was sought after and persecuted. No explanation of the 10 years following the JFK and MLK assassinations. You know, the important aspect of Newton's story in terms of motivation.

This is a popcorn series, without any real substance, made for those that perhaps recall the late 1960s and early 1970s (septuagenarians) and don't need any explanation of American social issues at that time. It's not made for today's, much younger, audience.

Newton's story, as told here, has zero impact when interspersed with the attempt at some sort of "buddy series". The series goes from heavy drama portrayed as docudrama, but lacking any real impactful actual facts.... and light "buddy film" aspects with the producer character.

It's junk.

I did not find it entertaining on its own, and it is definitely not a fitting way to tell the story of an important figure in US Civil Rights history.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

Not a complete film....

[5/10 · 14 May 2024]

I'm going to retype much of what I typed for the first film....

I get that there are at least 3 films to be made in this series. However, given that, each film should stand on its own overall. There's no ending here... it just peters out until it's tired.. and the audience is left to wait for the next film....

This film series is being made as if it were a television series. Each "film" is merely an "episode" and doesn't come to ANY sort of conclusion in itself. The difference is, for these films, audiences are left waiting YEARS before the next "episode" is released. I can't speak for others, but 3-4 years later I've long since lost any sort of investment in a story. Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, et al, at least created "chapters" where they actually had an ending and each film could be viewed independently of the other films. That is NOT the case in this new Dune series.

Given the series broken into separate films, each of the films needs to be a whole in itself. Having an actual ending to the film appears to be not even an inkling for this new incarnation of Dune. The first film had no ending, and this second film doesn't either. They are NOT complete films.

This is a decent sci-fi story. My mind does keep referring back to the 80s version. There are aspects they did WAY better in the 80s for the same story - even many of the CGI effects were better in the 80s.

Anyway.. it's not a bad story. It is engaging, but ultimately merely leads to disappointment and perhaps frustration. It's not a fulfilling series since each film is left without an ending.... and it'll be several YEARS before the story continues.

.. meh.. wait for all 3, then watch.

Dune (2021)

Meh.. not a complete story...

[5/10 · 14 May 2024]

I get that there are at least 3 films to be made in this series..

However, given that, each film should stand on its own overall. Otherwise all 3 films should be released at the same time. There's no ending here... it just peters out until it's tired.. and the audience is left to wait for the next film....

I think of film series like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings - each of the parts was a whole in itself. This new incarnation of Dune has no ending. It is NOT a complete film.

That being written, it's a decent sci-fi journey. My mind does keep referring back to the 80s version.. remarkable that some things in the 80s version were actually much MUCH better even though the story is pretty identical. Things like the personal shield, the baron in general.. all better in the 80s version.

Anyway.. it's not bad., but it's not fulfilling either without an ending.

.. meh.. wait for all 3, then watch.

The Amazing Race (2001– )

I miss the travel aspect. Now, it's just challenges.

[6/10 · 3 May 2024]

The Amazing Race has always been fantastic. Easily 8-10 stars. Until recently.

The last few (post COVID) seasons 34-36 have removed all the travel aspects and it's essentially watching the Detours, Roadblocks, etc in some exotic location.

They no longer show ANY of the travel.. no scrambling for "first flight" anywhere. No dealing with non-English speaking travel agencies. What's the point of a "race around the world" if you never actually see any of the travel?? Just have them all compete in challenges outside the studio lot in the US. Would it really be any different?

The lack of actual travel has made it FAR FAR less "adventure" overall. Some of the best parts were watching the contestant interactions at airports or bus stations when they were NOT competing in a challenge. Now, all you see are challenges and driving to challenges. They rarely even do the "take a taxi" and always seem to provide a race vehicle.

It's diminished the show considerably. They need to bring back the travel aspect.

This series started by showing clips of teams at the pit stops.. when they were NOT racing. Those moments were fantastic... it was a poor choice to removed those several years ago. Now, they've removed all travel. They've slowly lost sight of what made this series popular and have essentially ruined the entertainment value at great deal. Producers would do well to go back and watch seasons 1-4 themselves and see what drew viewers in.

I'm sure there's some reason for starting every leg with all teams already in some country and at a mat and merely ripping clues in order. But it's not nearly as interesting or entertaining.

Seems to me they are doing their best to create something they can sell in syndication.. a simple 1hr block for 10 episodes. Either that or Phil is tired of it. If Phil's tired.. find a new host for heaven's sake. I doubt anyone watches this show for Phil's short explanation narratives.

If the AU and CA versions can still show travel, why can't the US version?? Lack of travel has moved the US version to the bottom of the list.

Season 36 has even done away with the final "Remember the Race" detour. Perhaps because the "race" isn't really what this show is about any longer.

Secrets of the Octopus (2024– )

Meh.. interesting but....

[5/10 · 3 May 2024]

The actual detailing of the abilities of the octopuses was very interesting and generally well filmed. It's just too bad that's not what this series stuck with.

The 3 episodes seems to focus WAY too much on what the biologist/scientist "feel" about the octopuses they are studying. I thought it was supposed to be about octopuses, not about how the people studying them feel or imagine octopuses think.

I liked Rudd's voice over work. I disliked all the scientists voice overs. The scientists narratives made this far less about "secrets" and more about speculation or wild leaps to anthropomorphize octopuses. "I like to imagine she's dreaming about me." Really? Come on.

The James Cameron bit was pointless and self-indulgent.

Sugar (2024– )

What a fun new game Apple has provided with this...

[3/10 · 29 April 2024]

Watch along and gain points for spotting every tried and true, overused, detective cliché you can find.

Earn extra points for spotting non-detective cliches... from catching a fly with chopsticks, speaking many languages, living in a hotel, driving the flashy flamboyant car, to voice overs for inner monologues and an apparent medical issue to ignore..

it's got all your favorite cliché hits! You won't be disappointed with this family night of fun cliché spotting. Call your friends, call your relatives - everyone will enjoy a fun game of cliché spotting.

I sometimes wonder who producers believe will be interested in the television show they are making. This show is CLEARLY made for those above the age of 60 - often using callback and footage from 1940-60s films. Trying so, so desperately to draw some parallel between "Sugar" and long dead actors such as Cagney or Bogart. I mean they couldn't have made the demographic more clear unless they had a forward stating "Made for septuagenarians".

Honestly spotting the clichés is the MOST interesting as aspect of this show. Everything else, and I do mean everything, is hackneyed.

Dinner with the Parents (2024– )

Pales in comparison.

[4/10 · 23 April 2024]

Was destined to fail due to casting.

The actor playing "David" is completely wrong for the part. He looks like a peer to the parents, not their child. He also is not a great comedic actor. The ENTIRE point is that the boys give each other "trouble" not that one of them is a punching bag for the other. They've turned a sibling rivalry into basically just bullying by one brother.

Michaela Watkins - Decent actor but... Same as she ever is.. unfunny and overly nervous. Her demeanor is just off for this. She comes across as someone overly worried, and riddles with anxiety about EVERYTHING around her.

Dan Bakkedahl - great in some rolls but far too "goofy" to be the dad in this - at least that's how he's playing it. Dad isn't supposed to be "goofy". He's just supposed to be odd. There IS a difference. Dad here comes across as "stupid", the "dolt", the "moron". Not the well-meaning, but accident prone, nature of the original character.

Carol Kane - great skills, but the character, with the accent is just wrong. Is Ladka around? It's her Taxi character 40 years later. Sure audiences may not know Taxi, but that's the character.

.. overall this is VERY "try hard". So much clear effort to try and get to something funny. It feels exceptionally forced and unnatural. I mean the use of "sissy" is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

This is a very typical US remake.. they complete ignore the "tone" of the original and just rewrite the scripts with a US twist without paying attention to the overall atmosphere.

The original Friday Night Diner was so much, much, much better.. and the AU (or is it NZ?) remake.. Roast Night.. is also better. This show is the worst of the international bunch.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver (2024)

Completely pointless.

[2/10 · 21 April 2024]

DON'T watch this.. just watch Part one.

To be clear, Part One was NOT great by any means, but it was much, much, MUCH better than the second film.

This is a lesson in how to build an entire multi-million dollar film with no forethought and just because you had an idea for a cliffhanger at the end of the first film. This isn't a 4 hr story broken into two films... it's a mediocre story told twice, under the guise of being two parts. Part Two is quite literally nothing more than a different way to tell Part One. (A la ChatGPT's second generation for the same prompts - ya get the same thing, just slightly different)

Part two serves no purpose. It just retells part one for the most part... mixing in FAR too much harvesting, grain production and literally retelling character backstories which were told in Part One. (WTF???).

Just like part one.. this is a mix of 7 Samurai (aka Magnificent 7) and Star Wars.. but oddly the two worlds never actually intertwine. Space ships faster than the speed of light.. but still need a sickle and scythe to harvest??? A sentient robot, or a hologram communication device, but no simple machines to sort and store grain.. m'kay. Looooooong slow motion flashbacks to re-establish characters that were already established in part one.

I quite honestly don't understand anyone that would read this script and think it's worth millions. But it could possibly be Snyder getting one over on Netflix.. Netflix pays to have it made, Snyder ultimately delivers trash (Like most of his films).

This is bad... on par with Sy-Fy/Aslym film writing. "Rebelgeddon!" .. "Rebel Moonado!" --- Nonsensical, full of plot holes and pointless, poorly acted, wan-a-be-dramatic character building regarding cardboard cutout characters you've seen in any one a thousand films over the past 40 years. But at least Asylum knows they are making "schlock". Snyder thinks he's making gold apparently..... but it's pyrite in reality, looks shiny, but is worthless.

Apparently grain/wheat only grows on ONE planet in the entire universe..... And this huge high-tech multi-planetary army can't figure out how to feed itself unless they conquer a bunch of farmers with shovels and rakes???

So much more, but I'm avoiding actual spoilers.

VERY typical Snyder... pointless, nonsensical plot holes, and focusing on CGI far, far, FAR more than any story.

---- PASS -------

Ctrl+Alt+Desire (2024)

not great...

[2/10 · 19 April 2024]

Oddly seems to .. well.. not really "glorify", there was never any attempt to condone or excuse Amato's actions, .. but.. well.. this seemed to give WAY too much attention to Amato himself. This filmmaker seemed to feed into Amato's desire for attention, and Amato CLEARLY enjoyed it, in order to get a story. That seemed well.. just wrong. It came across as an uneasy way for Amato to "profit" from his crimes overall. I didn't like that. I mean, sure feed his ego to get the story, understandable. But that does NOT mean you need to use so much video of him in the doc itself. Audio recording would have been better. Don't provide him any unintentional ancillary "fame" so to speak.

Basically, I felt as though there were 2 episodes to feed Amato's ego (which he reveled in). Then one episode to detail Amato's crimes. I'm not really certain it needed the first and third episodes. If episode 2 was edited better and perhaps made it a bit longer - a 75/90 minute special rather than a 3 episode series would have made so much more sense.

It was interesting, but not a "must see" by any means.

This REALLY came across as "The Grant Amato Show." There's no "revelation", no "moment of clarity", no "uncovered story".. nothing really at all. I mean he was convicted.

I, for one, have the exact same impression of Amato after watching this as I did before watching it - spoiled rich kid with mental issues that reacted horribly when he wasn't getting what he wanted.

I found this to be a waste of time overall.

Parish (2024– )

Drab melodrama....

[3/10 · 1 April 2024]

It's drab. Unexciting, and in fact, boring. There's nearly no tension built .. no excitement.. no intrigue. (in spite of what the soundtrack wants viewers to believe.)

The characters are fairly ridiculous and largely uninteresting. Especially "Grey" - the lead character.

Giancarlo Esposito was fantastic on Breaking Bad.. where he said very little. Here.. where he's being a "dad" and portraying a struggle with emotion and family.. it just doesn't fit the storyline they are clearly trying to tell.

This "ex-criminal" rolls over for the bad guys easier than a bowling ball. He spends a ridiculous amount of time buried in flashbacks... And not flashbacks that are character development or explain his supposed criminal history but rather pointless flashbacks about being sad ... he has 10 minute arguments with his old "crime buddy" about "jobs" done more than 20 years ago as if they happened yesterday. But ZERO history of his "criminal" life has been shown or even explained.

It's simply written poorly and more like a soap opera than a crime drama.

The initial "heist" was boring.... unexciting.. and the driving afterwards, which is supposed to be Esposito's charter's specialty..was.. absolutely nothing special. An Uber driver would have worked. And then the "bad guy" hires this 65 year old to drive him and his child when he doesn't even know the guy?? Instant trust in the criminal world? That's an odd take. And "Grey" does NOTHING to dissuade the guy or get out of the situation?? He just does what he's told without a word. He's a pushover.. a patsy... sheep.

I typically love Paula Malcomson's performances as well.. but just don't buy the relationship on screen - the relationship is portrayed as if it is new and she doesn't know her husband at all. Does or doesn't she know this unknown criminal history her husband is supposed to have? One scene you think yes.. the next you think no. In addition, It has a very Gus Fring and Walter White's wife (can't remember her name) air ... it's too close to Breaking Bad in appearance and fails to achieve what they are trying to achieve - they should have avoided blondes for the wife, or asked Malcolmson to die her hair for the role.. that alone was a misstep.

Honestly.. after 2 episodes.. there hasn't been a very good start to the series. I'll give it one more, but I am by no means vested in the show. I am merely curious if I can correctly predict the outcome of the episode 2 cliffhanger.

Molli and Max in the Future (2023)

It's a dialog film with chaotic, unimportant, visuals

[4/10 · 31 March 2024]

This is a conversational film. The conversation is fully of witty banter and good moments.

Because it's a film, and not a pod cast, visuals are thrown in. Visuals that are often chaotic in nature and only serve to confuse matters. None of the visuals are necessary. You honestly never need to see anything.. close your eyes and listen, that's all one need do. Of course no one would ever know about this if it were merely a podcast.

I did enjoy the banter and conversation.. However, I was often annoyed by the visuals. The two do not meld well. The writing for the conversation is fairly intricate and well thought out.. the visuals often appear cheap and reminiscent of 1999 CGI effects.

Just listen.. don't watch....

Crime Cam 24/7 (2023– )

Nothing new.

[1/10 · 30 March 2024]

This is just a "clip show" that is using clips that have been seen repeatedly on other clip shows over the past 5-10 years.

It's almost as if they farm other clip shows to get content for this show.. I've never seen a single unique clip on the series.. it's all merely repeated clips from elsewhere.

There is literally nothing new in this series other than the rather dated "computer AI" overlays.. making the show appear to be based in 1999.

I need more characters to reach the required minimum.. so... repetition, replay, rerun, echo, recapitulation, reiteration, reproduction, recycle, reuse, reshowing, derivative, imitative, musty, predictable.

Palm Royale (2024– )

There are worse ways to pass the time...

[5/10 · 22 March 2024]

.. there are also better ways....

This is okay. Interesting in a "train wreck" sort of way.

It can be hard to empathize with a character who so, so desperately wants to be seen as part of "society" when there's never been a thing for me, or anyone around me. Really hard to understand the motivations. Has a very "Gilded Age" show mentality, but in the 1960s rather than the late 1800s or early 1900s. Rich women all side-eyeing the "new money" newcomer who so desperately wants to fit in with the "old money".

Has a humorous moment now and then, but it's not a comedy in any way, to me. It's far more of a light-drama.

There's a lot of focus in the first three episode about what Maxine is doing to be a part of the group.. and in the background, you see hints of the troubles that's causing elsewhere in her life.. but there's been no really story about the fallout from her endeavors. This makes it all come across as just shallow and vacant.

I think Wiig is going a bit over the top with the character, but that may be the writing and intentional. Never been a huge fan of Janey.. Duffy is doing a horrendous job. Dern is.. well the same as she ever is any more.

It's mediocre... definitely not a "must see" or anywhere close to that... but you won't be thinking of divorce if a spouse really wants to watch it.

The Girls on the Bus (2024– )

Not for me...

[3/10 · 22 March 2024]

Seems I'm not the demographic for this....

I'm not a politically-driven individual. Not big on the "us v them" mentality. This show is full of pointless, uninteresting, storylines related to fictitious political candidates - candidates that are so far from being based in reality they are laughable. And THAT is saying quite a bit with today's pool of political figures.

I've seen the first three episodes and, quite honestly, I've found NOTHING compelling or even that interesting.. other than just how far they'll go to "man-bash" or make it seem as if all men are a problem. Certainly EVERY man can't be a misogynistic a-hole... I mean EVERY man??? Come on. Some portrayals of "bad men" are less obvious and fall more into the "mansplaining" type... but still.. every man???

It really lost me when a news editor claims their reporting has been "too UNBIASED" and they need "more opinion-based reporting". Really? You mean unbiased reporting exists in 2024? Because I sure can't find any - especially where political matters are concerned.

After 3 episodes I honestly couldn't tell anyone what the actual "story" or overall plot is here. It's just female reporters dealing with their job and all the "problematic" men.

This is so far from reality and so women-centric that it looses any creditability in my eyes. Female leads, or a primarily female cast is great.. generally love Gugino's work and Benoist has had some shining moments in some past work... the problem is in the writing. Writing seems to focus on "down the patriarchy".. not on what the women are actually supposed to be doing.. you know.. their jobs... as in WHY they are "on the bus".

To me, it's like a show about river rafting.. and rather than focusing on the river and the thrill of rafting.... every episode focuses on each and every boulder in the river.. and there's no such thing as a favorable boulder.

.. just not for me I guess.

Justice, USA (2024– )

Disappointing....

[3/10 · 17 March 2024]

This is NOT a "360-degree view of the criminal justice system."

This is a look at very specific criminal cases - primarily the accused and their families and how they EMOTIONALLY deal with the justice system.

It's not about the justice system at all really. Imagine Yellowstone, being described as a "a 360° view of ranching" ... or Game of Thrones being tagged as a "360° view of dragons" .... sure you see ranching or dragons every once in a while, but that's not really what the show is about.

Seems they chose cases to follow where the accused (or producers) are trying to elicit sympathy more than anything.. thus making the series more about emotion than the justice system.

They should have at least chosen a case where the accused was inarguably guilty and perhaps not remorseful or even defiant.

Overall, this appears to focus a great deal on the juvenile justice system, although not exclusively. And it's REALLY pulling for some sort of compassionate response for the accused - in spite of them allegedly playing a part in killing others. Perhaps producers were hoping juveniles elicit more compassion than adults. While that may be deserving at times, the overall impression from the 4 episodes I watched is that.. they are all about family drama and emotional coping with an incarcerated family member or the emotional impact of being incarcerated, not the justice system at all. And victims.. victims are entirely ignored. I did not bother myself with the final 2 episodes, imagining them being no better.

There's VERY little detailing of crimes (save for a couple news-worthy juvenile incidents - which they had news footage for.. so why not use that??) There's is no detailing of police or arrest procedures, no detailing of court procedures, no detailing of bail or release procedures, no detailing of probation or parole procedures... At most there are some minor conversations with legal teams or probation officers, or statements from judges about the accused or the crimes, that's it.

They do follow 1 judge, for about 30 seconds every 20-30 minutes.. those segments seem like merely "filler" so they could loosely justify the use of the "360°" tag line.

This is an EMOTIONAL DOCUDRAMA.. about families and the accused and how they "feel" about dealing with the justice system, not the actual justice system itself.

Manhunt (2024)

meh...

[5/10 · 17 March 2024]

Clearly a work of fiction using known facts as a basis to flesh out everything else. And flesh out they have. Much is conjured and imagined, which I guess one would have to do if a story is to be created.

The concept of telling the story is interesting.. could be more of a western but is working out to be a bit more of a political drama, if nothing else.

Patton Oswald was a poor choice.. was Frodo Baggins busy?

I find the biggest issue is that characters all tend to meld and blend.. no one really stands out. .... for the most part I lose track of who is who because everyone is essentially wearing the same thing... Honestly two episodes and I can't tell you anyone's name beyond Booth, Johnson, Lincoln, and both Marys.

Seems to be a story of the Secretary of War more than anything. Couldn't tell you his name...

Hamish Linklater, playing Lincoln, does look the part very much and is actually the same height as Lincoln, 6'4". But that never seems very noticeable. Perhaps because they often have Lincoln sitting or the only one standing. Or perhaps humans have merely gotten taller, in general, over the last 100 years. Lincoln's voice sounds pretty horrible.. cartoonish.. unimpressive.. feeble... Is there audio somewhere that has Lincoln sounding like a 90 year old feeble woman??

Sets are good. Low lighting is understood as to be accurate to the time period.. ..

REALLY odd that witnesses they question immediately following the assassination show up days later to provide more information when that could have been provided initially. Clearly a method to delay the story and pad out episodes.

I will add that this is a story rife for "wokeness" and the standard rewriting of mindsets and attitudes related to historical figured or events.. I mean, of all people, wasn't there a drive to "cancel" Lincoln, The Great Emancipator, at some point???.. I did not see much of that in the first two episodes. Racists are portrayed as racists... I give the creators credit for NOT pulling punches and NOT trying to soften the unkind, hard, edges related to attitudes of the times. That alone tends to lend the show a more realistic aspect, even though it's clearly fiction.

More of a political melodrama in a mystery/western costume.....

Poor Things (2023)

Meh.. okay.. but felt way too long..

[6/10 · 12 March 2024]

I don't quite get all the hype surrounding this film.

It's basically 3 acts....

Act one is rather humorous. I found it highly enjoyable and fun. Only wish the entire film carried this same lighthearted tone.. but.. alas...

Act two is borderline soft core pornography.... It did have a rare humorous moment.. but nothing even close to act one. It was largely drama in a soft-core shell.

Act three is pretty much drama. There are couple call backs to the humorous tones of act one, but it's largely just drama. Not heavy dreary drama, more of a light drama.

Overall I felt act two just went on and on and on and on an on and on and on and on... the point was made but it was dragged out far too much. It was act two which easily adds an additional 30 minutes to the film which weren't really necessary. It actually caused me to lose interest overall... it felt like it was just droning on long after any point had been made This made sitting through to the end of the film just uncomfortable. My attention was diverted to just how poorly I felt after sitting for 2 hrs.. how my backside needed a break.. how the seat was uncomfortable.. I was no longer focused solely on the film itself and the passing minutes began to scream at me.... .started squirming.. tired of watching.. needed a break.. it was just too long.

All that being posted it was enjoyable other than the length..

If I could somehow trim act two down to just 10-15 minutes, the film would be quite a bit more enjoyable in spite of clipping out most, if not all, of the nudity. It almost seemed like... when you've got a well known actress willing to do full frontal nudity.. you beat that dead horse as much as possible.

Meh.. I couldn't sit through it again unless I'm able to fast forward parts. It's just too long.

:: Foul language, sex, nudity, drug use, suicide, gore, violence, and adult topics. Not a film for the kiddies.

--------------------------

What i DO GIVE CREDIT to this film for .... is being a film MADE FOR ADULTS. It's not watered down and homogenized to hit some PG-13 rating so pre-teens can see it. So many films are just ruined by placating the MPAA and wanting a PG-13 rating. Aren't most things seen via streaming now? No point in PG-13 if no one is spending a weeks earnings in order to go to any theater.

Puppet Killer (2019)

the 40 year old high school student....

[4/10 · 12 March 2024]

Well, it's a stupid little slasher flick. Pretty much on par with what one would expect. Not terrible.. but nothing you should rush to see either. It not funny in the laughter type of way.. it's MAY be funny in the "heh" type of way.. MAY cause a grin once in a while but that's it.

The cast are all supposed to be high school students...

But are all CLEARLY over 35, if not much closer to 50.. and one guy couldn't even be bothered to shave his full beard to portray a high school student. I mean, for f's sake.. at least make the guy shave if he wants the part.

Aleks Paunovic (the lead "student") is 54 years old as of this writing..... FIFTY FOUR years old.. but the audience is supposed to believe he's a high school student??? Did they pass out free hallucinogens at the screenings???

Now, okay.. so they cast who they thought was right for a part.. but then WHY have the opening settings relate to high school? There was no need for that. They could have been work colleagues.. that would have only required changing the setting for 3-4 scenes near the beginning and perhaps rewriting a few lines - nothing too difficult. And doing so would have made casting 40 year old actors make MUCH more sense -- because CLEARLY none of the cast is anywhere close to high school age.

Because of this poor casting.. after the opening sequence.. when they show the high school portion.. it just seems so ludicrous, so utterly ridiculous that it immediately sets the film in an "oh this is just f'n dumb" position it must crawl out of... it tried.. got close.. but meh.. don't think it ever did.

If this was the "best of Hexcon".. all I can say is Hexcon must really be bad.

Girl with a Gun (2022)

Soundtrack was the most annoying thing...

[2/10 · 10 March 2024]

I found the soundtrack the most annoying aspect of this film - and that's saying much more than you may realize.

I can see everyone involved did their best. While it's all sub-par, the acting wasn't ludicrous, just bad. All the actors were clearly inexperienced.

Some weapon training would have helped the entire cast considerably - More than perhaps a couple hours of safety training. No one looked natural holding a weapon.. no none.

The plot is just drab.. wannabe revenge flick but just full of boring drama with bad accents. The "revenge" aspect doesn't kick in until far, far, far too late making 80% of the film just repetitive and boring.

Production was overall decent. Scenes were lit well and audio levels were generally good without wild variations. But directing was clearly also a novice attempt. Poor scene blocking much of the time - WAY too close or WAY too far drone shots.

The worst part of the film for me was the soundtrack. 10 minutes of banjo repeating.. 10 minutes of piano repeating.. 10 minutes of steel guitar repeating.. then back to the banjo repeating.... etc. And by "repeating" I mean each instrument is like a 2 minute audio clip that clearly cycles over and over. "Hey look.. here's a nice 6 note progression!" then they beat it to death on every instrument thinking it won't be noticed. Rathe rthan changing the music, they just change the instrument playing the music with slight timing variations.

Kudos to those involved, it's a noble attempt, but just not really up to snuff. I've seen much much much worse. But posting that, I'd never sit through this again for any reason. It's unremarkable, uninteresting, and entirely forgettable. It's no wonder it appears to be a free "straight to Tubi" film.

The Beekeeper (2024)

Standard Statham...

[6/10 · 10 March 2024]

Decently entertaining.

It's a very standard Stathom film.. near-superhuman fighting/killing knowledge - better and everyone else... on a revenge rampage.

The stupidest part of this film is the backstory really. If "beekeeper" is merely a code name for these elite "protectors", then why is he ACTUALLY a beekeeper? Seems like too much overall. If the code name was "Baker" would he be forced own a cake shop if he retired??? If the code name was "gardener" must he own a lawn service after retiring? And he just happened to have retired to a farm with a woman who has a daughter in the FBI... yeah.. that's common. And the daughter playing the FBI agent.. oh.... not a lot of talent there, at least in this film.

So, basically, you'll probably roll your eyes more than once at the storyline - I know I did, often. But in spite of the ridiculous backstory, it's a decent action flick.

Bail Jumpers (2024– )

Series is titled poorly...

[1/10 · 7 March 2024]

It should be titled .... "The car ride to jail" because that's exactly what it is... a car ride to jail. Listening to the conversations taking place in the car on the way to jail. This could, in effect, be a podcast. Why this is a television series is a mystery to me.. there's no excitement, no intrigue, no interest. It's nothing more than listening to a bunch of criminals talk as they are headed to jail.

Pay no attention to the FAKE 10 star reviews from users with only 1 review (posted after I posted this review) and which are most likely related to this show in some manner. This is a VERY boring and uninteresting show - the people in the show are irrelevant - the premise of the show is just atrocious in terms of entertainment. Most will go into this expecting something along the lines of "Dog the bounty hunter" but that's not even close.. this show is literally a podcast on TV - 100% conversation, that's all.

It's nothing more than listening to criminals talk as they are driven to jail.

The Black Mass (2023)

Ted Bundy and the Sorority

[2/10 · 6 March 2024]

Ted Bundy and the sorority house.... That's this film.

The first 50-55 minutes is rather boring. Filmed as if you are mouse sitting on Bundy's shoulder - listening to his conversations on the phone, watching as he stalks the women in the sorority house... really rather boring, and drab, just an odd voyeuristic approach. There's zero character development for any character in this film.

At around 55 minutes it gets very brutal and violent. And is conveyed as fairly realistic overall. Rather disturbing in general.

The last 10 minutes is pretty poorly acted police footage outside the house... then past newsreel footage of Bundy in court.

I couldn't really recommend this to anyone.

It wasn't enjoyable as a film... it might be somewhat interesting given the speculation of what happened in the sorority house if one has some sense of morbid curiosity. But as "entertainment" not so much. Has an air of a "snuff film" really. It's not horror or thriller.. it's just brutal violence based on real life... almost exploitive given there were real, undeserving, innocent, victims. It's not at all a condemnation of Bundy as a person or his horrific actions.