Change Your Image
maximusthemerciful
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Bloodshot (2020)
Poorly Organized Homage to Recycled Cliches With Detrimental Reliance on Poor CGI and Too Much Slo-Mo
"Bloodshot" is the proverbial Frankenstein of a filmmaker's favorite parts of iconic science fiction and action films poorly stitched together. Vin Diesel plays Ray, a deceased U.S. soldier whose body is transformed into a billion-dollar weapon by a biotech CEO Dr. Harting (Guy Pearce) seeking to make billions in the military sector off of "nanites," a network of microscopic machines that heal Ray instantly from bullets and explosions, provide him with superhuman strength, and can hack into any online database to provide Ray with whatever information he needs (like learning how to fly a private jet in a few seconds (The Matrix, anyone?)).
The movie is interesting until the first overdone twist is revealed: Ray is nothing more than a human cyborg assassin (*cough* Terminator) which Harting programs to experience a fabricated virtual reality in which Ray's wife is murdered in front of him, Ray is then also killed by the same man, wakes up in Harting's lab, then (in spectacularly cheesy CGI fashion and frustratingly-overused slow-motion sequences) pursues and kills his murderer. Harting then recovers Ray, wipes his memory clean, and reloads the same simulation but changes the face of the "murderer" to whatever innocent soul the evil Harting next wants dead. No surprise, it's his business partners so he can take all the $$$ and power. Harting has a crew of other cybernetically enhanced soldiers that he makes deliver the same scripted lines and actions every time he resets Ray (think Truman Show but with way less believable actors).
From there, the movie loses its identity and, along with it, its intrigue. It is unsure whether it wants to be a lighthearted action romp with a sexy femme fatale and a black actor who is formulaically lovable because he's (1) a stereotypical programming nerd, (2) has a disarming British accent, and (3) constantly trying too hard to provide comic relief that never lands...or whether it wants to be taken seriously as a high-octane thriller.
The result is a schizophrenic mess of parading one tired cliché after another as Ray learns the truth about his reality and rebels against his creator/captor (The Matrix/Westworld/Blade Runner/Ex Machina/every science fiction movie ever).
I enjoy Diesel's Dominic Toretto and Riddick characters more than most, but this time he is unable to escape the typecast and bring any depth, humanity, or likeability to Ray. All other actors seem to be phoning it in, too, except for Pearce whose character is a refreshingly toned-down, levelheaded villain. But he's not enough to save this wandering plot with forgettable action scenes and nonexistent character development, whose attempt to be everything all at once results in it being a whole lot of nothing. You can leave your brain on the shelf for this one.
After Truth: Disinformation and the Cost of Fake News (2020)
Good Watch for Those Willing to Think Critically
I'd like to disclaim that I am a U.S. citizen who does not identify as either Republican or Democrat. I also do not get my news from any TV networks. If you believe Trump is an ethical and honest person, or if Fox News and Info Wars are your only source of "news," or if you are not prepared to recognize the fact that the majority of misinformation and fake news originates from international sources (mostly Russian) and domestic white nationalists, then you will not enjoy this documentary that addresses perpetrators on both sides of the political spectrum.
"After Truth" explores the origins, spread, and devastating consequences and human costs of fake news and misinformation via interviews with various journalists, political operatives, conspiracy theorists, and real-life victims. Topics include Jade Helm 15; Pizzagate; the murder of Seth Rich; the attempt to smear Robert Mueller; the Doug Jones/Roy Moore Alabama Senate race; Mark Zuckerberg and the Facebook Senate hearings; and the fate of psychopathic hatemonger Alex Jones of Info Wars.
Filmmaker Andrew Rossi does a good job of providing just the facts and various people's perspectives who are both Republican and Democrat, without putting his own spin on the events or concepts. His message is one that rings the alarm to warn us of the nefarious and insidious psychological effects of fake news and urges people of all political persuasions to think critically when evaluating information and to fact check using reliable sources before adopting that information as truth and sharing it with others. It shows the devastating costs, the worst of which being the erosion of civil political discourse and human costs such as the pizza restaurant's employees and owner that still to this day receive death threats (and had an armed gunman drive from North Carolina to Washington who stormed the restaurant) all due to completely unsubstantiated and fabricated allegations that started on the internet and was fueled by fear, resentment, and animosity toward the Democratic Party.
Where the film falls a bit flat is proposing an effective solution to fight the circulation of fake news. "Stop using online social media and interact with people face-to-face" is one obvious but unrealistic and impractical proposed solution. "Ensure our populace is better educated and trained to think critically" is idealistic but unlikely to eradicate the problem. The inherent problem, as recognized by Rossi, is that one cannot stop a fake news article from being circulated without serious censorship and First Amendment considerations. The slippery slope argument applies here more than ever, as without free speech and freedom of the press, we cease being a democratic republic and descend into authoritarianism.
I recommend this quick 90-minute watch to those seeking to learn and understand the serious threat fake news poses to our political process, especially with the upcoming presidential election. In the end, it's up to each of us to do our due diligence to determine whether the information provided to us is real or fabricated. We should never blindly trust what we hear on TV, what we read on the internet, or the speech of public figures, especially politicians, and especially politicians who have been objectively proven to have no integrity and no interest in serving the needs of the American people, Democrat and Republican alike.
10 Minutes Gone (2019)
Subpar Action Movie Riddled With Clichés
The only reason I gave this movie a chance is because I insist on seeing every movie with Bruce Willis. Love most of this work. But this is one he clearly did for the paycheck, because he put no effort into this role and had a total of maybe 10 minutes of screen time. Just a big name meant to pull in poor saps like me.
There is nothing original or inspiring about this C-movie action flick. Michael Chiklis plays a veteran bank robber who in the opening minutes of a "perfectly planned" heist gone wrong, gets knocked to the ground. When he awakens 10 minutes later (with no bruising to account for the head trauma), the loot is gone and his brother is dead. The rest of the movie is him trying to figure out how it all went wrong.
The dialogue is probably the worst thing about this movie. Wooden, unoriginal, poorly written, will make you laugh out loud at the "serious" parts. Second worst is Meadow Williams, whose utter lack of acting talent is exacerbated by the amount of botox in her forehead, the combination of which makes her utterly incapable of expressing any emotion convincingly whatsoever. The choice of Lydia Hull as the badass fixer-upper/cleaner was equally poor casting, though thankfully she's barely in the movie.
And then all the cliches. Guys with machine guns who couldn't hit the ground if they tried, shooting guns with one hand, walking toward the camera in sunglasses in slow motion with an explosion behind you, the "surprise" villain at the end monologuing and providing exposition for the viewers who fell asleep for the first 80 minutes. As for the "plot twist" reveal of the villain, it would have been surprising had I not been able to call it about 15 minutes into the movie.
This is a good movie to have on in the background while you're doing other things. If you lower your expectations to ground level, you will be barely disappointed.
Hereditary (2018)
Mediocre Thriller Overhyped by the Critics
This is a solid entry level thriller by Ari Aster with tasteful nods to the quintessentials such as Rosemary's Baby and The Shining.
The story opens with Mom (Toni Collette), Dad (Gabriel Byrne), high school son (Alex Wolff), and 13-year-old daughter (Milly Chapiro) dealing with the death of Mom's mother, a domineering woman with a penchant for spellbooks whose absence is generally not missed. After a tragedy befalls this family, supernatural chaos ensues, mostly inside the family home, which of course is in an isolated wooded location.
The problem is that it's too slow of a burn, as Aster takes 80% of the movie to build up the suspense and then fails to deliver the anticipated thrills, shock, and awe in the last 20%. Very similar pacing and cliche haunted house tropes (doors opening and closing, candles blowing out, seances, etc.) as the awful Paranormal Activity series.
The gem of this film is unquestionably Collette. Her performance of a woman who transitions from anxious grieving daughter, to frenzied matriarch, to utter hysterical terror by the end of the movie, would be the only reason I would ever watch this again (but probably won't). A dinner scene where she releases 16 years of pent up verbal rage upon her family (and the way Wolff's character internalizes the painful things she says) is, admittedly, a very well shot and executed 5 minutes of cinema.
Sadly, that's where the good ends. The movie's score is nearly nonexistent and overdoes it with the moments of drawn out silence. Byne is wasted in this film as the secular skeptic, detached father who witnesses the supernatural phenomena firsthand, yet still refuses to believe his wife's assertions that some kind of apparitions are pursuing them with malcontent (due to her convenient history of mental illness). It's also not believable in the slightest how Wolff's character processes the tragedy, receives no therapy whatsoever after the tragedy occurs, or that any of the family members being victimized in the home never think to leave the home.
Giving this movie an R rating was a stretch. Giving it a 93% RT rating was an unforgivable overhype. Watch it once for Collette's performance and move on.