JLuis_001

The timing of the holidays and its destined fate in the streaming abyss, created solely to offer Netflix fresh content, are the sole factors ensuring this movie earns a brief mention in the next two weeks before the year ends.

Confronted with such a foreseeable storyline, Saltburn goes for the equally predictable style over substance.Based on all the buzz surrounding this movie, I had pretty much anticipated where I was getting myself into, so what intrigued me most about its narrative was to see if there would be some kind of flashier twist, but that never materializes. That doesn't necessarily imply something negative; a story can be told multiple times and still captivate an audience, and Saltburn pulls it off, with incredible restraint, but it does. After all, watching you invite a cancer into your home and consume its inhabitants one by one, remains a subtly gripping and entertaining experience, even if it lacks surprises or fails to create a lasting impression — though, I admit, it does looks nice. Moreover, it reaffirms what a great actor Barry Keoghan is destined to become.

I had another Nicolas Cage movie in me today and true to the pattern I just mentioned on my previous review of him making several bad movies before delivering a good one, The Retirement Plan comes to emphasize the side of the bad ones. I'll say that I think this mix could have worked and mostly you would expect it to because its cast was more than decent, but when everyone is there to pay the bills - I'm talking about everyone talking writer and director included - the outcome inevitably ends up being mediocre.

Dream Scenario presents a delightfully peculiar premise, featuring a college professor (Nic Cage) who inexplicably starts appearing in the dreams of his students and strangers alike. As the phenomenon grows, the protagonist undergoes the typical trajectory of any celebrity—becoming both a sensation and an outcast.Nicolas Cage, as has been his career pattern over the last two decades, alternates between about some 6 o 8 **** movies and then delivers a standout performance. Although he seems accustomed to intentionally eccentric roles by now.Dream Scenario is effective in getting its humor going, even though it loses some momentum toward the end due to a lack of more intricate exploration. The laughs flow naturally because the themes are easily understood, but beyond the entertainment, there's a noticeable absence of plot depth, and it doesn't strive for it.I concede that this lightness also prevents the narrative and characters from becoming wearisome, as they're clearly not designed for a deeper exploration, which is totally fine.While Dream Scenario may not be groundbreaking or feature a monumental point or scene, it provides intriguing and eccentric fun. I never found myself bored, which is already a significant win.

After his stumble with Downsizing, Alexander Payne is back with The Holdovers, which I believe is his best film since Sideways.I've come across reviews by professional critics claiming the film feels artificial, with sequences too calculated to impart a natural and real atmosphere. And to those opinions, I say: ''You're completely off the **** course, the scenes in a film are calculated, it's an integral part of the craft. However, The Holdovers isn't the type of film seeking to impress with psychological or philosophical lessons. Instead, it aims to foster an appreciation for the emotional weight of the story and, above all, to savor the performances, particularly that of Paul Giamatti, who reaffirms how criminally underrated he is as an actor.Despite its simplicity, this is a very good movie. One of the best I've seen this year. It demands a lot more attention.

Stating that a film isn't for everyone doesn't necessarily mean you'll be entirely repelled by the material and yet ****: The Musical feels so devoid of meaning and so dull that, in my view, it never ascends and does nothing to escape its pit of mediocrity.

A pretty but meandering and purposeless film.Isabelle Adjani won best actress in Cannes for this film and Possession in the same year. What she did Possession was way better.

I save Bobby Cannavale from the rest of this very dull comedy that instead of provoking laughter, I found myself consistently checking the clock to see how much longer it would take for it to end.

Ben Kingsley delivers a standout performance in an otherwise uneven film, grappling primarily with a lack of creativity that falls short of capturing the essence of what it aims to depict.Dalí, known for his surrealism, is poorly represented by a film that follows a predictability that undermines the essence of his artistic class.

A great performance by Colman Domingo provides this project with enough weight to get by, and that is because beyond the recognition it provides for the figure of Bayard Rustin, this is an extremely conventional film.

Is there a crisis of toxic masculinity? I'm not sure I would label it as a crisis. I think the problem has always existed, it's just that now it's much more public. The very sexual repression, pressures to provide and the social anxiety that these ''men'' face is something that is not usually addressed on both **** themselves for the fear of being labeled as weak or some homophobic connotation and the society that does not typically address the issue because the ''male gender'' is not known for doing so. Manodrome seems to want to explore that theme at first and yet goes down the most predictable path, disguising these men's problems with a response that involves violence and aggression because they are unable to communicate in any other way. Jesse Eisenberg performs a sort of variation on his character in The Art of Self-Defense and as an actor he is beginning to typecast himself quite a bit as the dude that directors turn to when choosing a performer who will embody the repressed guy who wants to look tough for the world and yet you can't believe he'll do the part.Even when you know he will eventually explode - which he does, in a scene that you could see coming but is extremely poorly constructed - his thin development offers very little in the way of convincingly selling that twist. The key problem with Manodrome is not that there are going to be people who identify with Eisenberg's character, that's more than expected, the film's problem is that without glorifying those attitudes, its plot resolution only demonstrates that those individuals will seek out people who will reaffirm their frustrations rather than seek out people who will make them confront them and so, in the end, the film says nothing substantial about it. It's its own echo chamber.

I liked it, but only within the range that I could say is merely basic. In my perspective, I managed to get the gist of the story, though the development unfolds at such a leisurely pace that when the situation finally explodes, it feels not only rushed, but **** Royal Hotel is basically enticing you to play along to find out if there's a payoff at the end that will reward your time and attention. And yes, there is, but to achieve that with impact, you need more than just inducing the viewer into the notion of how long the protagonists will endure all that toxic masculinity, before getting to the point you're looking for, which surprise, surprise, involves the predictable but contained violence. It earns the extra point because at least I thought it was a decent film, though ultimately, the experience is utterly short-lived.

If you've seen any of Ridley Scott's epics, you're undoubtedly familiar with his style. Whether it's Gladiator or The Last Duel, you've got a good sense of what to anticipate, and, naturally, Napoleon carries that unmistakable ****, even someone with a modicum of discernment would recognize that encapsulating the existence of a historical figure such as Napoleon Bonaparte was not going to be accomplished in a mere 158 minutes. However, it was equally implausible to imagine that the whole thing would exude such a dispiriting atmosphere. Napoleon comes off as a sort of compilation of some of his life's highlights, cherry-picking key battles and significant moments from his time on this earth, in an attempt to integrate them into what is evidently intended to be a cohesive narrative. However, it never achieves that cohesion.I mean, despite the grand scale of the battles, none of them exude excitement or tension. They come across as mechanical and expendable. Even the portrayal of his defeat at Waterloo, consuming about 15 minutes of the film's concluding stretch, feels rather ****, it's a movie that aims to be an epic, and yet it feels so hollow.Joaquin Phoenix was good, but he has done better.Even his Commodus in Gladiator had more personality than his Napoleon.This is not a bad film, and I appreciate that Ridley Scott continues to create them with impressive energy at 85 years old. He's made 18 in 23 years, but perhaps that prolific career should be considering better projects.Quality over quantity, because as he said in a recent interview, that Scorsese made Killers of the Flower Moon, in the same amount of time it took him to make four new movies, yet Scorsese doesn't lower his quality. Scott does.

55/100Disney is often forgiven much because of the ''Disney magic,'' the ''Disney factor.'' When it comes to princess stories, most audiences don't quibble much, and children, especially, are not affected by a cynicism that might disqualify the experience.Wish is compelling but it's so much more of the same that you find yourself caught in a sense of déjà vu, feeling like you've been there before, only the wrapping has changed and, voila, all of the sudden you're watching something ''new''.Wish is not the kind of movie where you have to overthink. Its target audience won't have a bad time watching it and, while it only seems to come to swell the catalog of new irrelevant characters for the company's fantasy repertoire, Wish accomplishes what it needs to do, in the simplest possible way, it's true, but it does it.

When Julianne Moore and Natalie Portman share the screen, the film shines, but when it doesn't, as the viewer, you will have no problem understanding the story, but it doesn't feel like it matters with more enough dramatic weight, because even with so much to explore and delve into considering the nature of the plot and the themes within it, I have to say that much of the treatment given by Todd Haynes is grossly superficial. I mean, he never loses his way, but much of his treatment turns out to be pretty shallow. That was both surprising and unfortunate.

Similarly to Terrifier, Thanksgiving seeks to numb you with its dose of gore to the extent that you're left with only two choices: either you love it, or it becomes so comically absurd that you find it laughable. In this case, there's no middle ground.Regrettably, the movie totally overlooks any trace of creativity and, most importantly, scares. It neglects any attempt to generate tense or involving sequences; it's exclusively fixated on brutality.From my perspective, this approach gets monotonous when there's no diversity in the mix, and Thanksgiving just keeps adding more bloody meat to the broth until the experience becomes saturating and you start to get sick of it.

Next Goal Wins presents itself as an underwhelming comedy that, instead of exalting the spirit of self-improvement that should have emanated from the true story that inspires it, plunges into the idiosyncrasies of its director.Taika Waititi resorts to his exhausting need to impose his humor and style over the plot, which results in a lack of symbiosis between both elements, causing a bittersweet and disappointing taste. Waititi opts for the most predictable approach, saturating it with clichés and presenting it in a superficial manner that is unable to provide it with more **** seems, from what I have read, that it would be more enriching to enjoy the documentary of the same name. Fassbender delivers, but after seeing him in The Killer, it's clear that his talent was wasted here. I mean, he can be a good comedy actor, it's just that he needs better scripts and of course better directors.

The only person that comes out victorious here is Alice Eve, as she manages to sell the drama and suspense with her performance, as simple as it may seem. The rest of the plot and even a poor villain played by Bryan Cranston make this film an ineffective, boring and, above all, tension-free experience. Clearly a movie that those involved made to pay the bills.

There is a short sequence in which one of the main characters says that immigrants that immigrants take on jobs that many Americans don't want to do, and they do it for less than the minimum wage. That point has always bothered me because even some US politicians, who claim to champion immigrant rights, tend to mention that as if that's a positive **** the exploitation of these people really something they see as a good example so they can be living and working in the US? I don't think so. And that's the key problem with American Carnage. The buried message is better than the movie, the problem is that you have to see the movie to know it, but you can learn that elsewhere really.

What a tremendous waste of **** Estate is a film with will, but extremely inoperative. And by will, I mean that the idea for comedy is present but nothing in it comes together, as I think it wanted to do to make the humor work. What a missed opportunity. I was so bored but that confirms to me why it went completely unnoticed.

All things considered, Butcher's Crossing is a more than average effort that finds itself stuck in the mold of being another conventional Nicolas Cage movie, which ironically is what will provide the film with most of the audience's attention.While it's far from being an explicitly mediocre western, I can't say I liked it either.

The Marvels is colorful, humorous, has small doses of good action, but is still entertaining. I mean, the superheroes are still present, but not the stories and therefore this movie serves no purpose, and you don't feel anything for anyone in it.That's not to say this movie is a colossal failure, but like many of the post-Endgame productions, they could have skipped it, and nothing would have happened. Marvel Studios has reached an impasse where their movies no longer stand on their own but are now just a stepping stone to something else. They have become juts a piece of the breadcrumb trail that renders them irrelevant. They fail to generate the same excitement as in the past, mainly because there is nothing at stake, making them unable to engage the viewers with the anticipation of what will come next, especially since beyond the introduction of Kang, the direction of the MCU for the next few years remains a mystery. I doubt even Kevin Feige has a clear roadmap; it seems as if he's adjusting course as he goes **** most crucial segment of The Marvels unfolds in its closing 3 minutes. This occurs in the final scene featuring Ms. Marvel alongside another character from a different Marvel series that finally confirms the upcoming arrival of The Young Avengers—whether it's in the form of a movie or a series remains uncertain. Additionally, the mid-credits scene introduces a second X-Men to the MCU. Other than that, The Marvels doesn't add anything to it. While it does provide entertainment, you won't care about it once you leave the theater.

Good for Saoirse Ronan and Paul Mescal in terms of their performances, but the film, on the other hand, is a lifeless, underdeveloped and muddled story that never manages to wake up from its slumber, and as much as you as a viewer can maneuver as to how ''intriguing'' or ''interesting'' you might find the concept of its plot, -because frankly there are very few places to go with that argument, by the way- the truth is that Foe cannot overcome one very simple but 100% crucial element, and that is to avoid being tedious, and Foe is an extremely tedious movie.

At the time I read the Hunger Games trilogy and caught up on the movies, so when the prequel book was announced I think that like many of its hardcore fans I was quite surprised to discover that the central character of this new narrative would be none other than the antagonist from the original story.This choice felt a bit peculiar, especially given the limited information we had about that character throughout the three books and the four movies.Frankly it was known that he was a terrible, ruthless dictator who showed no concern whatsoever about eliminating anyone to maintain his power and perpetuate the violence and cruelty of The Hunger Games, effectively keeping the entire population subdued and fearful. That was pretty much the extent of what we knew about him. So, it seemed a bit odd that the creator of this character, aimed to humanize or rationalize him in some way, particularly since, as I mentioned, he wasn't a character with much depth or **** knew he was the bad guy, but that's pretty much it. I feel it would have been more effective to provide some character development for him in the original trilogy instead of making him the main focus in the prequel. Even though I haven't read the book, watching the movie now makes me question the significance of delving into the origin of this villain. What's the purpose of understanding the creation of such a monster?Was she trying to convey that he was not always like that? I mean, is there a genuine need for a narrative about the ascent of a vicious dictator? The response doesn't quite satisfy me, and I believe that's the primary issue with this movie from what I can gather, particularly given its more than excessive length. Some bits work from what they take from the previous movies, and I think they have that advantage because it was made by the same director of the last three. So, I think that's what The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes does well to appeal to most audiences, as that's what fulfills the ''entertainment'' part. However, it will hardly provoke any kind of discussion about morality, assuming that was an avenue they intended to explore. As I mentioned, while I read the original trilogy, I had no interest in reading the prequel, and the truth is that after seeing the movie, I have even less interest in doing **** fans of the saga, it's a green light, but for the casual viewer, I would say there's not much you're missing out on.

Relentlessly brutal, I can recognize that. But the whole ordeal ends at that point since that its only trick.

While promising in its conception Suitable Flesh turns out to be a disappointment. Nowadays people hear that a movie is based on a Lovecraft story and that seems to gratuitously add a quality to it that it doesn't actually have.While it's undeniable that the movie had the potential to be a captivating cosmic horror thriller, its execution is marred by a lack of finesse, resulting in a disappointing outcome that never truly takes off. And this goes from how cheap it looks to its overly simplistic screenplay.Heather Graham looks more committed than one might expect, but, in the grand scheme of things, Suitable Flesh fails to leave a lingering impression that would actually matter.

Wingwomen is a film that has a lot of tonal ups and downs which makes it rather disconnected without being able to get a real moment of true emotion and tension that would get you to give a damn about its story. It has its share of action and comedy, but director/star Mélanie Laurent doesn't share much chemistry with her co-star Adèle Exarchopoulos and when the third lead - Manon Bresch - makes her appearance she feels like a third wheel that doesn't fit properly with them, even when her character gains more weight towards the climax and conclusion. What I can rescue from Wingwomen is the musical score that was performed by the band Archive, which I like quite a lot. The movie itself struck me as completely disposable.

Nyad is a subtly inspiring tale that benefits greatly from having two actresses of such high caliber as Jodie Foster and Annette Bening to keep the audience engaged. Nevertheless, I believe there was a slight absence of focus and depth, which is somewhat understandable - at least how I see it - as the film's primary emphasis leans more towards the achievement itself rather than anything else.Although considering that detail, the film could have trimmed at least half an hour for a more efficient use of its running time.While it is true that to this date her crossing has not been formally ratified by any recognized marathon swimming organization, it is not as if she has been accused of cheating either.

The Marsh King's Daughter had an excellent premise that could have been turned into a much more effective drama, exploring the traces and wounds of a trauma. However, the film opts for an approach that, while not becoming explicitly simplistic, feels clumsy and ultimately lacks **** you're looking for a film that will entertain without requiring an intense narrative or a deeper plot, The Marsh King's Daughter can serve that purpose just fine. However, the film doesn't aspire to more, and as a result, you're likely to forget it in less than 24 hours.

In 2019, John Cena starred in the comedy Playing With Fire, which at the time went completely unnoticed in theaters. Back then, I expressed that even though as hard as Cena would try, he would not become a movie star like Dwayne Johnson did.However, he made appearances in more famous films, joined the Fast and Furious franchise, and got a lot of recognition for his portrayal of Peacemaker in The Suicide Squad, followed by his own series on HBO Max, so it seemed my skepticism might have been **** it seems Cena is back to where he was limited and destined to be with his recent appearances in such irrelevant movies as Vacation Friends 1 and 2, Hidden Strike with Jackie Chan and now Freelance. So everything seems to be back to normal.Freelance is a terrible action comedy. A mess that fails to be either entertaining or funny. It feels like a manufactured product in the hopes of getting attention for having Cena involved while the rest of the movie seems to have been improvised. Still, even to produce low-quality content, certain skills are required, and Freelance makes it clear pretty quickly that whatever they were looking to pursue is being offered to the audiences in a crappy and pitiful way.

There is no shortage of talent in this movie, and it got some genuine laughs out of me at certain moments, but sometimes no matter how hard you try, weak scripts are weak scripts and nothing of substance can be done to make them work.Quiz Lady is the kind of comedy that wants to succeed with only good intentions but lacks the humorous quality to pull it ****'s a pity for Sandra Oh, as you can tell she did put more effort into her performance, while Awkwafina, on the other hand, once again proves that her acting and comedic range is extremely minuscule.

Fingernails is an intriguing sci-fi/romance film that tells a story in which love is measured through a very strange and painful test that consists of tearing off a fingernail from each of the members of the relationship.This is a recurring theme in science fiction movies in which an algorithm or some kind of invention is the one that tells you who is supposedly the ''love'' of your life, only for the main characters to discover that emotions play the defining role in their choices. Nothing new there, but I recognize that the concept is captivating enough, though it ends up sounding better on paper than what the movie ends up executing with it.Fingernails exhibits a lack of subtlety and intensity in addressing issues of affection and the characters' own insecurities, and this happens because in my opinion the script tries more to sell the central process of its plot rather than delve into the motivations, so you get the idea of what the story is doing quite well, but at the same time it turns out to be frustratingly pointless and derivative.Jessie Buckley and Riz Ahmed's exceptional performances rescue the film. Their work deserves praise, but I do think Fingernails could have benefitted from a more imaginative execution to achieve a more enduring impact, rather than merely becoming another project destined to get lost in the vast sea of streaming content without making any significant noise.

Sid Vicious might not have had the musical ability to save his life, but punk, at its core, did not require virtuosity, and both Sid and The Sex Pistols have for decades represented the style and genre in unparalleled fashion.Personally, I'm not a fan of exalting figures like Vicious, as his life is a stark example of excess and self-destruction in the music world. However, this film provides a showcase for two remarkable performances, with Gary Oldman's being the one that is especially ****'s amazing to see this chameleon-like actor demonstrate his versatility.

Along the lines of the oneiric and, in this case, also psychedelic, Belladonna of Sadness is a wonderful Japanese animated film that embraces a rather unconventional style. The visuals may overshadow the narrative to some extent, but when the aesthetics are so dazzling, I don't consider it a problem, as it more than makes up for what the plot fails to **** you are a fan of experimental cinema and a lover of animation, this gem is fascinating and daring, and leaves a more than remarkable impression.

The Killer was among my most anticipated films this year, and to be completely honest, my enthusiasm to see it was quite palpable, and while seeing the results I can consider it a competent film, taking into account its director and leading actor, I have to say that this film falls short of the mark.David Fincher constructs a sort of internal monologue centered on his main character, which gives him certain interesting characteristics in the first 15 minutes of its execution, since everything the character says and does is related to his objective. However, once this initial sequence concludes, Fincher applies the same method to all the events that follow and that's where the issues begin.While, in a sense, this is commendable because it shows how dedicated and focused the character is on his task, it also makes him completely one-dimensional, a problem that is reflected in Michael Fassbender's performance, who basically takes what he did with his character David in Prometheus and endows him with a mask of coldness that he never sheds, resulting in a functional but extremely monotonous character.I didn't find The Killer to be a bad film, it maintains a steady pace and progresses without major difficulties, however, it is so self-absorbed in a single tonality that it is inevitable to wonder what the hell David Fincher wanted to tell with this story, which unfortunately is below the quality of what he usually delivers.

When Evil Lurks is a film that plunges into insidious, cruel and devastating horror. Despite some flaws, it manages to stand out by fully embracing the desolation of its narrative, never seeking to soften the intensity of what it presents.What I quite liked about this film is that it firmly sells the concept of what it means to stand up to evil. At least in the way a movie can.Here we do not find heroes who overcome the adversity and emerge unscathed from the situation. This story plunges into destruction and depravity, which I believe should be the norm when confronting demons who rejoice in them.While it doesn't take full advantage of all its elements and I admit that some of its main characters can be exasperating on more than one occasion, When Evil Lurks definitely moves away from the comfort zone and subdued horror that has dominated mainstream American cinema over the last decade - ahem, ahem, Blumhouse I'm talking to you - and manages to be quite effective for good **** you are looking for a solid proposal within the horror genre, I highly recommend this film.

While it's certainly undeniable that Five Nights at Freddy’s represents a completely different approach, its results also represent to perfection what I just mentioned in my opinion of the movie When Evil Lurks, which is that it reflects how the mainstream horror that is manufactured in the US is so watered down and cheapened that the producers and studios believe that just by carrying the name of a successful brand they've done more than half the work, and they seem to assume that fans and non-fans alike will enjoy scares of such poor impact in a plot that is so meaningless and so unentertaining.Honestly, my expectations were not high, but I did not foresee it turning out to be so lacking in substance and so simplistic. Which to no one's surprise was produced by Blumhouse.

Netflix released just in August a miniseries called Painkiller that focused on the birth of the opioid crisis, with an emphasis on Purdue Pharma, a company owned by Richard Sackler and his family, which were the makers of OxyContin. The pharmaceutical eventually went bankrupt, but its owners remain free and **** Pain Hustlers is a movie that purports to redeem a drug saleswoman - portrayed by a completely unremarkable Emily Blunt - who was blinded by money, and in this story, she is the person who had a change of heart and decided to cooperate with the authorities so that justice could do its work on those who were above ****'s a rather simplistic and mundane attempt to wash away dirt that in the real world we know is a lie. After banks and the guns in the US, there's nothing more protected than the drug companies, or at least their owners, and the way this story pretends to sell that there were some repercussions is pitiful and mostly **** just to mention it because that's how the movie ends, John Kapoor, the man who inspires Andy Garcia's character was sentenced to 5 1/2 years in prison in 2020. He did not enter prison right away because of COVID and just in June of this year he was released after serving only two years. It is estimated that the once billionaire still has a fortune of nearly $800 million dollars. Justice no doubt about it.

The Lair of the White Worm is the kind of movie you usually say is so bad it's good, though I have to be honest about it and say it's really not that bad, it's just too campy and cartoonishly ridiculous at so many points that it's a little hard to dive into.I think that a more violent approach, though not necessarily serious, would have done wonders.

The German Doctor is a film set in Argentina post-World War II. The story follows the infamous **** SS doctor and officer Josef Mengele, who conducted experiments on humans at the Auschwitz concentration camp, but in this case, Mengele is a different kind of **** my opinion, The German Doctor is slower than it should be, because while its subtlety is commendable, the lack of a tense climax takes away from the overall thrust and, more importantly, emotion. It's unsettling, but it doesn't do much with it.This is a thriller that leans more towards drama, though I thought it was a well-made and well-acted piece that brings substantial relevance to a subject that is not often explored as much as it is the aftermath of WWII and the individuals like Mengele who managed to ****'s not the kind of film that attracts widespread attention, but I found it satisfyingly apt in its own right.

I had been promised an extraordinary film, but let's just say that perhaps certain expectations and opinions were a bit overblown. Still, INU-OH has a rather impressive spirit and verve that gives it a rich, psychedelic identity. And while perhaps the music and visual quality deserve special recognition above its plot, this is not necessarily a detriment to its virtues.This was good.

I can acknowledge this film's embrace of the subject of demons from an Indian perspective. Unfortunately, these days, horror films are often not content to be just that, as they necessitate the incorporation of a cultural backstory that ultimately has no significant impact on the climax or the final **** discrepancy between what this story intends to explore or communicate about an immigrant family's experience and what ultimately becomes the supernatural and horror experience is very noticeable. This disharmony is not conducive to the progression of the plot or the effectiveness of the horror moments.Ultimately, the skills of It Lives Inside adhere to a mold that seeks to adhere to the conventions of the genre, and herein lies the fundamental problem that plagues films like this one: the inability to balance the two narrative fronts they wish to address.

David Slade's Dark Harvest is sort of like a mix of The Hunger Games meets The Purge with a traditional Halloween style sensation to it that feels enjoyable.While Dark Harvest features some good things it also shows a significant deficiency in its world building and character development, which leaves certain aspects **** performances and the evolution of the characters, in general, feel one-dimensional, which in turn fails to deliver the sense that something truly important is at stake, especially when it comes to its outcome.Despite its shortcomings Dark Harvest offers an experience that stands as a reasonable option to enjoy during this season and while it may not offer much in the way of spookiness, let's just say it goes more from average to good instead of going from average to bad.

Although I have not yet had the opportunity to immerse myself in the book that served as the basis for this film, the knowledge I have of these cases provokes me to say that, despite Martin Scorsese's monumental effort, the film falls short in exposing the vast conspiracy and betrayal that was hatched in Osage County, Oklahoma, to the detriment of the families of the Osage Nation.From the way the government began to impose white tutors on them under the pretext of "helping" them manage their own money, to how many people in the town became explicit accomplices in the horrific killing spree, all as a result of unbridled **** that dark period, corruption and chaos reigned, allowing the conspirators to bribe law enforcement agents and prosecutors as they carried out their murders. In addition, the ingrained prejudices of the time contributed to these crimes going unnoticed and ignored.However, that is history and there is nothing to be done about it except to continue to expose it.What this film does achieve, in addition to being a cinematic feat, is to consolidate Martin Scorsese's position, even at 80 years of age, as one of the greatest directors in the history of cinema and of our times. It also gives Leonardo DiCaprio the opportunity to enrich his already impressive resume in his sixth collaboration with him. While also giving a huge showcase to a relatively unknown Lily Gladstone who responds **** atrocities that Ernest Burkhart, his uncle and brother inflicted on Mollie Burkhart and her family transcends any bounds of decency and morality.Killers of the Flower Moon does not lend itself to subtleties, but rather exhibits without compunction the devastation that comes with trusting and loving monsters. Greed, ambition and betrayal are all reflected and centered in the suffering imposed on Lily Gladstone's character and her ****, I admit that I think that even with DiCaprio being the face of the film, Scorsese made a mistake in trying to give some conscience to the character he plays because, although in no way seems to redeem him, let's say it softens the image of the ruthless criminal he **** in all, this film is exceptional. A cinematic triumph, especially considering the time it demands from the viewer, and that adds to many of the other amazing productions that enrich the career of this master filmmaker.

Part of me hated what this film seems to glorify in some ways, and part of me understood it. However, it's hard to completely agree with a plot that feels somewhat loosely structured, especially when a character's narcissism and toxicity takes center stage, and he remains your main figure and after the damage he did you let him finish the story with a smile on his face while he rides off on his **** it's terrible when this lead character and the rest of the characters are not genuinely interesting, because the story forces us to be uncomfortable witnesses driven by morbidity instead of a legitimate motivation.I wasn't disappointed, but I must say that it fell extremely short of what it could have been.

I hate to to use the term "artsy-fartsy," but She Came to Me is the kind of indie film that displays excessive self-consciousness about its artistic aspirations and seeks to give the impression that its plot is more "intellectual" than it really is, wandering aimlessly without being able to find not only what it wants to say but where it wants to **** trio of lead actors comprising Peter Dinklage, Marisa Tomei and Anne Hathaway manage to keep this from falling apart and it is they who will get the audience's attention to want to see it, although there is little common ground in both the dramatic and humorous aspects of this story to make it stand out in any way.

The film and the album that was rediscovered about the musicians who inspired this story share the same name, and it's oddly appropriate that the plot centers on the act of scratching that dream, even when it manifests on a small scale. After all, who can resist this kind of storytelling? It is a universal experience that is hard to avoid.A bit of historical context: Donnie and Joe Emerson are two brothers who recorded an album in 1979 that, at the time, went completely unnoticed, and their aspirations of achieving fame and establishing a musical career never materialized. However, in 2008, a collector discovered the album and began to disseminate it, which led to its reissue, and in 2012, they held a commemorative concert.Dreamin’ Wild is about that. A simple story, but it is precisely the catharsis that emanates from its simplicity that makes it so effective. Unlike the other film I had the opportunity to see this morning, this one achieves a greater resonance because it is unpretentious, has solid performances and manages to convey emotions effectively while providing entertainment. If that's not good cinema, I don't know what is.

The narrative device employed in this work is exhausted more quickly than it should be, though it manages to squeeze its potential adequately, considering the distressing and senseless nature of the small portion of the genocide the protagonists **** is a terrible fear encapsulated in a situation set against a much greater **** was a good drama.

The latest directorial effort from John Carney, following the exceptional Sing Street, Flora and Son focuses on Flora, a single mother who is determined to connect with her teenage son, Max. A Guitar and guitar lessons form part of that approach.Nevertheless, this premise is only the starting point of what the plot intends to communicate, since it's intended to reflect on the idea that music is a manifestation deeply rooted in human emotions and relationships.While the film effectively transmits this message through its narrative, it falls short in the musical section. In my opinion, the musical selection is poorly chosen and not up to par with the story, resulting in a lack of memorable sequences in which the music plays a part. Unfortunately, this detracted from the film's overall performance.Despite this limitation, I found Flora and Son to be an acceptable option.

This is one of the worst and poorest sci-fi movies I have ever seen and incidentally it is the worst movie I have seen that MAX has put in its catalog so far, that is classified as an original movie for the streaming service.Gray Matter is a completely uninteresting story combined with bland and insignificant characters portrayed by actors who exhibit no acting chops at all. A major failure.