Sleazebagano

Are we kidding here? 8.2 for such an immature, asinine B movie? Biggest problem with this movie is the **** appears to have been pushed by some producer's nepo kid scheme. It's anticlimatic and especially ALL OVER THE PLACE. Every time there's a new twist or intrigue, they gotta put a new insufferable xylophone theme song, and it keeps getting less bearable as the movie progresses. And Hollywood, are you done with **** xylophones, pianos and cellos? How about guitars, flutes and brass for a change, damit!? Then, okay... I didn't expect this movie to be a space comedy of sorts. I got kinde by film critics and adversiting hailing it as a kind of Interstellar. But that's really just a bland space comedy, with botched out characters and character development. Was the casting right for such a film? Ryan Gosling here is trying so hard to be funny it looks pathetic. The guy's a good actor... but just not for this type of childish, tone-deaf comedy. I can understand the character to be some kind of schizophrenic, but here he just keeps acting like a moron. Having him to be a full-on schizophrenic would have given a great edge to the story, tho, but the screenwriters didn't seem to have either the ambition or wits for it.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Not all that bad... I think most of the detractors are either pissed off about the "woke" imagery or due to the fact they took the film far too seriously. Seen as a comedic sequel to a 20 years-old trilogy, it's pretty good actually. I wouldn't have paid to see it in theaters, tho it undoes many of the problems with Matrix 2 & 3, while also creating a mess of its own, especially with the gruesome "resurrection" subplot. A few missed opportunities still, as the movie could have been made more boldly with an oblique approach to the original story, with better-grounded main characters (new Morpheus was just created as a bot?). Which makes it a worthy sequel, while not being anywhere near as groundbreaking as the first Matrix movie.

Tho the prologue was way too long for a Bond flick, this ain't your normal Bond flick. So despite what some critics are saying about the pacing and length, after the intro this film got me stuck to my seat with a complex, colorful, multilayered story and insane action scences, but also presenting Bond as a human being more than the previous movies did, more specifically from the angle of what it means to live (and die) as an international spy. I thought the bad guys were a little too over-the-top, but then again this is the tradition of Bond flicks... you want them to look undefeatable. The locations and their use were fantastic, and the side actors were appealing even tho tongue-in-cheek. It's true, tho, that that "Mumbling Lucifer Satan" arch-villain could have been played with more energy as here he just acts like a zombie. The subplot of having not an even higher leader of Spectre but their biggest foe (?) was original yet not too appealing... I was hoping for having a full-blown Dr. No instead, which would have made more sense with this series continuity and the film's title, and more justice as the "final boss" for the Craig era. It's a great end of the Craig era, and deserves the praise it didn't get. Daniel Craig has been the most charismatic yet realistic Bond in a long while.

How does it compare to Lynch's Dune? Each of these two adaptations succeeds in the areas where the other failed, and vice versa. In a same way, one is telling aspects of the story that the other left in a corner. Let's start with the music. The soundtrack by Zimmer was rather generic, and while it would perhaps please the yuppie yoga crowds, we're here in a totally different world, soundscape-wise, to the psychedelic, New Age soundtrack that made Lynch's Dune so great. The latter soundtrack was a standalone music gem in itself, adding stellar quality to a rather flawed movie. The striking, dramatic visual poetry (I'm thinking of the repeating image of the hand opening while hearing about the "sleeper awakening") also isn't there much. A lot of witchy murmurs and visions Paul is having are there, but here they clearly lack originality as this stuff is taken directly from Lord of the Rings. A lot in this movie in fact makes it sound like it's trying to be a Lord of the Rings... something that is plaguing many modern blockbusters. While Villeneuve is a decent filmmaker with a vision, this is a Canadian director working with a Hollywood studio, not a Peter Jackson working with WETA studios outside of Hollywood's (and Harvey Weinstein's) grasp, with a plethora of original ideas, home-grown artists and visual magic-makers. So production quality consideration first... this is an overall beautifully made film that doen't refrain from grandiose scope, yet it is rather sobre and extensive. It definitely isn't near the baroque insanity of Lynch's film that is, along with the soundtrack and photography, one of the greater sides of the movie. Spaceships, buildings are huge, yet not the dope byzantine visual awe that only directors like Lynch, Jeunet or Wes Anderson would create. I didn't get especially awed with the Guild's Ship that is basically just a flattened giant concrete donut in space... All this grey stuff flying around -some looking like house appliances from posh ultramodern kitchens- ain't very appealing or surprising. So while Lynch had to struggle with many technical limitations, which made his more sci-fi stuff look silly, the gothic/art deco design behind it all was still vastly better inspired than what we got here. On the other hand, it has the narrative maturity that Lynch's take didn't really have (you can't make me forget that ridiculous intro with De Laurentis' daughter). The movie is well-structured and methodical, being careful about the details that matter... but only up until the third act which becomes very confusing and bloated. A bunch of narrative developments happening in the end makes it feel like there's two or three open endings. There's also in this third act a moment of a few seconds where Lady Jessica is having a clearly apparent desire for her son Paul, not long after Duke Leto's death. Okay... an Oedipal spin can be interesting to bring into such a space mythology, yet we're left asking: how was it needed? Why such a strange detail, or does the director really knows where he's going with this? As others said Jessica's character seems more involved with her son than her husband, so I don't see where this fits with the book, that contains no apparent incest subtext like this, where Jessica's struggle is more about dealing with the discipline of the Bene Gesserit cult and standing for her husband and her son. I liked the idea of having Chani introduced as reluctant towards Paul, after being hinted as completely otherwise in Paul's dreams, as this sets a more interesting evolution between the two characters. I was positively surprised also by this singer Zhendaya as she did deliver a solid performance for a starter. Same for Javier Barbem powerful, raw, feral composition that makes him feel like taken straight out of Lawrence of Arabia. It is possible that the combination of the two parts (or three?) will render this film greater than it is now. A lot still has to happen, and this one feels like more of an introduction to a universe. It succeeded at NOT making Lynch's film look badder than it was. It even made me want to watch it again.