​

Posted Using INLEO

Margin Call drops you into one crazy night at a Wall Street bank and I cannot lie, watching this whole thing unfold knowing what we know now about 2008 makes it hit different, I wont say it tells you with details what happen and why but makes you think how things play out, how they were smart and got out first even after destroying the market, a wise movie rather than getting out late and picking crumbs after the damage was done. The movie packs this entire financial meltdown into 24 hours which is wild because I doubt everything happen over night but it works for the story. Jeremy Irons shows up as the big boss John Tuld probably based on that Lehman Brothers CEO Dick Fuld and you can tell the movie wants you to see him as the bad guy but honestly I do not think he did anything wrong. The dude woke up in the middle of the night, got helicoptered into the office, some junior analyst told him their mortgage backed securities were about to tank hard and he made a call to sell everything before it got worse. Kevin Spacey plays this trader Sam Rogers who acts like they are committing some terrible crime by dumping their positions, but the truth aside from the consequences its just business. You can sell anything you want unless you got insider info and they did not have that, or at least thats not how the movie setup things, it was just a gut feeling things were going south. The whole vibe feels like people going to war and everyone looking miserable, when really it is just a bunch of suits making an investment decision. Sure the market crashed and people lost jobs and its a nasty reality that keeps happening every other amount of decades in different levels but tends to happen.

• IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1615147/
• Platform: TUBI

Rottentomatoes Rating

What I like about Margin Call is how it shows part of the brutal reality and how stone cold a CEO needs to be to dump such a massive position, when the time is right dont doubt to dump a bunch of money into others, at least I think this is something very close to what happened during the 2008 crisis. This is based on Goldman Sachs who did pretty much exactly this, they figured out early that mortgage backed securities were gonna crash and they sold their position before anyone else did. People were pissed at Goldman for doing it but from a business standpoint it was the right move, they protected their firm and their shareholders which is literaly their job. The movie tries to make it seem like this big moral dilemma but I just do not see it that way, these are willing buyers purchasing assets at market price, nobody is forcing them to buy anything but again I know many would argue they were selling shit assets to people who didnt know, that doesnt make it illegal but some people wont be able to sleep well knowing this, would you?. Now days its very common the "DYOR" do our own research, if you work in finance or investing into something you should know what you are buying, do your own research, understand the risks. The bank that buys these securities without doing proper due diligence, that is on them, sure it sucks that the financial system nearly collapsed and regular people lost their homes and retirement savings but that is a regulatory problem not a problem with one bank making smart trades and thats the basics of this movie. A the end Sam stays at the firm even though he is disgusted by what they did, mostly because he needs the money, which again feels very real and human, the truth is that not everyone gets to quit their job over principles when you got bills to pay and a family to support. Margin Call is definitely worth watching if you want to get an idea how Wall Street operates, yes there is fantasy aspects and adaptations because this is not a documentary, although its way more accurate than something like Wolf of Wall Street or even The Big Short in terms of showing the day to day reality. The cast is stacked with great performances, the pacing keeps you hooked even though its mostly just people in conference rooms talking and it explains complicated financial concepts in a way that makes sense. I would give it a solid 7/10, its not perfect but its probably the best movie about the 2008 crisis from the banks perspective.

#skiptvads, #inleo, #hive, #margincall, #wallstreet, #trading, #mortgage, #securities, #crisis, #banking, #finance, #investors, #leverage, #volatility, #liquidation, #firesale, #lehman, #goldman, #collapse, #recession, #subprime, #losses, #bankruptcy, #scandal, #economy, #market, #business, #money

Posted Using INLEO

Caliban’s War (S0213)

Airdate: April 19th 2017

Written by: Daniel Abraham & Ty Frank Directed by: Thor Freudenthal

Running Time: 44 minutes

The Expanse’s second season finale maintains the series’ tradition of naming its concluding episode after the corresponding novel in James S.A. Corey’s source material—a practice established with Leviathan’s Wake in Season One. This structural homage, however, belies a significant narrative divergence: unlike the novels where Caliban’s War represents a self-contained narrative arc, the television adaptation repurposes the title not as a neat culmination but as a thematic anchor for Season Two’s sprawling climax. The choice proves ironically apt, for while the episode eschews a tidy resolution to the season’s complex geopolitical machinations, it delivers precisely what its Shakespearean title promises—a visceral, chaotic war waged across multiple fronts, replete with gunfire, moral ambiguity, and the ever-present spectre of annihilation. Yet this very multiplicity of conflicts becomes both the episode’s greatest strength and its critical flaw, as three distinct storylines of wildly uneven quality compete for emotional resonance amidst the interstellar carnage.

The most compelling thread unfolds aboard the Rocinante, where Holden, Alex, and Amos retrieve Naomi and a traumatised Praxidike Meng following their harrowing escape from Ganymede. Their relief is short-lived; unbeknownst to them, they’ve smuggled aboard a monstrous stowaway—the human-protomolecule hybrid developed under Project Caliban. This creature, previously hunted by Holden on Ganymede, now turns the ship into a claustrophobic battleground. Meng’s desperate hope that the hybrid might retain traces of his daughter Mei’s consciousness creates a profound ethical schism: while Naomi and Holden insist on immediate destruction, Meng pleads for communication, his paternal grief blinding him to the existential threat. The tension escalates horrifically when Holden is crushed in the cargo bay during an initial confrontation, forcing the crew into a race against time for both his survival and the ship’s. It is Meng, ironically, who ultimately engineers the solution via scientific deduction. Observing the creature’s attraction to the ship’s reactor, he realises it feeds on radiation. Initially, they exploit this by cutting power to halt its advance, but Naomi devises a final gambit: removing a nuclear warhead from a torpedo, luring the creature with it, and detonating the device within its grasp. The plan succeeds, saving the Rocinante but leaving Holden critically injured. In a poignant coda, Naomi confesses she never destroyed the protomolecule sample; believing the Belt might leverage it against Earth and Mars, she entrusted it to Fred Johnson—a revelation underscoring the episode’s central theme: survival often demands morally compromised pragmatism.

This segment stands as the episode’s undisputed triumph, masterfully evoking the suffocating tension of Alien whilst consciously eschewing horror for cerebral action. The special effects—particularly the creature’s biomechanical fluidity and the reactor’s eerie glow—heighten the realism, but it is the writing that truly elevates the sequence. Meng’s arc is exceptional: his initial, emotionally driven misjudgment gives way to a solution born not of sentimentality but cold, precise science. In a genre often reliant on firepower, it is profoundly commendable to witness a crisis resolved through intellect—a testament to The Expanse’s commitment to hard sci-fi principles. The emotional weight of Meng’s grief, juxtaposed with his eventual rational breakthrough, delivers genuine pathos without melodrama, making this the season’s most resonant character moment.

Regrettably, the other two subplots falter under the weight of their own execution. The standoff aboard Jules-Pierre Mao’s yacht, featuring Cotyar’s valiant but wounded negotiation with Mao’s mercenaries, begins with promise. Cotyar’s physical deterioration and Asaravala’s whispered coaching create palpable tension, and Bobbie Draper’s eventual intervention—crawling through ventilation shafts to reach her concealed power armour—is a visually striking payoff. Yet the sequence suffers from jarring pacing: the protracted negotiation feels overlong, while Bobbie’s decisive takedown of the mercenaries occurs in a rushed montage, robbing the victory of catharsis. Naomi’s closing voiceover, attempting to lend thematic weight to Cotyar’s ordeal, rings hollow, rendering the entire segment curiously anti-climactic despite strong performances from Frankie Adams and Nick E. Tarabay.

Most perplexing is the UNS Arboghast’s ill-fated mission to Venus. Colonel Janus and Dr. Iturbi’s decision to descend into the protomolecule-controlled Eros crater, despite grave scepticism, culminates in the ship’s instantaneous disintegration—a spectacle of nihilistic destruction. While intended to underscore the protomolecule’s terrifying power, the subplot feels narratively redundant. The Eros catastrophe already established the entity’s godlike capabilities; revisiting this theme here adds little beyond gratuitous spectacle. Worse, it wastes two intriguing characters—Janus and Iturbi—introduced solely to be obliterated, their potential for future development sacrificed for a hollow demonstration of cosmic horror. The sole redeeming note is Adam Savage’s cameo as a doomed crewman, a nod to MythBusters’ legacy that will delight fans but cannot salvage the segment’s fundamental pointlessness.

Structurally, "Caliban’s War" exemplifies the pitfalls of The Expanse’s ambitious multi-threaded storytelling. While the Rocinante sequence thrills with its intellectual rigour and emotional authenticity, the yacht standoff’s pacing issues and the Arboghast’s narrative vacuity dilute the finale’s impact. The episode’s title, referencing Shakespeare’s enslaved, monstrous Caliban, proves thematically rich—each storyline explores beings trapped by forces beyond their control (Meng by grief, Cotyar by duty, Janus by curiosity)—yet the execution lacks cohesion. The Rocinante crew’s triumph, the yacht’s rescue, and the Arboghast’s annihilation should coalesce into a symphonic climax; instead, they feel like disconnected movements in a fractured symphony. The emotional beats land unevenly, with Meng’s victory overshadowing Bobbie’s heroics and the Arboghast’s demise feeling like an afterthought.

That said, the episode’s conclusion lands with chilling precision. Naomi’s confession about the protomolecule sample—and her belief that the Belt must wield it as leverage—sets up Season Three’s central conflict with elegant efficiency. At the time of broadcast, this revelation carried profound real-world weight; The Expanse had been cancelled by Syfy after Season Two, leaving fans in agonising limbo. For months, this cliffhanger threatened to join the ignominious ranks of unresolved sci-fi finales (Firefly, Carnivàle), a cruel tease for a show seemingly abandoned mid-sentence. Only the extraordinary efforts of its devoted fanbase (#SaveTheExpanse) secured its revival on Amazon Prime—a resurrection that transformed this moment from a frustrating dead end into a symbol of the show’s improbable survival.

Ultimately, Caliban’s War is a flawed but fascinating specimen of science fiction television. Its Rocinante sequence alone ranks among The Expanse’s finest hours—a masterclass in blending intellectual problem-solving with visceral tension. Yet the episode’s structural imbalances and wasted potential prevent it from achieving true greatness. In hindsight, however, its very imperfections feel emblematic of The Expanse’s journey—a show that, like its characters, repeatedly defied annihilation through sheer resilience.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/ InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo

InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Leodex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax Rising Star game: https://www.risingstargame.com?referrer=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7 BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9

You know, i generally avoided this series for a long time. Not because of lack of time, but out of pure fear of disappointment. The name – that legacy of the Addams Family – stuck in my throat. I was convinced that it would be a weak attempt to reheat our favorite black humor, transformed into a diluted product. When it comes to reboots, i like to stay away from them, so as not to spoil that perfect memory. I was wrong...blatantly wrong.

What i liked? The fact that it doesn't try to please anyone. Wednesday doesn't smile, doesn't explain herself, doesn't justify herself. She's there, cold, sarcastic, but functional. She doesn't demand empathy, but respect. And that, in the current landscape, is almost revolutionary.

It's not a cinematic achievement you expect to see at a festival. It's an achievement of style. Of absolute coherence. When i saw the idea, i said: Here, the dilution begins. Another iconic character, transformed into streaming bait. I was wrong.

This isn't about laughing with a character. It's about laughing with the idea that a single character is so detached that they ridicule the entire system around them, just by existing.

I don't recommend it out of enthusiasm, it's a cinematic work that works. It would be a shame to miss it just because, like me, you ran away from the title.

Posted Using INLEO

The year 1999 could reasonably be described as the annus horibilis for modern Serbia. In that devastating twelve-month period, Serbia lost control of its historic province of Kosovo following NATO's intervention, was subjected to crippling economic sanctions that brought the nation to its knees, and found itself perceived by much of the international community as a pariah state populated by genocidal monsters unworthy of membership in the civilised world. For ordinary Serbians themselves, however, the most traumatic chapter was undoubtedly the three-month-long aerial bombardment campaign conducted by the US-led NATO coalition, which resulted in the loss of thousands of lives, widespread physical destruction, and profound psychological trauma that would echo through generations. It is precisely from this nadir of national experience that Ljubiša Samardžić, one of Serbia's most successful filmmakers, drew inspiration for his directorial debut Sky Hook—a remarkable cinematic achievement that was conceived and produced merely weeks after the cessation of hostilities, transforming national catastrophe into compelling drama.

Set against the backdrop of the NATO bombing in a Belgrade neighbourhood near an abandoned factory, Sky Hook presents a narrative that centres on Kaja (played by Nebojša Glogovac), a man in his late twenties to early thirties who, like most of his generation, finds himself without meaningful employment in a country ravaged by international sanctions. His days are largely spent in aimless limbo, punctuated only by nightly dashes to bomb shelters and the ever-present anxiety of potential military mobilisation. A former aspiring basketball player, Kaja conceives a project that will give purpose to his otherwise directionless existence: he decides to build a basketball court amidst the rubble of his war-torn neighbourhood. Despite widespread scepticism from friends and neighbours who view the endeavour as futile during such precarious times, Kaja perseveres, braving nightly air raids, dealing with hostility from local street gangs, and managing domestic tensions as his wife Tijana (Ana Sofrenović) contemplates divorce and relocation to Italy with their young mute son Jovan (Ognjen Mirković). His determination ultimately pays off—the court is completed—but in a cruel twist of fate, Kaja is killed by a NATO bomb mere moments after realising his vision, leaving behind a poignant symbol of resilience amidst destruction.

What makes Sky Hook particularly remarkable are the extraordinary circumstances of its creation. Ljubiša Samardžić had previously been one of the greatest, most popular, and most iconic stars of Yugoslav cinema, and his decades of experience before the camera clearly informed his directorial approach. More significantly, Samardžić demonstrated considerable producer acumen by transforming what many would consider insurmountable obstacles into cinematic advantages. Filmed mere weeks after the bombing campaign ended, the film utilised the still uncleared rubble of Belgrade as its natural set, creating an authentic backdrop that would have been prohibitively expensive to recreate artificially. This pragmatic approach allowed Samardžić to craft a film that, despite its relatively modest budget compared to Hollywood productions covering similar subject matter, possesses a visceral authenticity that larger-budgeted international films often lack. The director's ability to work within severe constraints while maintaining artistic integrity represents a triumph of resourcefulness over resources.

The true strength of Sky Hook, however, lies in its screenplay by Srđan Koljević and Đorđe Milosavljević, which eschews the conventional single-protagonist structure in favour of an Altmanesque ensemble approach that captures the multifaceted reality of Belgrade under bombs. Rather than focusing solely on Kaja's basketball court project, the script weaves together the stories of various characters who represent different generations, social classes, and attitudes toward the national predicament. Nikola Kojo delivers a nuanced performance as Zuba, a tattoo artist who served as a federal army conscript in Croatia during Yugoslavia's dissolution and has since adopted a cynical worldview regarding the conflicts that followed. Dragan Bjelogrlić portrays Toza, a small-time criminal who thrived during the UN sanctions era by providing black market goods to desperate citizens. Ivan Jevtović appears as Turča, a Sarajevo refugee whose philosophical approach to the bombing stems from having survived similar experiences during the Bosnian War. Meanwhile, Nikola Đuričko plays Siske, a young man constantly admonished for his lack of ambition by his working-class father Zuka (Irfan Mensur). This rich tapestry of perspectives creates a more comprehensive portrait of Serbian society under duress than any singular narrative could achieve.

Notably, the screenplay generally avoids high politics and makes no attempt to provide broader geopolitical context for the NATO bombing campaign. Instead, the events are portrayed strictly from the perspective of ordinary citizens who, for entirely understandable reasons, harbour deep resentment toward the United States and Western nations responsible for the destruction of their country. The film was produced while Slobodan Milošević's regime—widely regarded internationally as responsible for the 1990s Yugoslav wars—remained in power, yet Samardžić wisely steered clear of any overtly propagandistic elements. There is no explicit justification of Serbian actions in Kosovo, nor is there direct condemnation of NATO's intervention; the focus remains steadfastly on the human experience of ordinary people caught in the crossfire of geopolitical forces beyond their control. This apolitical stance, remarkable given the political climate of the time, allows the film to transcend its immediate context and speak to universal experiences of civilian life during wartime.

Despite its many strengths, Sky Hook stumbles in its final act, succumbing to the very sentimentality it had previously avoided. The film's descent into pathos begins with an ill-advised fantasy sequence in which Kaja enjoys a basketball game with a real-life Serbian basketball stars (appearing in a cameo roles), a moment that feels tonally dissonant with the film's otherwise grounded realism. This is compounded by Kaja's death, which while narratively logical, is handled with such overt dramatic flourish that it risks undermining the authenticity that had characterised the preceding scenes. The sentimentality continues in the film's conclusion, with Jovan—who had been mute throughout the narrative—regaining his speech to provide voiceover narration detailing what happened to the other characters. This narrative device feels like an unnecessary concession to conventional storytelling that diminishes the film's earlier commitment to showing rather than telling.

Premiering at the Berlin Film Festival in February 2000, Sky Hook received generally favourable critical reception, though it was somewhat marginalised due to political sensitivities surrounding its subject matter and fears that it might be interpreted as anti-NATO or anti-Western propaganda. The film's timing proved particularly complex, as it debuted while Milošević's regime remained in power but was released just months before the dramatic political upheaval that would overthrow the Serbian leader in October 2000. Samardžić, ever the opportunist, would later capitalise on this historical moment with his political thriller Natasha, which directly addressed the events surrounding Milošević's fall from grace.

Ultimately, Sky Hook stands as a solid piece of cinema made all the more impressive by the extraordinary circumstances of its production. It represents something of a fresh start for Serbian cinema, which had been largely defined in the preceding decade by either government-sanctioned propaganda or apolitical comedies that avoided engagement with the nation's traumatic recent history. What elevates the film beyond mere historical document, however, is its universal theme of ordinary people finding meaning and purpose amidst extraordinary circumstances. The image of citizens building a basketball court in the rubble of their neighbourhood speaks to a fundamental human impulse to create and normalise even as the world around them collapses—a theme that transcends its specific historical moment. One can easily imagine the film's core narrative being transposed to contemporary settings such as Gaza or Ukraine, where civilians similarly struggle to maintain normalcy while living under bombardment. The film's enduring power lies precisely in this universality—it is not merely a document of Serbian suffering during the NATO bombing, but a testament to human resilience in the face of indiscriminate violence, a message that remains tragically relevant in our contemporary world where urban populations continue to bear the brunt of military conflicts they did not initiate.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/ InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo

InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Leodex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax Rising Star game: https://www.risingstargame.com?referrer=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7 BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9

Posted Using INLEO

Source

Black Bag is one of those spy movies that has good things to make it worth sitting down to watch on a Saturday night. Steven Soderbergh directed this and the guy knows what he's doing after so many years in the business, alongside Michael Fassbender and Cate Blanchett as the starring couple of British intelligence agents who have to deal with a traitor within their organization and at the same time keep their marriage intact which is harder than it really is. The movie isn't very long and that's a relief because lately it seems like everything has to last two and a half hours or more, here Soderbergh knows exactly when to get in and when to get out without staying around going in circles unnecessarily. What I found interesting about Black Bag is that it's not an action movie James Bond style even though it has Pierce Brosnan among the actors but it's more a story about trust and lies within a relationship where both people are professionals trained to deceive and manipulate information. Fassbender plays George a guy who hates liars with all his soul, this character has one thing very clear and that's that truth is the most important thing in his life to the point that when he was younger he screwed up his own father's career because he was unfaithful to his mother, that tells you everything you need to know about this guy and how he operates in the world. Blanchett on the other hand is Kathryn a field agent who is more flexible with the truth let's say, she knows how to lie when necessary and has no problem with that because she understands that in her work sometimes you have to do things that aren't exactly ethical but that are necessary to complete the mission.

Black Bag es una de esas películas de espías que tiene cosas buenas para que valga la pena sentarse a verla un sábado en la noche. Steven Soderbergh dirigió esto y el tipo sabe lo que está haciendo después de tantos años en el negocio, junto a Michael Fassbender y Cate Blanchett como la pareja protagonista de agentes de inteligencia británicos que tienen que lidiar con un traidor dentro de su organización y al mismo tiempo mantener su matrimonio intacto lo cual es más díficil de lo que realmente es. La película no es muy larga y eso es un alivio porque últimamente parece que todo tiene que durar dos horas y media o más, aqui Soderbergh sabe exactamente cuando entrar y cuando salir sin quedarse dando vueltas innecesariamente. Lo que me pareció interesante de Black Bag es que no es una película de acción al estilo James Bond aunque tiene a Pierce Brosnan entre los actores pero es más una historia sobre confianza y mentiras dentro de una relación donde ambas personas son profesionales entrenados para engañar y manipular información. Fassbender interpreta a George un tipo que odia a los mentirosos con toda su alma, este personaje tiene una cosa muy clara y es que la verdad es lo más importante en su vida al punto que cuando era más joven le jodió la carrera a su propio padre porque le fue infiel a su madre, eso te dice todo lo que necesitas saber sobre este tipo y como opera en el mundo. Blanchett por otro lado es Kathryn una agente de campo que es más flexible con la verdad digamos, ella sabe mentir cuando es necesario y no tiene ningun problema con eso porque entiende que en su trabajo a veces hay que hacer cosas que no son exactamente éticas pero que son necesarias para completar la misión.

Source

The relationship between these two is what makes the movie work because I was always wondering if they really trust each other or if everything is part of some bigger game that neither of them wants to admit. The movie opens with a dinner scene that's probably the best thing about it, George and Kathryn have several colleagues at their house for dinner and they're all spies too so you can imagine the level of tension at that table. Tom Burke plays Freddy a guy who clearly has problems with alcohol and with keeping his mouth shut, Marissa Abela is his girlfriend who works in the technology and satellites part, Naomi Harris is the agency's therapist who also has her own secrets and Rege Jean Page appears as another agent. During dinner they decide to play a game where each one has to tell the person to their left something they wish would change about them and everything goes to hell fast because when you put together a bunch of drunk spies playing at telling each other uncomfortable truths nothing good can come out of there, of course the intention of this was that George wanted to discover something, I liked that scene because it's tense and fun at the same time, each one handles the discomfort in different ways and you realize that everyone is hiding something.

La relación entre estos dos es lo que hace que la película funcione porque yo siempre me esutve preguntando si realmente confian el uno en el otro o si todo es parte de algún juego más grande que ninguno de los dos quiere admitir. La película abre con una escena de una cena que es probablemente lo mejor del asunto, George y Kathryn tienen a varios colegas en su casa para cenar y todos son espías también así que ya te imaginaras el nivel de tensión que hay en esa mesa. Tom Burke interpreta a Freddy un tipo que se ve que tiene problemas con el alcohol y con mantener la boca cerrada, Marissa Abela es su novia quien trabaja en la parte de tecnología y satélites, Naomi Harris es la terapeuta de la agencia que también tiene sus propios secretos y Rege Jean Page aparece como otro agente más. Durante la cena deciden jugar un juego donde cada uno tiene que decirle a la persona de su izquierda algo que quisiera que cambiara de ella y todo se va al carajo rápido porque cuando juntas a un montón de espías borrachos jugando a decirse verdades incomodas nada bueno puede salir de ahí, claro la intención de esto era que George quería descubrir algo, me gustó esa escena porque es tensa y divertida al mismo tiempo, cada uno maneja la incomodidad de maneras diferentes y te das cuenta de que todos están escondiendo algo.

Source

Source

What happened was that George received information that there's a traitor within the organization and he has a list of five suspects including his own wife which is a pretty big problem considering that he's in charge of the investigation. From there the movie becomes a cat and mouse game where George has to find out who the traitor is without revealing too much of what he knows and without making Kathryn suspect that he suspects her if he really suspects because the truth is you're never completely sure of anything in this movie. After dinner he finds a movie ticket in the trash that Kathryn never mentioned going to the movies and that puts him in detective mode, so he takes her to the movies to see her reaction during a scary scene and observes whether she had already seen the movie before or not, it's the kind of psychological shit that only someone like Fassbender can make look believable because the guy has that ability to stay quiet and just stare at you until you feel uncomfortable and start confessing things without him having said a single word. The lie detector part is also good where George interrogates all the suspects and each one responds differently, some ask why he's asking them those questions, others give vague answers that don't compromise anyone and one in particular gives very specific answers that make you think he knows exactly what's happening.

Lo que pasó fue que George recibió una información de que hay un traidor dentro de la organización y tiene una lista de cinco sospechosos incluyendo a su propia esposa lo que es un problema bastante grande considerando que el está a cargo de la investigación. A partir de ahi la película se convierte en un juego del gato y el ratón donde George tiene que averiguar quien es el traidor sin revelar demasiado de lo que sabe y sin hacer que Kathryn sospeche que el sospecha de ella si es que realmente sospecha porque la verdad nunca estas completamente seguro de nada en esta película. Luego de la cena el encuentra un boleto de cine en la basura que Kathryn nunca menciono haber ido al cine y eso lo pone en modo detective, entonces la lleva al cine para ver su reacción durante una escena de susto y observa si ella ya había visto la película antes o no, es el tipo de mierda psicológica que solo alguien como Fassbender puede hacer ver creíble porque el tipo tiene esa capacidad de quedarse callado y solo mirarte fijamente hasta que te sientes incomodo y empiezas a confesar cosas sin que el haya dicho una sola palabra. La parte del detector de mentiras también es buena donde George interroga a todos los sospechosos y cada uno responde de manera diferente, algunos preguntan porque les está haciendo esas preguntas, otros dan respuestas vagas que no comprometen a nadie y uno en particular da respuestas muy específicas que te hacen pensar que sabe exactamente lo que esta pasando.

Source

What I liked about Black Bag is that it doesn't try to be smarter than it is, if you know something about British spy movies you'll probably guess some of the twists before they happen but that doesn't ruin what you're watching. The final part where everything is revealed happens during another dinner which I thought was a good parallel with the opening scene and you realize how all the characters have changed since then, there's a moment where Blanchett pulls a gun from her purse and points it at the real traitor who turns out to be someone that honestly I didn't see coming because I was thinking it was someone completely different. Pierce Brosnan has a part where he admits he knew what was happening all along but decided to let things happen naturally like that to see who came out alive in the end, his character is interesting because he's like an older and more tired version of the spies that he himself played in the Bond movies twenty years ago. I liked that the movie looks very clean without unnecessary shots, everything that appears has a purpose and nothing feels like filler which makes the movie's pace maintain itself and doesn't feel like they wanted to stretch everything as much as possible.

Lo que me gustó de Black Bag es que no trata de ser más inteligente de lo que es, si sabes algo sobre películas de espías británicas probablemente vas a adivinar algunos de los giros antes de que sucedan pero eso no arruina llega a arruinar lo que uno está viendo. La parte final donde todo se descubre pasa durante otra cena lo que me pareciío un buen paralelo con la escena de nicio y uno se da cuenta como todos los personajes han cambiado desde entonces, hay un momento donde Blanchett saca una pistola de su bolso y apunta al verdadero traidor que resulta ser alguien que honestamente yo no vi venir porque estaba pensando que era otra persona completamente diferente. Pierce Brosnan tiene una parte donde admite que sabía lo que estaba pasando todo el tiempo pero decidió dejar que las cosas se dieram así de forma natural para ver quien salía vivo al final, su personaje es interesante porque es como una versión mayor y mas cansada de los espías que el mismo hizo en las películas de Bond hace veinte años. Me gustó que la pelí se ve muy limpia sin tomas innecesarias, cada cosa que sale tiene un propósito y nada se siente como relleno lo que hace que el ritmo de la peli se mantenga y no se sienta como si quisieron alargar todo lo más posible.

Source

Now what I didn't like much is that after building up all that tension the ending seemed somewhat quick to me, everything got resolved in a minute and although it makes sense within the story's logic I would have liked to see a bit more of the consequences of everything that happened. There was also something that seemed to me was left unresolved or well within an organization of that caliber and with so much power that some have maybe you can't do justice with everyone but I would have liked to see them fire someone there or retire them. But overall it's a good story that keeps you entertained for the time it lasts without asking you to turn off your brain completely because you have to pay attention to see if you discover who the mole is, there you doubt everyone. Fassbender and Blanchett have excellent chemistry and you believe they're a couple that's been together for years and that they know each other so well they can read each other's lies without much effort. So if you like spy movies that are more cerebral than physical then Black Bag is definitely worth your time, my score for this movie is 7.5/10.

Ahora lo que no me gustó mucho es que después de acuemular toda esa tensión el final me pareció algo rápido, todo se resolvió en un minuto y aunque tiene sentido dentro de la lógica de la historia me hubiera gustado ver un poco más de las consecuencias de todo lo que paso. También hubo algo que me apreció que quedó sin resolver o bueno dentro de una organización de ese calibre y con tanto poder qu ienen algunos quizás no se puede hacer justicia con todos pero me hubiese gustado ver que despidieran a uno por allí o lo jubilaran. Pero en general es una buena historia que te mantiene entretenido por el tiempo que dura sin pedirte que apagues tu cerebro completamente porque hay que estar pendiente para ver si uno descubre quien es el infiltrado, allí uno duda de todo el mundo. Fassbender y Blanchett tienen una química excelente y uno se cree que son una pareja que ha estado junta por años y que se conocen tan bien que pueden leer las mentiras del otro sin mucho esfuerzo. Así que si te gustan las películas de espías que son más cerebrales que físicas entonces Black Bag definitivamente vale tu tiempo, mi puntuación para esta peli es 7.5/10.

"Translated to English with DeepL"

Posted Using INLEO