EShy Reviews

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024)

No charm, no logic, just an unnecessary mess.

[2/10 · 21 March 2024]

It's weird when you have to talk about a different movie in a review, but I have to start with Ghostbusters Afterlife.

After the 2016 movie, many of those who grew up with the first two were weary about another sequel.

Jason Reitman said he'll never do a Ghostbusters movie, it's the family heirloom he didn't want to touch and ruin, but after Ramis passed away he came up with a great story.

That movie worked because of that. The plot revolved around a member of the original crew who passed away while investigating something and his lack of relationship with his family. It was the glue that held everything together. Why are these kids fighting ghosts? Because their grandfather left all this stuff behind.

It wasn't perfect, it wasn't really a comedy like the original, the marshmallow stuff made no sense and felt like a merchandising play, but overall the movie still worked.

This new movie doesn't. I was watching it at a preview and they just went from one scene to the next, like they were following a template.

That glue wasn't there.

The idea of Melody, a ghost girl, felt like "we need the ghost that works with them like we had in Afterlife".

The idea of Phoebe "killing herself" for two minutes also didn't make sense, and the girl ghost supposedly manipulating her to make it happen? How? Nothing leading up to that hinted that she knows it's possible and is trying to get Phoebe to do it.

It's all too forced. It would be fine if the plot was just an excuse for banter with Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd and the rest. It's ok when you have the goofy Rick Moranis character doing funny things (I guess Paul Rudd was in that role in Afterlife. Not as funny though) but it doesn't work when a movie takes itself too seriously, without the humor or charm of the previous movies.

The 2016 movie, which I remember nothing from, might not be the worst Ghostbusters movie now. No, scratch that, it probably still is, but this one isn't far behind (or ahead?) of it.

It was disappointing but knowing Sony, and seeing how they treated their "Spider-Man Universe", we can expect a lot more bad Ghostbusters movies to follow. They didn't set up this Ghost Corps brand to just let it go away.

The Equalizer 3 (2023)

Some good action but the story misses.

[6/10 · 1 September 2023]

This could've been a great closer for the trilogy but it felt a little rushed.

They tried to do it.

Let the hero of the story find peace.

Give him one final battle.

Let him find a successor.

It was just badly executed and all three of those things felt unjustified.

McCall, or Roberto now, arrives in this town hurt. We spent a lot of time watching him recover while the town slowly embraces him.

In those scenes he still feels like an outsider, even when he's told they see him as one of them now, it's doesn't feel earned.

We didn't see him to do too much other than walk around and get some tea, because while in Italy you have to be like Italians and dring coffee, once, and then go back to tea.

It's hard to believe that he finds peace in this little town just because of that. How is that different than the quiet life he was living when he first met him in the first movie? Or the life he was living in a small apartment building working as a ride share driver in the second movie?

While Roberto is recovering in that small town, we're introduced to Dakota Fanning's character. Roberto gives her a tip about the location of the opening scene from the movie where he killed a bunch of people and found something. At some point, maybe after she's at that scene, she asks "why me?"

I think anyone who watched the first two movies would immediately know the answer to that question, even if the filmmakers want to pretend it's not obvious.

They even have a flashback showing Melissa Leo's character, just in case we forgot she existed.

Her involvement is strange. She investigates things, she wonders who Roberto is, why he's there, but she isn't the one who discovers what's going on.

That's more bad writing. In the end, when Robert tells her she missed all the action, she says cracking it was the fun part, but she didn't crack it. He gave her the solution.

I guess her entire reason for existing in this movie is for McCall to pass down the role of Equalizer to her by sending her with the money to the people he was getting it for.

It doesn't make much sense. She's at the start of her journey in the CIA. It was her first time in the field. It took McCall decades to figure it out (which only happens in the first movie, after he was "retired" for a while from government work).

Maybe he just wanted to show her why he was doing the things he was doing so one day she can also choose that path.

Back to the small town in Italy. While Roberto is walking around doing is rehab on the various stairs, he notices the money collection operation going on. He stays out of it but it's obvious to us, since we watched the first two movies, that eventually he'll step in.

This is what made the first movie great. The unassuming man that gets underestimated by a group of villains and then quickly destroys them.

We got a little bit of that with the restaurant scene. Since this was the small heavy, not the main villain, I understand dispatching him so quickly.

We never saw the actual reaction from the town to the fact that this new to town man just killed four people.

When the big heavy comes to town demanding the killer's head, they protect Roberto, but why? Yes, things weren't great but they didn't know this mobster was planning to take over their town. All they saw was one store getting torched and a police office getting beat up for investigating it.

Just another thing that felt unjustified in this movie.

Immediately after the main villain visits that town, Roberto goes over to his place and takes everyone out.

This was another miss.

In the first movie, everything built up to that and we got a long fight in the hardware store with the big heavy, who could never figure out who Robert really was and why he was doing it.

In the second movie, it got a little bit over the top but we got the long last fight.

In both cases, the main villain got to see his entire crew destroyed and know his end was coming.

In this one? The main villain wakes up with his entire crew already dead and he's already overdosing on his own drug.

The realization that he messed with the wrong guy only happens when it's already over.

The structure is similar to the first movie. Take the small villain out first, which brings in the bigger villain.

It would've worked better if he was involved somehow in the fight and felt the circle closing in on him.

So he killed all of them. Visited Dakota's character in the hospital (oh yea, if you thought she might be involved in the movie? She gets injured by a car bomb that was meant for her), where she tells him she likes cracking it more than finishing it. I guess he set her up to get all the credit and move up in the ranks. Maybe that's what it was about.

Then Roberto goes back to that small town where he can be happy, and they can be happy he's there, the guy who killed the entire gang that threatened them. I guess he protected them, but still, he's an assassin, a killer, they know, and they're just happy to have him there.

I wasn't expecting this movie to be as good as the first. That would've been hard. I think Denzel was right for never doing sequels before but the result is still enjoyable enough. It just could've been so much better.

Oppenheimer (I) (2023)

This just might be as interesting as this topic can get

[6/10 · 25 July 2023]

I'm a big Nolan fan. Maybe this one just wasn't for me.

This movie was promoted as the story of the invention of the bomb. We were told we should see it on the biggest screen. Go out of your way for an IMAX 70mm projection if you can, or at least get a regular 70mm or Laser IMAX.

It turns out, that while Nolan's visuals still look good in this movie, there's nothing breathtaking that warrants those formats. It's like a 1 Michelin star, if your local theater has those formats, might as well go for it, but that's probably true for any movie.

It also turns out that this is mostly the story of political vendettas and the marketing of bombs exploding had little to do with the movie, the whole trailer is really just one scene. I guess there wasn't a more interesting way to approach the Los Alamos part of the story. What could he do, focus on the scientific challenges? Not really the best source for a story.

We get the review of Oppenheimer for a security clearance, which leads to his retelling of his history in flashbacks, which is why the story of creating the bomb is told as well as his personal relationships (I guess because she was a communist party member, the character played by Pugh is naked all the time, not sure why that was necessary) while at the same time we get a much shorter story of the confirmation hearings of Strauss, with a few flashbacks to a couple of meetings he was involved in with Oppenheimer .

It's a political drama, with not much drama. There isn't enough emotional connection to the characters to care about it. Will Oppenheimer lose his security clearance? Will Strauss get served by karma at his cabinet confirmation hearing? Who cares? If you're not invested in any of the characters, why would you care about what happens to them in the end?

Maybe this is the best one can do with the source material. Maybe the mistake was wanting to tell that particular story. Maybe better writing and staying away from the gimmick of two timelines of flashbacks intersecting could've told the story better. Maybe it's time for Nolan to let go of those gimmicks in his movies and trust his subject matter.

Unlike previous Nolan movies, I won't be thinking about this movie much or wanting to watch it again to understand it better. There's just nothing else in there.

For me, this isn't one of his top movies. Technically it's great, the acting is also great, the writing and editing just isn't there.

Also, IMAX is great, but not every movie benefits from it. This one really didn't. Maybe if Nolan wasn't so focused on the technical side he'd be able to get me emotionally invested in this story.

Edit:

I had to come back and add a comparable movie that does a much better job and shows you can tell this story with real tension.

The Imitation Game.

A movie about a genius trying to solve a problem during the same war. That topic is just as science heavy and the movie goes into his personal struggles, relationships and the personal consequences he suffered because of the politics of the time.

The tension is focused on the task of breaking the German code. Not on what will happen to the lead characters years later. It's a lot easier to be invested in that (even though we know who won that war) vs. The results of some political hearing.

The Woman King (2022)

Great movie

[10/10 · 16 September 2022]

Saw this movie today expecting to see some bad ass fighting, based on the trailers, but what I got was much more than that.

Yes, those fight scenes are there, and very well choreographed. I always enjoy bad ass women in movies, at least based on my movie collection that's filled with them.

The movie doesn't shy away from some of the realities of the time. It doesn't make the "bad guys" into caricatures or try to pretend only the rival tribes are doing bad things while the tribe we're following in the movie is all good and innocent.

It's interesting to see a story about the slave trade told from a different angle. Not a lot of movies go into the African side of things.

Lots of powerful performances, great writing, great direction. Definitely worth a trip to the theaters, especially if you can watch it in Dolby Cinema.

The Gray Man (2022)

Unoriginal and poorly executed

[3/10 · 26 July 2022]

Let me start with this. Making movies is hard. Making good movies is even harder. No one tries to make a bad one (well, almost no one, I'm sure there are some Bialystocks out there).

This one unfortunately didn't end as a good one, that's a shame considering the budget and talent involved.

In short, this movie's writing is unoriginal, the action is poorly executed, and the talented cast is wasted.

Everything about this movie screams direct to video B movie, and those cheap action movies are great for what they are, but when you have an A list cast, 200 million budget with writing for one of those cheap movies, it just feels off.

As is often the case with badly written movies, the mcguffin makes no sense. It's evidence that implicates the bad people in the CIA in doing bad things, but to get their hands on it they're doing much worse things that make that evidence irrelevant

The worse part was the tram chase scene. That whole sequence made no sense. It made no sense for them to go on a rampage killing cops and the CGI/stunts looked too fake. It was a great summary of everything wrong with this movie.

I like the idea of having the kidnapped girl with a trackable device on her, when that was revealed with a flashback, I though great, they'll let the bad guys "win" and get away and #6 will come at them out of nowhere.

That kinda happened at the end, but mostly off screen. Such a wasted opportuinty of the only knida original idea in this movie.

Ah well, at least Netflix learned their lessons with these big budget bombs and are planning to focus more on making actually good movies. We'll see if they're capable of that.

Obi-Wan Kenobi: Part VI (2022) Season 1, Episode 6

I don't know what some of the other reviewers are thinking

[2/10 · 22 June 2022]

There was nothing in this episode, and really in all six episodes, other than some badly done fan service.

Great. A fight scene between Obi-Wan and Darth Vader. Oh look, there's his face, looking a little like he did in the original trilogy.

That was about it. Nothing else made sense. It doesn't fit with the story from the original trilogy. It doesn't even make sense on it's own. If you just look at the arcs of each character and the decisions they make, it's all just illogical. If it wasn't for the fan service, there would be no reason to watch it.

And yes, the fight scenes were great. That's really low handing fruit.

Disney has this idea of doing very short seasons, with very short episodes. Just give them Vader and Obi Wan, a young Leia and Luke, and that's it. No need to actually write a story that makes sense. No need to have any character development.

It doesn't work in the 2020s TV landscape with so many great shows that have superb writing.

Since it's clear Disney will keep milking people with these shows. One can only hope they'll take them more seriously in the future.

The 355 (2022)

A waste of their time, more than yours

[4/10 · 1 February 2022]

It's the 2020s and Hollywood is still stuck onthe "gadget that can hack anything", that was fine for WarGames or Hackers, but it was already laugable with Swordfish.

When most of us are much more aware of tech and how things work, it's just not the right mcguffin to raise stakes.

It makes it unrealistic, and a movie about five women kicking ass should be a little more realistic to not make the whole thing seem like a joke.

That's just a symptom of the overall bad writing here.

The movie has some nice action scenes, and yes, give the women the big guns thank you. It's also a smart choice to not pretty up the women all the time, because right after an action scene they should be a little roughed up.

That's pretty much where the good choices end.

The rest is like a spec script written for Mission Impossible. Including the good guy is the bad guy twist, which keeps happening, and a bad girl is the good girl which doesn't make any sense.

The writing is so bad, I'm surprised Bruce Willis isn't in this movie

You can still enjoy this movie, if you ignore the plot holes, just like you have to do with so many similar action movies starring men.

It's just a shame some of the talent in front of the lens was wasted.

The Matrix Resurrections (I) (2021)

In the era of MCU movies, this movie fits right in

[7/10 · 22 December 2021]

The Matrix was a great movie. Sci-Fi Action at it's best.

It's interesting that Hollywood releases movies with similar ideas at the same time and in 1999 we had three with this idea.

I thought The Thirteenth Floor had a more interesting take on the philosophical question of is this real or a VR world. EXistenz was different, we didn't know it's a game but the players did.

Those two movies might have warranted more discussion on the philosphy than The Matrix. A blockbuster action movie that spent more on great VFX, stunts and fighting scenes than the core idea, but most people didn't see the other two so The Matrix became that conversation center (just like Inception did for many people, when it wasn't original at all)

The two sequels tried to expand on those themes and mythology, but failed, mostly because in the end that wasn't the strength of the team behind that movie.

Just like I wouldn't expect Michael Bay's astroid disaster movie to be scientifically accurate, one shouldn't expect The Wachovskis to be too smart with their movies, it's not what they're good at.

Great action, great VFX, great fight scenes. A story that doesn't make a lot of sense but whatever.

I did think it was a brave choice to kill both main characters at the end of the trilogy, basically telling WB we're not doing another one but also not giving the viewers a happy end.

Grading on that scale and with those expectations, The Matrix Resurrections is a good movie.

It starts with a bit of meta/pat on the back discussion of The Matrix itself, that exists in that world as a video game.

It explains why the main characters are around, shows us what happened after the trilogy and basically leaves us with a sense that this world will always be in a loop, repeating it's history in some way.

The story, even the good ideas and the little reveal at the end, are just not executed well enough to land and make the viewer care.

There are some good fight scenes, some good action, good VFX, none of it as great as the first movie, perhaps because so many other movies are doing the same things now.

There's no breakthrough VFX, like Bullet Time, or the Smith clones fight. They even refer to needing a new Bullet Time in the movie, which creates the expectation they may deliver something, but they can't really. That VFX was so groundbreaking, we saw it everwhere for a long while after the movie.

The bottom line is, it's an enjoyable popcorn blockbuster action sci-fi movie, on par with parts 2 and 3 but nothing to put it on any list of top movies.

The Many Saints of Newark (2021)

It doesn't work as a Sopranos story and it doesn't work as a mafia movie.

[4/10 · 1 October 2021]

There's no mafia story in this movie and the plot is very weak, focusing on irrelevant characters for too long but failling to create any connection to these characters.

We have a bunch of mafia guys with no actual enemies. A mistress we don't really care about, since the lead character doesn't seem to really. A "business associate" turned rival that only Dickie really interacts with and in the end doesn't seem relevant to anything.

The Sopranos connection is weak at best, except for the Junior stuff, but even that is fan service done poorly. Here's that line from the show "wink wink".

We do get to find out what happened to Dickie, but that would've meant more if it turned out Tony knew when he sent Christopher after his dad's killer in the show.

Having Tony Soprano as a teenager wandering through the movie here and there but not really being a part of him was a waste.

Prequels are hard, unless you go back far enough where none of the characters are really relevant, you end up winking at the audience and mentioning things that happened instead of focusing on the story.

This movie made me appreciate what Better Call Saul does even more.

Showing us events that we "heard" about, introducing characters we already knew and maybe know where they end up, showing what made a character act a certain way, how they got that scar, it's all fun and good fan service, but you need a story. This movie didn't really have one.

Boss Level (2020)

I'd rather have a sequel or a reboot

[4/10 · 9 March 2021]

Instead of bad writing ripping off other movies, that were much better.

The first 15 minutes of this movie assume it's the first time you're watching any movie. While ripping off things from Back to the Future, Groundhog Day, Edge of Tomorrow and others, they feel the need to explain in boring detail everything that is going on. While those other movies take you into the time travel/time loop story and let you figure out what is going on with the characters, this one just bores you to death.

Once that very long exposition telling you things you already know is over, it gets a little more interesting.

Of course, they still assume you will be lost and feel the need to show graphics for every "attempt" and keep narrating everything that happens.

The cast is full of known names, the type who are at a point in their career where they might take any role for the money. That's what you do when you try to attract viewers with names instead of actually making a good movie.

There's nothing original. They can call it an homage, but it's just a rip off. Maybe instead of paying all of the known actors they had on there, they could've hired better writers and at least make it watchable.

All that said, the action scenes are fun enough that if the story didn't ruin it, the movie would've been much more enjoyable.

I'm sure Joe's take on The Raid will be great

Joker (I) (2019)

It's a good movie, just, not a Joker movie

[6/10 · 2 November 2019]

This movie is an interesting look into someone with mental health problems who suffer abuse from pretty much every one he's in contact with until he eventually snaps.

The problem is that they titled the movie "Joker". They threw in some references to the other characters from that world in what felt like forced details to justify the title, which makes sense, it made them a ton of money. The exact same story without the Wayne names wouldn't make any.

This movie achieved "Love it or you didn't get it" status but the truth is, it's not that good. It's definitely not "The Joker", for that, they should've taken it to another level at the end instead of him just killing the guy who made fun of him on TV.

Harriet (I) (2019)

This film gives all of the credit to Harriet's bravery and bold actions to visions

[4/10 · 2 November 2019]

While she did claim to have visions just like depicted in the movie, it is used to help her avoid capture several times in the movie which makes it feel ridiculous and unreal.

It's one thing to think you had visions and to go and do something dangerous because of that but it's a whole other thing when it's constantly the reason you turn left instead of right, leave now instead of later, cross the river here and not there.

It took me completely out of the story when every time she was close to danger she would have a vision of what's about to happen and change her course of action.

It's a shame. I was really looking forward to this movie as a real biopic of an American hero and got a joke of a movie about supernatural powers

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)

There's nothing new here

[5/10 · 1 November 2019]

The Terminator - What if a robot that looks like a human was sent back from the future to kill a woman before she can have a son who will lead the fight against the machines? And what if the guy sent back to save her was the father of that son?

T2: Judgment Day - What if the future humans hacked one of those old models and now that human looking robot is the protector? And what if instead of just trying to survive it they went after the people and company that created the AI/machines?

Terminator: Dark Fate - What if instead of the son, it's a Mexican woman?

That's it. There's nothing added to the story other than making it about saving a Mexican woman who one day in, I guess the very near future, would be leading the resistance.

I wasn't a fan of the other sequels in this franchise but at least they tried to make the story bigger.

This movie's plot is pointless. I never care about the characters, not even Sarah Connor. By the time we get to the final boss fight, I don't really care if any of the three women or Arnold's terminator make it. So when one has to be sacrificed, it's sure, whatever.

In the first two movies having the protector from the future die or realize it needs to be destroyed sucked. You were rooting for them. Here, you won't...

Angel Has Fallen (2019)

No surprises here. You'll feel like you've seen this movie before.

[4/10 · 26 August 2019]

Everything that happens in this movie is either a cliche you've seen many times before or plainly telegraphed. The only part that could be a little unexpected was revealed in the trailers (the dad part) but even that wasn't really taken advantage of.

The actions scenes are done well, even if some go overboard (which movies like this tend to do, blowing up a hospital? sure, why not) but there's nothing original in this movie and even though it means repeat viewings when this movie makes it's way to cable networks wouldn't be fine (you can start watching in the middle and you won't be confused by any of it) there are plenty of other similar movies that provide the same amount of action but are less predictable.

Using cliches and subverting them could've made this movie much better. Let us think you're doing the same thing all of these movies have done before and then go somewhere else. Don't start the movie with an obvious training exercise masquerading as a real situation, don't make the obvious people the villains (the old army buddy that needs to get new private contracts, the vice president that's so hungry for power he can't stop interrupting the president). Have them act and do the same things but have them be the good guys and let someone else be behind everything.

Bottom line is, if you want mind numbing action sequences go for it.

Furious 7 (2015)

Crazy stunts and nothing else

[2/10 · 23 May 2015]

The biggest problem with this movie is that any plot in there was written around the crazy car stunt ideas they had.

Jumping with the car between skyscrapers? Awesome.

Moving between cars while spinning at high speeds? Cool.

How about parachuting with the cars? realistic? of course not. It's not even original (there was a car ad that did the same stunt).

These stunts are crazy and fun (so what if none of it is realistic).

I just wish they could create a plot that makes sense around it.

They got the brother seeking revenge as the main bad guy. In Die Hard with a Vengeance that idea worked great to justify McClane's involvement (because really, how does that s#$@ keeps happening to him?).

The problem with that plot is that there's not enough there to justify two hours of crazy stunts. So a secondary plot is introduced. The team has to rescue a hacker and find a device that would help them track down the revenge seeking brother.

That would have worked, if that bad guy didn't show up at every location. He shows up every single time and instead of trying to get him they try to escape.

This movie makes no sense but the stunts are fun. Just ignore the dialog and any attempts at a plot and maybe you can enjoy it.

This movie made a lot of money so another is probably on the way. Hopefully they'll use some of that money to hire a real screenwriter

Antibody (2002 Video)

I don't understand how this movie get such a high rating on IMDb

[1/10 · 3 May 2008]

I mean, 3.5, really? terrible acting and even worse writing.

The screenwriter should have picked up a book about screen writing first.

While in their ship, the dialog keeps going back and forth between "it's the first time humans ever did this" lines to "if you think this is bad wait till you see what's next" from the "experienced" people. It's the first time they do it, but they can sleep throughout the mission because they are used to it

In a way, the terrible writing made me feel bad for the actors, it's hard to deliver bad dialog while your depressed that this is the only type of movie you can get

this movie isn't even a bad movie, or A movie