Kaustav

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I would generally give movies like these a 7. I would have loved to have given this specific movie an 8 because how much I enjoyed it. But because of the trope it inhabits and the liberties that need to be undertaken to make the story bearable and likable despite their unlikely and leap-y nature, I came down to a 7 as you can see. Having given that interesting and exciting tidbit about how my mind works when thinking about review numbers, I would like move on to the worded part of my personal opinion about this movie which is, I repeat, I really enjoyed the movie and even more so the cast. The story is fresh reboot devoid of the baggage of the previous editions of the franchise - Marvel couldn't rope in 'their friendly neighborhood Spider-man because Tobey Maguire (I quite liked the original trilogy) was too old to fit in and Andrew Garfield's portrayal was over-the-top, dousing the darkness (with Gwen's death and general loss of life) in such a way that in no way was fit for the MCEU storylines we have come to know. And all that didn't even matter because Marvel hadn't even re-acquired their sold rights during the times these movies were made. Thankfully, this movie definitely comes under the taglines of "everything happens for a reason" and "good things happen to those who wait" (both of these statements are not universal truths at all but do generally make sense because of how human minds and lives work and rationalize our existence). The story is way more high school-centric and the cast feels about in the right age groups which helps immerse the audience in the story as much as they can about flying robots and teenage spider mutants (and taking myself as an example, you could say that the immersion level is quite high since I have always considered it terrific and terrible that Spider-man could exist and world of superpowers was possible). The start to the movie is a cool move on part of the people who made the story possible because it really gives a contemporary to the times sort-of feel and integrates Peter Parker, played by Tom Holland into the MCEU. The fact that Holland has such great chemistry with RDJ and fact that Iron Man's personal stake in Parker's life and story is reaffirmed and plays a necessary part in his struggle to find acceptance for his powers just made it real for me, since Iron Man is where it all began 11 years ago from now (in 3 days, it all comes full circle when I get to rejoice or possibly get terrorized by the arrival of The Mad Titan as Stark and Parker try to fight back). As far as the story goes, it is fairly simple and don't think there is any point to spoil the little things as it far too enjoyable to go in somewhat blind. But it does provide that some room for the actors to flex their skills with a twist here and there. Personally, I was much more interested and delighted about the cast and what they brought to the table for the story. So, thank you Director Jon Watts and in addition, Homecoming is where you may finally feel at home in Marvel's clutches (despite its money-grubby nature) and that is quite a good place to be before the War based and for the gauntlet which spans Infinity begins.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

It is a serene, intoxicating youth drama where each line holds you comfortably as think as about joys of life and love. It is exquisite in execution and the score is very underrated in its obviousness. Shout out to Chalamet, Hammer, Sthulbarg and Esther Garrel. Their selection is vindicated in their sincere presentation of their roles. I understand why this movie was appreciated by so many critics and audience in general - It is truly of the gay romance masterpiece of its time and it is also is something so much more than it resonates with something in every one of us. I do hope you'll take my word for it on this much, you must watch it and then decide on calling it by its name. :)

If I could I would instantly tell rate a 10; but that would mean that it's a flawless movie and everything in it is already of such an elevated standard, that it just won't be topped. But I, objectively, can't do that because it would be a bit unfair to classics like Casablanca and Citizen Kane. Honestly though, I can't say I found any faults in this movie. It's Paul Anderson's work and I already consider his Magnolia one of my must watch movies (and there was quirky AF and weird enjoyable story of Boogie Nights). It stars Daniel Day Lewis, the man who effortlessly time again slipped into so many characters and brought into narration in such a glorious way that it leaves all of us glad about cinema. And the supporting couple of Manville and Krieps are almost are as good at bringing the best out of the interactions amongst the trio as the subtle and upheaving score that hums, a bit like a phantom indeed. There's the rating, the acting, the cast and obviously, by now, you are most likely convinced. So, here's a right proper nudge in the direction of why south of two hours of your life's time is absolutely well spent on this: It is because Phantom Thread is one of most unlikely sort of biographical story and antitheticlally, the most personal sort of biography possible. It is the story of a man who was known for his work but what really needs to be told about him is who he was and how he behaved, why he was perturbed and how it comes to a beautiful tumble down for him. While Phantom Thread is a movie on the life of Reynolds ****, who sew the best for the best to wear, but the title of the movie is almost a beguiling pun; for it is the phantom threads of His life that really get unwinded in this superlative act of storytelling. I hope I have helped somewhat in making up your mind. And if you don't want to, 'you should eff off back to wherever you came from'.

The Square is a difficult film, almost a bit too much of fluff and with no closure or even punchline to take away. It is quirky, a lot of it is placed in a way that induces mirthless laughter but does not make you think much about it is trying to tell. It is movie whose sum of pieces (a few interesting ones - namely, the Museum Speech, the hookup situation(s) and human ape fiasco among others) is so much better than its whole; so much so that a person would be much better off watching those clips in a skit/sketch sort video on YT than ever caring about the movie itself. Here are the only three reasons you should watch this movie: 1) Danish (possibly) may well be the most annoying language humanly spoken ever and this movie goes out of its way to let you experience that. 2) There are very real and awkward interactions and conversations between some of the cast that is unbelievably fun. 3) It got a Academy Award nomination and you are far too curious and obsessive to let the opportunity go of knowing what did Terry Notary, Elisabeth Moss and Dominic West do to deserve it. Well, go and watch it then. Perhaps you'll know.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Firstly, do not judge this film by the contents of its reviews irrespective of whether it's good or pallidly pretentious. You should watch this movie. Why? Because it is sort of thing that in the first place makes people want to explore escapists panels of an artwork. It is the sort of thing that not only is bearer of a tale of reality that is embellished in places for the better but also the courageous sort and innovative workmanship that inspires people to do better. And if you think I am being overzealous in my praise of this movie, then let me remind of the hard work that was put into making 65000 frames of oil painting that were used to make this animated motion picture. It does not rest in its laurels aforementioned which surely are being already recorded in some or other panels of history, it produces passionate acting from a caring cast who fill and fit in well in their roles telling the tale of a man who lived with internal turmoil in life than the fame and recognition his art brought him in death. As far as arguments about his repetitive and not enough display of the titular character goes, I implore people to gather patience, be calm and revisit their words and possibly watching the movie itself. It is a posthumous journey of finding the truth of a perceived reality and while it does take time to get the bottom of things, it doesn't dally and neither do its protagonist seem bland. Also, while Van Gogh is shown infrequently, it is meaningful to his arc and every moments of this narrative is dedicated to him. To a Man who drew 800 pieces f art in 8 years, To a Man who was so troubled and so lonely, To a Man whose story changed the heart of another man unwilling and To a Man who left memories - for better or worse - in his wake for a lifetimes to come. If you still don't think this is worth your time, well good luck to further endeavors which I hope may bring you almost as much joy as this story did for me. And if you ever see anyone who was involved in this movie and its making, call them out and give them a congratulatory hug recognizing their contribution and dedications. Viva La Van Gogh!

This movie is hauntingly real, the actors too real almost, their stories hurt in a way that i s hard to forget - perhaps because we, as the viewers with probably better situations are the ones who are to able to realize what these people can't have and what these simple, sweet, children are getting twisted and torn away from their chance at happiness of childhood. It would be unfair to say that they are orphans and are dying of hunger or not being helped at all. No, they have some form of family and even friendly hands reach out from time to time, but its not enough. It's never enough to give such troubled people to get out of their vicious cycle. More importantly though, this story is about telling that there are such people and they are living, in their own way. Do not pity them, but if anything help them out with some bucks and a job if you can. Lastly, it is not where you should come looking for solutions for there is ample evidence for a lot of people it is just another way of life they can't get out or want to, for almost the same reasons as any other person from some other lifestyle - after this while, maybe it just seems easier than stepping out of the box. Special and obvious mention to the Child Actor who plays Moni and her relationship with her mother, whose portrayal as the slummy white single mother is very well done. While Willem Dafoe is too much of esoteric iconoclast to even be pointed out for his subtle acting, all the additional child actors and supporting cast really bring the whole of The Florida Project seem excruciatingly original to the viewer. The sound and general editing does well to avoid any jarring realisation between the scene changes even though there a quite few contrasts in changing. To sum up, You should watch this movie for its excellent acting, casting, story, direction and editing among all else I forgot to single out. But here's why You must watch the movie - It will remind to be kind and contemplative in your compassion on those low days when your mind can't help be a frog in the well.

PP2 is a bit on dryer and less humorous side of its prequel. The incumbence of bigger supporting cast who are seemingly quirky are just nothing as comfortable and enjoyable as Martin slipping into the skins of French accenting-Oddly Spying-Incapaby-buffoonish-at-being-best-at-his-job character de Closeau. Special mention to John Cleese for filling in as the new Chief Inspector Dreyfuss - for even though the accent and obscure idiocy that the previous actor brought is gone, this is The Cleese we are talking about. This man was the heart of great comical masterclasses such as Monty Python and Fawlty Towers for a good reasons and he shows that when he butts his reddened face into the washroom wall ;p. All on all, leave behind logic, mostly, and lower your expectations of the last time when you start through it and keep guffawing in mirth till it ends.

It is very simplistic form of slaptisck comedy that does a comic genius in the form of Steve Martin portraying Jacques Closeau. Jean Reno is by far the dark horse in terms of his supporting act and Emily Mortimer as Nicole is the perfect French secretary who leaves a fading memory of wanting something so much without never realizing it till its too late. Put your level-headed logic under the pillow of your bed and enjoy the hell out of it because that's how it works.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I felt the much **** (critical) movie of This is 40 is much more entertaining option than this despite the more solemn message this is supposed to be about. It is so much so of the generic formula that I don't care about the characters, story or climax; for I know exactly what will happen. And I don't care about it. The worst part of this is that now I mostly considering movies by Judd Apatow as a white noise source when I am tired or bored to actually watch something substantial. While this is a objective review based on proper proof and reason, take my advise: Stay yhe hell the from this one if you can. The rest is up to you.

It is a good semi-biopic. Not excellent to store away in your Hard Drive but not bad enough to diss in your next **** post. If nothing else, I applaud Margot Robbie's performance. it should gotten an Oscar nomination, despite all the other great actors in there. The movie is the weird mix of changing camera shots, documentary style shots and fourth wall breaks that brings alive a portrayal why a woman like Tonya Harding turned out. The story of her life being one of cruelty, abuse and misguided emotions is a right proper tragedy and there is darkly humorous about how that is shown - which was necessary to keep the focus on the character herself rather than the abuse. It tells of Harding as a violent woman, a stupid woman, a simple woman, an innocent woman, an accomplice woman, an unfulfilled woman, a problematic woman whose life is the indictment of the American way of life. The movie wants you to know that is it giving the truth. I suggest you take out two hours of your time and find out if you are in agreement with that. And on the off chance you aren't, it is still a good movie to put on your checklist.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I have seen the boil and bluster about Patty Jenkins being the first woman director to rake in 100 million for a movie. I don't if I should make a big deal about or be apathetic for **** this like makes no sense - It is not indictment of women that the movies they directed didn't earn such moolah ever before. But perhaps, highlighting such may affect the industry in a better way hopefully. This is a movie that for me stood because of Gal Gadot taking the titular role and it her own in terms of sheer glamour, grace, beauty and strength she portrayed. Rarely before have I been convinced of strong superwoman portrayal. Also Chris Pine and his gang of burly front-liners are much more poignant in men at war storyline, despite how hackneyed and bad the World War background was shown; not that much is expected of superhero movies in that regard anyway. The thing that makes this movie was worth the watch is it values the meaning of sacrifice and the impact of human lives; despite all their darkness and malevolence, the important choice to be made of what, who and why you want to believe in. That's what Wonder Woman is about.

I have never liked the Thor movies despite Loki being one of the most favorable characters in MCU. Perhaps, I was annoyed at the franchise for messing around with an artistic masterclass like Stefan Skellan and putting Natalie Portman in an annoying damsel role or not utilizing that nigh-pitched bombshell that is Kat Dennings. Maybe, I divulged. Anyways, Ragnorak is the funniest Marvel movie ever made and it is done so with the culmination of character deflection Loki who goes from World-conquering evil in Avengers to just a God of Mischief who Thor understands and can deal with and still be counted on to help out. As far as U-turns go, this is about it. But it's not a bad thing. It's enjoyable. And is Chris Hemsworth's Thor portrayal - He's funnier, less broody, realistic about his life choices and position, far less buff and with a new haircut. He has a few cool moments to with his entrance fight, the Gladiator helmet and Thunder God scene. You can pretty much round it off with new incomers - Cate Blanchett (cool Evil make-up), Jeff Goldblum (Wacky and Goldblum) and Tessa Thompson (Hot Warrior who purports to the possibility of Valkyries being a squad of voracious lesbites) being cool enough to complete the enjoyable five-fecta. Thor: Ragnorak is nothing extraordinary and nothing except the formulaic story but it is much better to deal to have when you are going to watch a movie of this nature.

Despite the fantastical CGI showpieces, I really can't give anything to this movie on basis of that. For Marvel surely has done better in that department and still manage to resemble bare-minimum and average act story-lines in their movies. Justice League does try to do what Avengers had to with 5 to 6 prep origin movies and much more prolonged and sustained storytelling which they knew has a future beyond the today and immediate box office. JL hurries through characters, their intros, their dialogues, camaraderie and the cast doesn't even look comfortable. Ben Affleck seemed a grizzly sort of fine before but now, he's just bland and without even a proper thing or two to say. Ezra Miller has an acceptably enjoyable quirkiness that could be associated with a very young Barry Allen but that's that; he's no quicksilver from X-Men Future of The Past irrespective of the speed matching debate. And Cyborg, well that character was simply unnecessary beyond the point of ticking some sort of checklist. The only saving grace is Gal Gadot's existence as Wonder Woman and Aquaman's (I hope they don't ruin the legacy of machismo that is Jason Momoa) Ode to her. Lastly, Steppenwolf is a straw-man baddie that could be anyone, possibly even the dark master Darkseid himself. Justice League is obvious failure of an overcooked hotch-potch that Zack Snyder (He had personal problems during that period) and Joss Whedon (perhaps, his sneaky feminist ally act kept him busy,, hmmm...) indulged in DC's corporate kerfuffling.

It is as the critics say, It is horrible and so it should be with the story it was going with and its cast. Not even The Rock's absolute alpha presence or Efron's boyish hunk charms or several display of flesh could save this one. Just watch if you're absolutely bored or feeling fine with cringing, and at worst you'll know of the existence of an angel named Kelly Rohrbach. And there's Alexandra Daddario of True Detective fame, so there's that. A special mention to the freaking beta male cuck that Donnie - please don't ever misguide yourself into thinking any self-respecting, let alone hot-ass babe, would ever want to end up with him unless she's a sadist or has a death-wish by boredom.

Underwhelming. I am fan of the work of Aaron Sorkin. Everything he writes has such a sharp edge to that is feels to fun to not just watch but hear patiently and intently. He is a good storyteller. Despite my obvious bias in this case, I don't know whether I should blame the writers who worked on it or the story itself, which while still unique, is just not interesting or causal enough to make a difference to me. I still admire the acting of Jessica Chastain (and the opportunity to know awesome and attractive she can look when needed to). She was only reason I was willing to watch through to the end. Her portrayal of a character that is perhaps way more than interesting I thought it would be. Idris Elba and Kevin Costner couldn't do enough to make me care for them or their characters, it felt anybody else would have sufficed too. At least, it was indictment of a chance at the Justice system still having hopes on itself and good people not being absolutely being horribly messed up for some inadvertent mistakes they met. Who knows, for this movie won't really answer it for you.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This is a sweet indulgent farewell sorta return to the comic masterclass that is Atkinson and his silly, hilarious antics that are perhaps an art form now. Also with some goofy roles by Tim Mcinnervy, Rosamund Pike, Gillian Anderson, Dominic West and Daniel Kaluyaa (Black Mirror & Get Out), the funny and flimsy take on the British spy films and cult of Atkinson is rather good for passing time.

There are always going to be movies of a particular sort where critics just don't do justice to the value of what the movie bring to the table. Johnny English is simply that sort of a movie. There are two simple reasons to watch this movie despite any hindrances you may face: 1) Rowan Atkinson - The man can make anything sound and seem funny, especially when he has to (try to) be serious. And supported by the character foil that is Bob, it is hilarious riot throughout. 2) John Malkovich - His french accent in portraying Pascal Sauvage is a hearkening to the the characters that bring the wacky narcissistic psycho-babble that is Malkovich Malkovich. Plus Lorna Campbell is an almost Bond babe, if Bond were to be arrogant pompous British failure whose stature is far too overstated... well, there you go.

In The Loop is the wish fulfillment of every bloody fan who wanted to see so much of the cast of The Thick of It and the sheer masterclass the whole team there pulled in its last two episodes of its final season. Not only is classic Ianucci-esque storyline that has all the nasty humor and abusive wit of the show that was but there are now additional performances from a talented additional cast that includes James Gandolfini, Tom Hollander, Zach Wood & others whose level of hilariousness knows no bounds. As is already known, the camera work compliments the narration so well that not only do you listen to the fun but it is almost as if you feel it. That's how good it is and that is why you should watch it.

'Lotus out of a muddy pond.' The Room was a horrendous and wacky at best sorta movie and somehow The Disaster Artist managed to portray just that and add something. It is really enjoyable and "WTH!" throughout and perhaps, with a guy as weird as Wiseau to be portrayed, it could be nothing but. It obviously doesn't humanize a East-European vampire but it makes glides through with a grin. While The Room is a cult masterpiece in failure, TDA is a success in art of autobiography. Hats off to Franco brothers, other members of the cast and cameos of Franco bandwagon and friends. If you are reading still, please go and watch it on whatever it is procurable for you!

Lady Bird is something different. I can't tell if that's good, great or pretentious. You should immerse yourself for a personal experience. It preaches nothing and weirdly, doesn't even teach you nothing. It is based on the premises of coming-of-age teenage story-line in a small town but it is isn't really about that; the fact the movie almost fleets by those moments so nonchalantly made me feel that way. What it really is about is that nostalgia and 'fish-in-water' aspect of being at home or remembering what it means to be at the ease of being at yours. It is also about a mother and daughter being so much of the same and never being able to express that mutual love without moments of personal crisis - something almost everyone goes through, not even finding the right words to articulate our emotions. Lady Bird, much the name given to Christine by herself, is a story in quotes. You see the acts coming up as you expect but it just never fits in place. Perhaps that is how it wants to be. Kudos to Greta Gerwig for the story and to Ronan and Metcalfe for bringing the silent turbulence of suburban world of Sacramento, "the Midwest of California", to life.

It is understandable why this is so critically low rated. But when it comes to movies of this genre and to movies that have Dwayne Johnson, it simply doesn't matter. Johnson, Jack Black and Kevin Hart are simply so well cast and hilarious (bit too obviously but that won't be a problem). Even Karen Gillan as Ruby Roundhouse pulls her weight. Go with somebody and get your guts laughed out. I can vouch for that. Despite it lack of innovative narrative, it does its bit to not seem out of place and the audience will get the reflection of work put in. One of those movies whose trailers tell you exactly what it is and doesn't shortchange you for it. That's all.