This movie was well-made, though its structure seemed familiar. It is a Scorsese film so perhaps it was the mob-like plot: a wealthy big shot tries to appear as a benign community leader, while he buys local political and law enforcement protection, has others do the dirty work, and throws any of them under the bus if the corruption is exposed. Just substitute the native Osage lands for the inner city neighborhood. In this case, rather than bootlegging, gambling or prostitution, the bad guy (William Hale) traffics mainly in murder. The goal is to have the sale rights of the Osage people’s oil land transferred from the murder victims to a white spouse in bad guy Bill Hale’s pocket, or through other machinations, to him directly.
The screen time is mostly taken up by Hale, his nephew Ernest Burkhart and Burkhart’s Osage wife Mollie. Ernest loves her but he is weak and kowtows to Hale’s wishes, even to the point of endangering his wife. Finally he — but I won’t give anything further away in the plot.
The only criticism I will make is that a lot of people are murdered in this story, especially from Mollie’s own family, and we see very little about the other victims except for a little insight into Mollie’s wild sister Annie. If you are going to use 3 1/2 hours to tell a story, I think a tad more character development on some of the victims would not go amiss.
However, the movie is well-made, as I said earlier, but I don’t see that I will feel driven to watch it again down the road.

Way too long. Worse than the book. Leo has a distracting facial expression the whole time. Some writing also pretty bad.

It's a hollywood oscar film. It's well put together etc. I don't really care for these films. They're fine. This one was good. I liked it. Leo is such a hate-able loser.

The importance of addressing (and attempting to correct) gross injustices can’t be overemphasized, and that’s the key objective behind writer-director Martin Scorsese’s latest release. This fact-based saga chronicles attempts by unscrupulous, two-faced White swindlers clandestinely (and sometimes quite brazenly) seeking to steal the considerable assets of wealthy Osage Indians in Oklahoma in the 1920s after oil is discovered on their land. This tragic tale explores the depths that these immoral criminals would go to (including murder) in the name of unabashed greed, efforts ironically spearheaded by the local, smiling, allegedly well-meaning sheriff (Robert DeNiro) with the help of his dimwitted nephew (Leonardo DiCaprio), especially in their scheme to shamelessly pilfer the wealth of the accomplice’s own wife (Lily Gladstone). The sweeping scope of this offering is indeed impressive, effectively brought to life by the fine performances of the three principals and an excellent ensemble of supporting players. And the stellar cast is backed by proficiently executed work in an array of technical areas, including production design, writing, cinematography and the original background score, making for a gorgeous picture to look at, all of which have earned “Flower Moon” a boatload of awards season nominations, with more undoubtedly to follow. However, the runtime of 3:26:00 – with no intermission – is a challenge to manage, even for the most patient and tolerant moviegoer. I streamed it, watching it in two parts, almost as if it were more of a TV miniseries than a standalone film, the only way I could effectively see myself getting through it. This handling of the story, in my opinion, represents something of a significant miscalculation by the filmmaker and the film editing staff – either cut the picture (which could have been done without losing much) or add a much-needed break partway through (which could have been accomplished without inhibiting the story’s continuity). In my view, I believe that the second half was far better and more compelling than the first and that some of the narrative’s more incidental detail could have easily been dispensed with without affecting the overall quality of the release. Still, that aside, it’s obvious that this project was a labor of love for the director, one with a clear vision of what it wanted to say in relating an important and little-known story of injustice in a nation that professes to be a staunch champion of truth and virtue, and, for that, we should be thankful for the enlightenment provided here. This unconventional take on the Western may not feature the traditional cinematic interpretation of cowboys and Indians, but it nevertheless sets the record straight about who the real villains are, at least in this story, a lesson from which we can all learn.

Hats off to Martin Scorsese, once and once again. This right here shows us the real power of cinema.

razocaran mnogu !!leonardo e glumec sto vo ovoj film izgleda kako namerno da go rusi svojot stil,a skorseze napravil film za deca so specijalni potrebi-nesto kako TELETABISI :(

While beautifully mounted, scored and acted, Martin Scorsese’s latest feature, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro, suffers by failing to provide motivations for its characters.
For full review, visit: https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/movies/killers-of-the-flower-moon-movie-review-martin-scorseses-slow-burn-look-at-the-troubling-birth-of-enterprise-is-frustratingly-opaque/article67465885.ece

I have issues with the decisions both Roth and Scorsese made when adapting the source material, but I’m still so happy this exists. Martin Scorsese has made sure that this American tragedy will never be forgotten.

First things first. There is absolutely no need for this to be 3½ hours long. It follows the story of the ambitious "Ernest" (Leonardo DiCaprio) who arrives at the Osage home of his venal uncle "King" (Robert De Niro) who encourages him to ingratiate himself with the wealthy, indigenous, population. He ends up meeting and driving the independent, no-nonsense, "Mollie" (Lily Gladstone) and after a while she starts to fall for his charismatic charms, they fall in love and marry. Though he does love his wife, "Ernest" proves to be a rather fickle and violent man who loves money more - and at the behest of his outwardly benign relative starts to implement schemes that will ensure the rights to the oil well heads move swiftly - and frequently brutally - to more "suitable" owners. This sudden spate of "accidents" and killings and the prudent action of the fearful local council alert the authorities in Washington who despatch a team of FBI agents led by the tenacious "White" (Jesse Plemons) to get to the bottom of things. Perhaps the "King" house of cards might now be becoming just a but precarious? DiCaprio is very effective here. He plays well a man who juggles internal demons and conflicts as he is cleverly manipulated by an on-form, slightly menacing, De Niro. It's Gladstone who steals the show for me, though. She plays the role of the decent and loving - but shrewd and savvy - "Mollie" strongly. As she starts to become a victim of her husband's avarice she exudes a sense of desperation that is both pleading and dignified and her struggle is potently illustrative of just how far the "white" man was prepared to go to get to - and keep - the money. The film is beautifully shot with a plausible look that helps generate for the audience a true sense of just how this outwardly genteel and civilised society was really anything but and the writing clearly interweaves the clandestine aspects of the the plot with the more noble ones. Perhaps sacrilegious to say, though, but at times it does really drag. I felt it could easily have lost an hour, condensed the story and immersed us more quickly in the characterisations and not really suffered. It's a good film, but it's not a great film and unlike Scorsese's far better "Irishman" (2019), I'm not at all sure I will rush to watch it again.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://fandomwire.com/killers-of-the-flower-moon-review-a-work-of-art/
"Killers of the Flower Moon is a remarkable cinematic feat by the master Martin Scorsese, with exceptional contributions from Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro, as well as a striking, breakthrough performance by Lily Gladstone.
It unveils a harrowing narrative that prompts deep, poignant reflection on the past and present. Technically, all departments shine, but Thelma Schoonmaker’s editing is simply flawless. The commitment to authenticity and the use of the Osage language are commendable additional traits.
The final sequence is one of the most powerful conclusions in recent years, a memorable, thought-provoking commentary on the desensitization of modern entertainment. A must-watch!"
Rating: A-

INT. GANGSTERS IN OKLAHOMA - DAY
Film students, film lovers, cinema-goers, and reviewers rejoice! Martin Scorsese's latest film is excellent! The Irishman might have been his last 'gangster' film. Still, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, Killers of the Flower Moon might not be a gangster film, but there are many 'mob' elements within it.
The biggest fear people had going into this film was the runtime. Weeks before the release, speculations came out about the length of this film. I saw an article stating it would be 4 hours long! Alas, it's only 206 minutes long, not even coming close to the longest film here at Cannes. I can confirm that the film never drags its feet for too long; there are times when it slows down, but this is only during the film's opening hour. Thankfully it quickly picks up the pace and goes by fast once the whole ensemble is introduced. Jesse Plemons is a late bloomer in the film, only being introduced 2 hours in; as I said, this is where the film starts moving.
The story is simple: During the 1920s, oil was discovered on Osage Nation Land. Turning them into the richest people per capita in the world! Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) returns to work for his uncle, William Hale (Robert De Niro). Ernest meets Mollie (Lily Gladstone), and they marry. However, slowly many of Mollie's friends and family are murdered, with those who married into the family taking ownership of the land—eventually, the FBI steps in to investigate.
Lily and Leo have excellent on-screen chemistry, with Lily performing phenomenally. I hear talks about the Oscars for her, which is entirely valid. De Niro steals many of the scenes he's in, often providing the most laughs. He is ultimately the most 'mob-like character within the film, never pulling the trigger but commanding the troops. Jesse Plemons is the final major character within the story as Tom White. Unfortunately, Plemon's isn't that interesting; I wonder if Plemons wasn't given much direction or if he decided to make the character this way. Still, White moves from scene to scene without much interest. He's just there, leading the FBI but never being an individual; I didn't remember his name after the film; I just referred to him as 'FBI guy.'
Technically, Killers of the Flower Moon is a marvel (Not that Scorsese would like me saying the word 'Marvel'), but just like all of his films, everything is great. Nothing stands out as 'excellent'; the score, editing and cinematography are at the level you'd expect from the mind of Scorsese.
This leads me to my final thoughts on the film; recently, Martin has been talking about his age and his ability to make films like he used to. Scorsese is 80 years old and doesn't believe he has the same drive as Ridley Scott. Suppose this is to be his final film. In that case, I'd be happy knowing it's not a significant departure from what made him the famed director but a story worth telling from a creator who will continue to be studied and praised for the next many decades.
FADE OUT.

When everything falls apart, it’s hard to know what will happen, especially in relations between survivors. Will mankind pull together to promote the uncertain continuation of the species, or is it a case of every man for himself? In this South Korean disaster film about what happens when a massive (and unexplained, not to mention highly improbable) earthquake destroys all of Seoul (and beyond apparently), except for one high-rise apartment building whose residents must decide whether to save only themselves or attempt to help displaced outsiders, despite a crucial lack of resources. What follows is essentially an apocalyptic retelling of The Lord of the Flies, with occasional back story flashes in the vein of television’s Lost. However, the film’s modestly engaging psychological thriller aspects aside, much of the narrative consists of a string of predictable (and not especially original) episodic incidents, most of which consist of various factions battling one another to become the prevailing alpha dogs. It’s not something we haven’t already seen many times before. What’s more, there’s precious little in the script to make viewers want to care about these people, primarily because of its tepid character development and an overreliance on recurring conflict (yawn). Add to that obvious and heavy-handed stabs at metaphorical geopolitical symbolism, erratic shifts in overall tone (particularly in the film’s first half), and a handful of feeble attempts at comic relief, and you’ve got a picture in need of serious retooling. It’s indeed puzzling to see the many accolades that have been so generously lavished on writer-director Tae-hwa Eom’s third feature outing in light of the project’s pervasive failings. But, beyond its imposing special effects and an impressive production design, there’s not much here to write home about. Wait for this one to come to home media if you’re really interested in sitting through this overlong slog.

What can I say that hasn’t been said? It’s an amazing film. The little detailed peppered around leaves ypu wanting more.

****Written by Gregory Weinkauf for Medium**
link to original posting at the bottom
**Film Festival Success PUBLISH OR PERISH Releases Nationwide: A Discussion with Writer-Director David Liban, and Producer Jonathan Miller**
Tenure thriller. Roll that around on your tongue. Tenure thriller. We don’t get a lot of those, do we? Not your conventional programmer! Seeking to fortify this underserved subgenre — or, perhaps, to create it — the new dark-comic film Publish or Perish explores the struggles of an ambitious, Colorado-based English professor desperate to reach that academic promised land. However, a cantankerous dean, conniving students, a lethal mishap, and some seriously unfortunate choices yield considerably more than status and job security.
Fresh off the festival circuit in which it picked up several awards including Best Feature (the U.K.’s Crystal Palace International Film Festival), Best Feature, Best Director, and Best Actor (Beaufort International Film Festival), Best Comedy (Sunscreen Film Festival), plus other awards and many official selections throughout the U.S. and U.K., Publish or Perish, acquired by Alation Media, bows on iTunes, Vudu, YouTube and cable across the U.S. on August 18th.
As it turns out, the writer-director of Publish or Perish, David Liban, also happens to be a tenured professor in Colorado —he’s the chairperson of the University of Colorado-Denver, Department of Film & Television, and holds an MFA from Brooklyn College and is a Fulbright Scholar — in addition to making films for over two decades. Producer Jonathan Miller, making his feature-film debut with Publish or Perish, serves as President and CEO of Alation Media, and its parent company, diversified financial services firm Parsonex Enterprises, having founded both companies. I spoke with Mr. Liban and Mr. Miller — hereafter David and Jonathan, respectively — and I began with an obvious but useful note of irony in the wake of their edgy production, asking David how he really feels about academia.
“That’s very funny,” concedes the film prof, who also produced. “I would say that academia has provided me with a terrific career, and a wonderful work/life balance. I love teaching. I am not a fan of the red tape and hierarchies that exist in academia, which is reflected in the movie. But at the same point, I love my job.”
And how about the influence of academia on the script?
“Going through tenure, it’s a highly stressful process. If you don’t get tenure, you essentially lose your job. I had a lot of ‘what if?’ scenarios running through my mind when I was going through tenure, and I thought they were humorous, and I just jotted them down. When I started writing the screenplay, they just kind of came out. It’s purely a fictional piece, but it’s certainly inspired by things that have actually occurred, aside from the death of students.”
I ask David about one of the featured students in the film, with whom he shares a surname.
“Yeah, that’s my son, Caleb, he’s a terrific actor,” the director enthuses. “He also is studying film at Arizona State University. We worked together when he was a boy on a previous feature, A Feral World (a 2020 coming-of-age post-apocalyptic tale which is available internationally). Now he’s an athlete in college, but he still wants to be involved in films, so we auditioned and cast him. Great working with him.”
Fielding a question about the various permutations of the screenplay, David offers some plot details we’ll omit here, but helpfully explains his technique:
“There’s different ways of writing scripts. Some people are very much into outlining. And other people just write where a story goes. I knew the inciting incident in the story, and I knew how it ended. 95% of this movie has our protagonist in it. The process was really just creating the obstacles in getting to those places, and what he goes through to get there. It’s really me playing with the obstacles and the people. Everything that he does in this movie is a barrier or a blockade, or there’s always something that’s causing him some sort of delay or stress.
“Then it’s kind of inspired by relationships I’ve had with people in previous institutions,” David adds.
Highlighting that Publish or Perish is fiction, I suggest that there’s death and mayhem and huge amounts of stress, but also some amusement along the way, so I ask both men about finding the film’s tone.
“That was a very conscious decision,” David emphasizes. “I really love movies like Fargo and The Big Lebowski, from the Coen brothers; and even Under the Silver Lake [dir: David Robert Mitchell]. That’s the kind of thing that makes me laugh. As a viewer, I don’t really respond well to slapstick or silliness. I like the grounded type of humor. So that was a very conscious decision.
“I have another son, his name’s Ethan, and when he saw the movie, he was wildly uncomfortable. Granted, he was 12 years old at the time. But he asked me: ‘Why is the dean, who really didn’t do anything wrong, the guy that we hate, but the guy who’s doing all these terrible things we kind of like, and we want him to succeed?’ I feel really proud that I got that question, because that’s exactly what I was going for, to understand his dilemma. There’s rationalization in his insanity. I really wanted him to be sympathetic, so I added him showing how much he loves his daughter, and how much he loves his wife. Then he does these terrible things, accidental, but still he doesn’t handle it properly That is where the story lives in my mind. Do you have any thoughts on that?” David asks producer Jonathan:
“First of all, it was challenging,” Jonathan chimes in, adding the second voice to this dual interview. “We talked about the business side of it. But I think it’s very interesting, because I wouldn’t say dark comedy is what I am normally drawn to. But this was different. Having looked at and read a lot of scripts, I also think it appeals to a lot of people. My wife really loves the film. When we did the original screening, we got EDO [stats] data back, and it was 83%, either very favorable or favorable, which is very high. That’s across a very wide spectrum. This is not a film for academics, but more a film for people who can relate to mounting frustration, tremendous pressure — so I think it has broad appeal.
“I would just say that, to David’s point, we had to be very intentional. Especially in the edits, and in how we presented certain things, because with dark humor, you can get away with almost anything as long as it’s funnier than it is dark. But you cross that line, you lose the audience, they stop rooting for the antagonist.” (Freudian slip or no, Jonathan does refer to their protagonist as an antagonist. Protagonist? Antagonist? Maybe an antihero? Viewer: You decide.)
I segue to the characters and casting, as the film feels firmly Gen-X, caught between the haughty Boomer establishment, and WTF? Millennial shenanigans.
“I appreciate that those comments are very perceptive. And you’re the first person to point that out,” David says, gratifying the interviewer. “That was very intentional. I would say that the character of Jim [the lead] speaks my inner thoughts. I don’t behave the way he does, or would, but like, him muttering under his breath, and judging people that he doesn’t like, it’s kind of like what happens in my head, a lot of the time. My wife pokes fun at it, so I see the humor in it.”
David heaps praise upon his cast, culled from their mountain region, including Anastasia Davidson as Jim’s wife, Allison, and Bonnie Clarisse Utter as their nose-ring-’n’-tats daughter, Amy (child version played by Jayden Bowry). “That was another reason for me to Save the Cat, so to speak,” he says, citing the popular screenwriting manual which includes hints of adding sympathy to one’s characters. “We were like, ‘Oh, no, don’t put that in your nose. You’re gonna hurt yourself.’ Like he cares about her and, you know, that kind of thing.”
Lead actor Timothy “Tim” McCracken is a friend David hired to teach acting as a chairman of their department, and also appeared in David’s previous film. “My relationship with him expanded my skills as a director,” he reveals. “He really inhabits the roles that he takes on and, prior to shooting, we would meet once a week, and he would go through the script line by line: ‘What’s going on here? Why am I doing this?” I was like, ‘Oh, my God, that’s terrific. I didn’t think about it that way.’ So he took it to the next level with Jim Shanklin [who plays the difficult dean]. Tim had worked with James on a play here in Denver called Anna Karenina, and so he recommended Jim Shanklin as a potential Dean Crawley. I reached out to him and he did an audition tape for us. He looks the part, and he nailed it.”
Onscreen, daughter-Amy’s hipster-perv-wannabe-filmmaker boyfriend — a character whose efforts David discussed in shorthand with his DP, Trevr [sic] Merchant, as “shitty student film” (it’s called, ha, “Song of Pain”) — is portrayed by one of his real-life students, Nick James (with whom he’d workshopped a scene from The Ref, if you can believe that semi-obscure reference). And softening his appraisal of the cinematic attempts of youth as depicted in his feature, David adds, “Even though we shot on a 4k camera, we made it look like VHS. All those things were part of the pretentious film, and you know, just the silliness of it. Not being aware how silly it is.”
On the casting and production in general, Jonathan elaborates: “This is the first film that I’ve produced. and financed, and everybody was like, ‘Do a comprehensive casting process!’ We did, and we actually conducted it during Covid, so we received video auditions. There’s not much film in Colorado, so there were a lot of submissions, a lot of interest, so we really got to curate through that. Knowing Tim and his abilities, David was pretty adamant that he was going to deliver in the lead role, and and he did, winning Best Actor and all kinds of festival awards.”
David concurs: “Prior to me meeting Jonathan, everyone was telling me no, you can’t use Tim, you can’t use him. But it wasn’t like we were rolling in the money to hire Sam Rockwell or whomever. I felt like we had a gift here: he was willing to do the work, and he was there, and he’s still involved.”
If you’d like to get involved in the perils of Publish or Perish, it’s available on iTunes, Vudu, YouTube and cable, starting August 18th.
https://gregoryweinkauf.medium.com/film-festival-success-publish-or-perish-releases-nationwide-a-discussion-with-writer-director-57319eb6c088

Fresh or Ripe?
The Freshman is a sort of comedy drama sprinkled with self aware barbs at film analysis. It’s a great opportunity to see Marlon Brando relaxed and fully playing up the self-parody angle. Plot finds Matthew Broderick as Clark Kellog, a film student arriving in New York who through unfortunate circumstances ends up working for a man who is not too dissimilar from Don Corleone!
Writer and director Andrew Bergman spoofs the Mafia via screwball scenarios and satirical scripting, though the latter is done to death and grows tiresome at the mid-point. Penelope Anne Miller and B.D. Wong get choice support roles and deliver the goods, in fact the casting across the board is spot on, and the tech credits are firmly in the plus column.
It’s all pleasantly executed and moves along at a brisk pace, but a little less satire and more straight laced character comedy wouldn’t have gone amiss. 6/10

There is a historical accuracy in how the film is presented. A small thing, the murder of a boy, builds and builds, and unravels all the layers of the onions until the ripples can be felt at the highest and most powerful levels.
That is, essentially what happened with Watergate where a simple B&E brought down Nixon. It's also what happened, almost 2,000 years earlier with the Conspiracy of Cantoline.
If you are tuned to it, like The Paper, it's not just about corruption, but about ripple effects and that is pretty cool.
And, it's really well acted, well enough to make you lament that Cusack and Pacino aren't paired more often.

Saw this one maybe 20 years ago and for whatever reason had a hankering to check it out again. Not great or ambitious as it sounds and pacing was a bit off, but in general found it engaging and had solid performances. I do wonder how much better it could have been under someone like Scorsese. **3.5/5**

Being a huge fan of Al Pacino (from the likes of 'Heat', the 'Godfather' movies, and 'Dog Day Afternoon' especially) and having had a huge crush on Bridget Fonda ('Single White Female', anyone?) back in the day (Peter Fonda's famous daughter was named 85th sexiest star in film history, and Mrs. Danny Elfman hasn't been involved in film, unfortunately, since 2002), I was hugely disappointed in this film, especially since I had loved director Harold Becker's previous 'Sea of Love', which also starred Pacino. The first half was decent and involving, but it kind of slid off the rails, interest-wise for me, the rest of the way and got too talky and uninspired.
I don't really know if the problem was with the script or its direction. I know I'm not the greatest John Cusack fan in the world (I find he's much better in comedy, like his sister Joan), but he had pretty good co-stars, whose talents were basically wasted, in Martin Landau, Anthony Franciosa and Danny Aiello (these guys were BORN for these roles and films, so on paper, this should have really worked out well). I had always wondered why this film had bombed so miserably, and now I know why. In cases like this, more should have been done to alter the story arc, just some basic tweaks, to make it more suspenseful and/or (though I usually balk at such 'Hollywood' tendencies) some romantic tension (a beauty such as Fonda's was misused--they may as well have hired someone else). All in all, a wasted opportunity that's worth a look if you like dramas about corruption--just don't go in with big expectations, and don't bother with a rewatch.

"Jan" (Doris Day) is a bit fed up with sharing her telephone's party line with lothario "Brad" (Rock Hudson) whose constant chatting to his various girlfriends means she can never place a private call! They eventually arrive at a sort of truce, agree times each can have access and hopefully that's that. Except, well he has taken a little bit of a shine to her and decides to try and orchestrate a meeting. She obviously want's nothing to do with him, so he invents the persona of "Rex Stetson" - a visiting Texican and sets about charming her. She's an interior designer and another of her clients is a bit enamoured of her. "Jonathan" (Tony Randall) even tried to buy her a car, but sadly his love is unrequited - a fact that he tells his best friend. Guess who? Yep...! When "Jan" starts to tell him of her new beau, he gets suspicious and hires a private eye to find out more about him - and that's the cue for truths to come out and for things to get a bit messy. All of this is taking place under the dipso nose of her maid "Alma" (Thelma Ritter) and makes for quite an entertaining, if entirely predictable, comedy caper. There's oodles of chemistry between Day and Hudson, Randall delivers charismatically as the foil to their increasingly daft shenanigans and Ritter, well she just has to show up to raise a smile with her sagely wise-cracking. Aside from the title song, there's only the one musical number - maybe not the best called "Roly Poly" but it gives the pair and chanteuse Perry Blackwell a chance to keep things simmering along engagingly with some charm. The writing gives just about everyone a chance at the limelight and though it's a little formulaic, it's still good fun.

In *Invisible Demons*, director Rahul Jain crafts a visually arresting and deeply unsettling meditation on pollution in Delhi, the capital of the world’s largest free-market democracy. Clocking in at just 71 minutes, the film feels both concise and, paradoxically, drawn out—a dissonance that left me simultaneously captivated and restless.
The film is unapologetically graphic, using its visceral depiction of pollution to drive its point home. From images of smog-choked skies to trash-strewn rivers, Jain spares no detail in painting a grim portrait of a city suffocating under the weight of its own consumption. The most haunting moments, however, are not just the environmental devastation but the silent, collective complicity of its inhabitants, struggling to breathe in a poisoned world.
While *Invisible Demons* is undeniably impactful, its pacing falters. Even at just over an hour, the film occasionally drags, with some sequences feeling overly indulgent. The repetition of certain imagery, though powerful at first, began to feel numbing rather than illuminating. Still, this lingering effect might be intentional—a way to mimic the slow suffocation of a crisis that unfolds daily, unnoticed by many.
The film also pulls no punches in its political critique. It's clear that the governing class—both local and global—bears the lion’s share of responsibility. Jain’s lens implicates unchecked industrial growth, reckless policies, and the insidious greed of capitalism. Watching *Invisible Demons* left me with a palpable sense of despair: nothing short of a global revolution seems capable of halting the slow march toward environmental collapse.
Ultimately, *Invisible Demons* is a film that demands to be seen, not for its entertainment value, but for its urgent message. It is a sobering call to action—a stark reminder that the destruction of the planet is not a distant threat but a present reality. Despite its imperfections, the film’s raw honesty and unflinching gaze make it a necessary, albeit uncomfortable, watch.

Get ready to meet Malvika and Siddharth in the original Rainetertainment release @ online MVR Cinema portal.
Setup in the holy city of Banaras and lensed admirably well by National Awardees Filmmakers Meenakshi Vinay Rai, the film’s visual fluidity and depth in terms of storytelling are well crafted to shower romance on you this monsoon.
The music composed by the young and promising team of Pratik Singh and Anmol Ashish takes you on a spiritual journey along with Siddhartha who one day at the Ghats of Banaras sees Graceful, Soulful & Cheerful Malvika and instantly gets hooked with her aura. Siddharth is at a loss for words as this is the same girl whom he saw 17 years ago while crossing the road.
Is destiny playing a game with him? Is it mere attraction?
Crafted like a healer the film sets up a mid-term evaluation for the audience on how to surrender themselves to love without expectations and for the sheer experience of the divine form of the emotion.
The undercurrents make them bond together to explore many hidden facets and at the same time, Malvika feels some interruptions. She is waiting eagerly for the sunset of 27th September. The film finds regular entrustment with meaningful lyrics and music. Dil Sharati Hua hai and Man Khila Khila Se Hai
keeps you asking for more.
The film is a treat for those who believe in spirituality or have an inkling of poetry. The promo got a strong response from youngsters as it sets up their love quotient with clarity.
Meenakshi Vinay Rai’s direction displays a firm grip on the subject of Energy lock between the auras of two individuals. If you want to unlock yourself this weekend then 27 September is the film you must watch @ MVR CINEMA online. https://www.chinh.in/mvr-cinema-copyraientertainment@yahoo.com
The ticket is priced at Rs. 99/- and film will be available for your viewing for 72 hours. Be a part of this independent cinema movement and watch 27 September know ‘Will the destiny would be kind enough to the coming together of Malvika and Siddharth’
Last and not least if you review the film 27 September after watching it then you stand a chance to win a gift hamper.
Directors: Meenakshi Vinay Rai
Duration: 81 Minutes
Format: HD

3 and a half hours of action, drama, intrigue and character study. Vanga shows he believes in quality over quantity, thereby balancing the dose of violent action with character drama. Some comedy aimed at male audiences also makes occasional appearance. Not a film for the faint-hearted, feminists or detractors of the action thriller genre. A lot of random scenes happen post the action-packed interval scene, but they add depth to the characters. Those crying about toxicity and misogyny need a dictionary, not a Netflix subscription. Chill.

2.5 hours of bloat. None of this makes sense to me. Lots of killing. Lots of love? Really not enough of anything to make it 3.5 hours. Everything looks good. Really cool stuff but...I suppose i don't have the cultural knowledge to get emotionally involved in the random killing, sex, betrayal, doubles... Unbelievable and the runtime, unbearable.

**Wannabe URI, but bad!**
When you watch this movies, you get the same feeling of URI, same sad scenes, same anger, same vengeance. One time is wonder, second time is not.
Also, disjointed directions, over emotional bad acting makes it even more annoying.

The title should have been:1918: The American Flu
Although the origin of the 1918 flu is still divided, pundits generally believe that it originated in the United States, because the first recorded case occurred in Fort Reary Barracks in Kansas, in March 1918, and more than 500 American soldiers fell ill within a few days.
The United States had entered the war by this time, and the epidemic was brought to France by American servicemen, and soon spread among the densely deployed troops. Military personnel of various countries, especially the British army, which had colonies around the world, spread infectious diseases around the world.
When the outbreak of infectious diseases began in March 1918, all the participating countries did not report them because of press restrictions, and the epidemic caused panic among the people, which was not conducive to supporting the war, and was classified as negative news that could not be reported. As a result, the military and people of various countries were kept in the dark, greatly exacerbating the spread of the virus.
As a neutral country, Spain has no possibility of leaking secrets, and the military naturally has no reason to take strict press control measures, and the media tracks various social hot spots as usual. When an infectious flu-like epidemic appeared in Spain, it immediately attracted the attention of the Spanish media.

Nowadays, I am rather bored with the same movies about spiteful little ghosts of teenage girls or resentful children who want to give someone a message or simply punish their murderers. Especially if we are talking about those Asian movies that always have a similar ending. Don't get the wrong idea about me, I am not trying to be rude or offensive, but horror movies nowadays tend to be way too similar when it comes to the whole "vindictive ghost" subject matter. Obviously, it is almost impossible not to base a movie on prior ideas and that is not the blameworthy thing I'm trying to point out. Basically what really annoys me about contemporary ghost flicks, is that they try so hard to shock the audience or provide something new, that they usually end up messing it up and worst of all, the ending is still predictable. At least that is my humble opinion. Fortunately, we can always rely on a good horror gem from many years ago and that is the case of "Hasta el viento tiene miedo". A simple and yet stylish horror movie that provides all the necessary elements, without trying so desperately to fill an hour and a half. It may be a little bit predictable in a way, but at least it's highly enjoyable and it doesn't try to mislead the audience with pitiful and superfluous situations.
In "Hasta el viento tiene miedo", a group of boarding school girls suffer from the torments of a authoritarian and conniving headmistress called Bernarda, who seems to unload of all her anger on the girls. In contrast, Lucia, the vice-headmistress, tries to be as easy-going as possible to make up for Bernarda's unkind behavior, earning that way, the girls' friendliness One night, Claudia, a student from the boarding school, suffers from a nightmare, in which she hears a ghostly voice that calls her name from the heights of a tower that is situated in the school garden. When she goes in and walks up the stairs, she opens a red door and finds the body of a blonde girl hanging from the ceiling. Claudia's classmates become so fascinated with that dreadful nightmare that they all go together to the tower to reveal the mystery, even though Mrs. Bernarda had forbidden the girls to go up there. Before they can reveal any mysteries, the headmistress arrives and catches the girls who were trying to disobey her rules. As a consequence, all the girls are punished and forced to spend their winter vacations at the boarding school. Furious with their headmistress, all the girls complain about their vacations, without realizing that something even more awful is about to happen. There's a ghost seeking for revenge and one of them is going to be chosen as a messenger and living avenger.
"Hasta el viento tiene miedo", is a well made Gothic horror gem, that not only frightens more than once, but also offers a lot of amusing scenes that work as some kind of humorous relief, without turning the whole movie into a comedy. Naughty winks and yet naïve situations that probably caused a little bit of controversy back in the 60s, when the film came out. For example, the scene in which the ill-disciplined and naughty student named Kitty performs a striptease for her classmates and teaches them how to do it, I think that's one of my favorites. Not so much because of the striptease itself, but mostly, because the other girls look at her as if she was killing someone right in front of their eyes. There's also the scene in which all the girls force the prude girl to dance along with them and then jump all over her, like barbarians and take off her clothes as a way of revenge for being such a gossipy. The chemistry between actresses who played the schoolgirls (some of them were almost in their 30s) was simply flawless. Marga Lopez, as the evil headmistress, probably offered one of the best performances in this film. Her character, Mrs. Bernarda, reminded me of those days when I used to go to school and I would feel a shiver up from down my spine, every time I saw an intimidating teacher or headmistress. Definitely not a pleasant feeling, which means she did a good job. The well known Mexican composer Armando Manzanero was in charge of the music, which is also an extra point. His work, is also one of the main elements that contributes to make this film so atmospheric. "Hasta el viento tiene miedo" probably even delivers a hidden message regarding the severity of school authorities back then and the fact that violence can only produce more violence. Now, the question is: is there really a hidden message or am I just overreacting and giving the film more credit than it deserves?. I suppose that's up to each one to decide. Either way, hidden message or not, I highly recommend this film.

Unfortunately because even film-lovers can be wusses and tend to stay away from subtitles, which takes some getting used to but can be a learned skill just like any other, this film has been horribly neglected. Thankfully it was included in the recent Universal Studios Dracula Franchise Collection--at least the DVD set I purchased. I must admit I like this basically as much as the Tod Browning-helmed, Bela Lugosi-starred, English-language original. Fine, underappreciated work by everyone involved.

Ignacio López Tarso is super in this superior adaptation of the Traven story "The Third Guest". He and his wife (Pina Pellicer) are living an all but hand-to-mouth existence with their young family - who reminded me frequently of baby birds in a nest constantly looking to be fed. He collects and sells firewood to the local bakery, she takes in laundry and does mending work. It's whilst he is delivering his wood that he sees half a dozen plump turkeys being roasted in the bakery ovens for a local grandee. The smell and the sight of these sizzling birds leads him to vow that he will not eat again until he can devour an whole bird - all by himself! For days he declines his food, but a slight contretemps between his wife and one of her clients might just provide for his deliverance... Heading into the forest with his unexpected fayre he encounters three individuals who offer him varying degrees of "riches" if he will share. He shows wisdom until an emaciated character tugs too hard on his heart strings. His reward is a gourde of water from the spring of life. One drop of this will stave off death from even the most terminally ill - well it will, most of the time! He uses his newfound power sparingly at first, but soon he garners fame and fortune and the attention of the Holy Inquisition. Having survived his perilous trip through the forest, can he now survive the suspicions of his own race? There is a very basic, but hugely effective, visual effect that allows us to follow his journey with his newly arrived friend (Enrique Lucero) and the direction from Roberto Galvadón allows us to begin to appreciate, slowly, quite what choice the eponymous character has, perhaps unwittingly - perhaps not - chosen for himself. The score complements well, as does the general aesthetic of this film and I really did enjoy the mix of the fantasy, sacrifice and the social comment. It looks great on a big screen, but is well worth a watch on any screen.

Even for an Alex de la Iglesia film, _Accion Mutante_ is bizarre. It’s bloody and volatile with a finale that is nothing but people shooting bulky and unrealistic guns at one another. The film is gritty and grainy while having this Evil Dead kind of low budget classic quality to it. _Accion Mutante_ is a messy and chaotic sci-fi film and an even sloppier comedy, but it’s worth checking out for its ridiculously aggressive and amalgamated "futuristic" mayhem.
**Full review:** https://hubpages.com/entertainment/Fantasia-Accion-Mutante-1993-Review

**An adult fairy tale with hints of repressed sexual fantasy.**
Spanish cinema has something that the Portuguese need to learn: it knows how to make films that are enjoyable, entertaining, commercially viable, and yet artistically beautiful and well-made. This movie is far from one of the best, and it decidedly hasn't stood the test of time: I would never have heard of it if I hadn't found the movie on the Internet by chance. The presence of some well-known actors and actresses helped my decision to see it, and I was even pleasantly surprised to discover that the film was filmed in Portugal (I discovered this through the train's locomotive, which I recognized as Portuguese).
The script was well written, and weaves a light comedy around a deserting soldier and a very liberal family for the period in which everything takes place, the thirties of the last century. The context is a Spain in political upheaval: the monarchy, unpopular and unloved, is increasingly contested by the people, who place hopes in socialism and republicanism. This is how the republican military uprising in Jaca takes place. The defeat leads Fernando, one of the rebel soldiers, to flee and desert, ending up in a rural region where he meets Manolo, an elderly republican who is quite progressive, but lonely, since his four daughters already live their lives away from their father's house. . When they finally arrive, Fernando refuses to leave because he is enchanted by their beauty: one of them, Clara, is a recent widow; Violet, on the other hand, is a lesbian; Rocío, on the other hand, is dating a boy, from the region, rich, idiot and supporter of Carlist ideologies. The youngest daughter, Luz, is the most innocent.
What follows is a cross-over between each of the old man's daughters and the deserting soldier. He actually goes to bed with all of them, and falls in love with each one in turn, which is both hilarious and absurd, and even anachronistic, since it goes against the narrow and closed morality of the Iberian countryside. from that time, when courtship was more social and heavily guarded by the girls' families. This was what irritated me most about the film: the anachrony of the behaviors and excessive sexual tolerance of those people. This seems much more like the product of some modern sexual fetish than a story set in the 1930s.
The actors do a reasonably good job: Jorge Sanz is a gentle protagonist, but his performance as an actor is rather lukewarm, and he turns out to be quite erased by the good performance of the actresses. Penélope Cruz and Maribel Verdú are the best actresses: each in their own character, they completely dominate the action with funny and well-executed interpretations. Ariadna Gil is rarely seen, but she also handled the task at hand well. Miriam Diaz-Aroca, in turn, is limited to the average. Fernando Fernán Gomez is a veteran who gives us a good performance, but in an ill-conceived character.
Shot in Portugal, the film is quite elegant, and the cinematography works very well, as it does much to give the film a dreamlike look, emphasizing rural beauty and nature. The sets and costumes were well done, and easily transport us to the 30s. The good soundtrack also deserves praise, even if it doesn't have any memorable songs.