Most "Haunted House" attraction movies are horrible. "Haunt" is the rare exception. The directors also wrote "The Quiet Place" and Eli Roth was involved. Regardless, this is a slick Halloween thriller.

I have no idea why I was expecting an anthology before I started watching this film. Anyway, it doesn’t matter. While I dislike the increasingly high number of horror films which take place in 1960s/70s/80s nowadays, I still enjoyed watching this one.
Surprisingly, each scary scene in the film is better than the one before, which makes the film better as you keep watching it.
Would I watch it again? Yes. Would I make my friends watch it? Why not?

I was a little bit disappointed by _Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark_, but I say that with the caveat of it being one movie that I went into with **high** expectations - something I generally try to avoid having if I can. There is a lot I liked, creature effects, probably top of that list, but the story feels disconnected and for me had an unsatisfying resolution.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

There’s just enough scares to appeal to the under-15s with disposable income, but very little for anyone else looking to get into the real Halloween spirit. ‘Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark’ has the potential to be really unique, but is let down by its blandness and lack of originality. Yes, there’s a hint at a sequel at the end of the film, but I hope for our sake that the book is closed on any more of these scary stories.
- Charlie David Page
Read Charlie's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-scary-stories-to-tell-in-the-dark-a-harmless-tale-that-wont-haunt-you

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)
This might be the very first film of 2019, which I knew absolutely nothing about going into the theater. Usually, I avoid trailers for most movies, but it’s almost impossible to not catch an image or a clip here and there. However, for Scary Stories, since it wasn’t heavily marketed in my country (at least), the only things I knew was that Guillermo del Toro was involved and that it was a horror flick. Knowing del Toro, I also remembered myself that this wouldn’t just be a straightforward horror story, filled with predictable jump scares, and a bland narrative. That’s my first advice to my fellow readers: if you expect a film similar to those of The Conjuring Universe, then you’ll be disappointed.
It’s also not the other extreme. It doesn’t follow the ambiguity and weirdness of Jordan Peele’s installments, so if you’re one of those people that don’t appreciate that type of horror, you’re safe as well. Having in mind the latest movies released from the genre, it’s hard to find one that balances these two separate takes instead of choosing one of them. Scary Stories spends its first half slow-building their characters, but mainly its story. There’s a massive build-up to something that’s pretty much the premise of the film, so it struggles to reach the actual “action” without it becoming a tad boring or too long. It’s a “breath of fresh air” (in the genre, I mean) to have a good set up, with decent character development, and an exponential interest in the main story, instead of jumping into silly horror sequences fifteen minutes after it started.
André Øvredal does an excellent job in directing. He really knows how to generate suspense and create a genuinely creepy build-up. There’s tremendous camera work involved in some fantastic sequences that don’t rely on jump scares to provide the “fear” factor. It’s the never-ending suspense, that feeling of claustrophobia even if the character isn’t in a confined space. Except for one scene, we can always see what’s happening. The “monsters” don’t appear out of nowhere, they don’t screech at you precisely at the third time a character looks another way, and the actual jump scares are rather efficient. However, they’re not scary, as well as the movie itself…
It’s not simply a scary film. It doesn’t have that heavy and dark tone that we feel in other horror movies. At first, I thought it might be a bad thing, but Scary Stories establishes this distinct tone from the very beginning. Even without knowing a single thing about the film, I understood from the first few minutes that it was going to be “different”. I would advise caution to not judge this movie by its trailers if they indicate that this is one of those films to make you scream every five minutes. There’s definitely a message to be transmitted, and I think it was well-delivered in the ending. It might be too cheesy for some or lack impact for a movie that asks the audience for a bit of patience, but for me, it worked well enough.
The acting is mostly good. Zoe Colletti (Stella) and Michael Garza (Ramon) are undoubtedly the standouts, and they do a good job of carrying the narrative forward. They both have compelling backstories, but for the time that the film spends developing its characters, I wish they went more in-depth with Stella. She has a particularly intriguing past, and I don’t think we get enough out of it. Gabriel Rush (Auggie) and Austin Zajur (Chuck) have great chemistry, but their comic-relief roles are a disservice to an otherwise pretty solid movie.
Technically, there are some beautiful shots from the DP, Roman Osin. Usually, sequences at night in low-budget films suffer a lot with lack of clear visibility, but Osin does a remarkable job, playing with lighting in a truly unique way. I’m curious to know what audiences will think of this movie. If I had to bet, I think people will leave disappointed due to the lack of more generic jump scares, and a straightforward narrative. Truth be told, the slow pacing doesn’t help, especially when the character development only works for two. Finally, the “scary stories” that Sarah tells are entertaining and imaginative, and the whole concept of this film is incredibly captivating.
All in all, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is a distinct horror flick, with well-developed leads, and a creative approach to an unique premise. It doesn’t follow the rules of generic horror, by not relying itself too much on jump scares, and making the actual story and characters the main interest. Beautifully-produced by Guillermo del Toro and co. as well as brilliantly directed by André Øvredal. The “scary stories” are indeed dark and creepy, providing a whole second-half of excellent horror scenes.
However, the first-half takes its time to set everything up, and the lack of more “action” might leave some viewers disappointed. Only two characters are genuinely engaging, which proves that the slow build-up didn’t entirely pay off as it should have. It’s meant to be a divisive movie, but I definitely recommend seeing it!
Rating: B-

A worthy effort, if nothing all that memorable.
I found 'Halloween Kills' to be a touch below 2018's 'Halloween' in terms of entertainment and general interest, but like that one it does what it needs to do and produces something that is (narrowly, in this case) worth watching. I would've liked a bit more progression in the story, as this very much feels like the middle entry in a three-parter.
This flick gives more screen time to those around Jamie Lee Curtis, which isn't necessarily a positive (given Curtis is as good as she is) but the actors all do find jobs - even if no-one particularly stands out, at least to me. Away from the cast, the deaths are solid and the use of the iconic theme is spot on.
I didn't love this, almost nonplussed by it in truth but overall I think it just does enough to merit being filed under 'good'.

When Halloween (2018) hit the screen, it was a breath of fresh air to the franchise bringing more gore while still maintaining the roots of suspense. This movie does away with the later, making Michael and killing machine in some scenes. Add that with the unnecessary social commentary, forced return of former castmates, and unlikeable characters that make your root for Michael. I was waiting for this movie to end, bad sign.
**Verdict:** _Poor_

What would happen if a bunch of Trump followers would try to kill Michael Myers?
Watch this movie and find out the hard way or take a good nap.

Given I wasn't a big fan of Halloween 2018, the bar on Halloween Kills was rather low and... pretty much met it. While some of the deaths were pretty gruesome, the rest was kind of bland and character decisions as dumb as others. Like the initial sequel, Halloween II, Jamie Lee Curtis spends the bulk of her time in the hospital.
There was also a scene early on when Michael fights a bunch of firefighters just came off as silly looking, maybe because I'm so used to seeing him butcher people one by one, the shot, beyond being clumsily choreographed, showed him taking on 5-6 people; just looked strange.
I don't know, there's not a whole lot to this sequel and like Halloween '18, not sure I look forward to revisiting. **2.0/5**

A African American and cacausion coach must put aside there racial differences to coach one of the worse teams in their school. They soon become one of the hottest teams and best teams to ever play for the school. Until tragedy strikes. The saddest thing is this is a true story.

OK, well, reading through the bad reviews there are some grudges here based on, well, how the other teams were depicted because 1971 wasn't long enough for some of the people that played them to pass on their mortal coils.
I can relate to that. I grew up countryfied and have tasted the salt of playing against a school that was three or four times our size, schools that could afford to cherry-pick who played. Schools where the defense could rest when the offense was on the field...apparently T.C. Williams was one of those giant schools.
I can sympathize with some of the negative reviews here...because, honestly, if they made a movie like this about Woodstock, I'd give it 1 star out of principal. Seriously, no, we might be hicks, but we rotate from linebacker to offensive tackle. When you faced off against schools that had an actual student body, you knew you were going to lose, the only question was how hard were you going to make their victory. Sounds like T.C. Williams was one of those giant schools.
OK, rant done.
I caught this on TNT and the music drew me in right away. Hear a good song it catches your ear and drags you in.
And this has the acting to back it up. It's very... nice seeing Washington NOT playing the smart-cop role or a variation there of. He can act, he can act well, and this is one of the movies where he's not playing the same role over and over again. So, when he comes out of that shell and gets a gig playing a role he doesn't always play... it's kind of a treat isn't it?
Of course the highlight was really Hayden Panettiere, not because she was absolutely adorable in the film (which she was), but more because she did a great job of turning a little girl into that parent, on the sidelines, that thinks he's Ditka, so she was not only adorable but hysterical.
The Hippie, Ryan Gosling?, was another little gem, not because he did a particularly good job acting, though it was fair enough. No, he stood out because anyone that's payed football knew someone like him. It gave it a bit of an authentic feel.
The only real downside was that, by 1971, schools were integrated and been for a while. It kind of lost that authenticity when they went that route. But, you know what, who cares, it was entertaining enough despite that.
It was a solid football movie.
And for all the 1 star reviews, particularly those written by people from the smaller schools that had to go up against the Titans... I feel for you. I remember being in that situation and I'd be bitter too if the giant school had a movie made about them that suggested they were in anyway the under-dog.

Denzel Washington leads the team on a charge until the final whistle in Remember the Titans, a grand and inspirational football film. This Walt Disney classic is a primitive display of adversity and courage. The amount of chemistry from the then-segregated gridiron warriors was remarkable and helped propel this film as a truly great and heartfelt sports movie for every generation to experience. 5/5

In Greek mythology, the Titans were greater even than the gods.
Based on real events in 1971, where T.C. Williams High School, a now hot bed integrated school, becomes a beacon of unification via their mixed race football team.
As is normally the case with films of this ilk, it quickly comes to pass that certain artistic licence has been taken with the truth. In reality the issues of race, integration and the near powder-keg atmosphere portrayed in the picture, were long past their worst in Virginia 1971. However, that should in no way detract from the thematics and truthful aspects of this Disney production. As is told in the film, the Titans did have what became known as the perfect season, whilst the bond formed between the black and white members most definitely existed. All told, the film soars high as an inspirational piece, not only for the mixed race community coming together plot's essential being, but in the crucial tale of one Gerry Bertier.
That this film urged me to seek out the story of Bertier is a testament to the power of film, regardless of any sort of sentimental prodding from the film makers. It's hoped that this film also prompts newcomers to research further the topics within the story.
The cast list is impressive, Denzel Washington and Will Patton find instant chemistry as the head coaches thrust together by outside influences, with both guys beautifully doing credit to the real life friendship that would be born from the situation. Ryan Hurst, Wood Harris, Ethan Suplee, Donald Faison, Kip Pardue, Craig Kirkwood and a pre-fame Ryan Gosling fill out the integrated football team. While two important female family roles are nicely portrayed by Hayden Panettiere and Nicole Ari Parker. The soundtrack is nicely put together, with the core offering of Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell's thumping rendition of "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" particularly potent and uplifting.
Though not primarily offering up anything new in the pantheon of race and sport related movies, Remember The Titans does have so much good going for it. It's hard to be picky, even churlish about the little faults (are these actors really the age of high schoolers for example?), so hopefully come the end, after the credits roll, you will be suitably inspired and perhaps a touch more better off for having spent time with this particular football team. 8.5/10

**A film that is much better than the critics would have said. Unfortunately, it's excessively exaggerated, has a confusing script and excessive sexualized characters and situations.**
David Koepp must have been very confident about this project. To make this film, he sought out a little-known character from a series of novels by Kyril Bonfiglioli, an author who will only be known by the English or by those who speak English as a native language. I have never found this author's books in Portugal. The film was a huge financial and critical failure, and I was afraid of what I was going to find, but the truth is that I find it mildly satisfactory.
The film begins by introducing us, in the voice of the protagonist, to the central characters of the plot: the art dealer Charlie Mortdecai, an aristocratic bon vivant, his beautiful wife and his faithful henchman Jock, tough and excessively virile. From here, we follow the protagonist on an adventure in search of a missing painting that could be a work by Francisco de Goya, with a past associated with the Nazis and believed as lost.
This comedy makes a huge effort to be as funny as possible and bets everything on a kind of comedy of exaggerations, in which each character is caricatured and everything is taken to the point of absurdity: Mortdcai, for example, is not just a “marchant d'art”, he's an insolvent aristocrat with tics of grandeur and a fetish for his mustache (okay, I wore a mustache myself, and it was a similar style, but I never let the mustache used me, if you know what I mean). Likewise, Jock is transformed into a mobster and sexual athlete. Exaggeration pays off: it is impossible not to laugh at the absurdity. The most obvious example is the way in which Mortdecai insults the US when he treats it as if it were still an uncivilized British colony.
The problem with exaggeration is that it doesn't work if it's overused: the second half is much weaker because we already know what to expect from the characters. I'm even willing to forgive that; harder to forgive is how the script ends up lost in its own twists and turns. Am I the only one who feels that the story is so confusing that even the characters don't know what they need to do? I also can't forgive the amount of sexual jokes. The film had a very restrictive parental rating in the US, but the overwhelming majority of other countries, including Portugal, made the big mistake of giving it a much lower rating, making the film available to a teenage audience. It's not the fault of the producers, it's the authorities of each country, but I wonder if our teenagers, who are starting their sex life earlier and with less awareness, need more sex-promoting stuff. We are no longer in the domain of hedonism, this is perversion.
Despite having a string of hits and a solid career, Johnny Depp is not in top form. Having made this film after two other failures, the actor was going through a bad professional phase, which was associated with a controversial marriage (and a divorce, litigious and mediatic, years later). I don't know to what extent his personal life influenced his work, what I can say is that Depp is a shadow of himself. The jokes, the humour, the comic gestures that he masters so well… everything comes out so forced that it's not funny. Paul Bettany, Depp's personal friend and another actor with established credits, is much more effective in the role of Jock. It wasn't the first time that the actor played a tough character, and it seems to me that he has a knack for this type of material. It's nice to see Gwyneth Paltrow here: despite the cold and forced chemistry with Depp, I think the characters asked for it and Paltrow knew how to give her character an additional elegance and charm. Ewan McGregor is welcome support but has little to do.
Technically, the film has many qualities, and it is obvious that it had a budget worthy of the cast it had. The cinematography is very good, with excellent colors, lighting and sharpness, and it makes deft and intelligent use of effects and CGI. I particularly liked the effect with the planes and the names of the cities, used whenever the characters had to travel. The filming locations were well chosen and the props and costumes (in particular Depp's and Paltrow's) were very well designed... although I need to consider that the Mortdecai costumes, with excessive use of silks, velvets and strong colors, exude a certain "nouveau riche aroma" that a legitimate blood aristocrat would not fail to condemn. The soundtrack also does its job flawlessly.

This movie is about three girls who are dating (other people... not each other), wait... that's not right, they are boys, who act like girls. Ok, lets start over. This is a movie about three boys finding life hard and troublesome, especially dating, since none of them can get girls, dammit, that's not right either. These guys can have whoever they like, and does, but they still complain and discuss the most amazingly childish things, in the most excrutiating and painful way.
Ok, plot aside, this movie is what is wrong with the world. The role of the man is changing (or rather the view of what a man is...), and it is a sad sight. It might be a very funny movie to some, but to me it was just painful to watch. The dialogue is written a little too perfect and delivered with perfect timing, not at all realistic, or like life... really... is. Life is indeed awkward, or can be, but what these three friends experience... has nothing to do with awkward. They are just spoiled brats who should grow up and pick any of these amazing women who throw themselves at them.
_Last words... if you are a teenager who finds life a bit hard and awkward... don't watch this movie... ever. Instead, go watch **Juno**, which is everything that this movie is not._
**Note:** I finished this review halfway through the movie, so if everything changes... I deeply apologizes for any harm I may have caused to the fans of Zac Efron, Miles Teller and Michael B. Jordan.
**Second Note:** Finished the movie, and something did improve... by the very end. Omar from the Wire turned up. Great show. Great actor. Great role. But not enough to save this movie, unfortunately.

For me, Set it Up is a typical mid-quality romantic comedy. It is witty in places and a smart script mostly of the time. It separates itself from other rom-coms in at least one way. Normally you have a couple either in love at the start or who meet early on and fall in love, and then have to survive challenges along the way if they are to produce the required happy ending. Set it Up takes a different path, with two couples who don’t even like each other at first.
The two personal assistants reluctantly agree to work together to play matchmaker for their bosses, with the idea that their jobs would get easier if the overbearing and frankly abusive managers got distracted by romance, or at least sex.
So that is the set-up for Set It Up, and it is fairly well done. It didn’t rely on raunchy humor or explicit language or sex, which is always a plus for me. I don’t think I will feel compelled to watch it again, but I don’t regret seeing it the first time around.

Boo! Jump!
Horror is one of those genres that creates such voting and reviewing hostility on internet sites. You can guarantee that no matter what new horror film comes out it will garner posts on the likes of IMDb as being "the worst horror film I have ever seen". That is until the next big release, where we will go around the houses again...
Ouija is just a standard boo-jump horror picture with a standard story line. Any expectation of any thing more would have (will do) led (lead) to great disappointment. It's one of those horror films that asks you to turn off the lights and just enjoy the quick spooky ride, then you get off the ride and quickly move on to something else. It's neither "the worst horror film of all time" or anything remotely original. It's Boo-Jump horror 101, so buy into that or leave it well alone. 6/10

One of my all-time favorite guilty pleasures has it all with a convoluted plot, insane Bay-like explosions, that orange-tinge the early aughts were known for (also see Gone in 60 Seconds) and John Travolta sporting a soul-patch. Saw this one in theaters back in 2001 and like to put it on very couple of years when I feel like relaxing. **4.0/5**

US Secretary of State "Charlotte Field" (Charlize Theron) has some fairly stellar approval ratings ahead of her impending bid for the Presidency when she encounters "Fred" (Seth Rogan) at a swanky soirée. She the epitome of chic, he that of chavdom. It turns out they dated many moons ago and against the advice of her staff, she decides that he could be useful as her speechwriter. A stroke of genius or a fit of madness? Well the rest of this over-long comedy drama really only belongs to fans of Rogan - and I'm not one of them. There are a few scenes where Theron plays the comedy well - swallowing some molly before some sensitive diplomacy, but for the most part it's a rather tacky comedy with loads of expletives and low-level crassness, compensating for a really lacking script and a predictable storyline. It does try to take a swipe at the political establishment and at those vacuous folks atop it, and the ensemble supporting cast help a little, but it's all been seen before and at over two hours, I'm afraid I just struggled to get engaged with the either of them before the rushed conclusion.

What I hate about the political people is that the right is dissing this because of the way it starts out and the environmental policies at the heart of the campaign... and the Left is saying how horrible it is because a Republican was Black, and had a point, and was still a good person.
So, once more we have a film that you are not supposed to like because meh politics... but at least it's a film that both sides say you should hate. I guess that is progress.
Other than that, Boyz 2 Men, got the biggest laugh out of me, which was kind of shocking given that this is a movie that is supposed to be a stupid and pointless comedy.
And it is, and it's not the best stupid and pointless comedy out there, but, hey, these are throw away movies designed for mindless fun and that is how this film bills itself. It's supposed to be vulgar and hysterical and it is.
And, once more, if you are not watching this to see a mindless and vulgar comedy... I don't know what you expected to see.
The only real draw back is that Theron and Jackson kind of come across as the two funniest people, on a screen with Seth Rogen who was the comedian of the bunch... and kind of felt like he phoned this one in. But, other than that, you get exactly what you expect from it.

Oddly mild and politically centrist-affirming for a movie about a woman who spends the majority of the movie trying to enact a climate-benefit policy. Also kind of exists in this weird in-between purgatory world where it's "so woke" and "not like those other RomComs where the guy gets the hot girl just because" but is simultaneously like... The slovenly ~nice guy~ still gets this political powerhouse stunner of a woman by the power of... Being himself? I guess. It's a very half measures movie, is what I'm saying. Moves towards one set of things but can't leave the other set behind. And so a movie with this middling a perspective, of course, gets the middling-est of ratings.
Charlize is a fuckin' champ in this though, absolutely runs the show.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)
Who would have thought that the first (positive) surprise of the year would be a movie starring Seth Rogen in a romantic-comedy?! This genre has been having trouble for the past few years (only a handful of films are worthy of high praise), but Long Shot's amazing cast called my attention at the beginning of 2019 when I was organizing my watchlist of the year. I genuinely love Rogen type of humor, and Charlize Theron is one of the best actresses of the 21st century. Add three more terrific actors like Bob Odenkirk (President Chambers), O'Shea Jackson Jr. (Lance), and an unrecognizable Andy Serkis (Parker Wembley), and you have yourself a clear path to success.
So, what's the missing key ingredient? A well-written and compelling story, which is the number one problem with rom-coms of today. Most of these movies go straight to streaming services since they're the easiest ones to produce. Just gather a reasonably decent cast, put together a cliche narrative about how two people with nothing in common end up together through the most unlikely and dumb plot devices, and you have a low-budget “success”. Long Shot‘s premise follows a variation of that concept and it still carries the trademark conventionality, but it's the chemistry of its leads, the hilarious comedy and the beautifully-written screenplay that makes this one stand out.
The dialogues don't feel forced, a large portion of the jokes land, and the best compliment I can give to this film: it took itself seriously, and it worked seamlessly. There’s a heartfelt message to transmit to the viewers, and it’s delivered in the most realistic possible way. The romance doesn’t seem far-fetched or born out of nowhere. Instead, it has a wonderful arc, filled with real-life relationship moral dilemmas and difficult decisions. Everything that any character says either makes sense or makes you laugh.
The cast is brilliant as expected. Seth Rogen and Charlize Theron‘s chemistry is palpable, and it’s one of the reasons why the romance part of the movie works. They clearly had much fun on-set, and that’s visible on the big screen. Rogen provides most of the laughs, but he also proves that he can be dramatic if necessary. Theron is just impeccable. She simply can’t act a single line of her script in a way that’s not perfect, whether it’s a romantic scene or a comedy bit. Her range is on display throughout the entire runtime, and Jonathan Levine should be extremely grateful as a director to have such an outstanding actress to work with.
In addition to all of this, there’s one thing I never expected to be praising right now: the makeup department. Before the film, I knew that Andy Serkis was on the cast, but I completely forgot what his role was. Without an ounce of exaggeration, I truly believe that it’s almost impossible to recognize him as Wembley if you don’t know beforehand that he participates in the movie. When I re-checked the cast members, I remembered that he had a role indeed, and I was almost as surprised by the discovery as I was with how much I enjoyed this film. O’Shea Jackson Jr. also delivers a hilarious performance while Bob Odenkirk doesn’t really have much screentime to shine.
This is one of those movies that you can’t precisely point out obvious flaws. A flawless film doesn’t mean it’s a perfect 10/10 movie. It just means you really don’t have any major issues with it. If every single aspect of a film is just “good”, then the movie is “good”, not “incredible” or “amazing”. That is how I view Long Shot. It’s an extremely entertaining rom-com, undeniably one of the best I’ve seen these past few years. Even though the main concept follows the genre’s traditional storylines, its well-written screenplay, hilarious comedy bits, and outstanding protagonists make a surprisingly serious story remarkably entertaining.
It’s a fast-paced 2-hour runtime that I recommend to anyone who just wants to have a good time at the movie theater.
Rating: B+

Could this really happen? "Marla Grayson" (Rosamund Pike) is a scheming, manipulative creature who takes advantage of folk in difficulty (real or otherwise) so she can put them in managed accommodation, drugged up to their eyeballs, whilst she realises, and disposes of, whatever assets they may have had on the outside. It's a clever network of conspirators - reliant on a justice system predicated on respect for the professional opinions offered to it by doctors, care home managers and, of course, by this thoroughly odious woman. She and girlfriend "Fran" (Eiza González) alight on their latest mark - "Jennifer" (Dianne Wiest) and all is going to plan before we discover that she wasn't quite the woman they thought, and that powerful interests have taken an interest in getting her free and her possessions back... Enter Peter Dinklage who manages to illicit a sort of comic menace (there's a fun scene where he shields his face from a bank camera as if to hide his identity amongst a great crowd of other men of his height - not!?) Anyway, he determines to have the woman freed and is a man of some considerable resource. "Grayson" fights back and what was, until now, quite an interesting story descends quickly into the realms of silliness. Her character is clever and shrewd, but as so often happens with these kind of films - she quickly acquires the skills of a trained ninja whilst he, the fearful gangster, ends up looking little more dangerous that yesterday's milk. It is almost as if someone wrote the first forty minutes or so, then went for a tea break and his 5 year old child finished it. Eventually, the ending did provide me with the result I wanted, coming from the left-field for a tiny twist and Pike is pretty good at the start - she depicts this heartless woman skilfully, raising heckles as she goes - it's just a shame that it all fell to pieces so quickly, and so thoroughly...

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
When it comes to Rosamund Pike, it doesn't really matter the type of film she's doing, I'm always in. Her constantly dedicated, incredible performances strongly grasp me to the screen every single time, so I expected I Care a Lot to follow the same path. From the most recent Radioactive to one of her most famous roles in Gone Girl, passing through numerous other memorable displays, Pike just can't deliver a bad interpretation. Being this my first viewing of a J Blakeson's movie, and with Netflix offering their pristine production value, I must state that I'm surprised with how much I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Let me begin with what I think really makes this movie so attractive: its screenplay.
Pike and co. all deliver outstanding performances, and I'll get to those, but Blakeson's script is both crazy and smart. If the premise isn't clear enough, capitalism is a significant theme throughout the entire runtime. From the rich-poor depressing yet realistic comparisons to the ruthless competition between the so-called sharks of this economic system, I Care a Lot provides excellent parallelism to the real world. The not-that-implicit messages regarding this topic are mostly delivered by Marla Grayson, a protagonist who doesn't shy away from assuming her lioness status.
Possessing cunning knowledge of both the pros and cons of capitalism and its borderline legal cheats, the viewer accompanies Marla through her exceptionally captivating process of acquiring and profiting from a new target, just like hundreds of companies and CEOs around the world do without most people realizing it. When Marla finds a worthy competitor, Blakeson risks its grounded story, replacing it with an absolutely lunatic second half, characterized by absurd, out-of-this-world character and plot decisions, which would be a major issue if its purpose wasn't precisely to show the ridiculous - and criminal - ambition of top-tier capitalists.
I can't deny it gets a tad too mad and irrational for my taste, but having in mind the context and Blakeson's goal, I consider it a mostly successful play. Plus, the entertainment value doesn't drop, much on the contrary, it skyrockets to a point where I welcome some of its craziness. The third act boasts tremendous tension and suspense, slightly unexpected developments, and a shocking yet utterly perfect ending that will make most viewers say "karma is a b*tch, right?" It's a quite enlightening story about the real-life guardians who exploit their wards. Blakeson brilliantly educates the audience on the power of bureaucracy, the moral compromises overly ambitious people must make, and how to profit for some means lack of freedom for others.
Marc Canham's score is the technical standout, delivering an electronic soundtrack that I usually don't appreciate that much, but it played the right type of tracks at the perfect moments. From the score alone, the viewer is able to understand the importance of certain scenes, and that's a massive achievement. Doug Emmett's cinematography also allows for a few gorgeous shots with exquisite lighting, but I need to move on to the fantastic performances from the cast. I already approached Pike's performance, and at the time of this review, she's already received a Golden Globe nomination, so I don't need to further compliment her display.
However, I can't let the rest of the cast go away without mentions. Peter Dinklage (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Avengers: Infinity War) offers one of my favorite performances from his film career with his slightly over-the-top yet intriguing interpretation of a dangerous gangster. Eiza González (Bloodshot, Hobbs & Shaw, Alita: Battle Angel) is also pretty good as Fran, Marla's lover, and her chemistry with Pike is on-point. Their sparse yet impactful emotional moments are quite compelling. Dianne Wiest is a total badass as Jennifer Peterson, a not-that-innocent old lady, and finally, a shoutout to Chris Messina (Birds of Prey), who hands his charm as an attention-grabbing lawyer.
I Care a Lot is one of the best Netflix movies this year has offered so far. Boasting an intriguing premise, J Blakeson brilliantly expands his idea through an enlightening screenplay that tackles the sometimes cunning guardian-ward relationship in real-life. Packed with clever analogies to real-life capitalism, Blakeson transmits impactful messages about the power of authority, excessive ambition, and the moral compromises one makes to gain wealth and success at the cost of other people's freedom. Rosamund Pike impeccably leads a film that starts as a realistic take on the process of acquiring and profiting from a new "victim" and then evolves into an absolutely crazy second half of absurd outcomes. This ridiculous development does get a bit too irrational, but its purposeful objective of demonstrating capitalists' immorally ruthless behavior regarding competition is undoubtedly accomplished. Outstanding performances across the board and a surprisingly effective electronic score only make this movie better. I couldn't recommend it more.
Rating: A-

I found myself curiously drawn into the plot and unable to turn away. Patrick Stewart was cool. Kinda disgusting and traumatizing though.

> There's only one way out and it is to fight back!
From the director of 'Blue Ruin', yet another crime-thriller. This time it revolves around a rock band who trapped in the neo-nazi enclosure on the outskirt of the city. So how do they plan to get away from the green room they're locked in, and armed men are outside waiting for them to take down. The film filled with lots of tense moments and mostly unpredictable stuffs which is a one day event.
I was not surprised, I just expected something as smart as the director's previous film. He retained his favourite actor, Macon Blair to play an important role as their third collaboration in this multistarrer and he once again did well. This theme is not the first time explored, it is a well known, but the setting was very unique. All the actors were amazing, but truly very sad to hear the news about Anton Yelchin. He was a young and a wonderful actor and his '5 to 7' was my favourite.
At first, I thought the plot was so silly. I wondered why they did not use the excessive force as they're capable to tackle such situation. But that's the best part, because they threw away the cliché and approached for something new way to deal it. So the writer, I mean the director did great to carve a rare and thrilling film of the year.
There's no martial arts, criminal gang's collision or the cops fighting the bad guys; it was about how the normal people confront during a hostile situation in the real world. Blue and Green are done, now I'm waiting for the director to announce his next colour project.
7/10

**HA HA HA**
I remember watching this when it first came out on DVD. At the time, I thought the movie was just okay. However, after gaining some life experience and spending time in long-term relationships, I appreciate it much more now. If we strip away the comedy, this film teaches us about self-awareness and the importance of communication, which definitely earns it some points.
Both actors did a great job in their roles, and as a fan of both, I was impressed by their performances. If you feel like you've watched every movie under the sun and you haven't seen this one yet, definitely give it a go.

How is this so great?
'Locke' truly ought not to be as engrossing as it is. I didn't know anything about it (bar the lead) before watching, if at that point you told me the premise and how it plays out I would've guaranteed an utterly boring movie, at best. However, this 2013 release is actually quality.
Tom Hardy definitely reaches the upper echelons in any favourite actor discussions, so things with him in are always likely to be a hit with me; eh, well, ignoring 'The Drop' anyway. Hardy is excellent in this, to be able to convey so much within such restraints is very impressive. I watched 'Deserter' before this and noted his iffy French accent, here he has a shot at Welsh... and it's gwych. It somehow adds a dynamic to events onscreen.
I shouldn't be surprised at how grand the writing is here given Steven Knight is behind it, I either like or love everything I've seen of that guy's work elsewhere - 'Hummingbird', 'Peaky Blinders', 'Taboo' (really gonna need that season two, chaps...), 'A Christmas Carol'. The guy knows what he does, that's for sure. Oh, and the touch of having known names starring alongside Hardy via voice only is an inspired choice, too.
Driving. Birth. Football. Concrete. And yet somehow it's an outstanding picture. How about that?

Locke precariously drives down the road of crushing solitude. Concrete. A highly versatile construction material that harnesses strength and durability as aspects of its properties. Impact and fire resistant. A common element for brutalist architecture. And just like the eponymous construction foreman, all it takes is for one mistake. The most minuscule of errors, before an erected building collapses. Unable to withstand the misjudgement of its foundations. Locke, as he drives his tissue-littered BMW X5 from Birmingham to London, must confront unintentional accidents that have caused his mentality to inadvertently spiral out of control.
A one night stand with Colman as she gives birth to a miscalculated oversight. Consequently causing Locke to abruptly depart for the hospital, resulting in his job dismissal and a construction company spending millions more on a building that has yet to come to fruition. Confronting his own family, showcasing honesty in the most desperate of situations. An hour and a half drive (“as fast as the traffic will allow”). Thirty six phone calls. A life dissolving in the confinement’s of one location. He had everything. Security. Family. Shelter. Only for them to be removed by signalled communications in the luxury of his BMW.
Knight illustrates the power of simplicity. No flashy visualised distractions. No abrupt editing mechanics. No action. The thrills, tension and drama stem from a screenplay that has its extremities tested by consistently filming in real-time. Allowing the dialogue to be the only aspect at the forefront. We witness an individual deal with the stresses of life. Both professional and personal. Examining the moralities of a man who strives to differ from his irresponsible father. But his wife’s rebuttal is an opaque sentiment that challenges forgiveness. “The difference between never and once is the difference between good and bad”. An eternally resonant message that self-drives this car journey into the realms of virtuosity.
Knight’s purposeful choice of enhancing the claustrophobic environment complements the depiction of Locke’s world, as he knows it, swirling in on him. Reducing the boundaries of his breathing space. His stress and anxiety heightening with each phone call he receives. However, none of the above would’ve been as effective if it wasn’t for Hardy’s exceptionally tantalising performance. Far from a car crash, he manages to centralise the focus on him with the camera rarely moving away from his bloodshot eyes or fatigued face. His desperation and intrusive responses illustrates loneliness on a more empathetic wavelength.
Despite the act of adultery, you never view Locke as an antagonistic entity. He does his best to find “the next practical step” whilst retaining the thoughts of the recipients in his own head. It’s relatable, personally, on a level that cancels out the background noise. And that, is a powerful dramatic endeavour.
There are a few bumps on the motorway though. The various scenes where Locke talks to himself, as if he’s talking to his father, were somewhat cumbersome techniques in order to convey his opposing stance to his father that still haunts him. It’s not particularly subtle, and contrasts heavily with the dramatic phone calls. A desperate attempt to convey abandonment, which would’ve been alleviated by a simple phone chat instead. It’s not shot in one take, and so editor Wright embeds scenes of traffic and the bright luminescence of roads to segregate the narrative flow. These occur too frequently and conceives an occasional irregular pace. And the maternity nurse wasn’t particularly helpful by constantly spluttering “she’s afraid” whilst Locke clearly stated he was on his way. Give the man a break!
Despite these bumps, Locke is a smooth drive with dramatic heft and cinematic experimentalism. An irony of a construction worker having his life demolished in minutes. Testing an individual’s moralities through a variety of stress-inducing situations, culminating into an illustration on solidarity. Hardy confidently drives the plot to its desired destination, “speed limits” included.

Been waiting ages to watch this, ever since its release really. Finally I have and 'The Banshees of Inisherin' is as great as I expected it to be. Terrific viewing.
There's not really much more to add to what I'm sure has been said by many, many others. All I can say is that I had a grand time watching it all unfold, it is expertly crafted in all areas and is brought to life by outstanding performances from Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson; Kerry Condon and Barry Keoghan aren't bad either!