Directed By: Amat Escalante Written By: Amat Escalante & Gibran Portela Cinematography: Manuel Alberto Claro Editor: Fernanda De La Peza & Jacob Secger Schulsinger
Cast: Ruth Ramos, Simone Bucio, Jesus Meza, Eden Villavicencio, Oscar Escalante, Bernarda Trueba
It’s a film that has to be seen to be believed. Though you are impressed with what it pulls off.
The film is told more visually than through dialogue. Letting the images tell the story, makes it feel not only more cinematic but makes the material feel more enriched and an experience for the audience.
A story of connection and a kind of love rectangle. As separate stories eventually converge. That is simple in its own way. Only enhances with a fantasy element.
That involves a dysfunctional family drama element.
The film is highly erotic and very sexual. So much so that there is even a brief scene of an animal orgy (with other animals, no Beastiality)
For instance, The opening scene is a sex scene that sets off the tale abs looks like it could have come from. Numerous hentai anime. As the film itself could be lazily described as live-action hentai porn with a plot. This film focuses more on characters in a domestic drama and the stories of how they end up meeting this monster more graphically.
As every character here has a secret though it comes across more like a fantasy, with the monster lurking inside that brings pleasure and pain. But don’t tell anyone about never revealing true selves. As the monster could easily be a physical manifestation of their secrets that are eating them up inside but brings momentary happiness but ultimately is destructive. Though at least by the end they all find and show their real selves.
Some get by in life, some are a slave to their addictions and end up victims. Some of their strength at times of tragedy.
It’s a little bizarre that there is not much of the monster. So if you come to this movie expecting that you will be disappointed. This is more like a science fiction novel where the stories come first. Usually are a parable that uses the science fiction element to make it grander. This is ultimately an empowerment story with a final girl of sorts.
Directed by: Adil Elarbi & Bilall Fallah Written by: Adil Elarbi, Bilall Fallah, Nabil Ben Yadir, Bram Renders, Kobe Van Steenberghe & Handrik Verthe Cinematography: Robrecht Heyvaert Editor: Adil Elarbi, Bilall Fallah, Kobe Van Steenberghe & Thijs Van Nuffel
Cast: Matteo Simoni, Junes Lazaar, Nora Gharib, Said Boumazoughe, Nabil Mallat, Paloma Aguilera valdebenito, Werner Kolf
Antwerp. The lives of four dealer friends, who want to become real-life swaggers, spin out of control when they steal a shipment of cocaine. They trigger a full-out war between them, an Amsterdam drug lord and the ruthless Colombian cartels.
Looked forward to watching this film by the directors of BAD BOYS FOR LIFE. Their last film before that film almost seems like an audition reel.
one can see why they were given directing reign of BAD BOYS FOR LIFE. As with this film. They prove they can handle Action and comedy that might be a little dark around the edges but not too bleak, but also a diverse cast.
Though when it comes to this film’s material, it often feels more cartoonish even though it tries to be really quite often. Like the characters, it feels too on over its head at times.
As every time the film seems to be sticking with a certain tone. The film withdraws and goes into another tone to throw off the audience and keep them guessing even when not needed.
This is close to being an almost Guy Ritchie movie except he keeps his tone light and has his characters a bit more defined, it similarly Whimsical and usually in the criminal world
The characters are likable but rather thin so that they are more defined by characteristics and their individual ambitions than actually coming off as characters. They more Just live up to their nicknames except for the main two characters of the crew.
Though the film is filled with its colorful characters, the most entertaining is actually the criminal lawyers played by the directors more for humor, but are unscrupulous when it comes to protecting their clients.
The film Touches on subjects but Rarely fully Explores them except to occasionally bring them up like racism, growing up as an immigrant. Making something of yourself, when education really isn’t a choice.
The film is a lot of things but never comes through with An actual decision that leads to it feeling all over the place. There is plenty of styles all over the place that is inventive in fact it feels like every scene and the shot is designed to keep moving and to always dazzle.
Though even for the hardcore material and subjects that they tackle. The film feels lightweight and almost playful. As it never goes in too deep. It also feels way overstuffed and too long. As the film feels the need to explain every detail and then show it. Whereas if the film was cut down by fifteen minutes it wouldn’t Feel so monotonous by the end.
Just like the main character by the end of the film, it Doesn’t Seem to exactly want to commit.
A troubled teenager attempts to conquer the love of his life by becoming the baddest boy on the block.
This is a film I was expecting more from. Strangely Wasn’t totally disappointed. Though by the end felt a little thin.
Considering the issues of the film. I didn’t expect it to stay so clean material-wise. So that by the end it felt like an after-school special with some adult themes.
It’s fine for what it is but was expecting something mroe hard-hitting. Especially for where it seemed to be going and what it introduces.
The film tries to paint the neighborhood as thorny and a bit crime-ridden but was left wondering is this the worst they have in the Netherlands? As it seems a bit quaint.
The film really comes off as a coming-of-age tale. Nothing you have my seen before. In fact, still shocked at how innocent it seems to stay. Like a teenage version of a crime film that doesn’t involve so much crime but more themes of growing up.
For instance, the scene where he is feeling grown up after a job well done after a night out. He celebrated by drinking milk like it’s an alcoholic drink.
How at first his problems are presented as worse than They actually are. Introduced to him more as immature. We notice throughout how he becomes more mature and responsible. Even as he gets more brand names and expensive designer clothes. As well as how they can. enticing and what is needed to keep them up.
The ending is the only place where it feels like a false note. As it is satisfying from the standpoint of liking the characters but it feels unrealistic when it comes to criminals and street rules.
Directed & Story By: Sergio Martino Written By: Sergio Martino & Ernesto Gastaldi Cinematography: Giancarlo Ferrando Editor: Eugenio Alabiti
Cast: Suzy Kendall, Tina Aumont, Luc Merenda, John Richardson, Roberto Bisacco, Ernesto Colli, Angela Covello
A string of appalling lust murders shocks the University of Perugia as a sadistic serial killer strangles to death beautiful college girls with a red and black scarf.
This film is bathed in sex and nudity more than expected. Even though at times the film tries to make it more artistic but still feels excessive.
This should be a teenage boy’s dream in the 1980s and 1990’s before the internet came forward. This is the type of foreign film you were hoping to catch on cable television that the TV guide said contained nudity and sexual situations but was usually more on the artistic side.
This film is more a murder mystery slasher where most of the characters who survive are suspects.
The actors playing college students in this movie all look way too old, but that is to be expected.
In living up to the film’s title, the killer carved up their victims after death. The film makes it feel fetishistic. As the camera and the killers’ hands Roam the victim’s naked body
Usually the torso before dissecting it and poking out the eyes. (Trust me the violence sounds worse in the description than what is shown) other times the camera lingers on the actress’s beauty also bodies.
As a product of The Times when it was released the film is definitely misogynistic. As most of the victims are female and the male victims are either afterthoughts or killed more aggressively and gruesomely. The male characters’ attitudes towards women are just as gruesome.
The final reveal is so ridiculous. As usual with a bit of a far-fetched initial motive for the killer.
As the film seems to maleness the death scenes more iconic while the Women look to live up to the killer’s view of them As living dolls.
With a happy-go-lucky soundtrack and each death explained except for the one person of colors. Who the film leaves as more of a discarded accessory’s. As they all gawk and the female characters are mo resemble fashion models at the time.
The film also has the male characters have ugly attitudes towards women. So that each seems like they could be the Killer. No matter how minor the character. Though her crime might be that she is a lesbian also for the film.
It offers very fun surprises and almost seems to get tired of creating more elaborate Murders.
Also seems that some characters are added to only be victims and up the body count as well as seem fairer in the number of male viewers
Not everything is as it seems for Cristi, a policeman who plays both sides of the law. Embarking with the beautiful Gilda on a high-stakes heist, both will have to navigate the twists and turns of corruption, treachery, and deception.
A calm and composed film noir that is a slow burn throughout. That involves quite a bit of players even though it starts out more intimate. It grows with each new detail.
It’s a neo-noir that is not as comedic as presented within the trailers. While it has dark humor it is more a thriller.
The film plays out non-linear at first but is presented and put together with different timelines as we flash forward, back, and then sometimes current time. Told lien this for the audience to get more intrigued and keep the story moving forward in a way that adheres to what the audience is familiar with.
The film comes alive in the third act with twists and turns that allow for some surprises, but still never quite speeds along or leaves details by the wayside.
The film does offer a femme fatale abs one hell of a seduction scene. Even though other than that scene. It never quite explains why the two characters bond enough to overly look out for one another, especially her considering her position.
The film offers more of a character study of sorts. Even though with so many characters it offers quirk in the language being studied abs used for this caper. Though seems more there to explore the situation and relationships more than being integral to the plot overall.
Though at first the film might be light shearers but have a tough attitude. It soon shows itself to be violent and dangerous also. Where no one Is truly safe or can be completely trusted.
As everyone has their own agenda here including the so-called good guys. While the film offers style it also seems at times to be overly artistic for such a simple premise.
Though we never quite get any answers for why the lead is so tightly wound or got so involved in the first place. As for its many introductions, the film seems only interested in the lead mostly. Who only really changes more out of circumstances. Not organically or emotionally compelled to.
The film is a great jaw-dropping modern interpretation of femme fatale in the form of actress Catrinel Martin still some questions or connection and plans of characters.
She has a great and strong entrance. Where she is illustrious and iconic, but through the rest of the film, he becomes more of a background character losing the Great strength she was shown as having only to become revitalized by the end.
Definitely an inspired film. Not the action Oriented kind. Yet it keeps you invested.
Directed By: Patrick Mille Written By: Patrick Mille, Julien Lambroschini & Sabrina Amara Cinematography: Andre Szenkowski Editor: Samuel Dansei
Cast: Vanessa Guide, Alison Wheeler, Margot Bancilhon, Philippine Stindel, Patrick Mille, Christine Citti, Susana Pires, Chico Diaz, Joseph Makebra
Four childhood friends reunite for a wedding in Rio, only to find themselves on the run through the Brazilian countryside after accidentally killing someone at a drug-fueled party.
The film feels very 1980s inspired. As the plot feels high concept and simple. As it takes a GIRL’S NIGHT type story and takes it further and more action-oriented.
It even feels directed like an interaction action film from the 1980s. So that you always feel a bit of nostalgia. If you are a fan of films from the decade.
The film offers a kind of girl’s gone wild scenario. As the characters deal with being on vacation in Brazil for a friend’s wedding and their lives not going too well. So they decide to show e fun no wild out. Which eventually leads to trouble. The film presents deals with them trying to stay out of trouble as more complications are presented.
Even though the film sounds like it would more be T & A fest. It is more for female viewers. As most of the male characters are stupid, evil and manipulative.
The film sets up an older male villain. Whose motives are understandable partially. As he is only reacting to the death of a loved one. One who ended up being reprehensible. Showing that the Apple doesn’t fall far from The tree.
The film plays so broad but then reins in some scenes that want to be more dramatic or character building.
The film certainly switches tones as it begins like a screwball comedy and then becomes more hardcore at first serious then action but tries to keep a sense of humor through it all. Leaving the film to be inventive and thankfully fast-paced.
In trying to stay out of trouble they are lead into all sorts of criminal activity and hijinks that eventually allows them to have a full-fledged adventure. That stays on the move and exposes a silly and unexpected side.
Even if the last-minute hardcore action seems a bit much.
The four leads all play types more than characters but all are needed for their particular skills that help along the way and they all have their own appeal.
The more darker-skinned characters are shown more as villains, tough and dangerous. It doesn’t seem intended that way but still comes off that way and noticeable.
The film offers an interesting tale of a girl’s vacation in its own way.
The film unfortunately might be entertaining as you watch it but by the end feels forgettable.
Sasori is outside the prison and on the run from the police, wanted for breaking out of prison and murder. She takes refuge with a woman who has a brother with a learning disability. The woman and her brother are also involved in an incestuous relationship. Both the police and an ex-prison mate of Sasori’s pursue her.
This sequel feel more like a closing chapter more than anything. As it feels final and with little else to go. It’s also a lot more somber than the previous films.
Don’t get me wrong it is still outrageous but not as ridiculous. As scorpion is On the run again and it seems everyone has it in for her. So that she has to seek revenge in multiple characters. The film is inventive in how it all comes together with characters each passing into another’s story.
Though this film is much sadder than the others as throughout this film scorpion becomes a ghostly Angel of vengeance for other characters who are victims of the villains throughout. As well as haunting the villains who underestimate her at first.
The film still has many uncomfortable exploitive moments meant to add drama or provoke a reaction out of the audience. Especially when it comes to sex scenes. This film feels more scaled back when it comes to sex and nudity but does have a sympathetic character In an incestuous relationship.
By the end no one Truly wins. The character you expect to somewhat be saved or be on the road to a better life by the end is pretty much still left where she was at the beginning. Only more tortured, but at least made a connection with the scorpion.
This is the last film of the franchise directed by Shun’ya Ito, which might be why this feels more like a finale than the eventual final sequel that stars Meiko Kaji in the role of the scorpion. Before eventually producers decided to revitalize the franchise without any of the original team involved.
All the male characters are evil and deplorable. Most are disposable also as cops, henchmen, or depraved men looking for sex or to exploit women.
One of the villains in the film Katsu seems more like a villain. Suited for the more outrageous previous films especially with her wardrobe and make up. As she comes across as campy almost she is cruel but the right amount of ridiculous as the previous films. Luckily as the film Goes along her development goes from scared to haunted to absolutely crazy with guilt. That she eventually matched the paleness of the make-up on her face naturally.
The film shows that the purgatory of prison was just as bad as the outside. At least prison only took up a certain amount of space. As the harsh reality of freedom seems to make the female characters natural prey. As it is so unpredictable. Whereas in prison you knew who to trust who not to.
The film shines a light on the harsh reality for the character after the more psychedelic freestyled previous films
Cast: Giancarlo Giannini, Mariangela Melato, Agostina Belli, Luigi Diberti, Elena Fiore
After voting against the powerful Mafia candidate in Sicily, in what seemed like a secret ballot, impecunious Mimì finds himself with his back to the wall. Desperate, and having no one to turn to, Mimì abandons his wife, Rosalia, and relocates to the bustling city of Turin, only to fall for the beautiful Trotskyist, Fiore. One child later, and as one thing leads to another, Mimì gradually realizes that he is not ready to accept the new social morals that prevail in the industrialized north, catching, once more, the Mafia’s attention. Now, political beliefs, loyalty, infidelity, and revenge become inextricably intertwined, and once again, Mimì is left with nothing, having no other choice but to return to Sicily. But, can he keep his life in Turin secret?
This film has the set-up of a comedy with a cowardly protagonist who it’s hard to feel sorry for as he keeps getting himself in trouble out of machismo, Revenge, and sex. Where somehow he usually fails up. Getting promotions and more money. Though supposedly anti-government.
Once he finds true love he works for it. But continues to fail. As he can’t even be loyal to a political party, but that is More due to pressure and assassination attempts. So that is understandable. This is truly the tale of a man who stands for nothing and pays the price for it.
I was introduced to the tale years ago watching it’s American remake “WHICH WAY IS UP?” Starring Richard Pryor abs tailor-made for his talents. Dipped into the politics at the time as background. The only difference is that Pryor played different characters In his version.
This film is also dipped into politics. We watch as the main character gets what he wants but keeps messing. It up due to hubris and when threatened quickly shows how cowardly he is. Along the way, he is never truly satisfied.
The third act at first makes no sense but as you learn more about it, it feels ridiculous though also, in the end, feels like a punchline. As it is all about foolish pride. Which truly becomes his undoing and exposes his character losing all he has.
Mariangela Melato again is a screen goddess. Still as amazing and fiery as in SWEPT AWAY co-Starring with Giancarlo Giannini again.
you can understand and see why he gets obsessed and tries to seduce her. Why he is willing to risk it all for her. Even as she makes her rules clear though amazed she stick by him. So thoroughly throughout and why she leaves after such a minor betrayal compared to his many others that She can forgive. He has no loyalty to anyone, including his family
Some scenes seem there to just add to the artistic surreal quality of the film and while there are build-up and reasons for these scenes. They also feel like episodic escapes.
The film is lively and ridiculous, but so artistic that it feels naturalistic and beautiful constantly and comes across deeper than it actually ends up being. Though it is heartbreaking. It is a comedy at heart, though so sad.
One of my favorite classic iconic directors to keep discovering her movies. Who might happen to be one of my favorite directors, who happens to be female (at least next to Nicole Holofcener) she has truly outdone herself here.
In the end, the film plays off like a grand comedy of morals and cowardness. That feels gross and political all at the same time.
Directed by: Jean-Luc Godard Written by Jean-Luc Godard & Catherine Vimenet Cinematography: Raoul Coutard Editor: Francoise Collin & Chantal Delattre
Cast: Marina Vlady, Anne Duperey, Roger Montsorat, Raoul levy, Jean Narboni
In this film, ‘Her’ refers to both Paris, the character of Juliette Janson, and the actress playing her, Marina Vlady. The film is a kind of dramatized documentary, illustrating and exaggerating the emotionless lives of characters in the new Paris of the 60s, where commercialism mocks families getting by on small incomes, where prostitution is a moneyspinning option, and where people are coldly resigned and immune to the human nightmares of Vietnam, and impending Atomic war.
When it comes to the films of Writer-Director Jean Luc Godard you never know what you are going to get. Sometimes you get absolute masterpieces at other times you get films you respect but might not love and then you get his more experimental films that can go either way. Sort of what it seems like Modern director Steven Soderbergh attempts.
Though both of their films can be off-putting for certain audiences. It might feel like most of those cinema comes off as pretentious.
This is one of the later films. Where he fills the film with beautiful women who keep your interest especially in close-ups but then the rest of the film is pretty much philosophical notions and existential discussions that become quite boring and superficial.
Where the genius lies is that he puts all of these speeches and interviews. While following certain characters. So that we examine their day-to-day experiences and living conditions. Then inserts the interviews and discussion. As well as his own whispered narrations asking us to question what we see and ponder them in different ways.
This is pretty much an experimental film all around. At times we see the characters off the wall characteristics. Like reading randomly from a stack of books while a friend writes down what they are quoting. Or a photojournalist dressed in an American flag t-shirt interviewing two women he has paid to undress in front of him while he asks questions and boats of his adventures.
All of this is indebted to the politics at the time. Which instantly dates the film and radicalizes it to a degree. While trying to add cinematic tricks and observation. That it comes off more like a lesson than an experience.
As even at times the director seems to interview people off the street who we never see. Where the footage becomes a scattershot. Other than showing constant construction.
Which we never see what came before or after.
It/‘a a film that is full of ideas and its heart seeks to be in the right place but to a degree feels empty. Where emotions should be.
The film seems to try and show it’s Characters are used to their lives. So they have no reason to emote or seem like they are seeking to strive or escape. They just deal with the everyday.
Even with a title that seems like the film will focus on the lead female. As we try to get to know her and become obsessed with her. Showing her in all her glory. Instead, she is just part of the overall who we occasionally see. Though she is the most constant.
The film or filmmaker wants us to know certain things about her but also expose her to the audience in all aspects. So that while we might fall for her we also know her. So that here is some kind of relatability but the end. Even if it just feels like a movie of expression wanting to say something yet cramming as much different stuff that connects into the tale and trying to decipher it all.
When you watch a Susanne Bier film you know you will be put on an emotional path that is in your face the whole time. the film and characters are raw which is emphasized by the grainy film she uses and the fact that most of the scenes are done in full close-up on the character’s faces. it helps that she tends to cast beautiful actors too.
I have seen her Films before this one BROTHERS was my first followed by her English language debut THINGS WE LOST IN THE FIRE. so I knew what to expect watching this film and i was still blown away. Now describing the plot of most of her films they sound like corny melodramas and the plots are, but they are also real. they are so full of emotion and address the things that are not seen in the film’s American counterparts.
The characters here feel full and real and are not afraid to show their unlikeable sides and decisions whereas other films would try to make every character lovable and likable. The thing that amazes me about her films is that on paper they are not the films I would normally watch or enjoy, but through her talented filmmaking and gut-punching scripts she makes them rewarding and essential viewing.
Sonja Richter is so beautiful a virtual screen goddess, Yet, she downplays her beauty for actually fully realizing an emotionally needy young woman. Who is engaged to be married when her boyfriend gets into an accident and ends up paralyzed in the hospital.
The female driver of the other car is so stunned she sends her husband. A doctor to talk to the young woman. Soon they become friends and he becomes her go-to friend especially when her boyfriend refuses to see her. Soon they are becoming more than friends and fall deep in love though they both feel guilty about the situation they go full speed ahead. It is here where the film becomes interesting as it explores all sides of this triangle. It even shows the effects it has on his children.
The film has no heroes, no villains just real people who make mistakes, change their minds, and don’t know what the right decisions are. The film is a multi-layered love story. that is sweet one minute and dark the next with little to no sentimentality. It’s such a gritty love story that scrapes the heart at times. It becomes hard to watch, but you must see ith through to see what happens. How will it end?
Mads Mikkelsen plays the husband he truly shows range as i have usually seen him only as a one-eyed Viking in and a villain in CASINO ROYALE. So him playing a compassionate family man who falls out of love with his wife for an unstable young woman and how it pains him to do it, is so moving.
The film is a DOGME 95 Film which is a decree that is summarized below. As with most DOGME films this one cheats on the rules a bit. but generally stays on with its doctrine. IT’s definitely worth watching and stay true to its artistic spirit.
The goal of the Dogme collective is to purify filmmaking by refusing expensive and spectacular special effects, post-production modifications, and other technical gimmicks.
The filmmakers concentrate on the story and the actors’ performances. They believe this approach may better engage the audience, as they are not alienated or distracted by overproduction. To this end, Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg produced ten rules to which any Dogme film must conform. These rules, referred to as the “Vow of Chastity,” are as follows:[1]
1. Filming must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in. If a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found.
2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. Music must not be used unless it occurs within the scene being filmed, i.e., diegetic.
3. The camera must be a hand-held camera. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. The film must not take place where the camera is standing; filming must take place where the action takes place.
4. The film must be in color. Special lighting is not acceptable (if there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).
5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.
6 .The film must not contain superficial action (murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden (that is to say that the film takes place here and now).
8. Genre movies are not acceptable.
9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm.
10. The director must not be credited. (Thanks to Wikipedia) a definite addition to the Film Library
Cut To The Chase 