**A thrilling and suspenseful space exploration film.**
Space exploration themes are the next big thing in cinema, as well as in the real world. So there some good films, I mean not science fiction, but real science based films were made in the recent times. This is one looked like one of those until the final scene. According to be, it looked so good, but when the end came, it ruined everything.
It was more like a docu-adventure-drama, but was a found-footage type film. I wanted to see it ever since I saw 'The Last Days on Mars', because people were comparing between these two. I think both these titles looks same, except different planet exploration. The 99 per cent of the film looked like a real mission, except the conclusion.
The writer, director and all the actors did good. The entire story takes place on a spaceship and a few scenes on the Jupiter's moon Europa, obviously a setting. If you like space travel concepts, you will enjoy it. It was just like 'The Martian', but it did not have popular actors, otherwise would have made a little buzz. Most of you have already seen it, if not try it, it is worth if you are a sci-fi fan.
_6/10_

Europa Report is one of those low-budget sci-fi films that crop up occasionally and start making the rounds on genre websites (my own first blush with the film was on io9.com) to create a buzz. Since Hollywood has depressingly sworn off any films that aren't megabudget tentpoles with an already-established audience anticipation index (read: sequels, remakes, or pre-existing properties), this kind of high-minded-but-low-budget genre films is a rarity at best.
In the film, six astronauts embark on a mission to (as one would expect) Europa, one of Jupiter's moons, after recent discoveries show a possibility of microbial life underneath its icy oceans. What we see is the recorded video from their ship's cameras (yes, it's a found footage film) that tells the story of their ill-fated voyage.
It's a simple premise, and director Sebastián Cordero seems to be a bit unsure of himself at the outset. The film refuses to follow a linear narrative; even before the main title appears, we join the crew many months into their trip, and are given the knowledge that there's obviously been an incident onboard already, one that's robbed the journey of one of their intrepid space explorers.
Two things worried me at the outset of the film: one: the much-ballyhooed attention to detail (the filmmakers brought on NASA to ensure an unprecedented degree of scientific accuracy) and two: that constantly-shifting timeline of the film. The first point was worrisome because most films that tout so heavily their technical accuracy forget to be dramatically compelling, and the second (similarly) because an overreliance on storytelling gimmicks to keep the audience's interest often betrays a weak story.
Happily, neither caused the film to fail: the attention to detail enhanced rather than detracted, and while the unnecessary nonlinearity of the storytelling didn't go away until the end, it did finally calm down enough for the audience to orient themselves. Given that I know now how the story unfolds, I can say that it would have actually been more dramatically compelling for the audience if the film had just told itself in a more straightforward manner. Ultimately, though, it works fine, just slightly weaker than it could have been.
The bare-bones plot is aided by some smart writing that refuses to dip into easy characterizations and instead defines its astronauts by their mission, rather than cliched, singular personality traits. While refreshing to see, it does leave some of the characters as relative cyphers, but strong performances all around (including District 9's Sharlto Copley and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo's Michael Nyqvist) get the film over that slight bump.
What's most gratifying about the film, however, is that it never loses its sense of awe. The film refuses to give in to the cynical pessimism of big-budget sci-fi fare, and its astronauts recognize the immense importance of their mission, particularly when things start to go south. Cordero keeps the tension ratcheted up, never letting the audience forget just how innately tenuous safety during space travel is. The performances are all good, and Copley in particular is a standout.
But what I appreciated most about the film was its tactile nature, a by-product of its low budget. The difference between models and fully CGI creations is literally tangible. A week or so ago, I watched Disney's 1979 film The Black Hole for the first time, and while the green-screening of that flawed film is terribly shoddy, its effects stand miles taller than most of the genre fare produced today, if only by virtue of the fact that being real, they informed the cinematography and performances around them.
Europa Report fits in comfortably beside Duncan Jones' fantastic low-budget Moon, and while not perfect, compares favorably to that modern classic. This class of film can either be a failure (see: Apollo 18) or a classic (the aforementioned Moon); Europa Report isn't flawless, but it's a great entry in the canon of smart, well-made sci-fi.

This is quite a confusing film to appreciate as it’s not entirely clear who it is for. It depicts the family lives of five orphaned girls who range from early teens to early womanhood who are living with their guardians on the coast of Northern Turkey. It’s after some fun, fully clothed, japes in the sea with some equally clothed lads that one of their neighbours complains of their “scandalous” behaviour. Of course, their grandmother (Nihal G. Koldas) goes a bit incandescent but not as much as the man of their household “Uncle Erol” (Ayberk Pekcan) who irrationally concludes that they have been permitted too much freedom and liberty as they have grown up, and that has got to stop. Slowly, but surely, they find their home becoming more like a secure waiting room for the marriage bed as they are, one by one, manoeuvred into advantageous marriages - whether they like it or not! Now these girls are no shrinking violets, and so work to find ways to still enjoy some of the freedoms they fear that they will lose whilst each of the older girls take differing views on their future roles and happiness. The five girls perform engagingly here, as does the conflicted Koldas but I’m not sure what I’m supposed to take from this. One level it’s a fairly brutal critique on women inhibited by tradition and custom and forced into lives they neither wanted nor sought. On the other hand, though, there are endorsements of the cultural benefits of respect and honour, and these girls don’t opt universally for either path. There are scenarios here that will stick in the throat of just about everyone whilst also offering hope - of one variety or another - too. It’s possibly from the perspective of the youngest girl “Lale” (Günes Sensoy) that we can make the most sense as she, barely into double digits, is left largely unhindered by their marital plotting but who sentiently observes just how the imposition of husbands, potential and actual, in the lives of her sisters profoundly changes the dynamic she has known since she was born. The production is lively and the photography gets up close and personal - a useful technique when demonstrating emotions that are this powerful from amongst a family whose love for each other isn’t ever questioned, but whose respect for each other and for their attitudes is the thing to watch ebb and flow. It’s not an easy watch, nor is it entirely one-sided as the boys don’t have too much say in their futures either, but it is that very lack of straightforwardness that makes it a bit more interesting and thought provoking.

> The clash of culture and modern lifestyle.
This is a Turkish film with the Turkish cast and crew, but financially co-supported by France. So it was nominated for the 88th American Academy Awards to represent France, after the Turkish film board denied to pick it. The film is set in the rural that tells a story of five young orphaned sisters who were raised by their stereotype grandmother and strict uncle. It depicts how those girls grow up without the parental supervise which is more essential than under others care and challenges they face due to difference between modern lifestyle they want to adopt and old traditions they inherited.
I know everybody comparing it with 'The Virgin Suicides' and so I thought the same because that's what everyone thinks who had watched these two films. There are some similarities between these two titles, but not the same film, that's very clear. Because of the cultural difference they slightly drew a different storyline, other than that the core of the story remained same. Written and directed by a woman filmmaker, so the narrative was very good that details the issues surrounding women. Especially about the impact of the lives when people nose into others affair.
It opens when the five sisters were punished by their grandmother after the report came from their neighbour lady for them playing on the beach with the boys. Thereafter their life changes and day by day their happiness declines for the severely imposed rules against them in the house. Later, one after another, they all forced to marry the groom they have chosen for them in a traditional way. But the youngest among them all is the most rebellious, so when her sisters were enforced, she plans to fight back and that's the remaining story that tells what happens with the remaining sisters.
> "I don't care about the match, I want to get the hell out."
They say Turkey is more a Europe than the middle-east, except being an Islam nation. But this film briefs the domestic abuse in the name of culture and religion on the young generation. The truth is, there is an upcoming culture of the future among the youngsters of the human earthlings in the line of one planet, one culture. That is nothing, but getting themselves free from the thousands of years old rules. Obviously, in this advanced science and digital world, they're completely outdated, especially islam is struggling to cooperate with the future world. From that perspective, this film narrated a wonderful, an eye opening tale.
I have heard the Turkish origins who had watched the film arguing about what it depicted is not true. I know that they know better than me on this, but what I want to tell is that any nation and its people go through this kind of cultural struggle/revolution. Especially in the remote places who are cut off from the modern lifestyle in their daily routine, and when the chief of the house is an elder person who is very conservative. Whatever the advanced country is Turkey among other islam countries, there's still the gender equality issue's persist due to the religion. Of course not the whole nation, but among the orthodox families. That's the same fate of other nations and its religion as well that has to change.
I have seen many Turkish films and this was very different from those, especially it digs on the positive and negative impacts of the old cultural practice which questions is it really necessary to carry on in this modern world? I am not a religious person, and I have no problem with the people of faith, but my take on this might really irk them. The elders should give chance to choose what their youngsters want, of course with supervised, instead forcing them to do everything in the old way what they and their parents did decades and centuries ago.
Yep, the film deserved it's Oscars nominee, but it did not win the prestigious award and that's okay because a better film bagged it. This director is going to have a great future in the filmdom, like the next Sofia Coppola. I hope her next work would be an international project. In the meantime, if you haven't seen it, give it a try, it is a good film that briefs in the line between the past and the future, there is present that ever exist where everything happens like the pains of the past, the present revolution and the future plan.
7/10

The young Okkotsu has problem. When he is upset or annoyed, an huge demon manifests itself to exact revenge on whatever is hacking him off. He thinks the best solution is just to live in solitude, but a teacher at the eponymous High School thinks training is the answer. Together with three other students, he gradually begins to understand his powers and to a certain extent, control them. Snag in all this is that a former student at the academy has a grudge, is bent on revenge and is prepared to unleash demons galore against the young quartet and their mentor to ensure the destruction of the school and - of course- world domination. The story here is strong, the characterisations (especially the spellcaster Inumaki who must speak in noodle ingredients for fear that any other words could cause disaster) likewise, with active animations (great emphasis on the facial expressions) that build well to a fitting denouement. Unlike with so many iterations of this style of story, the combat scenes - though destructive - are not endlessly repetitive. There is tragedy and redemption, as we gradually begin to realise just what (whom) his menacing demon is. Didn't know anything much about this franchise, but I did enjoy this film.

Here Edward Woodward stars as Sgt. Howie, a Christian Scottish policeman sent to the remote island of Summerisle to investigate the disappearance of a young girl.
The horror of the Wicker Man is not the obvious kind that hits you in the face with a hammer, but quietly creeps up on you. The way the pagan villagers act indifferently or defensively to the supposed disappearance or murder of a child is disturbing, especially as everyone seems to be hiding something, including the girl's classmates.
One criticism of the various heavily cut versions of the film is that not quite enough time is given to that subtle process of building up the suspense and atmosphere of the film. The Director's Cut, however, is a small masterpiece. The central idea of this closed-off pagan community, generally peaceful but indulging in the rare bit of ritual of human sacrifice, is delicious.
Woodward as Howie is on top acting form, as is the legendary Christopher Lee as Lord Summerisle. Economical storytelling ratchets up suspense and mystery. Additionally, the film boasts one of the best and most fitting soundtracks I've ever heard, comprised mostly of in world folk songs rather than generic "spooky" music.
The ending of The Wicker Man must go down as one of the most shocking in cinema history. Since the film plays it relatively cool until that point, the payoff is all the more harrowingly believable.
I also enjoyed the idea that, in terms of what may lie beyond death from the point of view of the characters, both Howie and the islanders get some kind of "reward" from the final ritual. The islanders get the reassurance that their crops will thrive in the coming year, while Howie gets his martyr's death and the expectation of a special place in heaven. The film made me think a lot about belief systems; who is to say paganism is less valid than any other system of religion? All religions are sustained by faith and passion rather than reason or evidence.
Thought-provoking, strangely beautiful, and just plain creepy, the restored version of The Wicker Man deserves its cult status. Even if you're not usually a fan of horror, you're likely to take something away from this burnt offering. The word "classic" was invented for this brilliant and eccentric film.

Well the cinema was packed as we all sat though what seemed like an interminable preamble of interviews with those connected with the film - including Britt Ekland - before it all started. Was it worth it? Well, I didn't really think so. Policeman "Howie" (Edward Woodward) arrives on a remote Scottish island after reports that a girl has gone missing. He is perplexed by the seemingly indifferent attitude of the locals who claim that she never existed or her mother who claims that she is six feet under in the graveyard. He becomes even more bemused by the general attitude of the villagers - led by their laird "Lord Summerisle" (Christopher Lee) and taught by their not quite "Jean Brodie" schoolteacher "Miss Rose" (Diane Cilento) to life in cereal, and to his presence in particular. Soon, his investigation starts to lead him a merry dance as he begins to suspect something way more sinister is afoot - and boy, is he correct. Thing is, though, can he find and save the missing girl and get to the bottom of this mystery. To be fair, it does offer us a more sophisticated, almost mythological, approach to an horror movie loaded with mysticism and pagan ritual. Indeed, I don't know that it fits well into that genre at all - it's more of a psychological thriller populated by a decent cast of household names. The thing for me is the story. I just found it all a bit weak; it takes far, far too long to build up anything like an head of steam and is really rather over-scored with music that is left do too much of the heavy lifting when it comes to generating the sparing senses of peril this film elicits. Perhaps it isn't fair to look upon it critically forty years later, when so many of our sensitivities have been eroded away, but I really couldn't figure out quite what all the fuss was about. It's now a cult film - and maybe that says it all? Worth a watch, but a television leaves nothing missing, I'd say.

I believe in the life eternal, as promised to us by our Lord, Jesus Christ.
Mainland Sergeant Neil Howie (Edward Woodward) flies off to the remote Scottish island of Summerisle to investigate the disappearance of a 12 year old girl. What he finds is a culture steeped in Paganism, presided over by Lord Summerisle (Christopher Lee). Meeting static and indifference wherever he goes - and being driven to anger by the assault on his Christian beliefs - Howie is very much a man alone and most likely in grave danger?
Directed by Robin Hardy and adapted to screen by Anthony Shaffer from David Pinner's novel, Ritual, The Wicker Man is very much a cult masterpiece. The back stories to it could make a film all by itself, be it censor baiting, studio cuts, body doubles or just plain offending religious groups, it's a film that is well worth looking into via the top range home format releases.
From the moment Howie (a truly brilliant Woodward) lands at Summerisle everything seems off, there's a sinister atmosphere pervading the story. He is met by unnerving imagery wherever he goes, songs and rituals gnawing away at his senses, there's even eroticism deftly placed within the film's master plan. He doesn't know what's going on, and neither do we, this is a mystery right? There is after all a missing child to be found, right? But once Lord Summerisle (Lee also terrific) enters proceedings and ups his game, things unravel in edgy fashion, building up to the justifiably famous and harrowing finale.
Some modern horror fans may baulk at the lack of bloody carnage et al, but this is classic horror. A horror film bulging with intelligence and pulsing away with literate smarts. 9/10

My favorite Mortal Kombat movie to this day. I loved the story and all the characters. Scorpion was amazingly done and so were other characters like Liu Kang. I loved Shang Tsung and Quan Chi as the villain. I really enjoyed how they managed to tell us the story of Scorpion and his quest for vengeance while also showing off Liu Kang and his development through his dialogue with Raiden and his fight and dialogue with Kitana. Kitana was amazingly done as a supporting character. Additionally, seeing goro and cameos like nitara was a lot of fun and added to the movie.

Mortal Kombat Legends: Scorpion's Revenge gets off to a very promising start. I don’t think it’s hyperbole to call the first 10 minutes a blood orgy – I mean, a waterfall ends up literally flowing red with the blood of the dead. This is all great stuff, brutal and uncompromising. Unfortunately, it’s also the best part of the film, after which it doesn’t take long for things to go downhill.
The plot goes in autopilot, following a very familiar path – and, as they say, familiarity breeds contempt. For starters, we have all the usual suspects; Liu Kang (Jordan Rodrigues), Sonya Blade (Jennifer Carpenter), and Johnny Cage (Joel McHale). The latter is the designated comedic character, at which he fails miserably – though the only laugh to be had here does have a little to do with him (or, rather, with a poster for one of his fictional films).
Once the inevitable Tournament begins, the movie gives up completely and becomes an animated remake of the 1995 Mortal Kombat – and, I guess, an animated prequel or something to the 2021 version. Scorpion's Revenge is without a doubt the best looking of the three films; it’s also the closest to the game, and while that’s good in terms of gore, it’s not so good in terms of storyline.
It’s just one fight after another, with little to distinguish each from the one before or the one after, and the characters are just as one-dimensional as their video game counterparts: Sonya is constantly trying to prove herself as good or better than the men, Cage is a buffoon who persists beyond the limits of reason in believing that the MK Tournament is his latest movie, and Liu Kang's dialogue consists almost entirely of Buddhist pseudo-koans. Furthermore, the script has a plothole so big a giant stalagmite could pass through it – and literally does.

If you're a fan of the video games, stick to them - the visuals and narrative that they deliver are still at a much higher level of sophistication than 'Mortal Kombat Legacy: Scorpion's Revenge'.
- Jake Watt
Read Jake's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-mortal-kombat-legacy-scorpions-revenge-an-animated-gorefest-for-aggressive-preschoolers

**A somewhat one-dimensional comedy that is based on uncomfortable dialogues and situations.**
I didn't really know what I was going to find when I sat down to watch this film, directed and written by Kevin Smith (who also appears in the film, in a minor role, his famous “Silent Bob”), who we know best for his participation in the “Clerks” movies. When I finished, I felt moderately satisfied, even though I consider the film forgettable.
The plot is based on an unlikely romance between two very different people: Holden is a comic book artist who lives and works with his best friend, Banky. Being a conservative and conventional man, he is confused when he falls in love with Alyssa, a liberal and sexually experienced woman, who says she is a lesbian, but who does not give up having sex with men when she feels like it. The romance will cause mutual discomfort and will lead Banky to try to “protect” Holden from that woman, who is so different from them.
Creating a romantic comedy in which a conventional and conservative man gets involved with a clearly more liberal and experienced woman is a good idea, but the film stops there and doesn't go much further than the tension created around it. The characters are poorly developed and are limited to “symbolizing” incompatible ways of experiencing sexuality. We never know more about them and their motivations or thoughts, and the film is not very effective in the way it tries to create comical situations around this. Thinking about the subject, I believe that the funniest dialogues are those of Banky, who shows from an early age that his character is spontaneous and prone to saying things that shouldn't be said.
With a poorly developed script, situations whose joke never exceeds the average and production values that also do not surprise or exceed the “standard”, the strongest point of this film ends up being, in my opinion, the work of the main cast, in particular Ben Affleck, Jason Lee and Joey Lauren Adams. Affleck, especially, is superb in the way he brings his character to life. One could hardly give more strength and credibility to that character. Lee is equally good, in that he can be funny, even if he is one-dimensional. Joey Adams does a very good job, and it's strange to see how this film didn't contribute much to the growth of his career.

Pretty dumb movie. I was expecting this moving to be funny. It wasn't. This moving is very boring. Nothing exciting or interesting about it.

About on par with the original, which I suppose is the minimum you want from a sequel.
I have similar thoughts about 'Enola Holmes 2' as I do for 'Enola Holmes'. Millie Bobby Brown is a strong lead, the support cast are good but the plot still isn't the most entertaining to watch unfold onscreen. I'm not sure it needed to be told over 2hrs, either.
Still, I got the required amount of entertainment from it. I appreciate the message and the story it tells, as well as them (seeming to, to me anyway) toning down the fourth-wall breaking - which is a tad overdone in the 2020 flick.
It seems likely that we'll be getting more of these, which I'm cool with - if the main cast remain, that is.

I very much enjoyed this movie. They left the Enola Holmes vibe of the first movie somewhat behind. Now we have more Holmes Enola mystery movie.
She's older and out making her own life finding love, finding her brother Sherlock, finding her mom and finding clues to a mystery.
It's worth a watch.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/enola-holmes-2-spoiler-free-review
"Enola Holmes 2 maintains the levels of light, adventurous fun of the original, surpassing it due to a much more cohesive, intriguing central narrative, in addition to overall better pacing. The different storylines mesh together nicely, and Harry Bradbeer's distinctive visual style remains a standout.
Millie Bobby Brown shines as Enola, as does Henry Cavill as Sherlock - the latter even too much, sometimes stealing the spotlight from a female-empowered story partially based on a real event with a significant impact on the evolution of women's rights.
Highly recommend it as a weekend viewing."
Rating: B

The Drunk and The Babes!
It's 1943 and Baseball in the states has been decimated by all the men being called up to join the services. Enter the ladies who themselves help to kick start a womens league to keep the Baseball fires burning.
The first thing any prospective first time viewer of this piece should note, is that it's not actually a film about Baseball. It's about friendships, challenges and differing off shoots to the complications of war, it just so happens that it's the game of Baseball that brings it all together!
Directed by Penny Marshall (Big), screenplay by Lowell Ganz & Babaloo Mandel (City Slickers/Parenthood) and featuring Tom Hanks (wonderful as drunken coach Dugan) as the leading male, it's no surprise that "A League Of Their Own" booms with sentiment and no little amount of comedy. It is to me a very rewarding picture, the sort that wants you to chuckle along with it whilst noting the need for human interaction during a troubled time.
The lady actors do great impressions of bona fide athletes, asked to parade in short skirts and entertain the watching public, these gals, led by the always engaging Geena Davis, deliver a sparky picture that never veers into maudlin territory. There are of course some sombre moments, but they are placed nicely by Marshall in the context of the films' events, never trite, they serve more as tender vignettes to run alongside the frivolity on offer.
Ultimately "A League Of Their Own" has achieved its aims come the final credits, its not taxing and its not purporting to be an intelligent look at a period in history. It's asking us the viewers to feel heartened by what we just watched, and just maybe to give those girls back in the 1940s a piece of our respect, job done. 7/10

***Post-Apocalyptic Horror***
"Carriers" (2009) is easily one of the best post-apocalyptic films. The story involves four youths in Southwest USA seeking sanctuary from a lethal virus that has wiped out much of the population and continues to do so. To all intents and purposes Government no longer exists and society is now a world without laws. To survive, they live by a set of rules of their own making: Avoid anyone with the disease, trust no one (not even your friends/family), immediately sterilize anything a carrier touches and realize that anyone with the disease is already dead.
The four youths are Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci), his brother Brian (Chris Pine), his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo) and Danny's school friend Kate (Emily VanCampo). Over the course of a handful of days they are continually forced to make difficult moral decisions that no human being should ever have to make. They soon discover that the real enemy is not the sinister pandemic, but the darkness within their own hearts.
Unlike semi-goofy post-apocalyptic films like the Mad Max series, "Carriers" is deadly serious from beginning to end. This works in the film's favor because if the filmmakers take the material seriously the viewer can as well.
One of the moral conundrums explored is what do you do if a loved one gets the disease? Since anyone with the disease is as good as dead, do you mercifully kill them? Leave them behind to suffer and die alone? Or stay with them, which is tantamount to suicide since you'll catch the virus as well?
The film also explores one's reaction to such a pandemic: Do we forsake all sense of morality in an attempt to survive -- lie, steal, forsake and murder -- or do we hold on to our moral compass, come what may? Is life worth living if you must become an immoral, wicked savage to survive? Isn't it better to live with dignity at all costs -- fight with nobility and die with dignity when and if we must?
"Carriers" is to be commended for provoking such poignant questions.
Some denounce the film on the grounds that it's too downbeat and depressing, but wouldn't a lawless society with a highly contagious lethal virus on the loose be a very dire situation? In other words, the downbeat vibe reflects the reality of the story. This doesn't mean that every character has to be some moralless savage, as one of the main characters becomes, but it definitely makes the proceedings believable for the viewer. That said, I admit that I would have preferred if the film offered more glimpses of hope, faith and human dignity, but the filmmakers obviously wanted to explore the element of a near-hopeless-situation and the film should be accepted and respected on that level.
One obvious plothole is the perfectly maintained lawn of the golf course at the abandoned resort.
The film was shot in desolate regions of New Mexico & Texas and runs a short-but-sweet 84 minutes.
FINAL SAY: "Carriers" is an excellent -- albeit decidedly melancholic -- depiction of a post-apocalyptic world where conventional law & order are non-existent. The film successfully stimulates moral reflection and is engrossing from beginning to end. Although it looses points for being too downbeat...
***ENDING SPOILER ALERT***
...especially the climax. C'mon, the dude makes it to the remote beach and he has a hot lass at his side; they could be the new Adam & Eve, but all he does is whine like it's the end of the world or something.
GRADE: A-

Some people mention too slow for them. This film is a modern tone poem (complete with appropriate sound track) about deep love and deep loss. It clocks in at only an hour and a half, and I've thought long and hard about it: I call the pacing methodical, not slow. There's an awful lot of information being conveyed here, and virtually none of it is blatant.
At one point, I thought the secondary characters could have used a little development. In retrospect, the answer is no. We actually were given everything we need to know about the deep loss of the father, and about the deep grief of the son in respect of the unnecessary loss of both his mother, and his father.
How that all plays into the empathy of the twice grief-stricken Robin (Nicolas Cage) is just brilliant. This might be the pinnacle of Cage's career.
This is the kind of cinema that I love, ranking right up there with the best the world has to offer, and I'm so surprised to see it coming out of the USA.

On the surface _Pig_ is a basic story of a man on the search for his lost pig, but underneath the initial layer is a deep and compelling character study on love and loss.
In the beginning, Rob and Amir start off as distant business partners, with not much relationship other than their weekly transaction. As the film unfolds, the audience begins to discover more about each character's past and motivations, and in doing so an intimate connection form with them both. The viewer cares about Rob and wants to see him reunited with his pet. During this same time, a parallel is created between the audience and Amir as a distant stranger becomes a friend. I found it so gripping the way we know nothing about Rob, as he seems to be an outcast and a loner that no one really knows about at all, but there is more than meets the eye with him. That mystery is one of the strongest aspects of the film and the payoff is incredibly satisfying.
Nicholas Cage is absolutely fantastic in this role. Cage has very few lines throughout the entire film, as he is very reserved and closed off, but still is able to take command of every scene he is in. The way he broods over everyone and analyzes the situation is incredibly engaging and you can tell that he has a strong familiarity with the area. That is not to say Cage does not display his full range of acting abilities here, as his emotional scenes are captivating. I never thought a movie could make me tear up about a man’s connection with a pig, but he pulled it off effortlessly with his performance. The chemistry between Cage and Alex Wolff is fantastic. The two really evolve as a pair and the transformation of their relationship is very believable and done incredibly well.
While the film has some slow moments, it is still able to engage the audience throughout its 90-minute runtime. The writing is fantastic and will deliver some very great twists that the audience will not see coming. _Pig_ is a fantastic film, and anyone remotely interested should give it a try.
**Grade:** _88%_
**Verdict:** _Excellent_

That'll do.
'Pig' is a good film, made very good by its conclusion - which threw me, to be honest. I wasn't, up until that moment, overly invested in the story, but when the reality hits home I actually felt my stomach sink for Nicolas Cage's Robin - unexpected!
Cage does put in a neat display, I enjoyed his performance throughout. Alex Wolff and Adam Arkin add positive bits in their respective roles, too. It's a 2021 flick that is well paced, well shot and well told. Recommended.

We have waited quite a log time for this, but finally we have a film from Nicolas Cage ("Rob") into which he appears to have put some effort - and it works. He lives in the wilderness with his truffle hunting pig. Remote and isolated, his only contact with the outside world is when he meets his dealer "Amir" (Alex Wolff) who swaps the fungi for essential supplies. When his pig goes missing, "Rob" proves determined and inventive as he tries to track down its whereabouts. As the sub-plots develop, we discover there is substantially more to the character than that of just a porcine detective, and as the relationship between himself and the younger man develops, we learn more about what drove this man to seek his life of solitude. At times poignant, violent, pathetic and entertaining this film is a good showcase for an actor going back to basics - quite literally, and the handsome Wolff proves a decent enough conduit for him to tell us his story. I wasn't mad on the ending, but it is not really what I expected either.

A great performance from Nicolas Cage. The story was engaging in the first half of the movie and then sort of dissipates into a search.

With this starring Nic Cage, you would think it'll be a thriller with the same vibe of John Wick...and you would be sorta right.
This movie was a drama first and thriller second as we go on a journey for the main character's (Rob) pig while we explored the past of Rob and Amir's lives. There was no graphic violence, no cage rage, and no insane scenes. Like Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie Maggie (2015), this showed Cage as a raw performer which we rarely see these days.
With that said, there will be comedic moments but nothing goofy or silly. This story played on the emotions and connections the main character had toward others. If you went into this movie wanting action and Cage being a crazy individual, this won't be a good watch for you. The direction, story, and performance were all great. It did set a tone throughout and this was Michael Sarnoski's directorial debut.
Overall...this movie was something I didn't expected and it was pretty damn good. This movie might not be for everyone but it was definitely a good one in my book. Especially that ending. Go into this without any knowledge of what to expect.

Pig is a drama and thriller. The story is real, authentic, touching, and emotional. Such Individual movies are known as "Cinema" and are the building blocks of the Hollywood Industry. Such movies aren't considered worthy of watching and praising just because they don't belong from a Franchise or Studio.
I love watching such movies but only a few movies touch me deeply in this genre like Joker 2019 and the Pursuit of Happiness were my favorite individual movies.
I watched this movie but I didn't find its story epic. Yes, it was a good and decent story but as I said that in this genre, only a few movies can touch my heart but unfortunately pig wasn't among all that.
But But But... the character of Nicolas Cage is just amazing in this movie and an Oscar-winning character. His character development was too good and his performance was just excellent. I would only suggest you watch this movie for Nicola's performance.
The scene where the protagonist was confronting a specific character in a hotel was outstanding. It's an emotional story of a man dealing with his past and present loss. You would love it if you love such poetic movies. But this movie isn't for everyone.

Not watching trailers has infinite pros. From going into the theater without a visual clue about what's going to be seen on the big screen to the ability to avoid spoilery clips that ruin supposedly surprising moments, this is a methodology I've been strictly employing in my life. So far, I've had nothing but spectacular screenings. Watching a movie completely blind is an experience I recommend to every film lover. This intro serves to explain why I was so impressed by Pig's grounded, action-less, character-driven storytelling.
Without watching any trailer, just by reading the synopsis, it's impossible not to expect an absurdly crazy revenge flick starring the one and only Nicolas Cage (Prisoners of the Ghostland). Well, Michael Sarnoski delivers a subversive directorial debut, focusing on the always heavy theme of grief. Cage's character is a retired chef who lost someone he truly loved, and the (adorable) pig is the only living being he can associate with his former lover. Instead of following an action-heavy, bloody path of murder to help deal with his emotional loss like John Wick, Pig draws attention to the protagonist's feelings.
It's a wonderfully written character piece, featuring a beautiful score (Alexis Grapsas, Philip Klein), and incredibly captivating, unforgettable dialogues that replace the expected action sequences. Cage offers one of the most nuanced performances of his career, proving he's one of the most talented actors of his generation. It's a shame that most people only recognize him as Hollywood's main source of memes. Alex Wolff (Hereditary) is also outstanding as a young man with father issues, though his character's subplot isn't as interesting as the main narrative, slightly affecting the overall pacing.
Despite anticipating several action scenes, the lack thereof didn't result in disappointment but instead in a pleasant surprise. Highly recommend checking this one if you have the chance.
Rating: B+

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
Alexandre Aja caught my attention when he delivered one of the biggest surprises of 2010, Piranha 3D. A vast majority of viewers expected that film to be absolutely awful, and while I don't exactly love it, I added the director to my list of filmmakers to follow closely. After years of trials and errors, Aja apparently found his great breakthrough with 2019's Crawl. A disaster flick that, once again, people anticipated to be one of the worst movies of the year, and it ended up as one of the very best in the genre, at least in recent memory. Therefore, I was obviously not going to miss Oxygen, a French-speaking film that boasts a highly mysterious premise.
Movies like this make spoiler-free reviews really challenging to put together. This Netflix film possesses dozens of plot twists and impactful revelations that I just can't delve into, so it's tough to share my complete thoughts on the most significant moments of the movie. So, I'll work around the explicit answers to the intriguing questions that ultimately make this film incredibly captivating. Christie LeBlanc offers a fascinating screenplay packed with everything a one-location, claustrophobic, enigmatic thriller should have to be successful. Honestly, it's one of the most well-written scripts I've seen in quite a while within the genre.
For those viewers who hate ambiguous movies, Oxygen is far from it. Every single question raised by the narrative is clearly answered. No viewer will leave disappointed for not understanding hidden meanings or vague themes. However, I can't state this enough: LeBlanc's screenplay holds *dozens* of questions and the same amount of answers. It's impossible to convince everyone in the audience to accept every twist, especially during the revelation-heavy third act. From a specific moment onwards, it's an overwhelming flow of shocking information that might prove too much for some spectators. Nevertheless, most viewers enjoy nitpicking something that isn't present in this film: "movie logic" issues.
If you've seen the film already, you're either going to wholly agree with my latest statement, or you probably think we watched different movies. As usual with this type of problem, it all depends on people's perspective and mentality regarding heavy sci-fi elements or truly advanced technology. In fact, for many audiences all around the world, just the fact that Mélanie Laurent's character is stuck in a futuristic-looking cryogenic pod with a Siri-like AI helping her understand what's happening is already stretching their believability limits. Not everyone can suspend disbelief in the same way, so I won't be surprised if Oxygen receives a more divisive public response.
Nevertheless, I firmly believe this will end up as one of the most overlooked/underrated films of 2021. Aja proves his tremendous talent behind the camera by making an average-length movie inside one of the tiniest places a protagonist was ever stuck in for most of the runtime. Each new block of information about the where, how, why, and when concerning the main narrative is carefully handed to the viewers with *just* the right hints to what's truly going on. Even though the audience is also imprisoned in the same place for almost two hours, Aja and Maxime Alexandre (DP) create innovative, suspenseful manners of keeping the momentum going, never letting the film feel too monotonous or tiresome.
Mélanie Laurent's exceptional performance is one of the most vital elements of the movie. Without her terrific display, it would be extremely challenging to continue to feel invested in the character's mission of finding out everything that's happening to her, including who she is. Her role requires ridiculous emotional range, and Laurent demonstrates all of her immense talent. Technically, the cryogenic pod features impressive technology, some of it created by remarkable VFX. The ominous score by Robin Coudert also brings another layer of mystery and suspense to the already obscure film. Overall, it's a perfect example of how low-budget movies can still be astonishingly well-made.
Finally, Aja and LeBlanc bring several themes to the table, identity maybe being the biggest one. What truly makes us human? Feelings and memories? Physical suffering? It's impossible to dive into this subject without spoiling some of the most shocking moments of the story, but it's only one of many underlying storylines that ultimately make Oxygen a beautiful example of profound storytelling. General topics such as health and politics are also approached, as well as moral dilemmas regarding extremely advanced technology and what humans should do with it. Honestly, it's been three days, I watched two other films meanwhile, and I'm still thinking about this one…
Oxygen is a phenomenal example of one-location filmmaking done right, which will, unfortunately, escape most viewers' radar. Christie LeBlanc's extremely detailed screenplay packs shocking, impactful revelations and plot twists that will leave no one indifferent. Brutal moral dilemmas, surprising discoveries about the mysterious protagonist, and a fantastic one-woman show from Mélanie Laurent keep the slow, flashback-heavy narrative engrossing. Boasting many underlying themes, Alexandre Aja maintains a suspenseful, tense atmosphere with a sense of urgency that never quite leaves the screen. Maxime Alexandre's creative camera work and Robin Coudert's mood-setting score elevate this deep study about human identity without ever feeling too ambiguous. For fans of claustrophobic thrillers with sci-fi elements, Netflix currently holds one of my favorite movies of the year. Highly recommend it.
Rating: A-

It's a bore!
I didn't anticipate much from 2009's 'Halloween II' based on its predecessor and it turns out I was right to have done so. It's nae good! More of Brad Dourif is nice, though to be honest none of the cast members do anything to elevate this film up.
Not that I blame those onscreen, as it's all poorly cobbled together. The early hospital scene, starring Octavia Spencer and Richard Riehle (minorly) interestingly, showed some promise, but this flick quickly descends into a waste of 105 or so minutes; I zoned out a few times.

**Paying to see this is a waste of time and money.**
I've seen the original franchise, but I confess that "Halloween" will never be a movie that I enjoy. It's simply not the style of horror I enjoy: "slasher" films are simply too "campy" and will probably scare only those whose fear is measured by the amount of fake blood used in the scene. However, Carpenter's films acquired, with some merit, the character of classics. None of the older sequels even deserve to be used as a benchmark. They are simply awful, and it was the Franciscan poverty of subsequent films that motivated Rob Zombie to take the franchise and start over from scratch. And if the first movie was bad, this one is worse.
The film wastes no time with introductions. Starting at the point where the predecessor ends, it immediately transports us to the action, with a lot of deaths of characters that we do not know, and with which we do not care. The film thus functions as a virtual meat mincer. The script is downright amateurish, and an excuse for a horror film based solely on gratuitous bloodshed.
The actors are pretty bad. Malcom McDowell, who is usually a very good actor if he is well directed, has one of the worst works of his career in this film: in addition to having almost no time to do anything, the little he does is terribly bad, and the character is very bad. and unhappy. Brad Dourif does what he can, but in all fairness, I can't rate his effort beyond merely satisfying. Even so, he is the best actor in the film. The rest of the cast is forgettable, or downright awful, and that includes the entirety of the female cast.
Technically, the film bets heavily on CGI and liters of fake blood. The director completely forgot that the audience tends to feel the film more if they really sympathize, or care, with some of the characters, and in particular with the protagonist. Instead, he offers us all the fake blood he could buy with his millionaire budget, and grotesque deaths. It's no more exciting or frightening than an expensive video game, but it must have brought in a nice bag of money for the main players...

Malcolm McDowell so 2 stars just like I did the first one: ** The nudity isn't as much, so maybe I was wrong, maybe he was going for satire in the first one and not snuff porn...or maybe he was told to tone it down with the rape and dead naked women...
...but there are still naked women that get murdered by the big scary male monster after committing a fundamentalist sin of one kind or another...
...so was it intended to be a satire of the genre or does it just get Zombie off? Still not sure.
And again, the atmosphere isn't there. The film has a feel to it that is almost grindhouse sleaze without being good enough to really achieve grindhouse sleaze.
It makes for an off putting after taste in your mouth.
And with all the nudity it still feels like its trying to be Friday the 13th more than it is a Halloween installment.
Yet again I ask "Why remake it?" And this time the answer I can come up with is, Zombie is a great musician...unfortunately he shouldn't quit his day job.