Reviews

This film falls short of expectations; from the first half, I found it unenjoyable and often pondered why it was made. "Thunderball" is particularly challenging to evaluate. It is undeniably not "Goldfinger." It lacks the meticulous pacing and distinguished cast of characters that made "Goldfinger" a classic.

The most troubling aspect of "Thunderball" appears early on, as Bond recuperates at a clinic in the English countryside. After narrowly escaping torture on a stretching machine by SPECTRE agent Count Lippe (Guy Doleman), Bond coerces the attending physical therapist, Patricia Fearing (Molly Peters), into a sexual encounter by threatening her job. This scene is especially disconcerting, even compared to "Goldfinger," as it depicts Bond manipulating Fearing under duress, cornering her against a sauna wall before they strip.

The story itself is also lackluster, taking nearly 30 minutes to establish the main plot-time that could have been significantly reduced.

Visually, while Terence Young once described "Thunderball" as an efficient film, it was not one of his favorites. He criticized the extensive underwater scenes, deeming them anti-James Bond. While this may be harsh, the sheer volume of underwater sequences does indeed drag the film down. Nonetheless, I appreciate the technical efforts involved in creating these scenes.

"No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!" This iconic phrase epitomizes the legendary status of "Goldfinger" within the James Bond franchise. Recently, I rewatched this film along with the rest from Sean Connery's era, and it's clear why "Goldfinger" holds a special place in fans' hearts.

Unlike "Dr. No" and "From Russia with Love," "Goldfinger" amplifies the action and suspense. While some action scenes may seem dated by today's standards, they remain impressive for a film from the 1960s. In fact, I found them more enjoyable than those in the preceding films.

Sean Connery fully embodies the character of 007 in this installment, with his wit and charm reaching new heights. I can't help but compare it to the previous films because that's the beauty of this franchise-each film offers something new and exciting.

Goldfinger himself, though perhaps not as intimidating as previous villains, brings a unique presence to the film. His introduction may seem abrupt, but his consistent involvement throughout the movie was a refreshing change.

The pacing is excellent and keeps the viewer engaged, with no dull moments or unnecessary dialogue. "Goldfinger" truly offers a one-of-a-kind experience that does justice to the character of James Bond.

"From Russia with Love" stands out as one of my favorite James Bond films. Its wealth of memorable characters and scenes surpasses those in "Dr. No" in many respects. The film's visual appeal is striking, with exceptional cinematography and stunning locations that leave a lasting impression. While some of the action scenes may seem outdated by today's standards and occasionally appear a bit silly, they generally hold up well.

The villains in this film are among the most memorable in the Bond series, in my opinion. Red Grant, Rosa Klebb, Kronsteen, and the iconic introduction of Blofeld contribute to a formidable rogue's gallery.

I also appreciate the film's slow-burn, suspenseful espionage narrative. Most of the action unfolds near the end, which enhances the tension and build-up throughout the story.

Additionally, Tatiana Romanova has a genuine character arc and displays excellent chemistry with Bond. She is far from forgettable, particularly as she is the first Bond girl to save him and kill a villain, making her a standout character in the series.

Recently, I embarked on a journey through the Bond films, rekindling my appreciation for the iconic series. Naturally, I began with "Dr. No," the inaugural film starring Sean Connery as the legendary 007.

What captivates me about "Dr. No" is its straightforward narrative and the film's relaxed pace, a stark contrast to the high-octane spectacles of recent Bond entries. While the action scenes may seem dated by today's standards, the film's strength lies in its performances. I had forgotten just how compelling Sean Connery was as Bond.

Dr. No himself is a superb villain, and I particularly appreciate the decision to delay his introduction. This choice adds a layer of intrigue, making the sinister presence of an unseen adversary work brilliantly in the film's favor.

Bond's introduction is nothing short of iconic. Connery embodies a perfect blend of class, charisma, and subtle menace. His cold delivery of the line "you've had your six" as he shoots Dent twice is a defining moment, instantly solidifying Connery's legacy in the role.

I also have a fondness for the Three Blind Mice. They are underrated villains, in my opinion. Their unassuming guise makes them unexpectedly formidable, adding an element of surprise that is refreshingly unique.

However, one aspect that does not hold up is the film's visuals. Understandably, it's a product of its time, but it pales in comparison to other entries in the franchise. Despite this, "Dr. No" remains a thoroughly enjoyable film, laying a strong foundation for the adventures of James Bond.

Ishana Night Shyamalan has definitely inherited her father's touch, and honestly, I'm not mad about it at all. While the movie starts off a bit slow, it quickly picks up, with a simple yet engaging plot. The atmosphere is eerie and creepy, avoiding the overuse of jump scares that have become cheap in many horror films. The tension builds gradually, creating a sense of dread that lingers throughout the film.

Although the story isn't groundbreaking and feels familiar, it's still quite enjoyable. There's a certain charm in its straightforwardness, allowing the viewer to become easily invested in the narrative. However, the acting was a major downside for me. The cast didn't feel natural or dynamic with each other, despite their efforts. The interactions seemed forced at times, which detracted from the overall immersion. The character backstories also needed more development, as they felt somewhat shallow and underexplored. A deeper dive into their histories could have added more layers to the narrative and made the characters more relatable.

Furthermore, I believe a different cast could have significantly improved the film. The chemistry between the actors was lacking, and a more experienced ensemble might have brought out the nuances in the story more effectively. Despite these shortcomings, the film manages to maintain a gripping atmosphere and keep the audience engaged.

The ending is very satisfying, and while the twist is predictable, it still makes for a solid horror flick. It ties up the story nicely and leaves the audience with a sense of closure.

I rarely enjoy documentaries, but "Trixie Mattel: Moving Parts" was an exceptional experience that truly captivated me. When I think of Trixie Mattel, I usually picture her vibrant drag persona, and I often overlook the other aspects of her life and origins. This documentary provided a fascinating and deeply personal insight into the life of Trixie and the person behind the persona, Brian Firkus.

Watching Trixie's journey to success was truly heartwarming, especially knowing the challenges Brian faced along the way. The documentary delves into his struggles and triumphs, revealing the determination and resilience that propelled him to stardom. "Moving Parts" offers a glimpse into that arduous journey, capturing both the wild and emotional aspects of his rise to fame.

One of the most striking elements of the documentary is how it portrays Brian's vulnerability and humanity. Seeing him navigate personal and professional hurdles adds a layer of depth to the persona we see on stage. It's a reminder that behind the glitz and glamour of drag performance, there is a real person with a unique story.

I also want to commend the editors for their outstanding work. The documentary is polished and well-crafted, with exceptional editing that enhances the storytelling. The visuals are crisp and engaging, and the pacing keeps the viewer invested from start to finish. The high production value adds a great deal to the overall impact of the documentary, bringing out Trixie's personality in a new light and making the narrative even more compelling.

"Moving Parts" is not just a documentary for fans of Trixie Mattel; it's a powerful story of perseverance, creativity, and the human spirit. It offers a rare behind-the-scenes look at the challenges and joys of a beloved performer, making it a must-watch for anyone interested in the world of drag or the journey of self-made success.

I wholeheartedly recommend this documentary to anyone looking for an inspiring and entertaining watch. "Trixie Mattel: Moving Parts" is a moving and unforgettable experience that stays with you long after the credits roll.

UNHhhh is undeniably one of the most entertaining shows available today, and it keeps getting better with each passing season. The dynamic duo of Trixie Mattel and Katya Zamolodchikova, two of the funniest drag queens in the world, bring an infectious energy and chemistry to the screen. Despite their distinct personalities and contrasting styles, they complement each other perfectly, creating a unique and captivating viewing experience.

One of the most appealing aspects of UNHhhh is its complete lack of a formal premise. The show thrives on its spontaneity and unscripted nature. There's no rigid structure or organized agenda-just two friends engaging in hilarious and often absurd banter about the most random topics imaginable. This freewheeling format allows Trixie and Katya's natural wit and charm to shine through, making each episode feel fresh and unpredictable.

Adding to the show's brilliance is its top-notch editing. The editors play a crucial role in enhancing the comedy, inserting clever visual gags, quirky animations, and perfectly timed cuts that amplify the humor. Their contributions elevate the show to a whole new level of hilarity, making it not just funny but a visual treat as well.

The combination of Trixie and Katya's chemistry, the unstructured format, and the exceptional editing makes UNHhhh a standout show. It's witty, ridiculous, and thoroughly entertaining, offering a unique blend of humor that appeals to a wide audience. Whether you're a long-time fan of drag culture or just looking for something genuinely funny to watch, UNHhhh is a must-see.

I have mixed feelings about Furiosa. The film starts off with a bang as a girl gets kidnapped, but then it slows down before picking up again, leaving me confused about the overall story. The plot tries too hard to seem mature and complicated, but the effort doesn't pay off.

The acting is mundane and unimpressive compared to Mad Max: Fury Road. While Fury Road embraced its campy and cheesy elements to suit the setting, Furiosa fails in its attempts at campiness, coming off as foolish instead. Chris Hemsworth's character is particularly annoying and lame, a far cry from his performance as Thor. The rest of the cast is equally lackluster and uninteresting.

Visually, the film pales in comparison to Fury Road. Although it attempts to match its predecessor's style, it feels less impressive and somewhat cheap. It's not that it looks bad, but it doesn't live up to the previous film's standards.

The young Furiosa's storyline at the beginning is dull and poorly edited, with many side events that lead nowhere until the focus returns to her story. The film drags on unnecessarily, taking 58 minutes of nonsense before introducing a more mature Furiosa. Unfortunately, it doesn't improve from there, devolving into a "mature" scenario that lost my interest. The plot, if there is one, is weak and unengaging.

There is one standout scene involving a chase with the war rig that is well-made and visually impressive, leaving me wishing the rest of the film had that same energy. Despite my hopes, Furiousa ends up being silly, with bad acting, boring dialogue, and lackluster visuals.

After watching the Skywalker film series and the "Obi-Wan Kenobi" mini-series for the first time in 2024, I was hesitant to continue. I was quite disappointed with the Obi-Wan series and wanted to avoid further disappointments.

However, "Rogue One" turned out to be an excellent film, even better than the last two films of the sequel trilogy. It had a straightforward story, solid acting, and interesting new characters. Unlike recent projects, it didn't rely heavily on old characters-though a few familiar faces appeared, they weren't the main focus, which was refreshing.

This is what recent Star Wars projects have been missing: the introduction of new, intriguing characters rather than relying on the old ones. While "Rogue One" has its flaws-it's a bit too long for such a simple story, and some action scenes felt a bit tedious-it was still a solid film overall. I hope they explore this direction further in the future.

I understand why people don't like this. After watching the main series in 2024, I wanted to explore the side stories, so I started with "Obi-Wan Kenobi."

I was excited to watch this because I really liked Ewan McGregor as the younger Obi-Wan in the prequel films-he's a talented actor. His performance in this mini-series was outstanding, even surpassing his work in the prequels.

However, my main issue is with the story. Bringing Skywalker and Leia into the plot felt like beating a dead horse. If the story had focused more on Obi-Wan's personal struggles and less on rehashing old characters, I would have enjoyed it more.

The setting is more mature than the films, which I didn't mind-I appreciate a more mature Star Wars story. The cast was good, but the story was a letdown and didn't match the quality of the main film series.

"The Rise of Skywalker" wasn't as engaging as the previous films, though I should have seen this coming since "The Last Jedi" wasn't that great either.

The cast's performances were excellent, with many standout moments. I watched the film mainly for Kylo and Rey's storyline, which was compelling and came together well towards the end.

However, the film felt disjointed at times, which was disappointing. The potential for a great story was there, but it needed more refining.

Regardless, this was a fun ride. I understand why people love Star Wars now-the lore is fascinating, and the characters and stories are truly captivating. Despite some lackluster moments, the great ones are amazing, and the films are visually stunning.

I'm more invested in the franchise now and look forward to exploring the side stories.

At the beginning of the film, I was intrigued by how the story would unfold, but the constant switching between events left me feeling overwhelmed.

The storyline between Rey and Ben was captivating, and I would have loved it if the main focus had stayed on them. The side quests felt disjointed from the main story. One thing I've learned from watching Star Wars films is that less is more; doing too much can be distracting.

I also felt that Finn's story could have been more personal and would have preferred if he had been more integrated into Rey and Ben's narrative, rather than being sidelined as a secondary character.

Despite these issues, the film was an enjoyable experience. It may not be my favorite in the franchise, but it's definitely a good film.

I regret not investing in this franchise sooner. After watching the main trilogy and the prequels in 2024, I became intrigued by how the story would continue.

"The Force Awakens" picks up where the original trilogy left off, and I was pleasantly surprised by the direction it took. The film has everything: drama, action, excellent cinematography, compelling characters, and even better acting than the previous installments. The entire cast delivers stellar performances.

It's a shame I missed the opportunity to see this in theaters; I bet it would have been an incredible experience. Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. I'm a fan of darker-toned Star Wars stories, and while I don't mind some lighthearted moments, I appreciate it when the narrative takes a more serious turn.

Finn and Rey are both strong characters, and I'm already excited to see where the story goes next. This film has deepened my appreciation for the franchise, and I can't stop watching.

After watching both the original and prequel series in 2024, I finally understand why people love Star Wars.

Each film has a straightforward and entertaining story, with each installment adding something truly special to the franchise.

"Revenge of the Sith" was exceptional, providing a great conclusion to the prequels. Visually stunning, even for a 2005 film, the story was engaging despite some clichéd dialogue, which didn't bother me much.

One drawback was the abundance of side stories that felt unnecessary and didn't contribute much to the main plot. Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed the film, and it was great to see Hayden Christensen improve his acting skills.

I'm excited to watch the next trilogy and explore more stories in this series.

I just finished watching "Attack of the Clones," and I must say, I enjoyed it much more than "The Phantom Menace." The mature approach to the story, improved visual effects, and superior cinematography all stood out.

The story progression and pacing were excellent, seamlessly navigating two storylines before bringing them together. If I had to criticize one aspect, it would be Hayden Christensen's performance. His acting felt stiff and wooden, and I didn't connect with his character throughout the film.

I don't understand the low rating for this movie. As someone seeing it for the first time in 2024, I believe it's a solid addition to the franchise, despite a few plot holes and some questionable character actions that felt contradictory. Overall, looking past these minor flaws, I think it deserves a better rating.

Watching this for the first time in 2024, I was puzzled by its low ratings. I found the film to be really good and would have rated it 10/10 if not for one major issue: the character of Jar Jar Binks.

Having enjoyed the original trilogy, I was excited to dive into this new one. "The Phantom Menace" delivers on many fronts: beautiful cinematography, amazing costume designs, a good story, well-crafted dialogue, and an interesting backstory for the original films. However, Jar Jar Binks truly annoyed me. Unlike the endearing clumsiness of characters like C-3PO and Chewbacca, Jar Jar comes off as annoying rather than lovable. I still can't figure out why this character was included.

Another aspect that felt off was the pod racing scene. It seemed to drag on forever, taking up more time than necessary. While it was enjoyable at first, it eventually felt overly long and unnecessary.

Towards the end, the film's pace became overwhelming with too many simultaneous events. The constant switching between different subplots took me out of the main story. It might have been better if the film had focused on fewer, more important events.

Despite these issues, the film's main political storyline is admirable and more mature than the previous trilogy. Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson are fantastic in their roles, commanding every scene they're in. Jake Lloyd also does well, considering his young age. The rest of the cast delivers strong performances too. The action scenes, especially the lightsaber fights, are excellently choreographed.

Overall, I recommend this film to anyone.

After thoroughly enjoying the first two films in the Star Wars franchise, which I watched for the first time in 2024, I was excited to see how the story would continue. The film started strong, picking up right where it left off and keeping me hooked until halfway through, when the story shifts to Endor.

The Endor section felt like an afterthought, with several side stories that didn't add much to the main plot. The Ewok scenes, in particular, were overly silly and detracted from the overall narrative. I dislike when films introduce side stories that feel unnecessary and distract from the main story.

Aside from that, the film was decent. However, compared to "A New Hope" and "The Empire Strikes Back," it falls short. The actors seemed disengaged in the second half, and their performances lacked emotional depth.

The cinematography and visual effects are impressive for their time, and the soundtrack remains iconic. While it was an acceptable conclusion, I expected more and felt it could have been better. Nonetheless, I'm excited to watch the prequel trilogy next.

After watching the first Star Wars film for the first time in 2024, I was definitely intrigued to see where the story would go next.

I'm so glad I continued the journey-what an adventure it was! The story surpassed the first film, with excellent pacing and no dull moments. I appreciated the darker tone and the more personal and complex plot, while still maintaining a straightforward narrative. The cinematography and visual effects were impressive for a film made in the 1980s.

The acting was outstanding as well. Mark Hamill truly shined as Luke, a significant improvement from his performance in the first film. The rest of the cast also did a fantastic job.

I have nothing negative to say about this film; it was perfect!

This was my first time watching any Star Wars film, so I decided to start with the first one and watch them in order. Here's my review of the original film.

I expected a silly, overhyped sci-fi movie, but I was pleasantly surprised. Even in 2024, the visuals are impressive. Some effects are a bit outdated, but they didn't bother me. The story is simple and straightforward, which I appreciate in films. The acting is great, especially from Harrison Ford, whom I admire. The rest of the cast also did a fantastic job.

However, I did have issues with the pacing. Few scenes took them too long to get to the point. Some action scenes felt unnecessarily long, particularly the final scene, which made the ending feel anticlimactic. Additionally, some dialogue could have been better written, but overall, the film holds up well.

The soundtrack perfectly matches the atmosphere of the film, and I now understand why it's so iconic. Overall, this was an enjoyable sci-fi film, and I'd recommend it to anyone.

I usually avoid biopics about singers because good ones are rare. "Ray," "La Mome," "Walk the Line," and the recent "Elvis" are exceptions.

This film is a prime example of why I avoid them. The lead actress's performance feels strained and unnatural, more like she has a jaw problem than like she's channeling Amy. Her portrayal is inconsistent, sometimes sounding like Amy, but often not. The cinematography is dreadful, resembling a cheap soap opera with boring, unimaginative visuals and horrible color grading. The rest of the cast is equally disappointing, with none of the performances engaging.

The depiction of Amy's relationship with Blake is tedious, with their interactions showcasing a masterclass in bad acting. Naming the film "Back to Black" while neglecting Amy's music and true talent is a huge misstep. The film also inaccurately portrays the men in her life as good people, when in reality, they contributed to her downfall. Her father neglected her and still doesn't admit his failures as a parent.

Sometimes, it's best to let people rest in peace. Amy Winehouse is at peace now, and we should let her be.

I can't believe this film is by Alex Garland. The same director who gave us masterpieces like Men, Annihilation, and Ex Machina made this?

Let's start with the casting. Who thought it was a good idea to cast Kirsten Dunst as the main protagonist? She was supposed to portray a cold, hardened woman, but all I saw was a bored actress reading lines. The plot and pacing were lackluster, only getting interesting towards the end.

The only redeeming aspect of this film was its depiction of war. As someone from Iraq, I've witnessed firsthand the gruesome reality of war and how it can turn people into monsters. The film captured that atmosphere well.

On a positive note, I think Cailee Spaeny has a bright future ahead. She was surprisingly good in this film, and I'll definitely be keeping an eye on her future roles.

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire was a snoozefest of a film. After the excitement of Godzilla vs. Kong, I was eager to see where the story would go next, but it seems Adam Wingard has lost his magic with this installment.

I'm usually a sucker for a cheesy story with good cinematography and pacing, but Godzilla x Kong offered none of that. The pacing was terrible, the action scenes were lackluster, the CGI was subpar, and the human acting was atrocious. The film felt like a pointless monster mash, with destruction for the sake of destruction.

It's a shame because this franchise started off strong and held so much promise. Instead, they decided to abandon what worked before and create a film that seems aimed at a third-grade audience. Even the human stories, which are usually a redeeming factor, were lackluster here. The acting was so bad it felt like watching a high school play with people just reciting lines.

I was really excited for this film because I think Dev Patel is such a great actor. The film started out very strong, and I was thoroughly engaged. Despite the pacing feeling rushed at times, it somehow worked for me as a viewer, providing all the necessary information to lay the groundwork for the story.

However, the second half of the film was a disappointment. It felt like an afterthought and pulled me out of the story. The pacing slowed down in a strange way, making it feel out of place. It was like anticipating a great bridge in a song, only to be let down by a disappointing EDM drop from a Jennifer Lopez track from 2011.

Regardless, I think this was a solid directorial debut for Dev Patel. He did a good job, and the action scenes were really engaging and impressive.

Argylle was a travesty. In most well-crafted films, even within strange or unconventional worlds, if a character seamlessly integrates with the environment and other characters, it enhances believability and coherence. However, throughout the entirety of the movie, I never once felt that Bryce Dallas Howard's character belonged in the depicted world. From her demeanor, acting, appearance, dialogue, and decisions to her involvement in action sequences-nothing seemed to click. To be fair, I doubt any actor could have successfully embodied the Elly character, but my goodness, nearly anyone else would have been preferable. The character desperately warranted a comprehensive overhaul.

The concept of her mind oscillating between Sam Rockwell and Henry Cavill was intriguing but executed poorly, resulting in a jarring experience. Furthermore, it completely loses its impact once the twist is unveiled.