Yikes, but was there fuss around this when it was released? A film about porn, yes, but a film about men in porn - and with the ribbed and toned "Marky Mark" too! What will we see? What will he show? I remember the general interest in this hitherto rather unsavoury topic was insatiable. Well, what we do get is a rather interesting and lively exposé of just how the porn industry might have worked in the late 1970s. Experienced producer "Horner" (Burt Reynolds) spots hunky waiter "Eddie" (Mark Wahlberg) in a restaurant and next thing, the young man is the hottest of properties. With the timeless moniker of "Dirk Diggler" (try finding that on PornHub!) he is soon a true star with money and girls and drugs galore. Fame is a fickle friend, however, and the writing is soon on the wall for our emotionally ill-equipped young man who never for a moment considers that this escalator can go down as well as up. This story is filled with engaging and enigmatic characters - ranging from the stoic "Amber Waves" (a cracking effort from Julianne Moore) who seems to try and instil a sense of proportion and responsibility to the gorgeously stereotypical "Reed Rothschild" (an unlikely casting, I thought, in John C. Reilly). It's Mark Wahlberg who proves to be the revelation here, though. He works quite naturally with the on-form, and entirely plausible, veteran Reynolds and for quite a while, their roller-coaster of sex and success is compelling and quite enjoyable to follow. Is anything real in that scene at the end? Well who knows - but 2½ hours peppered with some great disco just flew by in a cinema that was packed to the rafters.

Shame is nothing short of a masterpiece: every shot tells a story.
SYNOPSIS: (from Google)
Successful and handsome New Yorker Brandon (Michael Fassbender) seems to live an ordinary life, but he hides a terrible secret behind his mask of normalcy: Brandon is a sex addict. His constant need for gratification numbs him to just about everything else. But, when Sissy (Carey Mulligan), Brandon's needy sister, unexpectedly blows into town, crashes at his apartment and invades his privacy, Brandon is finally forced to confront his addiction head-on.
REVIEW:
I'm certain Shame will always be my personal favorite McQueen film. McQueen tells a story with the camera and with the voice.
McQueen brought on Sean Bobbitt as cinematographer for this amazing project and Bobbitt does not disappoint. Together they craft some of the most revealing and beautiful scenes in recent cinema. The lighting for this movie (also headed by Bobbitt), aids in the visual storytelling.
Abi Morgan and McQueen's script really shines, bringing Brandon's addiction further into the light.
Harry Escott's haunting score will never leave your brain after you see this film. Escott's use of both classical and original pieces bring the film together.
Michael Fassbender gives a stunning performance as Brandon, one moment he's casually strolling about, the next he's acting on his most basic impulses, and the next he's yelling at his sister. Carey Mulligan gave a great supporting role next to Fassbender as well. Both are given several scenes to shine.
The film uses its NC-17 rating to its fullest extent, yet none of the sex feels sensationalized. It's all very real and most of the time almost disturbing to watch. McQueen delivers the entire story very artistically, including the sex scenes, which many directors could have messed up. This makes the film as a whole flow better. The movie portrays sex addiction (and addiction in general) in a very real way, while everyone is different we all feel shame after we've gotten our fix, and sometimes we'll do anything to get that fix.

Has a good reputation among critics and film-buffs, but I thought this was duller than dullsville on a dull tuesday.
Fassbender has got to be one of the most overrated actors in recent times. He's got a distinctive look and his eyes pierces through the screen I'll give him that. And a well-sized johnson (as proven on numorous ocassions here) but other than that he's fairly mediocre.

The expression "flogging a dead horse" comes to mind with this unnecessary and unremarkable trequel. This time our reclusive, eponymous, hero (Sylvester Stallone) has to relocate from idyllic Thailand to war-torn Afghanistan - amidst the Soviet invasion! Why? Well his erstwhile CO "Trautman" (Richard Crenna) has managed to get himself captured whilst leading a covert operation to supply some tribal rebels. "Rambo" has to get his skates on, though, because Uncle Sam is denying all knowledge of this clandestine operation and chances are that the prisoner won't last very long under the tender mercies of "Zaysen" (Marc de Jonge - presumably, Steven Berkoff was busy?). There is plenty of traditional action, loads of pyrotechnics and firefights but the plot is predictable - almost propagandist; the dialogue really rather banal and the whole thing seems to be little more than a stop-gap enterprise to keep the franchise momentum going while Stallone and the team concoct something more substantial for the next outing. It's not unwatchable, but it's pretty forgettable afterwards.

_**Rambo goes to Afghanistan to fight Russians**_
Living at a Buddhist temple in Thailand as a handy man, Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) is offered a mission by Col. Trautman (Richard Crenna) to go to Afghanistan to assist Afghans against the Soviets. He goes only to rescue someone dear to him. The cast includes Sasson Gabai as Rambo’s sidekick Mousa; Spyros Fokas as wise Afghan Masoud; and Marc de Jonge as Soviet Col. Zaysen.
“Rambo III” (1988) contains what you would want from a Rambo flick: A muscular protagonist, a one-man-army scenario, a noble cause and loads of action. It also has a quality cast, fabulous locations and a good score.
Playing like a Conan the Barbarian adventure set in the modern day, it has a comic book vibe like the previous film, but not as bad. Everything works for an action/adventure flick until the last 15 minutes when it’s burdened by one too many action scenes. The strange thing about movie action is that too much of it becomes boring. That’s the case here with the final act.
Just so there’s no misunderstanding, Rambo was NOT fighting for what became the Taliban. Rambo Meets a man named Masoud, the wise leader of the Mujahadeen who are fighting the Soviets. This character was named after a notable Mujahadeen commander of the Northern Alliance, Ahmad Shah Massoud, who fought against both the Taliban & Al Qaeda. Massoud warned the Euro leaders about Bin Laden and was assassinated by Al Qaeda on September 9, 2001, two days before the September 11th Attack.
My ranking of the Rambo movies is as follows: First Blood, Rambo IV, Last Blood, Rambo III and Rambo II. Only the first two are great, but the other three have their points of interest for action/adventure fans.
The film runs 1 hour, 42 minutes, and was shot in Chiang Mai, Thailand; Arizona; and Israel.
GRADE: B-/C+

This has shades of "Horatio Hornblower" to it, but is much grittier. Russell Crowe delivers a strong, convincing, portrayal of the doughty captain "Aubrey", in command of HMS "Surprise" and charged with tracking down a French privateer that is raiding the vital British whaling fleet during the Napoleonic wars. Coming up against an equally courageous and skilful French captain and engaging in a lethal game of cat and mouse, he must outmanoeuvre this cunning foe before he and his crew end up in Davy Jones' Locker. The film nods to the social issues and superstitions of living on a 19th Century frigate and to bravery (and cowardice) in a subtle yet plausible way. Above all, it's an adventure film and there is plenty of action as we go. A strong ensemble cast in support (though Paul Bettany as the doctor and "Aubrey's" best friend on this voyage didn't quite wash with me) complement some great maritime cinematography; a good score and Peter Weir's able and exciting direction.

What you have here is Crowe still thinking that he's the greatest actor that ever lived.
That all takes away the fun of a movie that had the potential to be a high seas epic like, say, Captain Blood.
Peter Weir lets Crowe go crazy and you can almost taste the ego dripping out of the pours of every seen, so much so that he doesn't allow Paul Bettany to shine and he's a good actor in his own right, as is James D'Arcy and again, Crowe seems to want to hog all the acting glory there too.
Honestly, its hard to sit down and watch a man try to upstage everyone in every scene, especially when they are actors that could hold their own against Crowe...if Crowe allowed that to happen.
So, you get to sit back and watch ego and that gets boring.
It's a shame, the script and directing were there, it could have been a great film if we didn't just see ego shine.

I enjoyed 'Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World'.
The early scenes are surprisingly (given the relatively close release dates) similar to fellow 2003 release 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl', with a hidden enemy ship spotted amid foggy conditions and then one person spots unexpected cannon fire and tells others to duck... there are even main characters named Jack (lead!) and Will!
With those amusing (to me, given that POTC is my favourite film) connections noted, the film goes on, of course, to do it's own thing and I'd say it comes out very nicely. The constant (supremely shot) action is a major plus, as are the performances of Russell Crowe and Paul Bettany. I coulda done with more characterization for those behind Crowe and Bettany as I didn't overly care for them, though the support cast are all solid to be fair.

This is a rousing sea yarn with great camera work, but it also shows comraderie and relationships in a realistic way on board a British fighting ship.
As happens sometimes but not always, I enjoyed this movie more than I liked the book it was based upon. O'Brian has written a lot of great sea tales, but this one confused me. I felt like checking to see if the pages were in the correct order. The story seems simplified in this adaptation. (Some may say that is not a good thing!)
The first several minutes of the film move the viewer around the ship, and I felt like It was a realistic representation of what it was like to sail on it. The creaking and other ever-present noises, the tight spaces allotted to the crew, all helped me feel like I knew what it was like more than just reading about it.
There are a lot of characters aboard ship, so out of necessity some of them never really developed, but even the glimpses we get of them here and there illustrate that they are people, not stereotypes. There were a few rather unlikely plot turns later on in the film, but by then I was drawn into the story and right there with the crew, so I forgave them. I have watched Master and Commander twice so far, and wouldn't be averse to seeing it again.

For England, for home, and for the prize!
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is directed by Peter Weir, it stars Russell Crowe as Jack Aubrey and Paul Bettany as Stephen Maturin. It is spliced from various novels in the Aubrey–Maturin series written by Patrick O'Brian. The film takes place during 1805, during the Napoleonic Wars and finds Captain Jack Aubrey and the crew of British frigate HMS Surprise ordered to intercept, destroy or take as a prize the French privateer Acheron. But the Acheron (The Phantom as the crew of the Surprise call her) is no ordinary ship, and her Captain is smart. So Lucky Jack has his work cut out; not only in the pursuit of the Acheron, but in harmonising the crew under his command. Especially his loyal and trusting friend Stephen.
It's pretty evident within the first few minutes of Master & Commander that this is no standard blockbusting naval based war movie. If you are after, or was expecting, a wave to wave Bruckheimer carnage a-like piece, well you best, or should have, stay(ed) away. For this is a Peter Weir movie, in fact this is a Peter Weir "period" movie, where attention to details and character dynamics are the order of the day. There's battle action here for sure, beginning and end, and terrific they are too, as first cannonballs crack and splinter their targets (note the sound work here), and later as blade meets blade - it's exhilarating stuff alright. However, this is more interested in palpable tension, both on deck and on the waves. Threat is never far away, again, this is is covered by the impending duel with the Acheron and Aubrey's tactical pursuit/escape of her. As the Aubrey machinations unfurl, the crew give us a series of character dramas to involve us in the make up of a man-o-war's personnel. How different classes and males (there's not one female in the film) of all ages have to work together as one efficient unit in order to survive and triumph. Except for an interlude spent on the lusciously filmed Galapagos Island (Russell Boyd Best Cinematography Academy Award Winner), the film is set 99% of the time out at sea, on a cramped ship, this tells you that Weir is interested in telling a character driven story, one that is cloaked in realism above all else.
The teaming of Weir with the highly rated O'Brian material looked a good one, and to someone like me who has never read an O'Brian novel, it is. Unsurprisingly many of O'Brian's fans have been upset by either the stuff missing in the film, the stuff put in to fully form Weir's vision of the characters, or for Crowe not being Pugwashy enough. These complaints were inevitable since they come with practically every adaptation of novels these days. It should be noted, though, that Weir was very much a fan of O'Brian, and in fact always felt inspired by the tight intricate detail of his writings. What of the author himself? Well he passed away three years before the film was released, but he had always envisaged Charlton Heston for the role of Aubrey. So, who in the modern era comes closest to Heston's physical presence on screen, why Russell Crowe of course. Who not only brings that to the character, but also depth, because Aubrey comes with many traits. Strength, honour, stubbornness, leadership and loyalty are a given for a Captain on the high seas. Yet Aubrey is also vulnerable, self aware, playful, knows his limitations and is able to laugh at himself. Crowe peels off each layer and delivers a high quality performance - from our first encounter with Crowe as Aubrey, the realism so loved by Weir is given a shot in the arm - and it stays throughout the movie.
So an excellent piece of casting then, as is that of Paul Bettany as ships surgeon, science and nature lover, and best pal of the Captain, Stephen Maturin. Bettany and Crowe had formed a friendship on 2001's A Beautiful Mind, where their on screen chemistry lifted an already fine film, to an even better one. So it be here also. Stephen & Jack's relationship is the core of the piece, two very different men yet as tight as two peas in a pod, with Stephen serving as the code breaker for the audience as sea talk and tactical intrigue weaves in and out of the story. It's there where Bettany excels, for he not only has us believing in this warm (platonic) friendship, he's also got us rooting for him since he is in essence the odd man out on this ship. Our sympathy is firmly with him, our friendly rebel if you please. Of the rest there's note worthy turns from Billy Boyd, James D'Arcy & Edward Woodall, while Lee Ingleby gives a really heartfelt and emotionally engaging turn as the haunted Hollom.
The film is not without flaws, though. The pace of the piece does slip from time to time, while the talky middle section may stretch the patience of some, and the film isn't long enough to give the main characters some back story for the audience to work off. Yet it's still a terrific movie, ripe with intelligence and interesting characterisations, and boasting enough adrenalin, humour and upset to fill out a big budgeted 1950s historical epic. So get on board folks, for this is quality film making and it demands to be seen via the best format available. 9/10

This artistic masterpiece is unfortunately undervalued. Unfortunately, Warner Bros. Entertainment does not know its worth, and due to their lack of interest in it, it has become obscure. This artistic masterpiece must be revived again. Warner Bros. Entertainment must do this, just as 20th Century Fox did when it released two improved releases of the Titanic movie in 2003 and 2012. Who would believe that a movie released in 1997 is now available in 4K quality and 3D technology?! Warner Bros. Entertainment must re-release the movie trailer in 4K quality as a first step to correct its course, and launch a new strong marketing campaign for the Red Riding Hood movie, just as it launched a strong marketing campaign for the Barbie movie that does not deserve it. They should do this for the movie that deserves it, not the opposite. Essentially, the reason for the lack of fame of the Red Riding Hood movie was the failure of Warner Bros. Entertainment in its marketing campaign for the movie, as it was a very weak campaign, in addition to its excessive pursuit of the PG-13 age rating instead of accepting its R-rating, which led to changing the ending for the PG-13 rated cut. The reason was not the movie itself or the director Catherine Hardwicke. In fact, Catherine Hardwicke directed the movie in an unimaginable way, especially in the unrated original cut of the movie known as the Alternate Cut. The existence of a rated cut without additional terms such as (Alternate Cut) does not necessarily mean that it is the original cut. In fact, the original cut is the one that was not modified to fit the PG-13 age rating. The original cut is the one that was released as is without modifications. The original cut is the one that the MPAA did unrate, so you always find the word Unrated next to it. The original cut is the Alternate Cut, and it was not named Director's Cut because Warner Bros. Entertainment changed the ending of the PG-13 rated cut to fit the PG-13 age rating. Therefore, it is no longer possible to name the original cut as Director's Cut, as this title does not include the change in the ending. Therefore, they had to name the original cut as the Alternate Cut to include the change in the ending. As you know, production companies do not like the R-rating because it narrows the audience range, which reduces revenues. Therefore, Warner Bros. Entertainment pressured Catherine Hardwicke to modify the movie to be released with a PG-13 age rating instead of an R-rating. This explains why the ending was changed in the rated cut compared to the unrated original cut. In my opinion, both cuts are successful artistic masterpieces, but the original cut is more artistically successful, and I loved it more. My rating for the rated cut (modified) is 9/10, and my rating for the unrated original cut (Alternate Cut) is 10/10. It is the best and greatest of all time in presenting the story of Red Riding Hood, and no movie surpasses it in presenting this story. Thank you, Catherine Hardwicke, for this artistic masterpiece.

Hardwicke clones Twilight style on every way in this movie: photography, editing, dialogues, disconnected story telling and even the looks of the male hero.
However, the script is interesting and keeps you hooked on not knowing what's going on until the end.

Surrogacy is a perversion. It's an addiction. And you have to kill the addict to kill the addiction.
I first viewed Surrogates upon its home format release and positively found it very ordinary. Viewing it again, with focus and in solitude, it proved to be a far better experience.
The action scenes are what you would expect for a multi-plex appeasing popcorner, loud, colourful and owing great debt to modern technology. Yet to dismiss this totally as one of those easy money making blockbuster movies is most unfair.
Surrogates oozes intrigue, even if it doesn't quite deliver on the smartness written on the page. The idea that in the future robotic alter egos can carry out our everyday mundane functions is cracker-jack, and it opens up a whole can of berserker worms.
This is not merely an excuse to have Bruce Willis running around exploding surrogate robots, as much fun as that is of course, there's a deeper emotional core pulsing away as Willis fights the good fight to make sure being human is not cast aside like a thing of the past, that as flawed as we are, hiding away in a surrogate is not the answer.
This axis of the story is beautifully realised by the plot strand involving Willis and Rosamund Pike as his wife, with both actors doing fine work to give it the required emotional heft. It may ultimately lose itself to a standard conspiracy plot, but there's intelligence within to make Surrogates a better film than it first appears. 7/10

Basically, there are a ton of 1 star reviews on IMDb complaining that it makes the left look bad... despite, you know, things like Antifa and their belief that a red hat means they gt to physically assault people.
So I am going to give it 10 stars... because my wife had a milk shake thrown at her for being a "race traitor" and, on our way back from work we got egged (along with everyone else at a red light) in an attempt to convince us to support impeachment.
And, because of that I think that this works as a satire about that attitude that having a different opinion means they have the right to act violently, by taking that attitude to an extreme.
And when reviewers write sentences like "insipid portrayals of both the elite and the deplorables" it only serves to reinforce the attitude that the film is parodying, that attitude that they are "elite" elevated above all others, and those in the out group are dehumanized as "deplorable."
In fact, the vast majority of the 1 star reviews are written with a vocabulary that so perfectly echoes the people that the film is a satire of that it is almost impossible not to see the brilliance here.
"Elite" and "deplorable" a part of me thinks that they realize that they are the subject of satire in this film... but can't seem to avoid acting exactly like the people that are being mocked here.
So, congratulations, language of the negative reviews alone make this a brilliant satire.

**_Satirical look at Left and Right in a “Most Dangerous Game” setting_**
Several non-Liberal people wake up in the middle of nowhere, possibly Arkansas, to discover they’re being hunted by cutthroat Leftwing radicals.
"The Hunt" (2020) takes the basic-Zaroff scenario of "Open Season" (1974) and "The Hunger Games" (2012) and applies it to the Left’s ire toward “deplorables.” Unlike those other two flicks, this is an amusing satire that pokes fun at both political sides while arguably veering toward pro-Conservative, at least more so than pro-Left.
Betty Gilpin is quite effective as the protagonist, Crystal, while Hilary Swank eventually shows up in the last act for a knock-down-drag-out climax.
The film is snappy at 1 hours, 30 minutes, and was shot in Louisiana, including New Orleans.
GRADE: A-

Fantastic watch, will watch again, and do recommend.
This is one of the best, if weirdly refreshing movies I've seen in quite some time. I'm a sucker for a good survival movie, and this is an "elites hunt people for sport" trope mixed with a good mystery plot if there ever was one. The story structure alone is worth the watch as it essentially runs 3 (-4) sequential stories to tell one overall story while telling you about the story structure. Some movies clearly put a lot of effort into keeping you on your toes, this movie just does it.
Not only is the gunfighting immaculate, but the combat action sequences are amazing. Betty Gilpin steals the show every time she's on screen, and I would normally say she's the one that carries the movie, but the movie is good enough that even though she's over the top great, I can't say the movie needs her to carry it.
There is an investigative aspect of the movie that is very intriguing, but that is given in the "why are they doing this to us" of it all, but unless the villains give an "evil speech", then it should be expected.
If you enjoy human vs human survival situations, then I think you will be pleasantly surprised by this one.

I knew this film was going to be something different but I didn’t read anything about the film before I started watching it. And this is my absolute recommendation to anybody who is thinking of watching this film. Don’t read anything about it. Just watch it. It is different, obscure, unusual, political, weird and overall awesome!
Would I watch it again? Yes! Would I make my friends watch it? Absolutely!

It was... fine. Nothing really to write home about, but some decent kills and gore, plus true subverting expectations with the cast of characters killed off early on. Kind of peters out towards the end but overall it's worth a rental but one could wait until it's available for free as part of a streaming service. **3.5/5**

Irony of ironies that this movie's release got pulled due to Trump's shitfit despite never having seen it, when a not insubstantial part of _The Hunt_ is about the left's propensity for sparking outrage without having the whole story. The reality is, the nothing _The Hunt_ has to say is worth being outraged over. Betty Gilpin's great in it, because of course she is, intermittently there some pretty fun violence, and only **most** of the dialogue is incredibly awkward, but if you want any sort of consumable message, or witty repartee, don't be fooled by people on any end of any spectrum, saying that's something you can find here.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

> Review From **_Horror Focus_**
Gaining its momentum back in mid 2019, The Hunt stirred up quite a bit of controversy prior to its initial release, branding it too brutal for release due to the mass shootings in Ohio, Texas last summer. This Blumhouse picture was later rescheduled, and was at one point never to see the light of day, which would have been a crushing blow knowing how relevant this actually turned out to be. Luckily for us, Blumhouse soon caught on and realised movies like The Hunt are exactly what our cruel audience’s need right now, something with a sharp satirical bite with a gut-punching narrative reflective of modern society. Welcome to my favourite horror movie of the past few years.
Imagine a Twitter thread was made into a movie, this is The Hunt. What we have here is a film that functions on the confliction that exists in the real-world between liberals and conservatives, as they take chunks out of each other when discussing politics online, spilling blood on each side as opinions and views are torn to shit by the opposing party. What is depicted is literal death and carnage, which is representative of how the different identities and political views that are one person's beliefs, but another’s infuriating joke.
Image result for the hunt 2020 film
The beauty here (which is addressed as a massive concern to most reviewers) is the lack of depth to these characters within The Hunt, and to their lifestyle choices and political standpoints. What works best is that it never takes a stance when mocking both sides of the political spectrum, and allows us as an audience to identify which whatever our political views lead us to, even if one side is draped in murderous overtones. I admire how we are left to decide where we would stand, and if what is happening is something we can sympathise with. To most, what I’m saying sounds ridiculous, but this lack of depth to these characters is very much reflective on the current state of our social media, having people who we know nothing about spreading their views which are toxic to half and relatable to others.
It’s that online façade that is at play here, as we witness comments and statements daily that tear down others, ruin people’s professional statuses or simply to spread offensive and insensitive comments online to troll others. This is the world we live in, and the characters in The Hunt exist within our real world. The characters within this may not be fleshed out, but to the online profiles with nothing but a name, a picture and a flurry of controversial tweets neither are they, and that certainly looks like modern day humanity to me.
Much of The Hunt’s satirical sting comes from its reliance on our current climate and political correctness, which leans on its accurate depiction of society to get its laughs in when it can. It’s understandable that this particular sense of humour might to a little too one-note for some, but it firmly has its own tongue planted in its cheek when openly mocking our current way of thinking, juxtaposing these characters with opposing mind-sets to create a genuinely clever and on-the-nose depiction on humanity’s contemporary views. Aside from the intelligent links to modern society, it’s also really enjoyable and highly entertaining when utilised to its full potential. One could be offended by some of the humour here, but when the film itself jokes on our own generation of snowflakes, it begs the question if The Hunt is pointing the finger at you, and calling you out for being said snowflake. It all really works for me on a sharply pungent level, one that had me tickled pink until the final credits. The Hunt ultimately holds up a darkly comedic mirror up to the political divisions in a way that hasn’t been explored to this stature.
Image result for the hunt 2020
The action here is outstanding, with the violence being the appropriate level of over the top to match its exuberant premise. Betty Giplin is undeniably outstanding as she delivers a powerhouse of a performance in her portrayal of Crystal, a tough as nails heroine who easily establishes herself in the ranks next to such genre greats as Erin from You’re Next and Alien’s Ripley. Her level of badass is contagiously ferocious, making every scene she’s in an absolute blast to witness. Each fight scene is crafted brilliantly, looking seamlessly effortless with its high-energy intensity, most notably when we reach our final act in which our Million Dollar Baby Hillary Swank comes head-to-head with Giplin, which can only be described as one of the most entertaining fight scenes in recent horror memory.
Nothing is ever fully dripping in suspense, but you soon realise it doesn’t need to be when you’re watching enigmatic fight scenes that are as vicious as they are diverting. The film also works its best when it plays at its most unexpected, knocking familiar faces off like Drew Barrymore in Scream level of unexpected in ways so gleefully gory it will have you laughing with sheer shock. The Hunt may split audiences right down the middle, but there is one thing that is universal, and that’s that Betty Giplin’s Crystal is already this decades best Final Girl.
VERDICT
Proving to be one of the strongest contemporary social and political horror movies in recent memory, The Hunt is a lean, mean, fighting machine that is as sharply satirical as it is viciously violent. Make room for Betty Giplin, our new final girl is in town.
★★★★★

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
In case you don't know, I'm from Portugal. Why does this matter? Well, The Hunt was delayed after a massive shooting in the USA, and since the movies' themes are extremely sensitive, the producers decided to postpone the film. At the time, I felt frustrated that, once again, movies have to suffer from real-life situations. Going to the theater is supposed to be an "out of this world" experience. The audience is transported into a fictional place where real-world problems can be forgotten for a couple of hours. So, I never handled these constant controversies surrounding films very well...
With that said, I believe The Hunt not only benefited from that delay, but its satirical story has even more impact now. There's no way around this. Craig Zobel's movie is meant to be one of the most divisive films of the last few years. I know it's a pretty basic analogy, but it's just like a dark humor standup show. If you don't have any issues with jokes about topics like racism, stereotypes, immigration, refugees, religion, politics, and every sensitive theme that your mind can imagine, then you'll find The Hunt a brilliant allegory of society's most extreme people. If you do have problems with this type of comedy, then stay away from this movie because Damon Lindelof and Nick Cuse go all out!
When I write that every remotely sensitive taboo subject or activity is unrestrainedly addressed, I mean EVERY SINGLE theme. This is a narrative completely packed with extreme, over-the-top cliches and stereotypes of both right and left political sides. At first glance, The Hunters feel like the "bad guys", in the sense that they're hunting innocent people for pure pleasure. Once the audience understands the reasons behind the selection of the people being hunted, one small but tremendously effective thought enters everyone's mind: "you know what... the world would actually be a better place without this kind of people".
Suddenly, not a single character is worth caring about. To clarify, I don't mean "caring about" in the common, emotional way. No character is written with the purpose of making the audience worry about it. In fact, almost every character (maybe except Betty Gilpin's) is a despicable human being. Their view of the world is clouded by ideologically outdated mentalities. I love how the screenwriters use each character to represent a particular type of ... extreme personality, let's call it that. One of the best compliments I can give the film is that it didn't pick a side. Everyone gets blasted with jokes.
It's a dark yet hilarious satire of today's society with a special focus on the close-minded people that go online to try and spread their conspiracy theories and immoral beliefs. Everything that I just wrote so far resembles the movie's impact on the viewer: either you're okay with this type of screenplay and you'll be incredibly entertained; or you'll get extremely triggered by all this. It's one of those films that will end up on a bunch of "Worst Movies of 2020" lists simply due to its narrative's nature.
However, the story isn't the only aspect that can make people give up on watching this movie. The actual hunt is as over-the-top as everything else. There's blood everywhere, ridiculously disgusting deaths, and absolutely no limits whatsoever in killing people in the most insanely entertaining way possible. Action-wise, The Hunt is better filmed than a lot of blockbusters. Beautiful wide shots when something (or someone) explodes, exceptional (and hilariously long) choreography for the "final fight", and excellent editing overall. It's genuinely a well-made, well-produced, and well-filmed movie. The score is also pretty cool.
Obviously, it's one of those films that's easy to pinpoint flaws. Every single paragraph that I wrote above can be interpreted as some of the worst aspects of the entire movie, depending on each person's perspective. In my opinion, I think the ending would have benefited from a more serious tone, but at the same time, it would probably clash with the widespread satirical one, so it's an inevitably difficult ending to completely get right. The cast is a bit hit-and-miss when it comes to each actor's performance (some are very bland), but Betty Gilpin delivers an outstanding display and seamlessly carries the whole film. Finally, there's a small part of the movie that involves military characters who don't belong to either side of The Hunt, and that portion didn't really work for me.
All in all, The Hunt is a brilliantly dark satire on today's political views of the world. It's meant to be one of the most divisive films of the last few years, and it undoubtedly succeeds in its mission. Just like dark humor, either you're okay with it, or you're not. If you can't take a joke about the most extremely sensitive taboo themes (and I mean ALL of them), then stay away from this movie or you'll be triggered for a whole week. However, if you can see the fun side of this type of comedy, The Hunt is the most entertaining, witty, hilarious, bloody, over-the-top action thriller you'll see for a long time. Damon Lindelof and Nick Cuse go all out, and they don't forget to approach a single topic. It's a well-made film all-around: well-written, well-produced, and well-filmed. A few minor issues regarding its ending and a small subplot don't diminish Craig Zobel's exceptionally captivating concept and Betty Gilpin's compelling performance. I definitely recommend it depending on how much you enjoy dark humor.
PS: everyone knows the tale about the rabbit and the turtle, right? How the rabbit races the turtle, and all that? Well, The Hunt's version of that story just became my all-time favorite.
Rating: A-

Liberal snooty types lashing out at conservative cronies and their right-wing leanings should have made for some enjoyably edgy satire, but 'The Hunt' is merely a by-the-numbers comedy-horror-suspense thriller that has a few punchy moments. But, if production company Blumhouse wants to remake a bunch of 90s Jean-Claude Van Damme action movies with Betty Gilpin in the lead role, I think I'd be down with that. I'd watch them, not in the theatres obviously, but late at night after a few beers.
- Jake Watt
Read Jake's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-the-hunt-blunt-lazy-and-undeserving-of-controversy

The Father is a brilliant film. Fantastic performances all around, amazing editing, and cinematography that creates confusion for not only the audience but our main character. This story is so touching and incredibly tragic, it had me tearing up at multiple points. Not only do the emotional points work, but this film also creates an almost horror aspect of Alzheimer's that is quite frightening. It really made me sympathize for those with this disease and fear for the potential future of myself losing my memory.
Score: 92% |
Verdict: Excellent

We, as "normal" people, cannot imagine what really goes on inside the head of those suffering from more advanced dementia. We only know for sure what is reflected by caretakers and psychiatrists. Yet, Florian Zeller has done a tremendous job of immersing us in what may be the experience of one suffering individual. As a caretaker of two parents who both went this way, it is about as accurate an experience as we will ever come to understand. This is a powerful drama, made real by an absolutely amazing acting by Anthony Hopkins.

Anthony Hopkins's performance in The Father is bulletproof. This is fortunate, because he encounters what the military calls 'friendly fire' resulting from a baffling decision by co-writer/director Florian Zeller, who has a couple of characters played each by two different sets of actors.
Thus Anne, Hopkins’s character’s (also named Anthony) daughter is played by Olivia Williams and Olivia Colman (who at least share some physical resemblance), while Anne's (ex)husband Paul is played by Rufus Sewell and Mark Gattis (who are like day and night). No wonder Anthony is so confused – as are we.
There are certainly precedents for this type of casting, the most famous of which is That Obscure Object of Desire, in which Luis Buñuel alternates the role of Conchita between Carole Bouquet and Ángela Molina – but then Buñuel was a prankster, whereas The Father's theme of senile dementia is very serious and deserves to be treated accordingly.
Now, I’m aware that it’s only natural for Anthony to think that his nurse is also his daughter, but the source of his confusion should be that the person he believes to be his daughter behaves like a nurse, and not the other way around. It would make more sense, comparatively, for Colman to play Anne and the nurse, and for Williams to only play the nurse, but not Anne.
On the other hand, it doesn't make sense that the first time Anthony fails to recognize Anne we can't recognize her either, because then we think there’s something fishy going on. It would be far more dramatically effective if the actress Anthony doesn't recognize as his daughter is the one and only whom we identify as Anne. The protagonists turmoil is internal, and it’s Hopkins's duty to externalize it – of which the actor does a flawless job.
The film's mise-en-scène works better to convey Anthony's cognitive impairment but, again, it is the character's mental feng shui, or lack thereof, that interests us, and which Hopkins expresses unequivocally through a masterful combination of oral and body language. It’s not that he's the best part of the movie; he is the movie.
Hopkins puts on the proverbial clinic; his is a heartbreakingly beautiful performance, a veritable emotional roller coaster with sudden highs and unexpected lows. The Briton’s acting is all the more impressive because he makes it look easy – I mean, like Brando easy.
And yet, it's as if Zeller doesn't quite trust Hopkins to make his vision a reality, hence all the visual gimmickry that hurts more than it helps (to paraphrase Jorge Luis Borges, saying something too much is as bad as not saying it). This is most unfortunate because Hopkins's talent for storytelling remains as powerful as ever – perhaps even more so.

‘The Father’ is an incredibly moving film that leaves you as confused in time and place as the main character (an incredible Hopkins), allowing the audience to experience - if only a little - what it must feel like to have dementia.
9/10

Incredible performances from Anthony Hopkins and Olivia Colman!
'The Father' makes for a rather heart-breaking watch, it's very clear from the get-go where the film is heading but that doesn't stop it hitting directly in the feels. I've fortunately never been around someone with what this film depicts, yet it still came across as very realistic - based on what I have heard about the condition.
Hopkins is utterly superb in the lead role, which is what I expected given I had heard about this 2020 flick back when it won the big gongs. Something I hadn't heard about, though, was Colman's performance - which is absolutely fantastic, particularly in one emotional scene alongside Hopkins and Imogen Poots.
A very saddening but brilliant film, cleverly portrayed too.

'The Father' is a standout during this very bland awards season, but just because it's both a critical darling and awards frontrunner doesn't take away from the emotional power and stellar performances for Colman and Hopkins.
- Chris dos Santos
Read Chris' full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-the-father-a-deeply-moving-look-at-mental-illness

“The Father” gives its audience a fully immersive experience with the frustrations of dementia in this stage-to-screen adaptation of Florian Zeller‘s 2012 play. Making his feature film directorial debut, Zeller gives the project a personal touch with much emotional gravity, as he’s so intimate with the source material. The film has the look and feel of a stage play, but it thrusts audiences into the main character’s head in a way that only the medium can achieve.
Anthony (Anthony Hopkins) is growing increasingly confused in his day-to-day activities. At first he can’t remember where he left his watch, but later he doesn’t know if it’s morning or night. The man sometimes doesn’t recognize his daughter Anne (Olivia Colman), and he confuses his caregiver Laura (Imogen Poots) with others in his life with increasing frequency. As Anthony’s mind continues to decline at an alarming rate, he starts to have severe mood swings that are brought on from the frustration of his lifetime of memories slipping away. He refuses assistance from Anne, who is trying her best to help him cope. Change is never easy, but Anthony’s paranoia grows as the fabric of his reality unravels.
The film features excellent turns from Hopkins and Coleman, two seasoned actors who carry the dialogue-heavy film. It’s fantastic work from both of them. Zeller puts viewers into Anthony’s shoes, adopting the old man’s mental state as he questions what’s real and what’s imagined. You’ll begin to wonder if his daughter and nurse are playing cruel games on him, with a sense of doubt that’s contagious. Something isn’t quite right, and the conflicting distractions offer a puzzle with no easy solution.
The intentional misdirection is a bit gimmicky and the pacing slow, but “The Father” paints a poignant and effective (if depressing) picture from the point of view of a person struggling with dementia.

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
I've watched some incredible films during my life. Some offered me a blast of pure entertainment, others left me crying like a baby, and dozens made me laugh uncontrollably. Nevertheless, the most memorable movies are the ones that profoundly impact me emotionally either by remembering me of a past phase of my life or by possessing main characters who I can strongly relate to. What might be "just another film" for most viewers can ultimately become a personal journey for other people in the audience, which is how I partially experienced The Father. I didn't have massive expectations for the movie itself, but I was curious to know how great Anthony Hopkins would be.
While the legendary actor is undoubtedly a notable standout, Florian Zeller's creative, unconventional storytelling left me completely floored. By the end of the film, I felt emotionally drained of all my feelings and thoughts due to the increasingly heavier, devastating narrative co-written by Zeller and Christopher Hampton, adapted from the former's award-winning play, Le Père. This could have been yet another generic story about dementia, but Zeller's brilliant storytelling places the viewer in the protagonist's skin, offering a terrifying viewpoint of the disease. From the very first minute until the end, the spectators accompany Anthony, an old man starting to lose track of reality, through his own perspective.
I genuinely don't know if this sort of point of view has been depicted before, particularly in the case of dementia, but either way, it's a harrowing experience that will surely leave a vast majority of its viewers extremely captivated throughout the entire runtime. Watching Anthony go through scenes that he wholly believes are indeed happening as he sees them is as attention-grabbing as it is frustrating and sad once the audience gets to see how the same scenes really played out. In fact, if one starts watching the movie without even knowing the synopsis, the first act will almost seem like a mystery-thriller due to so many twists and turns regarding previous conversations that Anthony and the viewers believe are 100% real.
Zeller and Hampton's script doesn't only approach Anthony's feelings but also the loved ones surrounding him, which I firmly believe was both necessary and honest. The Father doesn't shy away from showing the boiled-up frustration and even desperation that the family usually goes through when dealing with someone with this terrible health condition. I have no words to describe how thoughtful and impactful Zeller's storytelling method ends up being. I found myself remarkably surprised once I realized the film had reached the one-hour mark. The control of the movie's pacing and tone is absolutely seamless. Technically, Yorgos Lamprinos' editing work is as impeccable as Ben Smithard's lingering cinematography.
However, it's Ludovico Einaudi's outstanding score that steals the spotlight in the technical realm. From the atmospheric, grand opera music to the more subtle tracks, Einaudi makes sure to elevate the critical moments with a noticeable sound that helps the viewer understand the progressive shift in Anthony's perception of reality. Zeller demonstrates immense talent in his feature film directorial debut. Being an adaptation from his own play certainly aids him in bringing the story from stage-to-screen, but his filmmaking choices are worthy of recognition, such as the extensive use of long takes to let the actors shine in their layered roles. And since I mentioned the cast...
Anthony Hopkins delivers an award-worthy performance that only finds in Chadwick Boseman (Ma Rainey's Black Bottom) a serious rival for this year's awards season. Hopkins holds countless astonishing displays throughout his career, but this one is definitely one of my favorites. I never anticipated I'd shed so many tears by watching an old man cry or getting slapped in the face, though it's not even due to the acts themselves but to everything that builds up those moments. During most of the runtime, I don't really feel sadness or anger. Instead, I feel every character's pain because it's incredibly hard to watch how everyone deals with the situation. Hopkins and Olivia Colman are undoubtedly the most impactful, but Olivia Williams and Imogen Poots also add a lot to the sentimental component.
I insinuate above that The Father impacted me at a personal level. A little bit about my life: my grandfather didn't have dementia, but his mind slowly deteriorated until it reached a point where he had to spend his last few months on this planet stuck in a bed without really talking or moving. Still to this day, part of me regrets not spending that much time with him near the end, while the other part feels a bit relieved that my memory of him in his "normal" state remains intact. I always feared that if I visited him often in his last days of living, I'd only remember his time at the nursing home instead of the years packed with tremendously essential lessons he taught me. This movie left me sleepless, spending the night thinking about that time of my life...
The Father is an overwhelmingly devastating depiction of the painfully progressive disease that is dementia. Florian Zeller's extremely captivating storytelling places the viewers inside the protagonist's mind, making the audience witness and feel everything through his unclear perspective. Zeller and Christopher Hampton deliver a brilliantly unique screenplay packed with emotional punches that will leave no one indifferent. From the perfect editing to the persistent camera work, it's Ludovico Einaudi's gorgeous, impactful score that elevates the big moments. Zeller's use of long takes feels both necessary and important to attach the viewers' attention to Anthony Hopkins, who delivers an award-worthy, powerfully compelling performance. One of my favorites of his entire career. Hopefully, this will be the closest I'll ever be to experience this mental condition. My personal connection to this film justifies why I'll offer it my highest rating since November 2019 (Ford v Ferrari). One of the best movies I've seen in the last couple of years. Do not miss it!
Rating: A+