Log: week 39 / 2020

I've never liked Tom Hanks much, his role as an annoying manchild here won't do much to change that. The only good thing is that they didn't cast Robin Williams for the part. Hanks' romantic interest is pretty dull too, as is the rest of the cast to be honest. Then again, it wouldn't be fair to blame everything on them.

It's no surprise almost everyone in this "always keep your childlike wonder" tale falls for the charm of Hanks, I can't say I could really go along with that. Marshall's bland direction is definitely a reason, so is the languid plot, the poor casting and the drab styling. Hollywood cheese with few redeeming qualities.

In This World follows two refugees on their trip from Pakistan to the UK. It's not a jolly journey and there's quite a bit of drama to wade though, some of is quite confrontational, but it never feels overly cinematic or dishonest. It's simply a trip many try to make in search of a better life.

The semi-documentary style really does wonders for this film. It gives it a more natural feel and puts you right into the action. The soundtrack is also an asset, making the experience that tiny bit more polished. The actors do a good job too and even though the film is somewhat repetitive, it never loses impact. Very good.

Don't expect anything great or remarkable, but within its shelf filler context the film isn't all that bad really. I'm not a big Michael Wong fan, but this is actually one of his more decent performances, the pacing is pretty solid and Fok's direction get points for trying. That's more than I'd expected.

The action scenes in particular stand out. Nicely edited, shot with the necessary flair and not lacking in numbers. In between the quality takes an expected nose dive, but it's never too cheap or cringeworthy. If you've seen all the notorious and stand out Hong Kong action flicks, this is decent filler when you need a fix.

Den of Thieves goes for the grittier action. Tough, pumped up men do a lot of grunting, posing and love acting rough with each other. And when the guns get out, it's the type of heavy machinery that can win wars. While director Gudegast clearly has the chops for this work, he fails to add something of his own.

140 minutes is too long for a film that brings nothing new to the table. Performances are solid, the action scenes are good and the heist is pretty fun, but some personal drama feels misplaced and some scenes are dragged out too long. If Gudegast had managed to cut 30 minutes or so, this would've been a lot better.

The plot revolves around a student who is interested in onscreen violence and wants to write her thesis about the subject. Looking for gruesome and shocking films, she gets mixed up with some shady people and ends up caught in the middle of a snuff operation. Most of the film is spent on figuring out the culprits.

Though Thesis is often booked as a horror film, it's really just a thriller with a darker subject matter. Maybe this was tense or scary in '96, but nowadays it's pretty tame, not in the least because Amenábar makes sure not to show the most disturbing footage. Performances are mediocre, the direction is rather plain and the whodunit too basic. It's not terrible, just nothing special.

The interviewees are terrible people (every single one of them), the focus lies on marketing strategies and petty rivalries instead of actual competition and the documentary seems more interested in juicy narratives and bold claims rather than facts and reality. The result isn't pretty.

At least you get some fun footage of classic games, a couple of gaudy commercials and a few hilarious takes on "the gaming industry ruining our children". The problem is that all this footage has little to do with the subject of the documentary. Just skip this one, I'm sure there are better sources on this topic.

For a comedy, way too much attention goes to the plot, which isn't all that interesting to begin with. The story about a country bumpkin who ends up in the big city isn't exactly new, and Mr. Coconut fails to add anything substantial to the many films that came before.

There's a lot of nervous banter, characters being loud and actors overacting, but it never amounts to anything funny. I'm really not surprised these films never made it big outside of Hong Kong. Ko is very hit-and-miss, if you want to make an educated guess before picking one of his films, it's probably best to just check whether you can stand the cast.

Contrary to what the title suggests, there isn't that much nudity here. A Night in Nude seems more interested in crime and thriller elements, though the setting still allows for showing a little skin here and there. In that sense, it's closer to Gonin than it is to Flower and Snake.

Performances are pretty good, the film is very moody and the detective plot is intriguing enough. While the first part is pretty solid, Ishii goes into overdrive the final 30 minutes and delivers a gripping finale that is by far the best I've seen from him. It's a shame the rest wasn't on the same level, otherwise this could've been Ishii's definite masterpiece.

Connery is a decent Bond. Not too serious, but no goof either. The rest of the cast isn't quite up to par I'm afraid. The bad guy is pretty lame and the Bond girl clearly wasn't chosen for her acting skills. Add a low quality plot which is a little too prevalent and get you get a film that struggles where it shouldn't.

At least the action is fun and there's still plenty of silliness. The many scenes with the sharks stand out, but the finale is also pretty hilarious. It makes for decent entertainment, but it should've lost at least 30 minutes. Not good enough to be consistently fun, hopefully the next films manage to trim some of that excess fat.

The film's TV roots are painfully obvious. Character designs are very plain, the animation looks cheap and unappealing. It feels like two episodes stuck together, with little extra budget to make it into something more. All that's left then is the plot, but that's just the usual mishmash of cartoonish nonsense and dim drama.

You really have to be a big Batman fan to get anything out of this film. It's TV-level cheap, with atrocious dubbing, lame animation and uninspired direction. That seems to be a returning issue with many of the animated Batman films, then again they get pretty decent ratings so someone must like them.

The film explores the three relationships up close, but doesn't seem very willing to give clear reasons for the adultery (which is a good thing). A certain restlessness and ennui seems to lie at the basis, but the individuality of the characters and the general complexity of human relations are never taken for granted.

Performances are great, with Terajima and Ikematsu doing a lot of the heavy lifting. Stylistically the film's a bit more basic, which kept me from giving it a higher rating. It's not bad, just very by the numbers. A more than solid drama though, that handles its subject with great care and respect.

I wasn't a big fan of the first film. It felt like an Indiana Jones/Tomb Raider knock-off wrapped in a Disney jacket, meaning it was too polished, too neat, too PG to be any fun. The sequel doesn't deviate from that at all, so once again it feels like the fun was sucked right out of the film.

Cage is way too restrained, the action scenes are dull, the mystery is somewhat childish and the effects are poor. No deaths, no real bad guys, not an ounce of grit of edginess. It's a good thing they stopped after this second film, but it's one of those franchises that could be revived with a single snap of a finger.

It's probably a combination of being easy enough to animate and cuddly enough to like, personally I'm not a big fan of animated rodents. Especially not when they're trying to act all cool, which just makes things worse. Add the atrocious dub work and you're got a certified recipe for disaster.

The plot is dumb, the music is of the shlocky pop kind and the comedy is certified unfunny. Probably fun for very young kids who want to see an age-appropriate Mission Impossible, I can't see this doing much for anyone else. At least it was short and decently paced, but that's not much of a comfort when the rest is terrible.

And truth be told, there are quite a few scenes where it works. The CG isn't flawless, but the monsters and sets are impressive enough and the strict pacing makes sure you rarely have enough time to get irritated by technical defects. The downside is that it gets a little too cheesy at times.

Designs are also a little uninspired. The actors try to make do, but it's clear they're struggling to keep up the illusion, dressed up in silly costumes and acting against green screens. Oh well, as long as you don't expect serious film making, it's a film that passes the time quite nicely. Far from great, but not as bad as I feared.

It's been a while since I last saw one of these films, which is probably why I was a bit more lenient. I'm still a big fan of the setup and its potential for creepiness, but if Dark Web proves anything, it's that it's quite difficult to create and sustain tension this way. The film has its moments, but they're sparse.

Performances are decent, there are some mean kills and the pacing is excellent. I wouldn't expect too much realism and tech-doom levels are through the roof, but since we're talking straight-forward horror cinema it's not that irritating. A pretty solid horror film, though in the end it was unable to rise above its limitations.

Three 20-something women are sharing a flat, looking to get their lives on the rails. That translates to finding a good job and a (wealthy) husband. Easier said than done though, as the men they date invariably turn out to be lechers. Throw in some random drama (a child dies) and a surprisingly jolly rape scene and you'll begin to understand what we're dealing with here.

Lau seems to have no control whatsoever. The film is quite light, the first part is a basic romantic comedy even, but then he throws in some pretty heavy drama without even trying to change the tone. The drama has no impact, performances are mediocre and the atmosphere is terribly inconsistent. Not exactly Lau's best work.

Primal Rage is a Bigfoot film, only our Bigfoot behaves like a veritable Predator and takes a few cues from King Kong. This means it's not a very elusive creature that only pops up at the very end, instead we're seeing a hunter that relentlessly kills people and doesn't mind showing his face early on.

Creature effects are decent and there's plenty of gore for the horror fans. Sadly performances are mediocre and the lore isn't all that convincing. The creature is supposed to be incredibly menacing, but in certain scenes it's borderline silly. Magee had some trouble finding the right tone for his film, it's still pretty decent filler though.

It's not unlike Zhi's Love Speaks released just a year earlier, which also featured two people stuck in the Chinese countryside. Breakup Buddies focuses more on male bonding and trying to get over a busted relationship though, not so much on forming a new one, which makes for a slightly different dynamic (though less than you might expect).

The comedy is only so-so and the film's a bit long, especially since the material isn't all that special or deep. But the cinematography is very slick and Ning made excellent use of the setting. Performances are also pretty decent. This isn't one of Ning's best films, but it's solid filler that passes the time quite effortlessly.

For one, it feels a lot less British. The leads are less agreeable, Depardieu is somewhat of a miscast (one completely over the top villain was more than plenty) and the cozy, warm atmosphere seems to be replaced by a harsher American vibe. That's not really what I was hoping to see here.

At least the sets are still pretty nice looking, but that's about the only positive thing to say (well, apart from the decent pacing maybe). It's just not as fun and quirky the second time around. Worse cast, worse plot, worse comedy. It's worse in just about every way and I blame Lima's input.

Goldfinger brings back the underground bases, the lasers and the goofy gadgets. Then there's the larger than life characters like Goldfinger and Pussy Galore, who leave very little to the imagination. Sure enough this is a suave spy flick, but please don't take it too seriously.

The effects are pretty crud though and the action isn't very dynamic. In a way it adds to the charm, on the other hand it takes away some of the fun. Performances are decent though and the tone is pleasantly light. Goldfinger is decent and amusing enough to keep exploring the Bond franchise, but great cinema this is not.

In this version Nezha takes on the five Dragon Kings. There's a very short origin story, quickly followed by a pretty action-packed adventure. For a film that's only 65 minutes long, there's quite a bit of plot to go through, so expect a fast-paced (maybe even rushed) film.

The animation is pretty basic, luckily the art style is rather beautiful and kept my eyes glued to the screen. Very colorful, with typical Chinese designs, giving this film the necessary flair. The dub is decent, the soundtrack a bit loud and overbearing. Not a bad film, but a little too cheap/old to be truly impressive.

It seems not much has changed over the years. I still dislike Williams in comedy roles, I simply don't think he's very funny. He does mediocre impressions and relies on his energy, that's about it. The cross-dressing element isn't very convincing either and the situational comedy is beyond irritating.

But it's not just Williams. The rest of the cast is poor too, the plot is lame and predictable and Columbus is virtually invisible as a director. It's just drab Hollywood comedy stretched out to match an excessive runtime. At least I watched it in full now, so I can safely never watch it again.

The plot is absolutely pointless though, it's just there to bring together everything from Nazis, dinosaurs, moon bases and an Apple/Steve Jobs cult. I'd forgotten already what the first film was about, but you could just as easily see this as a stand-alone film, the comedy is what matters here.

Effects aren't great, but still much better than I expected. The film doesn't look overly cheap and doesn't use its comedy hook as an excuse for poor execution. Performances on the other hand were pretty poor, some actual comedic talent would've done the film some good. Far from a masterpiece, but I still had quite a bit of fun with this one.