chris543213 Reviews

The Man from Earth (2007)

Novel, thought provoking and superbly acted

[10/10 · 23 June 2022]

Explores what it would mean if the most fundamental characteristic of life was to not apply to someone. The implication is explored during a seemingly everyday event, a last farewell to a relocating co-worker.

The revelation is unveiled by slowly peeling layer upon layer off an onion through the dialog between friends, in what starts out as an innocent "what-if" question.

Taking place in mostly one room, the setting is slightly reminiscent of some of Tarantino's earlier work, sans the action and gore.

To me it stirred emotions akin to the underrated gem Bicentennial Man with Robin Williams.

If you enjoy a thought provoking story and superb telling of it through dialog and acting performance, you will not be disappointed.

Resident Alien (2021– )

First season: 8/10. Second season: 1/10

[8/10 · 19 February 2022]

This show will cater to people who appreciate clever satire and dark humor.

For those where such comedy goes over the head, stay away as you won't get the jokes.

The first season was the most hilarious I've seen in decades. Clever jokes about society and things we take for granted, from the eyes of a neutral observer; an alien trying to understand and mimic us. It's a bit like reading Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy. Similar sort of introspection through an outsider's lens.

Sadly, something unfortunate happened during the transition to season 2. All elements described above are now gone, and the show has turned into a completely different one, a badly acted small-town drama with uninteresting characters, and absent any humor or plot. The star and main character from season one; the alien, has now become an extra. To add insult to injury, the writing for the 1-2 minutes the alien is onscreen is just as awful as that of the rest of the show.

Watch season 1, but stay FAR away from season 2.

Do be aware: The first season does have a low-point; two annoying kids a'la. Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone, child actors that never had a childhood. I deduct two stars for that miscast. If you can't stand Culkin-like kids, just fast-forward those scenes. The rest is good to fantastic.

Resident Alien: The Wire (2022) Season 2, Episode 2

Magic is gone

[3/10 · 4 February 2022]

The main.character has been pretty much relegated to an extra in this season.

It's now a drama show about anyone and everyone, about tedious everyday interactions, and not the clever look at humanity from an alien's perspective.

Tudyk does his best with what he has to work with, and it got exactly three small chuckles out of us during the 40 minute episode. He's a fantastic actor who with the good material made us LoL pretty much throughout season one,

Example of the magnitude loss in writing quality was a joke about not fitting a cow through a bunker entrance. The classic semantic overlap, where a discussion involves two perspectives, where someone asks a question from the first perspective and gets the answer from the other. I'm still puzzled as to how the writers failed so utterly at making that sort of joke work. It sure wasn't the delivery.

I'll let this season run its course, and in autumn might fast-forward to the "Harry" scenes in hope of at least some chuckles.

I prayed they wouldn't change up the formula from season one, but here we are. Another fizzle.

The Expanse (2015–2022)

Has past its expiration date

[7/10 · 25 January 2021]

The first three seasons were great. Fantastic production value, some great actors (Thomas Jane) as the main protagonist Miller, and an interesting faction setup with Earth, Mars and the Belt. To put a wrench into status quo there is a discovery of something called the protomolecule, which will make things spiral.

Unfortunately the crew around which much of the story will revolve is mostly a mis-cast, with some impressively bad actors and actresses (Holden & Nagata in particular). Luckily there is so much else going on in the show that one can just fast-forward past the Holden & Nagata scenes.

The arcs are initially progressing at a good pace throughout the episodes, and there is often something interesting in each episode that makes you want to see how the next unfold. Some of the dialogues between characters are backed by great acting. Particularly the interaction and performances when both Miller (lead) and Dawes (supporting) are on screen at the same time is a treat. Action and cinematic is top notch. The show initially feels like a cross of the earlier seasons of Battlestar Galactica and GoT.

Then something unfortunate happened in the production around season 3-4. The writers decide to kill off all actors with any sort of acting ability after season 4. Only two reasonable to good actresses are kept on for season 5 (Cara Gee and Aghdashloo). It's obvious at least someone in the directing department realized this mistake, but sadly only managed to get a single good new actor (Michael Irby) onto the cast for S5 to mitigate the talent short fall. The show still has great visuals, but something has gone terribly wrong in the writing and directing departments.

In Season 5 the show has ground to a halt, and been reduced to episodes full of character exposition of the most uninteresting kind; delivered by the show's weakest actors/actresses, embodying the least intersting characters, in irrelevant and uninteresting "plots". What started out as a fantastic plot, intrigue and scheme centric show has been reduced to the most boring and poorly acted family drama I've ever seen.

If you're binging this, then watch season 1-3. Possibly season 4, which is carried entirely on the shoulders of a new "pirate" character (David Strathairn) and an established one (Aghdashloo). Do not watch any further, as that will taint your entire perception of the show. Unfortunately, like GoT, I watched past the due-date of this show and have had the entire experienced ruined by season 5. Damage is done, but at least you have the opportunity to have your viewing experience end on a high note, by ending the story on your own terms, at the show's peak.

The Witcher (2019– )

Makes very little sense

[2/10 · 28 April 2020]

I've not read the books, but played the Witcher 3 game. In that game I learned some of the context, setting and characters this show tries to depict. Even with that leg up, the show still kept losing me. Things are happening without any explanation to why. I recognized some names, but only because I had been exposed to the material earlier. I can't fathom how people who know nothing about this universe and setting can follow anything that is going on.

As for the acting, it's bland. The witcher actor delivers in my opinion a fairly faithful portrayal of the game-version of Geralt, but that's unfortunately the only one in the entire cast. What I particularly don't understand, and hasn't been explained at all in the two initial episodes I watched, is why there are so many non-slavic people in medieval eastern europe (poland area). I hope that will be explained, for story continuity reason. Further more perplexing is why some of the main characters are portrayed as non-slavic people. It makes no sense, since these people are related to other people who the show writers must then also change completely, such as A. Henrietta. If they change her, then they must change and explain her entire lineage...down the rabbit hole it goes. But nothing has been explained at all so far, so perhaps story telling isn't what this show aims to offer. If not a story, then what is this? A music video without music?

I see not a single element in this show resembling the witcher universe from the game I so enjoyed. I had hoped to be immersed into a dark, at times witty, and for me culturally exotic, slavic fantasy world with interesting characters and some kind of story arc. The unrelatable setting, poor casting, overall bad direction/acting, and lack of information establishing the fundamental rules governing this new universe, makes this show fail at delivering a believable or even enjoyable experience. Two episodes were enough. I'm out.

The Mandalorian: Chapter 4: Sanctuary (2019) Season 1, Episode 4

Badly written, directed and acted

[3/10 · 1 December 2019]

Pointless episode. No plot progression. Atrocious acting by most cast, and cheesy lines as written by a grade school student, for a class mates audience. It would have been better for the show as a whole to not have aired this episode.

The up-until-now somber and mysterious Mandalorian was forced to act very much out of character as a result, breaking the character that has been built up through the previous three episodes.

Out of nowhere, a new Wonder woman is introduced, a character who fights laser weapon equipped enemies with her fists. To top it off, she whops the floor with the Mandalorian. A one woman army.

My advice would be to put this new superwoman in a separate show, such as a reboot of Xena warrior princess or something else CW rolls out. In the Star Wars universe, and in this otherwise grounded and gritty show in particular, this sort of character feels completely alien, and breaks the world building that used to be the hallmark for the franchise.

In the episode, only Pascal, Jones and the mute baby Yoda puppet put on a performance. Unfortunately, the two with lines, have to contend with the awful writing and direction, which no amount of acting prowess can overcome.

Really a disappointing and time wasting episode. Will give the series one more episode before writing it off.

Mr. Robot (2015–2019)

Novel

[8/10 · 28 May 2015]

Going in with low expectation, not knowing anything about this show, the pilot turned out to offer a pleasant surprise. In short, the show is a bit unconventional, like a mix between an audio book and a TV show, but one rather well researched and executed.

The acting is fairly good, the narrative style felt novel and fresh, and there's ample room for various subplots and story lines. The setting also felt real, as others have pointed out. Some interesting creative decisions were made, such as blatantly spelling out the antagonist, a company, by giving it an unmistakable name. It also makes subtle jokes and pokes fun of things probably only people in the IT industry would recognize.

Whereas most shows and movies seem to throw all connection to reality straight out the window when it comes to IT related stuff, this show does not. In fact, it seems extraordinarily well researched for an entertainment piece. Being in that industry myself and having had a bit of "fun" as a youth, I'd have to say that overall the portrayal of IT security and hacking in this show is leaps and bounds more accurate than anything that has come before it, even if the attentive viewer would be able to spot some minute factual errors.

Perchance even entertainment execs have realized they can no longer get away with silly and unbelievable things like "magic picture enhance", nerdy super hackers who as through divine insight guess their targets passwords in 1-2 attempts, or with peddling notions of tools that have weeks of artist design effort spent on them, for buttons that once clicked, reveal some information that would logically be impossible to get hold of through the channel used.

It seems as though we finally have a show that doesn't treat its audience as idiots, and where the writers actually spent some time doing their homework. I'm just concerned that the show may be targeting too small an audience, an audience consisting of people who do not switch their brains off when they turn on the tele, and as such it may not be awarded a series contract.

So far, highly recommended to tune into if you're interested in seeing something fresh and aren't allergic to narration (getting inside the mind of a somewhat odd protagonist), as there's quite lot of the latter.

The Russian Specialist (2005)

A B-flick

[2/10 · 14 February 2006]

I'm at a total loss when I read the other reviews about this movie. I'm seriously wondering if we all watched the same movie.

Now, what in particular was the points which dragged the movie down?

1) The tempo was god-awful slow.

2) The plot was as original as the 174:th western flick in late 1979.

3) The acting was horrible with the exception of Ben Cross which was the only real actor in this debacle.

4) Dolph had as many (and well thought out) lines in this flick as he did as Drago in Rocky IV.

5) The budget was almost non-existent which means that this film did not even have the normal cushion to fall back on like it's fellow titles in the trash bin, a $50 million effects and props budget.

In short, the director of this movie seem to have aspired to reach the grandeur of an Uwe Boll production. Really says it all, doesn't it?

Sahara (2005)

Uninspiring.

[3/10 · 12 July 2005]

Big budget, weak acting and mediocre plot. Worst of all were Penelope Cruz with a total lack of energy on the screen. More stiff acting one has to search hard for.

Pretty much each turn of events could be guessed about 5 minutes in advance, so you won't get any surprises here either.

The precurser (10 minutes in the beginning, not really part of the plot) was kind of nifty though, played out in the 19th century with a steamboat looking like a stealth airplane bouncing canon balls off it's hull instead of radar waves. When the real plot kicked in though, it all went downhill.

What does this flick has to offer? Who knows? What was it the writers wanted to tell? Who knows?

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

a tragedy

[2/10 · 1 July 2005]

The summary says it all really.

I just saw this film with my wife, partly to get her eyes open for Douglas Adams' work (She's never read any of Adams' books, odd as that might seem). In hind sight, this strategy now appears to have been a much flawed one. We essentially left the theatre after one hour to get a meal instead (which proved a wise choice after having just had 60 minutes of our lives stolen).

It's very very hard for me to say say bad things about anything related to Adams' works, but this film was a disgrace, completely incoherent and lacking any ounce of humour (for which the books are famous). It's essentially a scene flipping contest with one dull scene followed by the next. Not having seen the last 30 minutes I can't comment on them but unless some miracle happened, like the director gotten sacked and having a new qualified one doing the latter third, I'd say the film is a complete 90 minutes waste of anyone's time, Adams' fans as well anyone else.

The sad point is that this filmisation had everything going for it. Great source material, fair to good cast, lots of money, good special effects etc. This can only lead to the conclusion that the blame for managing to, against all odds, deliver a result of this calibre lies squarely with the director.

I truly hope the next attempt will receive a captain (director) more suitable to do the material justice, so that Douglas Adams' legacy won't end up entirely lost to the coming generations (and what is left of the remaining one having previously missed out on the gems).

Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004)

No plot, no acting, no suspense, but a lot of eye candy

[3/10 · 27 December 2004]

The title says it all really.

The acting was amongst the worst I've ever seen, and I've seen quite a few crappy movies in my time.

Not even a shimmer of acting by any of the actors. I simply have to assume the audition went something like this. For the male actors: "Can you walk? Can you wear clothes? What? Never acted before? Doesn't matter, you're hired". For the women: "Can you walk? Do you mind wearing scant clothes? Never acted before? No problem, we'll give you some drivel to spit out since acting isn't a pre-req for this 'kind' of movie".

I did like the eye candy, I admit, both the props and the sexy women. However, when they have less than zero (negative) acting capacity, one just wants to demand the money back, or for the theater / producer to pay me for wasting two hours on cinematic suffering.

The Plot then.. Well, it was thin as ice. It took me until the middle of the movie before I though I might possibly have perceived what the story was about: Getting out of a doomed city. Short version of the film: Blam Blam Blam, one liners ala: "Me get wood", "Bit me" and for some odd reason a lost Harry Potter side kick "Oye, a thought upon me stuck, where be thee Elves"!?

Don't get me started on the awful camera and editing of the fight scenes. The zeleot who edited this clip EDITED AWAY with all the fights. The only thing one sees is someone having a huge problem holding a camera still!! This really bugs me, since if they at least had had an average camera guy, the fight scenes might have turned this movie from god awful to below average (the props and special effects were nice, so at least I could've gotten an OK fighting movie out of it).

As it unfortunately stands, I'd have to rate it a 3/10.

Jeremiah (2002–2004)

Above average acting, dull plots.

[12 October 2004]

Never fancied Luke perry much and didn't think he could act before, but in this show he performs as an above average actor. M.J. Warner though, is a rather fine actor whom I'm guessing will be appearing on the big screen in short order. A real surprise from the Theo role he had in the Huxtable show. In all fairness he was just a kid in the previous show and the show wasn't exactly named Theo, thus not allowing too much acting freedom.

As for the rest of the cast, they're pretty good as well, with a few exceptions.

The real downer I'm sad to say are the thin plots, which diminishes the show's standing from what could have been a great show to just barely an above average show. I just have to second another reviewer's comment: SACK THE SCREEN WRITERS! Exchanging that part of the crew to some more competent writers could really give this show the energy injection it so badly needs.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

Movie 1-3 a downhill slope (Starting great but ending up face down in a puddle of mud)

[3/10 · 5 November 2003]

The third movie in the trilogy, the finale.

The movie had very long scenes, which stretched on and on where they should have been cut to about half their length (someone was apparently sleeping at the editing table). It wasn't just that the scenes were long, they also didn't help propel the plot forward. Some scenes should also have been cut entirely, like the train station scene, or 90% of the zion scenes, as neither did anything for the plot.

When the audience starts laughing at scenes where the director intends tension, relief or the audience to be impressed, then something is very wrong with the movie.

What bugged me the most was that there was NOTHING new in this movie at all. No new central characters, no revelations or explanations of any kind to any thing or concept revealed in the previous movies. In short, this movie was a huge let down, barely capable of wearing the coat of a decent fast paced action movie.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

What is the attraction?

[3/10 · 10 June 2002]

After viewing a movie which seemed like 10 hours of thinking "Get on with it", I only need four statements to sum this movie up.

1. Incredibly over-hyped.

2. Acting, isn't it a requirement anymore?

3. Beautiful scenery.

4. Did I hint at booring?

Overall I can appreciate good children's movies, like The Never Ending Story, Lord of the Rings and The Phantom Menace, so I think I'm not biased when it comes to films like this one. I think in a movie, very important is the acting and thus that particular area of this motion picture needs some further mentioning. Aside from Alan Rickman (who is always excellent as a villain) and the rather good acting from the young couple Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, all the rest of the cast was utter hogwash (hey, wasn't that the name of the main setting, the school?). Worst of all the cast (I wouldn't want to draw shame upon the acting community by calling this bunch actors) was the shrunken version of John Lennon, a.k.a. Daniel Radcliffe. This kid wouldn't know acting even if it snuck up and bit him in the rear.

Over all, a huge disappointment and I'd give it a 3 out of 10 (one point for each of the previously, by name, mentioned actors)

Trinity and Beyond: The Atomic Bomb Movie (1995 Video)

Boom, again and again for 1,5 hrs.

[2/10 · 18 November 2001]

This movie did say absolutely nothing new. The general info. the movie tried to convey has been publicly know for decades. Perhaps a comment here and there from some specific player was new, but nothing that's important was revealed here.

For those who have not yet seen the movie, I can say without spoiling anything that the movie is like 1,5 hours of viewing the same pictures over and over and over again. You have all seen them before, the shock-waves destroying buildings, trees, cars etc. Or should I rephrase and say that it is not possible for anyone to spoil this movie, since there is no plot and everything in here has been public knowledge for the last few decades?

Don't waste your time on this history recap. Just lean back, close your eyes and think back and picture the news and history lessons for the last 10 years. A 30 second recap and you have just saved yourself 90 minutes to do something else.