Watercoolerparty

Sports,Movies,TV,Music,Food and all my opinions and passions.

[darringauthier]

In The Blood (2014)

Genre: Action

Who's In It: Gina Carano, Cam Gigandet, Ismael Cruz Cordova, Danny Trejo, Luis Guzman, Amaury Nolaslo, Stephan Lang, Treat Williams

Who Directed It: John Stockwell

Plot: When her husband goes missing during their Caribbean vacation, a woman sets off on her own to take down the men she thinks are responsible.

Run Time: 1 Hour 48 Minutes

IMDB Score:5.7

Metascore: 40

Why I Watched It: Mostly the cast.

How I Watched It: Tubi

Random Thoughts: Boy that is a boring ass poster, I mean at least try a little. Also poor Cam Gigandent isn't even on the poster in name form. He's the missing husband. That plot description goes very well with the poster. Cliched on both counts and tells you nothing.

This took me a long ass time to watch it, one of the things was finding it streaming. So it took almost ten years and watching it on Tubi to finally see the damn thing, no it wasn't worth the wait.

Also this was the movie where we figured out Gina Carano was not going to be a mainstream action star, at least as a lead, she's had a good career in made for DVD/streaming though and I've seen a couple of them.

What I Liked: John Stockwell is a very good genre director, he usually makes a very watchable and different B-Movie. If you love genre you know him if you don't go check his IMDB he's had a fun career. Of course I've seen a bunch of his films. Here he's made another on paper by the numbers action movie but with soime quirks, this is an odd film, wouldn't call it good but t's watchable and that is Stockwell's calling card. Now I will warn you about the cast Treat Williams and Stephen Lang are barely in it, both are cameos and Lang is almost blink and you miss him. Which is too bad cause they were half the reason I watched the film.

The action or shall I say violence is more brutal and gritty then slick and fun which also surprised be. I thought this would be a slight but fun action but it's a lot darker and not as much fun as you would have hoped. Now I put this in the like section because at least they did something different, they kind of zigged when you though that would zag. The acting is a mixed bag but I did like they kind of tried to flesh out characters Luis Guzman is good here, heck he's always good, granted he should be in a different movie cause his arc is very unexpected. Carrano is not a great actor but she does have presence and of course she's believable action wise. She has the look of an action star just not the acting chops.

The film does go in different directions and there is a character that doesn't go the way you would think, again this movie is trying not to be a cookie cutter action film and at times it does succeed.

What I Didn't Like: My two things that screw up a movie for me is tone and pacing and this film does crap the bed in both areas. Pacing wise this film drags and it's way too long. Tone wise it's a mess, there's like two films at play here and they keep butting heads, this film is too goofy to be a hard hitting action film and it's also too brutal and at times mean to be fun. The tones shifts really make it an odd watch. Now it's not a terrible thing but it does make the film lose it's flow. This film does stop start a few times.

Now I say this as someone who doesn't mind Gina Carano, I do find her charming but she's a bit over her head here. She's asked to do some heavy lifting acting wise and she kind of falls short. She's good with the action but I'll be honest for here there's just as much drama as there is action. They really could have used Lang and Williams to have bigger parts to help out. I should also say Trejo is barely in it as well and his character is all over the place. That's the other thing with this film the plot does not go in a straight line and I will say once you find out what's going on it really does feel like we've flipped into another movie. The ending is also weird, and not fun weird like well that's a strange way to end an action movie. The ending drags like crazy could have chopped it in half.

Final Thoughts: Not boring but very uneven and just doesn't really mesh all the way through.

Rating: 5/10

[darringauthier]

Spiral: From The Book Of Saw (2021)

Genre: Horror

Who's In It: Chris Rock, Max Minghella, Samuel L Jackson, Marisol Nichols

Who Directed It: Darren Lynn Bousman

Plot: A criminal mastermind unleashes a twisted form of justice in Spiral, the terrifying new chapter from the book of Saw.

Run Time: 93 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.2

Metascore: 40

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 37% Audience 75%

Why I Watched It: I've seen all the Saw movies even the one called Jigsaw.

How I Watched It: I saw it on iTunes, it was on sale at the time. It's now playing on Starz in Canada I know.

Random Thoughts: Including this one there are 9 Saw movies, yup that's a lot. Just for the record my favorite is Saw II, lots of fun and some of the franchises best twists. Hated 3, just for the record.

So director Darren Lynn Bousman comes back to the franchise.

It's a bad title, what is The Book of Saw, they were movies and Jigsaw didn't write all these stories It was a reach. To be fair so was the film Jigsaw which I honestly thought was the end to the franchise.

What I Liked: This is tough cause I'm going to sound very harsh with this film and I just want to say I didn't hate it but man was it bland and disappointing. So here comes the rub, this is the spot for me to write positive things, tough here and it's not because everything is badly done but the stuff that kind of works only kind of works.

Alright I did like Samuel L Jackson and he did have good chemistry with Chris Rock, I didn't buy them as father and son but the couple of scenes they had I liked. Jackson is basically a cameo here, which is too bad I wish he was the lead.

The look of the film and the tone is good here as well, that's all I got and I did really try.

What I Didn't Like: The Saw franchise has been milked dry. It's sad but I feel it's done. Now I will saw this film is just using the name Saw, it's not really a Jigsaw movie and really they just use the "games" gimmick and not very well at that. You could have called this anything else and no one would have said this is a Saw ripoff. The deaths are very uninspired and the ones near the end are over the top silly. They didn't have the tension and the imagination the best Saw films have. It's weird but this one feels very mailed in and the whole point of this one was to breath new life into the franchise.

Lets get to the acting, it's not great Samuel L Jackson is the only one that is good and he's barely in it everyone is else is miscast or not good or both. Alright Chris Rock is badly miscast I will say he does better than the trailer showed cause that promised a reckoning of bad acting. He's not my favorite actor but he's decent in the right role and this wasn't it. It didn't help that Max Minghella wasn't much better, also they had no chemistry together.

Saw is known for it's twists, I'll say this there is really only one and good God you can see it coming nine miles away. To the point I was like no way this is the twist they're playing us here but nope. You can not only pick the killer but the reason as well. For me this kills the film it takes it from ho-hum to lazy bad, this twist would have been cliched in 1980. If this was the twist from the first one we wouldn't have gotten a franchise. The film also just plays it so down the middle, it's not campy, it's not over the top, it's not crazy violent or intense it's just there. Nothing stands out but the lame ass twist.

Final Thoughts: It may not be the worst in the franchise but it's the most boring. The one plus it's only 93 minutes.

Final Thoughts: it's between a 3 and a 4 for me so we'll say 3.5

[darringauthier]

Top 5: Humphrey Bogart Films

Now this is not an easy list for me, I have 6 I really like and a few more I respect and one of them has what I think is Bogart's best performance. Now I will say this or write this like I do for any list, these are my top 5 favorites not best. Which means I don't have to defend it cause this list is mine.

5. Casablanca (1942)

It's a stone cold classic and really the only film on this list that isn't really in my wheelhouse. With that being said the cast is great and it's a prestige film.

4. To Have and Have Not (1944)

I came to this one late, I hadn't seen it and I really liked it when I got around to it. Great Bogart and Bacall film, chemistry is off the charts and the story is solid.

3. The African Queen (1951)

Just a really fun film again Bogart opposite another great actress, this one is more of an adventure film and even though he's older here he still has it in spades.

2. The Maltese Falcon (1941)

One of the greatest film noir's and detective stories ever told. The cast is unreal here, everyone perfect. Bogart was born to play this role. The film still stands up and it is a great mystery.

The Big Sleep (1946)

Now this is one of my all-time favorite film noir stories and one of my favorite private detective stories, not going to argue Maltese Falcon is a better film but I love The Big Sleep more. It's dense and it's a lot of fun and it does have Bogart and Bacall and that may be the reason it's at number one. I've seen this film more than anyone on this list so it's an easy pick.

Now a few more in case you haven't seen these: Key Largo very close to making this list just couldn't find a film to bump. The Caine Mutuny is maybe his best performance.

[darringauthier]

Boss Level (2021)

Genre: Action/Sci-Fi

Who's In It: Frank Grillo, Mel Gibson, Naomi Watts, Michelle Yeoh, Annabelle Wallis

Who Directed It: Joe Carnahan

Plot:Trapped in a time loop that constantly repeats the day of his murder, a former special forces agent must unlock the mystery behind his untimely demise.

Run Time: 100 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.8

Metascore: 56

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 74% Audience 76%

Why I Watched: Huge Frank Grillo fan and Joe Carnahan is an interesting sometimes very good director.

How I Watched It: I watched it on iTunes but it's now on Amazon Prime Canada.

Random Thoughts: Those numbers are high, it's rare where I think the numbers are high across the board. The ones I'm closes to is the Metascore. Surprised the film ranked this well for what it is.

I've already said I'm a huge fan of Frank Grillo and has a fan I have watched a lot of crap, he works a lot. I will say he works with Carnahan a bunch and it's some of his best work.

What I Liked: Joe Carnahan is an action director, now that is the base level cause he's better than that, not always but he's very stylized and he's a director that puts thought into his action and characters. Here is Carnahan giving you his riff on Groundhog Day, and on that level it works. He takes the gimmick and makes it his own. I didn't love this film but the two things that work is the action and Grillo. Grillo is very good in this kind of role, hes tough, a smart ass and human, he's relatable. I liked him here and he does his best. The action is very over the top but it's shot well and there's a couple of really good gags here. The action is heavy but there is humor in some places.

Here's something that I like at the beginning, it's the fact that we start the film with Grillo already in the loop and I thought this was a nice way of getting out of the cliches of this sub-genre, we get narration rather than seeing him go through it time and time again, for me they took out the boring part, well kind of cause they do a flashback and add all that stuff that I was glad wasn't there.

What I Didn't Like: I didn't think they did anything new or different to the genre, look at what a film like Happy Death Day did to this, they took a comedic premise and spun it into a horror film and it was really good. Here they spun it into an average action movie. The romance the villain the Sci-Fi machine was all very ho-hum for me I didn't care for Mel Gibson here at all. He's almost a B-Grade Bond baddie here. He of course gives this long speech and it falls flat for me. The character is beyond stock, I think they were counting on Gibson to elevate it and he didn't.

The romance and son/kid sub-plot really didn't work for me, I really wished they pushed the story more but they pretty much check off all the boxes. They took a cookie cutter action story and just through it into a time loop film. They even waste Michelle Yeoh, who is always good but she's not in it much and that's a shame cause they could have done some fun things with her.

Here's a nitpick, the title Boss Level comes pretty much from video games, it's a term all gamers know and I'm at a lost why they called it this since it has nothing to do with video games or the process of getting to a Boss Level Again there's a good story here but it not taken anywhere unexpected or original. The film also lags in the middle, it's one of those films that feels longer than it is.

Final Thoughts: It's not terrible but it is disappointing, liked some bits and liked some of the action but for me I never clicked with it.

Rating: Originally I ranked this a 6 but after further review it's a 5.

[darringauthier]

The Hunt (2020)

Genre: Horror/Action/Thriller

Who's In It: Betty Gilpin, Hilary Swank, Ethan Suplee, Emma Roberts, Amy Madigan, Ika Barinholz

Who Directed It: Craig Zobel

Plot: Twelve strangers wake up in a clearing. They don't know where they are, or how they got there. They don't know they've been chosen - for a very specific purpose - The Hunt.

Run Time: 90 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.5

Metascore: 50

Why I Watched It: I'll be honest I wasn't sure, the trailers were ok but wasn't sure what this movie was but I gave it a shot mostly from the buzz, genre reviews and a sense of curiosity.

How I Watched It: iTunes, twice actually.

Random Thoughts: Just a side note I couldn't get the Rotten Tomatoes numbers as the site wasn't working for me so maybe one day I'm come back and add the numbers.

So this movie got pulled because of real life mass shootings and then became a kind of political football that both sides in the US kicked around. It was one of those movies that people had opinions on but hadn't seen the film.

I wouldn't call this a horror film, it's more of an action movie. Just given my two cents.

What I Liked: The weird thing with all the talk and buzz about this movie the main thing kind of got overlooked, it's just another reworking of The Most Dangerous Game, people hunting people but The Hunt not only had a political bent it was also for the most part satire. I will say that's tough to pull off and for me this film works as an action movie. I had a lot of fun with it and on that level it's a solid movie. With that being said I do believe the movie is worth watching mostly for Betty Gilpin, she pulled off some tricky character work here. She's bad ass, damaged and for the most part quiet but she's amazing. I not only loved the character but the way Gilpin under plays most of the stuff, she's just trying to getaway with her life she doesn't care about anything else I want to survive. She pulls this off and it make it all the more amazing she's playing against type here, it's hard to be a believable bad ass but she does it.

The other big reasons this works so well is that it's 90 minutes, I could see a big Hollywood boom feast of this film being 2:15. Not only is it crisp and clean the pacing is very good all the way through, yes even a 90 minutes film can drag and feel long this just moves. The thing that struck me was I didn't know where this was going and that says something cause this sub genre is usually very by the books. For a 90 minute people hunt people movie they did a nice job of layering some decent character work and at least given the "bad guys" a different kind of motive for doing what they're doing. Their not comic book characters.

The way the film is structure really helps the story cause we start off not knowing what is going on but learn slowly what the motive and what the real story is. The writers at least gave it some thought and didn't just do the standard paint by numbers story.

What I Didn't Like: I do think they try a little too hard with the satire, it because more text than sub-text and some of it might not be heavy handed but maybe you could say it was too on the nose.

I really liked the film but my main beef was Hilary Swank, she didn't ring true to me and the final battle with her and Gilpin just didn't really vibe for me. Not sure why, one reason could be I didn't buy Swank doing the action, and her character was way over written, she gets one too many big speeches. Not arguing that Swank isn't a good actress but she just felt miscast to me and her and Gilpin didn't have the right chemistry together to really make the final fight rock.

Final Thoughts: I enjoyed it more than I thought I would and would love to see Betty Gilpin in more lead roles.

Rating: 7/10

[darringauthier]

Don't Breath 2 (2021)

Genre: Horror/Crime/Thriller

Who's In It: Stephen Lang, Madelyn Grace, Brendan Sexton III, Fiona O'Shaughnessy

Who Directed It: Rodo Sayagues

Plot: The sequel is set in the years following the initial deadly home invasion, where Norman Nordstrom (Stephen Lang) lives in quiet solace until his past sins catch up to him.

Run Time: 98 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.1

Metascore: 46

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 44% Audience 85%

Why I Watched It: Saw the first one, didn't really care for it. Do like Stephen Lang a lot though.

How I Watched It: Amazon Prime Canada

Random Thoughts: Those numbers are very bi-polar, 88% audience is wild to me, even the 6.1 on IMDB seems high. It's clear this is a critic vs audience movie.

I'll throw this in here, it's kind of a complaint more of an observation, It's weird this film was made, the first one didn't need a sequel and you make a sequel and have the bad guy your lead for the second one with no one from the first one with him. It's odd.

Not sure this is a horror film, it kind of is but it's kind of not. It's a home invasion but then it's not, it's a hard movie to categorize.

What I Liked: Stephen Lang is always watchable but here like the first one it's more of a physical role than pure acting. He does way more fighting than speaking. This is tough cause this guy is not likable if you've seen the first one but he goes through so much here and he is trying to defend a little girl so you kind of hope he wins even though you can't forget what he's done. Lang makes the character watchable. Madelyn Grace is good here, solid for a young actor cause she's put through a lot, not only the physical stuff but she has all the heavy lifting to do acting wise.

The best thing about the movie is the action, the fights, the kills are good. I give the director and cinematographer a ton of credit cause they play with darkness and it works not only for the main character but as an audience you can see what's going on and it makes it more effective and atmospheric. I also like they didn't sty with one location like the first one.

What I Didn't Like: If this was a stand alone film and wasn't tied to the first one I think this would have been a more effective film. This has a sequel hurts the film cause it really has nothing to do with the first film, if the girl was in the first one it would maybe make sense but you kind of force this story onto an unlikable character. This might have worked if Land was a straight up bad guy and the people after the girl were good but here you end up with a film of almost unlikable characters. There is really 3 someone good people, one dies early, one kind of turns to do the right thing after doing bad things and the other is the girl. If the film was more like Becky was and had the young girl be the lead against everyone it might have worked but here you kind of don't care about anyone and just have the violence to keep you entertained.

The film is suspenful but it does have a tone problem once the main bad guys come into play and we find out why they're doing what they're doing it almost becomes campy and a tad over the top. It was like they had to make the bad guys so terrible that we cheered for a murder and rapist. Tough sledding here. The film also goes on too long and yes Lang's blind man does say he's not a good person and he's right but it seems hallow and it's the end I will say it's one of the few movies I've seen where the dream of the main kid is to live in a orphanage, that's different.

Final Thoughts: Not a bad film, well made and the action and suspense does carry the film but I was never invested in it and that kept me at a distance.

Rating: 5/10

[darringauthier]

Hypnotic (2021)

Genre: Thriller

Who's In It: Kate Siegel, Jason O'Mara, Dule Hill

Who Directed It: Matt Angel+Suzanne Coote

Plot: A young woman seeking self-improvement enlists the help of a renowned hypnotherapist. But after a handful of intense sessions, she discovers unexpected and deadly consequences.

Run Time: 88 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.3

Metascore: 32

Why I Watched It: Combo of premise and cast.

How I Watched It: Netflix Canada

Random Thoughts: I find that some made for streaming service movies are now being looked down on like made for DVD were back in the day and that's dumb. To dismiss a movie cause it's a "Netflix" is really limiting your self. I do like the idea that people complain Netflix doesn't promote their movie well enough then from the other side of their mouth they say they hate a movie being shoved down their throat. Also I think it's a mistake saying all made for Netflix movies are the same, they aren't, it's not like Hallmark Christmas movies. So that's my rant judge each movie on their own merits.

With that rant out of the way I have to say I knew very little about the film, I saw the trailer and that's it. I didn't even know Dule Hill was in this, a side note, I'm a huge Psych fan.

What I Liked: I've seen a lot of movies, I love movies. It's been a life long love affair but sadly I tend to not love a lot of movies anymore, most films are fine or ok. My average rating is 5 or 6, worth a watch but didn't float my boat. Now I should say I'm a B-Movie guy, genre freak give me a well made smaller movie all the time, not art house per say but nice pulp. Every once in awhile I stumbled onto a movie that takes me not only by surprised but end up really liking it to find out everyone else this is OK. I really liked this movie and I wasn't excepting a lot but it really worked for me. Now the premise is not new at all but it's well written and I have to say not all the characters act like idiots. Also I will say I wasn't sure where this was going. I thought early on it was going to be very cliched and tired take on the whole hypnosis horror sub-genre. That's the other thing it's not a horror film it's more of a thriller.

The cast does carry it, Kate Siegel is very good here and she does some nice subtle work, her character just doesn't just have a "past" she has baggage she is trying to work on and dare I say she's not a one dimensional character. Also she's a strong character. The other thing I really like about the film is something old school that I wish more films did and that's have a cop character that is not one note, not cliched, and not stupid. Dule Hill is good here, he's a decent cop who smells something funny but not sure what it is, so we get a sub-plot and it really makes the film richer and less one note.

I'm not going to give any of the plot away cause the plot description is vague and the film is a lot more than that. I thought the ending was clever and really appreciated that both the lead character and the cop were dumb and we're trying to figure things out. It felt like characters doing something rather than just doing what the plot needed them to do. Also I love the run time, under 90 minutes, if this was a big Hollywood film it would have pushed two hours. The pacing is nice and tight.

What I Didn't Like: Jason O'Mara is fine here but he's the one character that isn't fleshed out, well he is but in a very cliched way, won't go much further. The film does really veer in some camp directions, especially involving motive and some plot turns. The film is played straight but once you learn a couple of details about a characters past does veer into bad B-Movie look out it's going to go batshit crazy, it doesn't but I wish it was written a little better. The film is kind of better than just making the villain "crazy"

Final Thoughts: I really enjoyed it, it was one of those well this is so much better than I thought it was going to be. It was a film that didn't feel like it was just going through the motions.

Rating: 7/10

[darringauthier]

Birds Of Prey: And The Fantabulous Emancipation Of One Harley Quinn (2020)

Genre: Action/Super Hero/Crime

Who's In It: Margot Robbie, Rosie Perez, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jurnce Smoett, Ewan McGregor, Chris Messina, Ali Wong

Who Directed It: Cathy Yan

Plot: After splitting with the Joker, Harley Quinn joins superheroines Black Canary, Huntress and Renee Montoya to save a young girl from an evil crime lord.

Run Time: 111 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.0

Metascore: 60

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 79% Audience 78%

Why I Watched It: I like the character of Harley Quinn with that being said I usually pass on live action DC films but I gave this one I try.

How I Watched It: Netflix Canada

Random Thoughts: My oldest daughter loves this movie and Harley Quinn, she owns it now. She made me watch this. To be fair I love DC animation but DC live action leaves me cold and the movies are way too long and boring for me. Yes I'm close to Super Hero burn out but I will say with this one and The newest Suicide Squad DC is changing it up a bit.

By the by I really don't like the title of the film and I really don't like typing the whole thing out and to be honest it's not really a Birds Of Prey movie.

What I Liked: The best thing in this movie is Margot Robbie, she nails Quinn and I will say this if she's in any DC movie playing Harley Quinn it's worth a watch just for her. She carries the film and it's one of those performances where it's mostly charisma and star power but she does give a very good performance. I will say she works better in the light and goofy stuff. To be honest Harley Quinn is a great character and this is mostly her movie. If you know the comics this isn't really a Birds Of Prey movie it's more a Harley Quinn movie and it works as such.

I had a problem with tone in the film but I'll save that for the what I didn't like section but I will say this plays better has a black comedy rather than an action film. The humor does work in places and the character stuff with Quinn is gold, but her anywhere and it works. I did like most of the cast and the casting for the Birds Of Prey is good I just wished they had more to do and I do hope to one day to get a true Birds Of Prey Movie.

The look of the film is cool, it's bright and it's vibrant and odd so it works great for the lead character. All the craft stuff is well done here, liked the cinematography and score. The money is on the screen for the most part.

What I Didn't Like: This is one of these cases where I liked the lead character more than I liked the story they were in. I'm mixed on the film mostly for the plot and the big bads in the film. I don't mind Ewan McGregor but he's miscast and frankly not very good here. He's vanilla ice cream to me, sure it can be in a bowl, or cone or you can eat it out of the tub but it's still vanilla ice cream. Nothing wrong with that but the film needed someone to meet Robbi's performance and he doesn't Also speaking of bad guys Chris Messina as the main henchman is terrible and I say that with a heavy heart cause this is the first performance of is I didn't like. The two of them are in a different movie and it's not as good as the one I wanted to see.

The film works better as vignettes than a long form story. The main plot didn't work for me and the sub-plots were worst. I didn't mind Rosie Perez here but her character got way more time than the other members of the team. The real problem is we didn't really get to know Huntress or Black Canary and that's a shame cause both characters are very cool in the comics. The film is under two hours but it dragged for me and the pacing was very slow in the middle and any time McGregor was on screen. I also want to point out I think Black mask is a good villain but here he's just psycho and a standard bad guy.

Final Thoughts: This was a mixed bag for me, the stuff I didn't like really bugged me but I did enjoy Margot Robbie enough that in the end I did enjoy the film it's a decent film I think could have worked better.

Rating: 6/10

[darringauthier]

Zone 414 (2021)

Genre: Sci-Fi/Thriller

Who's In It: Guy Pearce, Matilda Anna Ingrid Lunz, Jonathan Aris, Travis Fimmel

Who Directed It: Andrew Baird

Plot: Set in the near future, private detective David Carmichael is hired by Marlon Veidt, an eccentric businessman, to track down his missing daughter. David teams up with Jane, a highly advanced A.I. to solve the mystery.

Run Time: 98 Minutes

IMDB Score: 4.9

Metascore: 36

Why I Watched It: Mostly because of Guy Pearce and it's genre so I just went with it.

How I Watched It: Netflix Canada

Random Thoughts: Just some housework, on the poster she's billed as Matilda Lunz, but IMDB has her as Matilda Anna Ingrid Luntz.

I'll be honest I hadn't heard about this film till it turned up on iTunes I like Pearce but the trailer felt bland and then wouldn't you know it showed up on Netflix.

What I Liked: Guy Pearce, that sadly is about it and to be honest he's not great in this but he's still Guy Pearce, he doesn't sleepwalk through anything and he does a lot of iffy films. I'll be honest he's miscast here, they're going for a film noir/Blade Runner vibe and he's just not rugged enough, not weary enough for me. I give him credit he does a husky voice but he comes off a little too slight for what the role needs.

I love film noir it comes in right after horror has my favorite genre but I've had to face facts they don't make them anymore so you take what you can get. So I didn't mind a Sf-Fi detective story and some of the mood and locations work but that's about it.

Sorry not a lot of What I Like in this one but to be honest I didn't hate it but it's one of those movies that is just kind of there, it does alright but it doesn't stand out nothing is special or different.

What I Didn't Like: The mystery element is very weak, ok I'll say it, it's very weak and boring. The film just lacks anything to really connect with. The mystery element is boring, the Sci-Fi is so by the numbers that you're not wrong calling this a Blade Runner knock-off cause it kind is. The thing that disappointed me the most was the world they create is bland and again he comes the word again boring, the production design doesn't stand out and come on if you're doing a Sci-Fi film and you're world building then world build. The Sci-fi part is the most boring of the lot, they don't even have fun with the tech.

For the most part the acting is fine but I will say I'm not sure what Travis Fimmel is going for, it's an odd performance not good and closer to bad but at least he's going for something. That's really the thing about the film is that nothing stands out, nothing grips you. The mystery and who's behind it is a huge let down, if you've seen more than five movies you'll know who and why the bad guy is. I wish they went a little crazy and played it up, the film is just static the whole way through no ups and downs just right down the middle. It's hard to hate it but it's really impossible to love it cause it doesn't give you anything.

Final Thoughts: tough movie to grade it's right between a 4 and a 5, I have always thought that a movie I rate 5 or higher is at some level worth watching and anything under that you can safely skip and this film is riding that line.

Rating: 4/10

[darringauthier]

Fatale (2020)

Genre: Thriller

Who's In It: Hilary Swank,Michael Ealy, Mike Colter, Damaris Lewis, Tyrin Turner, Danny Pino

Who Directed It: Deon Taylor

Plot: After a one-night stand, a successful married man finds himself entangled in a cunning police detective's latest investigation.

Run Time: 1 Hour 42 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.4

Metascore: 42

Why I Watched It: The trailer looked fine enough, I'm a big fan of Michael Ealy, so underrated and under used in my opinion.

How I Watched It: Starz Canada

Random Thoughts: I'll just throw this out there it's weird seeing certain actors in genre films, or I should say Oscar winners in B-Movies, not against it but sometimes it's like having peanut butter with ketchup, both are fine on their own but together just weird. I will just say this I don't think Hiliary Swank would have been an actor I would have thought of for this role.

Also this is another trailer that pretty much gives you the whole movie in two minutes. Also this isn't as big of a Fatal Attraction knock-off as the trailer makes it seem to be.

Don't like that a poster kind of like the vibe just it just doesn't click with the movie.

What I Like: A kind of rule I try to keep with watching and discussing movies is talk about the movie they gave you and not the one you think they should have given you. I think there is a very fun batshit crazy movie that could have been made and it almost comes close but it's just not there. Also this movie should have been more fun, this is a very somber, serious B-Movie. So I know this is in the what I liked part, so I let me say something positive, I liked the idea, this is an attempt at a sexy film noir, now we don't get either of those genres much anymore. This is a weird film for me to critic cause this is what I call a "but" movie, I'll start saying I like this film but, this was good but the casting was off, see what I'm saying. The best part for me was not knowing where this was going, if you take the trailer off the table this film goes in some different directions. The standout for me was Michael Ealy, he does everything that is asked of him, he plays a great guy way over his head. It's one of those movie where the lead might not be perfect but everyone else around him is terrible.

Now I will have more to talk about this is the what I didn't like part but for me Hilary Swank is miscast, she's game and her and Ealy really try the thing that hurts them and the film is they don't have sexual chemistry but when they go against each other they shine cause they're two good actors.

In a film like this you get a lot of set up, we get twists and turns and I think in the last act the film started to get fun and started to get a little crazy not crazy enough to make this a must watch but enough to make you ask what if they did the damn thing.

What I Didn't Like: The film has one huge flaw and it's the huge suspension of disbelief they ask the audience for, the basic set up that is in the trailer, that a guy has a one night stand then something bad happens and the cop on the case is the cop he had sex with, oh and he's married. They could have made this work, but they have it that he goes to Vegas not the city he lives in and has this one night stand and it so happens this women is from the same city and is the cop assigned to his case. If this was going to work have the case first and then have them have a fling then have the twists and turns.

I said earlier that this isn't as big a knock off of Fatal Attraction and it's not but in one way it is and that's how the female lead is written, in both cases it would have worked better if they were total psychos, I thought here it would have been good if Ealy was more the bad guy. Swank does try but it's very cliched. I'll also get to Swank being miscast, she's a good actress but not right for this role, it's weird but having a very good actor does hurt some roles, I think if she would have gone all out and maybe did little camp or like a 10% Nic Cage performance it might have worked better. If comes off as her slumming or trying to show a different side, it just doesn't fully work.

The other key thing that hampers the film is they throw way too much plot into this, we have so many twists and turns and sub-plots that it feels over stuffed and the film loses focus. I liked the third act but the ending was pretty much by the book.

Final Thoughts: This is very much a mixed bag, it's not a bad film but it doesn't fully work. A rare case where if you got maybe lesser actors and put less into a movie it might have been better. This could have been a fun B-Movie but it ends up being an interesting miss.

Rating: 5/10

[darringauthier]

The Rental (2020)

Genre: Horror

Who's In It: Dan Stevens, Alison Brie, Jeremy Allen White, Sheila Vand, Toby Huss

Who Directed It: Dave Franco

Plot: Two couples rent a vacation home for what should be a celebratory weekend get-away.

Run Time: 88 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.7

Metascore: 62

Rotten Tomatoes: Critics 74% Audience 44%

Why I Watched It: Another one that I have no good reason for, it's a horror film? It has a decent cast? Dan Stevens was great in The Guest.

How I Watched It: Amazon Prime Canada

Random Thoughts: First thing first, not sure I would call The Rental a horror film but that's how it's billed. Also the 74% from Rotten Tomatoes is baffling, that's way high. I would tend to lean towards the audience's 44%. Kudos to Dave France an acting making his directing debut and not acting in the film,his wife is in though.

What I Liked: This is one of those movies that I didn't hate but there's not much I really liked. It's a very Meh film. So I'm searching for good points and honestly there's not many. Acting wise I think Alison comes off the best, she's the one where she kind of has a character. She's likable enough, always good to see Toby Huss, even though he's wasted here.

Sadly I think that's it for what I liked, I usually like Dan Stevens but he's bland here. I got nothing else.

What I Didn't Like: This is a boring film and even at 88 minutes it's long. There is hardly a story here, I mean it's one of the reason I wouldn't call this a horror film cause almost nothing happens. There is one plot point that makes it creepy and that's it. The film is more of a relationship drama than horror film, or thriller or suspense genre.

Now I will say I get that this was Franco's film and it's smart to get it simple but it still has to be a movie. The worst part is that the characters aren't interesting and they're not fleshed out at all. They do things that are bad we really don't know why. We get told things about characters and relationship they're in but we don't see it. That's another big thing is the relationship stuff doesn't work has no one has any chemistry with anyone else. You don't buy the two male leads as brothers and you don't by the love relationships either. They're together so two of them can cheat, and that isn't sexy or racy at all.

For a film that wants to fancy it's self as a horror film it has no energy or suspense in it at all. The film is pretty much a straight line, it's one of those rare films that I wouldn't have minded a jump scare. The end is downright anti climatic and somehow predictable.

Final Thoughts: Not a terrible film but a boring one. I watched this late at night and almost feel asleep, I had to work to stay awake.

Rating: 3/10

[darringauthier]

In Darkness (2018)

Genre: Thriller/Suspense

Who's In It: Natalie Dormer, Ed Skrein, Emily Ratajkowski, Joely Richardson, James Cosmo, Neil Maskell, Jan Bijvoet

Who Directed It: Anthony Byrne

Plot: A blind musician hears a murder committed in the apartment upstairs from hers that sends her down a dark path into London's gritty criminal underworld.

Running Time: 110 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.8

Metascore: 59

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 47% Audience 34%

Why I Watched It: Honestly not sure, mostly because of the cast.

How I Watched It: Netflix Canada

Random Thoughts: Bad poster, not a great title either. Also Emily Ratajkowski is third billed on the poster but be warned she's barely in it, she plays and important character but she doesn't have a ton of screen time.

What I Liked: In Darkness is a throwback in a few ways, one it feels like either a late 70's or early 80's film, it was a sexuality that most films nowadays don't and it feels very Euro, now I say all of that as a positive as it is different. I will also say that there is a lot going on here, maybe too much but it does keep you on your toes, lots of characters and lots of sub-plots and yes it's one of those "not everything is as it seems" or the people for that matter. I did like that about a third of the way in I wasn't sure what this was going to be about or where it was going, found out it was going to a lot of places and plot points.

The acting is a mixed bag, most of the performances are quiet and most of the characters aren't good to even nice people, almost everyone is flawed. Natalie Dormer carries the film and she's good as she has a lot going and she is a layered character that kind of unveil herself as the film goes a long. I do feel we had too many characters and some of the actors get short shifted. I did kind of like what Ed Skrein was going for, he's not my favorite actor as a find him kind of one note but here did have more things to do.

The plot is completed which isn't bad but it's hard to explain without spoiling things. I did like the fact that it's kind of a sexy movie or at least sexuality is part of it. We don't get that lot these days, we get way more violence than sex in film.

What I Didn't Like: It's slow and long, which is never good. The other thing is it's tone this isn't action packed, it's more character driven and plot driven. So there is times not much is going on and it does get a tad bit boring, it did need to have more energy but as I said this is going for a more Euro feel where it's more internal and thoughtful. It's easily a film if you're tired while you watching will test you to sty awake and alert.

The blindness of the character is a big plot point and I get why but again it's not used for suspense or for character purposes it's more of a plot point. This is a film where the characters seem bond to the plot, they are what and how they are because the plot needs them to be and there's time in the film the characters just seem to be going through the motions.

Final Thoughts: It's not a bad film, the plot does play out well it's just it's not very riveting and it does lack excitement but if you go along with it, it does have a few pretty good twists so your patience will be rewarded.

Rating: 6/10

[darringauthier]

Till Death (2021)

Genre: Thriller

Who's In It: Megan Fox, Eoin Macken, Callan Mulvey, Jack Roth, Aml Ameen

Who Directed It: S.K Dale

Plot: A woman is left handcuffed to her dead husband as part of a sick revenge plot. Unable to unshackle, she has to survive as two killers arrive to finish her off.

Running Time: 88 Minutes

IMDB Score: 5.9

Why I Watched It: Trailer was decent enough did like the plot and it was short.

How I Watched It: iTunes

What I Liked: This is one of those movies that has a very good hook, not going to lie this movie works cause of it's very good B-Movie premise, logic is going to fall by the way side but it's cool plot will keep plotting. The idea may be silly but it does work and a lot of credit goes to Megan Fox and the director S.K Dale, Fox does some great physical work, she mostly has to deal with a dead body attached to her but she sells anger, desperation and fear. The fact the films works is because the director was smart enough to keep the action working once the plot kicks in. This is one of those movies if you give the audience too much time to take the breath they fall in to the plot holes, keep it movie and the audience doesn't have time to think the just go with it.

The action is good and the location is great you can feel the cold and I think that was another smart element to the story, everything is working against the lead, she has to survive not only the bad guys but the elements.

What I Didn't Like: Megan Fox isn't a great actress and the beginning is hurt buy that and also the set up takes a while and I have to say the first part does hamper the film, no one is likable and they give us too much time to not really care for Fox, and that's a bad thing cause we'll be spending a lot of time with her and if we don't like her why do we care what she's going through. The weakness in the character is we don't know much about her, she's married a rich prick and even though she has everything she's not happy and she's having an affair, again not really likable.

I'm not going to pick every plot hole or WTF moment but let's just say there's a few and oddly there has to be to keep this movie going, it's only 88 minutes it would have worked better at 75. The very end does drag and the two bad guys that so up are so stock and one dimensional I almost tuned out.

Final Thoughts: I'm kind of mixed but I will say this is a small movie and it does work on a basic and cool B-Movie level and say what you want about Megan Fox she's a watchable actress and she works her ass off here to sell the danger.

Rating: 6/10

[darringauthier]

Hello everyone, I'm back writing reviews and giving my opinions. So I had to deal with having carpal tunnel in both my wrists. I'm not 100% percent, will be needing surgery but I've had two cortisone shots, one in each wrist and for the moment my hands are feeling better than they've felt in over 3 months.

Also I'm on Letterboxd, Darrin Gauthier if you want to me follow me there as well.

[darringauthier]

The Gentlemen (2019)

Genre: Action/Crime

Who's In It: Matthew McConaughey, Charlie Hunnam, Michelle Dockery, Colin Farrell, Henry Golding, Hugh Grant

Who Directed It: Guy Ritchie

Plot: An American expat tries to sell off his highly profitable marijuana empire in London, triggering plots, schemes, bribery and blackmail in an attempt to steal his domain out from under him.

Run Time: 113 Minutes

IMDB Score: 7.8

Metascore: 51

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Critics 75% Audience 84%

Why I Watched It: I wouldn't call myself a Guy Ritchie fan but I do watch most of his movies and this one is no exception, also the cast.

How I Watched It: Netflix Canada

Random Thoughts: I'll put this here cause it's not a like or dislike but boy this is a very Guy Ritchie film, it's weird cause when he does his crime films they're all the same set up but somehow different. I do think it's mostly the cast and some of the characters differ but there's no mistaking this is a Guy Ritchie film though this one does have a female character with something to do.

What I Liked: Style over substance, sometimes the style is enough and had some very good actors and really on certain nights that's all you need. I will hand this to Ritchie he puts his stamp on his films, a lot of films I review I barely mention the director but just go check now and see how many times I've typed his name. I don't like all his films but his style does carry most of them and also he has a knack of weaving many characters in different sub-plots that all come together very nicely and The Gentlemen is a good example. He does a great job of having a large cast and giving everyone character something to do and makes them seem like a real character and not a plot device or a troupe. This one has a few I really like, Colin Farrell and Michelle Dockery are easily my favorites and I do wish they were in it more. Farrell underplays his part really well, he gently takes scenes he doesn't steal them. I really like how well rounded he is with not that many "big" scenes. Dockery is a nice counterpoint to men running around being very manly. She's cool and intelligent and she has very good chemistry with McConaughey. Yes he's good here as well but he's dialed back this time out and he's very good, I wouldn't call his performance against type but it's not some different shading.

Now one thing I won't do is try and go into the plot, I will say it's dense and has many different moving parts but by the end I think you not only know what this was about but how we got there and because it's a Guy Ritchie film we got here by taking the scenic route. Now this isn't ground breaking but it's a film that not only knows what it is but it pulls it off well. The biggest compliment I can give it is that it's a good Guy Ritchie film. Trust me he has swung and missed a few times. This film is very much in his wheelhouse but he doesn't phone it in he does twist it enough to make it fun. That's the other big thing with the film is flows very well, the pacing is good and it keeps your interest.

What I Didn't Like: Not all the characters worked for me, i thought Hug Grant was good but there was way too much of him and his character does grate on your nerves. He never shuts up, I get that what he's going for but I could have done with a bit less of him or maybe dial him down a tad. Charlie Hunnam is fine but fairly bland, e's not that interesting of a character and that would have been fine if he was a side character but he like Grant are in it more than I would have liked cause he did take time from better characters.

I will also say that Ritchie just can't tell a story without twisting and bending things. Again the film scream "style" but at times you just wish he would tell the story in a way that was a little smoother. Some of the violence is harsh and there's a couple of things that are very creepy in the did we need that. The tone at times is a bit jarring. I get it though at the end of the day none of these people are really good guys, all shades of black and that can be a bit boring at times.

Final Thoughts: I enjoyed it, one of those film that I didn't love but it kept my attention and I wasn't bored at any point.

Rating: 7/10

[darringauthier]

Those Who Wish Me Dead (2021)

Genre: Action/Thriller

Who's In It: Angelina Jolie, NIcholas Hoult, Finn Little, Jon Bernthal, Aidan Gillen, Jake Webber, Medina Senghode, Tyler Perry

Who Directed It: Taylor Sheridan

Plot: A teenage murder witness finds himself pursued by twin assassins in the Montana wilderness with a survival expert tasked with protecting him -- and a forest fire threatening to consume them all.

Run Time: I hour 40 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.0

Metascore: 59

Rotten Tomatoes: Critics 62% Audience 85%

Why I Watched It: The cast and I will say the trailer was pretty good.

How I Watched It: iTunes Rental

What I Liked: My mother use to say to me why can't you just enjoy movies why do you always have to over think and over analyze movies, can't you just enjoy them. I feel I do both and the answer to the question is, well it's just how I'm wired. Now with that being said Those who Wish Me Dead is one of those movies where at fave value it's a fun movie no doubt it's what use to be called a crowd pleaser. Now give yourself about ten minutes after you've watched it and you start picking holes and seeing flaws but I will say I enjoyed it or what it is. Now the only problem is I think it wanted to be more.

I really enjoyed Angelina Jolie in this and it was nice seeing her back in the action genre. The one thing that always strikes me is Jolie is so poised and comes off like she's always thinking. Here she's basically in a gauntlet movie, the last half is all running away and trying to survive but she always stops to think. She does a good job of making her character seem human cause it's very thin. She has a backstory that is basically from Cliffhanger but she does her best and she's not only bad ass but she comes off scared and vulnerable.

I will say this the cast is very good. No one is bad and even though Tyler Perry showing up for a cameo is a tad weird he's fine, a little distracting but fine. A standout for me is Medina Senghore, she's very good. She plays pregnant and badass very well and she's another character who is smart not dumb cause the plot needs her to be, she's another character that comes off as a real person. The plot is so straight forward I can see why the fire is added, to be honest it feel forced and doesn't work the way it should but the effects are solid and it does turn up the urgency meter to an eleven, not only do you have two hitmen after you, you also have to survive a forest fire.

What I Didn't Like: It's weird cause I get the fire and I liked some of the action that comes from it and the tension but it seems like a huge overkill and something really dumb. You're chasing someone or in this case two people through the woods with the goal of killing them so you set fire to an entire forest. Doesn't seem like you thought that out. You can't control it and not only does it put yourself in danger it also brings attention. If there's a major flaw in the film it's the two bad guys, not the actors they try very hard but they screw up a lot and they come off at times as a little dim. Now the plot needs them to be or they will kill the kid and Jolie but they come off as cliches. I think this film would have been very good to almost great if the bad guys were either super cool or smart. Also one gets seriously hurt and just kind of rubs dirt on it and keeps going.

Taylor Sheridan co-wrote and directed this and I have to say I was surprised by it cause this is a straight action/thriller he usually does deep or more grand films and I do think it hurts him here cause he throws in a very cliched backstory and a lot of the scenes are played very heavy and it cause the film to have a tone problem, it's got in between thrilling genre movie and heavy character piece. Now it works as a thriller but the characters are not well written enough to make it deeper or to leave a lasting impression. The directing is good the script is very lacking.

Final Thoughts: I liked it, and if you leave it at that I think you'll enjoy it.

Rating: I was very torn between a 6 and a 7 so sadly I'm going 6.5

[darringauthier]

The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021)

Genre: Horror

Who's In It: Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Ruairi O'Connor, Sarah Catherine Hook, John Noble, Eugenie Bondurant

Who Directed It: Michael Chaves

Plot: The Warrens investigate a murder that may be linked to a demonic possession.

Run Time: 1 Hour 52 Minutes

IMDB Score: 6.3

Metascore: 53

Rotten Tomatoes Score: Audience 83% Critics 55%

Why I Watched It: Well it's a horror film and I've seen all of the Conjuring films and the films in it's universe so I guess I had no choice but to watch it.

How I Watched It: On sale at the time on iTunes.

Random Thoughts: So they didn't use the number but this is the third Conjuring film. Not sure why they didn't tack on the number three they did it with number 2.

Look at those numbers big gap with audience and critics, I think this is a case that fans of this series got what they wanted.

The plot description is very thin, just saying, also not a great poster.

What I Liked: There's no doubt in my mind that the best part of the three Conjuring movie is the team of Wilson+Farmiga, they work so well together and yes both are very good actors but you buy them not only as a couple but a couple still in love with each other and that's a big part of these films cause one or both are in danger and they're love and affection for each other carries the film and gives this one a lot of it's tension.

Of the three I think this one is the thinnest, it's got a good hook but the film is very generic, the first two films were much more cinematic. With that being said this film does a good job of going from A to B, the pacing is solid and the tone is good. It's one of those films were it's not great but it does what it does well and you're onboard. I think it really helps this is the third film cause the past history and the characters help make this meatier than it is on paper.

What I Didn't Like: This is a very workman like movie and on it's own that's not a bad thing but this story is bare and it needed some bells and whistles. It also needed some more scares, there was only one moment that got me, for a horror it's not very horror like. This plays more like a TV episode. This is the weakest of the three Conjuring films, now I wasn't a fan of the first one but it's a better told film and shot movie.

This film is fine and with the actors and with the franchise it's in we should get a little better than fine. I would settle for an interesting failure. The thing is I don't think this is a failure, it's not a bad film it's just a very "fine" film. It's a bag of original flavor chips, it's not BBQ but it's better than no chips. I excepted the film to have more atmosphere and I needed it to have more urgency. I do think the direction and the script were lacking. At the end of the day it wasn't a very gripping or memorable film. I was also surprised we didn't get a breakout character like The Nun from the second. The odd thing with this film too is that it didn't really know what it wanted to be, it could have been a courtroom film, a mystery, it decided it was a horror film and sadly it was the lesser of the three elements.

Final Thoughts: It was not a bad film, a little long but if you've seen the first two then by all means watch this one for Wilson and Farmiga alone.

Rating: 6/10