Longform reviews of films, TV, anime, books, and audiobooks, written by the scrobble.life community and published to the Hive blockchain, so each one is owned by its author and can earn rewards from readers. 51,242 reviews and counting.
Source/ Image edited with Canva/ Imagen editada con Canva
The first season of the first series of the highly successful Alien saga recently ended. For years, this series has been the subject of much discussion because it has presented us with a variety of possibilities surrounding the Xenomorphs.
Alien: Planet Earth introduces us to a world in which Earth does not have a traditional government but is divided between five large corporations, which exercise political and military control over territories and colonies in space, establishing a form of corporate geopolitical government. Among these corporations is Weyland-Yutani, one of the most recognized and powerful.
As far as we can see, this series takes place two years before Alien, the film that started the saga. Now, this series begins with a jump in events, which are explained later on. The first two episodes are very good because they are full of action.
But it also presents us with something refreshing by introducing other elements into this universe, such as the fact that human consciousness can be transferred to the minds of synthetic bodies, transforming them into tactical soldiers, and that this ship was not only carrying xenomorph eggs, but also other very interesting species.
In this installment, we see two specimens of xenomorphs. Remember that these adopt characteristics depending on their hosts, as well as how corporations abuse their employees, something that is not suggested in other installments.
At times, the episodes are very weak because they focus on the psyche of some of the characters, with the aim of helping us understand how extremes or absences can cause imbalance, as well as how not having enough maturity or malice can make us vulnerable to others.
Now, returning to the other aliens present in this series, we have a space tick that lives on blood, but they are not basic beings; they show intelligence. There are also carnivorous plants and an eye with tentacles that not only takes the place of the eye it supplants in the living being it attacks, but goes even further.
Now, is this series worth watching? If you are a fan of what has been the Alien saga so far, you will most likely be disappointed, as they do not give the xenomorphs the full spotlight and also show us one of them that is, let's say, domesticated, which for me is very difficult, if not impossible. I think what they are actually presenting us with is a connection between the xenomorph and one of the central characters because they can communicate, but it is still unclear how this happened.
Personally, for me, Alien is a saga that shows us the attempts to take advantage of and exploit the xenomorphs, which has cost the Weyland corporation millions and lives, always ending in disaster. These disasters are what make it interesting to see who survives and how they do it in each installment.
In summary, Alien: Planet Earth could have exploited some of the new elements it introduced more, but perhaps they are betting on doing so in its second season, if it happens. I give this series a 4 out of 10.
I don't know if the series will be renewed, but I found it very, very slow after its second episode, and the audience's criticism in many cases was not the best.
Versión Español (Pulse aquí)
Hace poco terminó la emisión de la primera temporada de la primera serie de la muy exitosa saga, la de Alíen, que durante años nos ha dado de que hablar porque nos ha presentado diversidad de posibilidades en torno a los Xenomorfos.
Alíen Planeta Tierra, nos introduce en un ambiente en el que la Tierra no tiene un gobierno tradicional, está dividida entre cinco grandes corporaciones, las cuales ejercen control político y militar sobre territorios y colonias en el espacio, estableciendo, así como forma de gobierno una geopolítica corporativa, entre estas corporaciones se encuentra Weyland-Yutani una de las más reconocidas y poderosas.
Hasta donde se ve esta serie nos ubica en el año dos años antes de "Alien-El Octavo pasajero", la película que dio comienzo a la saga. Ahora esta serie comienza con un salto en los eventos, los cuales nos los explican más adelante. Sus dos primeros dos capítulos son muy buenos porque estan llenos de acción .
Pero también nos presenta algo refrescante al introducir otros elementos en este universo como por ejemplo el que las conciencias de seres humanos pueden ser trasferidas a las mentes de cuerpos sintéticos, transformándolos en soldados tácticos, también el que esta nave no solo trasportaba huevos de xenomorfos, también otras especies muy interesantes.
En esta entrega vemos dos especímenes de xenomorfos. Recordemos que estos adoptan características dependiendo de sus anfitriones, también como las corporaciones abusan de sus empleados, algo que no es sugerido en otras entregas
En algunos momentos los capítulos son muy flojos, porque se centran en la psiquis de algunos de los personajes, esto con el propósito de ayudarnos entender como los extremos o ausencias pueden desequilibrar, también como el no tener la suficiente madurez o malicia nos puede volver vulnerables ante otros.
Ahora volviendo a lo de otros alienígenas presentes en esta serie tenemos como una garrapata espacial, vive de sangre, pero no son seres básicos, muestran inteligencia, también hay plantas carnívoras, un ojo con tentáculos que toma no solo el lugar del ojo que suplanta en el ser vivo al que ataca, va más allá.
Ahora, ¿vale la pena esta serie? Si eres un fan de lo que hasta ahora ha sido la saga de alien, es muy probable que te decepciones, pues no le dan el total protagonismo a los xenomorfos y además nos muestran uno de ellos digamos que domesticado, cosa que para mí es muy difícil por no decir que imposible, creo que en realidad nos presentan es una conexión entre xenomorfo y uno de los personajes centrales porque se pueden comunicar, pero todavía no queda claro como ocurrió esto.
En lo personal para mi Alien es una saga, nos muestra los intentos de aprovechar y explotar a los xenomorfos, lo que ha costado millones y perdida de vidas a la corporación Weyland, terminando siempre en desastre y, estos desastres, son lo interesante de ver en cada entrega quien sobrevive y como lo logra.
En resumen, Alíen Planeta Tierra, pudo haber explotado más algunos de los nuevos elementos que introdujo, pero tal vez están apostando a hacerlo en su segunda temporada, si es que se da, yo le doy a esta serie un 4 de 10.
Desconozco si la seria logrará una renovación, pero la sentí muy, pero muy lenta, luego de su segundo capítulo y la crítica del público en muchos casos no fue la mejor.
An action movie became a huge success because of the way they managed to create every second of it, and years later they continued to achieve success and take those movies to another level, such as the great John With franchise, a series of films characterized by being the best action movies and, above all, each of the missions they have to carry out in order to make them even more exciting. They are now on their fourth film, and we don't know if they will release a fifth. However, in order to develop each of these films, they need a great team and, most importantly, a director who can carry out the entire project, being the best and finding the formula to make these films a success and ensure they are always well remembered.
That's why a documentary called Wick is Pain was recently released, containing a lot of important and interesting information and things that had never come to light when John With's films were released. This adds value because it allows us to see the directors' opinions, how these scenes are created, and all the physical, mental, and emotional work that goes into putting together a whole film. Therefore, it will be more than hours of documentary explaining every detail from the first installment to the last and perhaps the next ones, as well as a franchise that changed the course of action movies and that is why today almost all of them have the same pattern, since when something works well, everyone takes the same path.
Una película de acción se convirtió en todo un éxito por la manera como lograron crear cada segundo de la misma y años después siguieron consiguiendo éxitos y llevar esas películas a otro nivel como lo es la gran franquicia de John With, una saga de películas que se caracterizan por ser las mejores de acción y sobre todo cada una de las misiones que tienen que hacer para así poder darle mucha más emoción, la cual ya van por la cuarta y no sabremos que si sacaran la quinta. Sin embargo, para poder desarrollar cada una de esas películas necesitan un gran equipo de trabajo y lo más importante, un director que lleve a cabo todo ese proyecto siendo el mejor y encontró la fórmula para que estas películas se convirtieran en todo un éxito y siempre sean muy bien recordadas.
Por eso hace poco se estrenó un documental conocido como Wick is Pain con mucha información importante, interesante y cosas que jamás habían salido a la luz cuando se estrenaban las películas de John With, algo que le aporta valor por el mismo de hecho de poder ver la opinión de los directores, como se crean dichas escenas y todo ese trabajo físico, mental y emocional que tiene que pasar para así poder armar toda una película. Por lo tanto, será más de horas de documental explicando cada detalle desde la primera entrega hasta la última y quizás las próximas, además una franquicia que cambió el rumbo de las películas de acción y por eso hoy en días casi todas tienen el mismo patrón, ya que cuando algo sale bien todos toman ese mismo camino.
Making that kind of movie and continuing to grow has its consequences, and the slightest mistake can end it all. In part, they emphasize stopping the entire project because of everything it involved, and that's where decision-making comes into play, knowing that it could be something big or a failure. This applies to many movie franchises that are successful today. Wick is Pain offers many valuable things, and behind it were two directors who were instrumental in developing the first film. After that, they parted ways, leaving the entire project vulnerable and requiring a change in order to continue, given that the first installment of John With was a hit and they knew that with a few improvements, more action, and less filler, the sequels would also be a success.
Hacer ese tipo de película y que cada vez siga creciendo, tiene sus consecuencias y el mínimo error puede terminar todo, la cual en una parte hacen énfasis en parar todo el proyecto por todo lo que estaba implicando y es allí donde entra en juego la toma de decisiones en saber que puede ser algo grande o un fracaso y esto aplica para muchas franquicias de películas que hoy en día son un éxito. Wick is Pain brinda muchas cosas de valor y detrás de eso existían dos directores que fueron los principales en poder desarrollar la primera película y después de eso, se separa y todo el proyecto queda vulnerable y tocó hacer un cambio, para así poder continuar por el mismo hecho de que la primera entrega de John With brilló y sabían que con un par de mejoras, más acción y menos relleno las siguientes también iban a ser todo un éxito.
The main thing that characterizes these films, beyond their scenes, effects, and every detail that makes them so good, are the stunts they perform in them. He mentions that many of them are real and that it's easy to see that in the film, However, behind the scenes are the people who have to put their lives at risk to perform these stunts so that the scene can be filmed, all in order to create a good movie. This is something we can see in the third and fourth films of the series, and it is here that we ask ourselves, “Is it worth risking your life for a movie?” And many other things that have a great impact and that the viewer does not see in the film.
Another thing is the role that John With takes on when putting together an entire film, which requires him to be there as long as necessary, working and giving his best at all times. What's impressive is that he does every scene himself, which is why he always earns everyone's respect in each of the films for being the best. Even though he is always taking orders from the directors, he is an actor who knows how to do his job, and despite his age, he still has a lot to do and can continue to take this franchise to the top.
Lo principal por lo que se caracteriza estas películas más allá de sus escenas, los efectos y cada detalle que permite que sea muy bueno son las acrobacias que hacen en la misma y menciona que muchas de ellas son reales y uno en la película lo ve de una manera muy fácil, sin embargo, detrás de eso están esas personas que tienen que poner su vida en riesgo para hacer dicha acrobacia y así poder grabar la escena, todo sea con el fin de poder crear una buena película y estos es algo que lo podemos ver en la tercera y cuarta película de la saga y es aquí donde nos preguntamos ¿Valdrá la pena arriesgar la vida por una película? Y muchas otras cosas que son de gran impacto y uno como espectador no ve en la película.
Otras de las cosas es ese papel que toma John With al momento de armar toda una película lo cual requiere de estar allí todo el tiempo que sea necesario, trabajar y dar lo mejor en cada momento y lo impresionante es cada escena lo hace el mismo y por eso es que siempre se gana el respeto de todos en cada una de las películas por ser el mejor y a pesar de que siempre está recibiendo órdenes de los directores es un actor que sabe hacer sus cosas y a pesar de la edad que tiene aún le queda mucho poder hacer y seguir llevando esta franquicia a la cima.
A very good documentary, and very rarely do I see something like this. As a fan of John With's great franchise, it undoubtedly has many important things to offer, and one is left speechless by everything he has to go through and do in order to put together an entire film from start to finish, with the clear goal of always being the best. This documentary, Wick is Pain, is a great testament to the fact that when things are done with love, dedication, and without mistakes, anything can be achieved, and the result is evident in each of the John Wick films.
Un documental muy bueno y muy pocas son las veces que veo algo como esto, sin duda como fanático de esta gran franquicia de John With tiene muchas cosas importantes y una se queda sin palabras por todo lo que tiene que pasar y hacer para así poder armar toda una película desde el momento que inicia hasta que termina, con el objetivo claro de siempre ser la mejor y este documental de Wick is Pain es un gran testimonio de que cuando las cosas se hacen con amor, dedicación y sin errores se logra lo que sea y el resultado se nota en cada una de las películas de John Wick.
All the applause in the first season felt like a warning I did not want to hear. The smiles of heroes hiding their cruelty made me question every instinct I had about who deserves admiration. Homelander’s charm concealed tyranny so well that I found myself cheering and recoiling at the same time. The Boys does not offer comfort. It forces you to stare at the spectacle and recognize your own complicity. Every laugh carries a sting, every shocking moment reminds me that fascination and disgust can coexist in ways I did not expect. Watching became less about entertainment and more about acknowledging what we reward without noticing.
Bravery takes strange forms in later seasons. Butcher moves between hero and monster, dragging vengeance into places that reveal its futility. Annie bends innocence until it becomes performance, forced under constant scrutiny. Supporting characters act as reflections, showing desires and hypocrisies that feel unsettlingly familiar. The story never tells me who to root for or condemn. It trusts me to recognize the patterns in my own life as I watch them unfold. That trust makes the satire sharper. The tension between laughter and moral unease becomes the heartbeat of the series.
Cinema breathes in every frame. Lighting elevates violence into ritual, the camera lingers where it should shock, and the soundtrack turns horror into spectacle. The show choreographs complicity, using beauty to expose corruption. I felt caught between fascination and resistance. The elegance of the production mirrored the attraction to power the show critiques. Every stylistic choice reinforces the message that spectacle can seduce and betray simultaneously. The Boys converts the format of superheroes into a tool for reflection, forcing the audience to see the emptiness behind the iconography we consume as entertainment.
Different archetypes carry sharper truths than exposition ever could. Patriotic icons conceal cruelty, avengers become absorbed by the systems they oppose, and innocence performs under public scrutiny. The cracks feel familiar, echoes of societies where virtue and vice share the same stage. The satire succeeds because it never pretends to simplify or reassure. Each exaggeration mirrors a reality we resist admitting, making absurdity compelling and uncomfortable at once. Watching characters unravel felt like watching society unravel, revealing how narratives are elevated even as they devour the ones who tell them.
Even now, after every season, the show lingers in thought. The Boys becomes less about heroes and villains and more about the gaze that elevates them. I feel implicated, aware that applause often hides complicity. Closure never arrives, leaving unease tangled with recognition and reluctant admiration. The monsters are only powerful because the audience allows them to be, and that realization unsettles more than any fight or explosion. The Boys does not instruct or console; it insists on recognition, reflection, and the difficult awareness that we often celebrate the very power we should question.
In David Simon’s meticulously rendered Baltimore, change occurs with a glacial pace, yet once set in motion, those tectonic shifts become utterly unstoppable. The city’s institutions and its inhabitants are caught in a current where adaptation, however painful or imperfect, often yields marginally better outcomes than futile resistance, which merely accelerates one’s demise. This profound truth, central to the series’ worldview, finds a potent and tragic illustration in Season 3’s pivotal episode, Reformation. Here, amidst the crumbling edifices of the drug trade, the police department, and city hall, multiple narratives converge to demonstrate how attempts at radical change – whether born of desperation, ambition, or genuine idealism – inevitably collide with the immovable bedrock of systemic inertia, political expediency, and human frailty, leaving devastation in their wake.
The episode’s title, "Reformation," resonates with bitter irony across several plotlines, but its most immediate and catastrophic application is to Major Howard "Bunny" Colvin’s audacious, clandestine drug decriminalisation experiment. Establishing de facto "free zones" – the infamous Hamsterdam – in the most blighted corners of West Baltimore, Colvin sought to corral the open-air drug markets, drastically reduce violent crime plaguing residential streets, and redirect police resources towards more serious offences. Crucially, Colvin operated with the fatalistic certainty, etched deep within him, that regardless of the scheme’s measurable success – and by conventional metrics, it was succeeding, with street-level violence plummeting spectacularly – it would ultimately come crashing down. The sheer scale of the moral and legal compromises demanded proved unsustainable; the experiment required turning a blind eye to rampant drug use and associated petty crime within the zones, tolerating a parallel, albeit regulated, criminal economy, and fundamentally violating the oath every officer takes. These burdens proved too heavy for some of Colvin’s subordinates. It is precisely this fragility that Herc exploits, tipping off Baltimore Sun reporters. Their subsequent visit to Hamsterdam transforms Colvin’s controlled experiment into an imminent public scandal. Cornered, Colvin resorts to desperate, short-term damage control, spinning elaborate lies to the press about an ongoing "major investigation" and barely securing a week-long reprieve – a stay of execution bought with fiction.
Yet, this reprieve proves as ephemeral as the free zones themselves. Recognising the inevitable, Colvin chooses to confess his scheme directly to Commissioner Ervin Burrell and Deputy Commissioner William Rawls. Their reaction transcends mere anger; it is volcanic fury directed less at the policy’s merits (or lack thereof) and far more at Colvin’s breathtaking insubordination and open flouting of the law. To them, he hasn’t just broken rules; he has shattered the fundamental chain of command and exposed the department to catastrophic political fallout. Colvin, anticipating this, accepts his immediate removal from command and a humiliating "vacation" – a bureaucratic purgatory. His last-ditch effort, presenting letters of support from community leaders praising Hamsterdam’s tangible reduction in violence, is dismissed by Burrell with contemptuous indifference. However, the political fallout escalates when Burrell must report to Mayor Clarence Royce. Facing the Mayor’s wrath and his own potential dismissal, Burrell desperately attempts to salvage his position by using Colvin’s very letters of community support – the same evidence he scorned when Colvin offered it – a cynical, last-gasp manoeuvre that proves utterly futile against Royce’s righteous indignation. The system, once threatened, reflexively protects its own hierarchy, sacrificing the innovator while the underlying problems remain unaddressed.
Simultaneously, the inevitable unraveling of Hamsterdam mirrors the equally inexorable consequences of the schism within the Barksdale Organisation. Avon Barksdale’s forces have struck back against Marlo Stanfield, eliminating some of his soldiers, but the escalating, brutal war unnerves Proposition Joe and the other Co-Op partners. They present Stringer Bell with a stark ultimatum: make peace with Marlo, however humiliating the terms, or be expelled from the Co-Op, losing access to their vital supply of high-quality narcotics. Avon, enraged by Marlo’s vicious retaliation against the "honeytrap" Devonne, refuses any notion of truce. Stringer, his vision fixed on legitimate business aspirations but increasingly disillusioned by Senator Clay Davis’s obvious corruption and the financial drain, chooses a treacherous path. Lacking Avon’s street credibility and physical force, Stringer makes the fateful, cold-blooded decision to eliminate his partner by contacting Colvin’s detectives, hoping the police will do his dirty work. It is a betrayal born of rational calculation utterly divorced from the street code, highlighting Stringer’s fatal disconnect from the world he seeks to transcend.
On another front, the Barksdale Organisation faces the relentless pressure of McNulty and Freamon’s investigation. Embracing a legally dubious but operationally brilliant tactic, they initiate a scheme involving pre-marked burner phones peddled to dealers. Freamon, posing as a con artist specialising in phone fraud, successfully dupes the organisation’s naive street lieutenant, Bernard. The necessary wiretap warrant, secured only through the ethically murky exploitation of Judge Phelan’s infatuation with Assistant State’s Attorney Rhonda Pearlman, underscores the pervasive moral compromises inherent in the system. Pearlman’s calculated flirting, conducted even in the presence of her current lover, Lieutenant Cedric Daniels, exemplifies the transactional nature of power within the city’s institutions.
Meanwhile, the realm of Baltimore politics descends further into cynical calculation. Tommy Carcetti, shedding any lingering idealism, confronts the brutal reality that his path to the Mayor’s office requires fracturing the Black vote. He coldly decides to manipulate his friend and colleague, Councilman Anthony Gray, into running against the incumbent, Royce, purely as a spoiler. Gray, oblivious to Carcetti’s machinations and his own limitations as a candidate, becomes the perfect pawn. Carcetti then plots with his advisor, Theresa D'Agostino, and his predominantly white allies, who cynically discuss "sprinkling" Black faces onto campaign materials to render it "less monochromatic." This subplot lays bare the machinery of racial politics, where tokenism is deployed for electoral advantage, revealing the hollowness beneath progressive veneers.
Amidst this institutional decay, however, emerges a genuinely redemptive arc: Cutty Wise’s profound reformation. Having recently exited "the game" and briefly been drawn into the escalating drug war, Cutty commits himself to establishing a boxing gym for neighbourhood youths. His initial efforts founder on the rocks of his own inexperience as a coach and the kids’ deep-seated rejection of authority figures. Yet, unlike the grand, doomed schemes of Colvin or Stringer, Cutty’s response is characterised by resilience. He refuses to abandon his mission, choosing instead to grant himself, and crucially, the sceptical youth, a second chance. His reformation is quiet, persistent, and grounded in the daily grind of earning trust, offering a stark, hopeful counterpoint to the catastrophic failures elsewhere.
As these internal pressures mount, Baltimore is further destabilised by the return of an external force: Brother Mouzone. Concluding his previous visit left business unfinished, he arrives determined to settle scores with those he holds responsible for his wounding – Omar Little or Stringer Bell. To reach Omar, he dispatches his hapless, openly homophobic associate Lamar to a Baltimore gay bar, tasked with finding Omar’s lover, Dante. The plan, chillingly efficient in its exploitation of prejudice and vulnerability, works with terrifying ease.
Written by Ed Burns, Reformation stands as a masterclass in The Wire’s unparalleled narrative architecture. Multiple, complex plotlines – policing, the drug trade, politics, personal redemption – are woven together with seamless coherence, each strand reflecting and refracting the central themes of institutional failure and the human cost of systemic dysfunction. The episode brims with sharp, often darkly humorous observations: Rawls’s casual patronage of the same gay bar targeted by Lamar inadvertently revealing his own sexuality; Burrell’s desperate, hypocritical deployment of community support arguments he previously dismissed; the sheer, grim cynicism permeating Carcetti’s political calculus.
Furthermore, the episode delivers a devastating character study of Jimmy McNulty. Despite the apparent professional success of the wiretap operation, McNulty’s profound social ineptitude is laid bare. His self-destructive inability to forge meaningful connections beyond his obsessive work has alienated his wife, estranged him from superiors past and present, and even distanced him from the previously idealised D'Agostino. His professional triumphs are utterly hollow, accentuating a loneliness that seems increasingly terminal.
Yet, for all its brilliance, Reformation occasionally stumbles into the territory of preachiness, a minor flaw in an otherwise flawless season. This manifests most prominently in another grand soliloquy from Colvin, this time directed at Carver, where he articulates the series’ (and Simon’s) scathing critique of the futile War on Drugs and the need for radical policing reform. While powerful, the speech risks substituting character for mouthpiece. Colvin is positioned as a flawed moral anchor – a man of principle who chose the wrong, illegal path – whose professional trajectory plummets catastrophically in this episode. This descent creates a profound thematic counterpoint to Cutty’s genuine, grassroots reformation. Where Colvin’s top-down, systemic attempt at change shatters against institutional rigidity, Cutty’s bottom-up, personal transformation, however arduous, offers a flicker of authentic hope, suggesting that meaningful change, if possible, must often begin at the individual level, outside the corrupted machinery of power.
Finally, viewed from the vantage point of the present day, Reformation possesses a poignant historical specificity. Colvin’s entire Hamsterdam experiment hinges on operating in the shadows, shielded from immediate public exposure. The notion that such a radical, city-sanctioned (if unofficially) decriminalisation zone could remain hidden long enough to even be attempted is utterly implausible in an era saturated with ubiquitous phone cameras and instant social media dissemination. The episode is thus firmly anchored in the pre-digital surveillance landscape of the early 2000s, a time when secrets, however large, could still linger in the Baltimore twilight for a fleeting, doomed moment. This temporal context adds another layer to the tragedy: Colvin’s experiment wasn’t just politically impossible; in the contemporary world, it would be logistically unfeasible from the outset. Reformation ultimately serves as a stark elegy for a specific moment in time and a brutal lesson: in Simon’s Baltimore, even the most well-intentioned attempts to bend the rigid structures of power are met with crushing force, leaving only the slow, painful, and often solitary work of personal redemption as a viable, if fragile, path forward.
I was thinking about running another contest, with all those "organizational formalities" designed to better segregate content. However, this time I've decided to do something different. Throughout the month of October, I'll be curating a special selection, focusing solely on horror and thriller movies, because Halloween is a fantastic time to write about movies within these genres. So, let's do this (just right now)!
If you'd like to participate, simply write a review of any horror or thriller movie. Then, if you'd like, simply post the link to your post in the comments section of this post (which will act as a sort of "container" for me to see all the content that's already been published), as this will facilitate the curation process (which will be handled solely by me, even if each participant doesn't post their original links here in this post).
Above, I mentioned links (in the plural) because more than one post per user will be allowed, meaning you may have the opportunity to win rewards more than once. Speaking of rewards, absolutely all users that are chosen by me, will win some kind of prize, including HIVE POWER delegations, as well as HIVE and CINE tokens (from the @cinetv project). However, this is a surprise that you'll learn about very soon. For now... Dedicate yourself to writing the posts.
Every week, I'll publish a new post with the winners. This means that over the next three weekends (before Halloween), there will be three different opportunities for you to be chosen. After that (after Halloween), I'll publish another post with the final prizes (which will be attractive to the winners, I can guarantee). Be very creative and authentic in your choices and especially, in how you write your texts.
That's it for now, folks. I hope to count on the participation of all of you. See ya!
¿Truco o trato? | Si te gusta escribir reseñas de películas, estate atento a esta publicación.
Estaba pensando en organizar otro concurso, con todas esas formalidades organizativas diseñadas para separar mejor el contenido. Sin embargo, esta vez he decidido hacer algo diferente. A lo largo de octubre, seleccionaré una selección especial, centrada exclusivamente en películas de terror y suspense, porque Halloween es una época fantástica para escribir sobre películas de estos géneros. ¡Entonces vamos a escribir (ahora mismo)!
Si quieres participar, simplemente escribe una reseña de cualquier película de terror o suspense. Después, si lo deseas, simplemente publica el link a tu publicación en la sección de comentarios de esta publicación (que servirá como un "contenedor" para que vea todo el contenido ya publicado), ya que esto facilitará el proceso de selección (del que me encargaré exclusivamente yo, incluso si cada participante no publica sus links originales aquí en esta publicación).
Mencioné los links (en plural) porque se permitirá más de una publicación por usuario, lo que significa que podrían tener la oportunidad de ganar recompensas más de una vez. Hablando de recompensas, absolutamente todos los usuarios que sean elegidos por mí, ganarán algún tipo de premio, incluyendo delegaciones de HIVE POWER, así como HIVE y tokens de CINE (del proyecto @cinetv). Sin embargo, esto es una sorpresa que descubrirán muy pronto. Por ahora... Dedíquense a escribir las publicaciones.
Cada semana, publicaré una nueva publicación con los ganadores. Esto significa que durante los próximos tres fines de semana (antes de Halloween), habrá tres oportunidades diferentes para que sean elegidos. Después (después de Halloween), publicaré otra publicación con los premios finales (que serán atractivos para los ganadores, les garantizo). Sé muy creativo y auténtico en tus elecciones y sobre todo, en cómo escribes tus textos.
Eso es todo por ahora. Espero contar con la participación de todos vosotros. ¡Saludos!
Doces ou Travessuras? | Se você gosta de escrever reviews de filmes, fique atento a esse post.
Eu estava pensando em promover mais um concurso com todas aquelas “formalidades organizacionais” que são feitas para uma melhor segregação de conteúdos. No entanto, desta vez eu decidi fazer algo diferente. Durante todo mês de outubro, eu estarei fazendo uma curadoria especial, tendo como base apenas os filmes de horror e suspense, porque o Halloween é uma época sensacional para se escrever sobre os filmes dentro desses gêneros cinematográficos. Então vamos em frente!
Quem quiser participar, basta apenas escrever um review sobre qualquer filme de horror ou suspense. Em seguida, se quiser, é só publicar o link do seu post na sessão de comentários deste post (que irá funcionar como uma espécie de “container”, para eu veja todos os conteúdos que já foram publicados) porque isso facilitará no processo de curadoria (que será feito unicamente por mim, ainda que cada participante não publique os links originalmente aqui neste post).
Acima eu falei links (no plural) porque serão permitidas mais de uma publicação por usuário, ou seja, vocês podem ter a oportunidade de ganhar recompensas mais de uma vez. Falando em recompensas, absolutamente todos os usuários que forem escolhidos por mim, irão ganhar alguma premiação, dentre elas: delegações de HIVE POWER, além HIVE e tokens CINE (do projeto @cinetv). No entanto, essa é uma surpresa que vocês saberão muito em breve. Por enquanto... Se dediquem a escrever os posts.
Semanalmente, eu publicarei um novo post com os escolhidos para receber alguma premiação. Isso quer dizer que ao longo dos próximos três finais de semana (antes do Halloween), haverá três oportunidades diferentes para vocês serem escolhidos. Depois disso (após o Halloween), eu publicarei um outro post com as premiações finais (que serão atrativas aos vencedores, isso eu posso garantir). Sejam muito criativos e autênticos em suas escolhas e principalmente, em como irão escrever os seus textos.
Por enquanto é isso, pessoal. Espero contar com a participação de todos vocês. Até breve!
Hello everyone, dear Movies and TV Shows community, I hope you're all doing great. This time, I'm going to talk a little about a movie that I really liked. Today I'll give you my personal opinions on it: A Real Pain. I went into it out of curiosity, mostly because of the names that sounded familiar, and I came out feeling like I had experienced something that really touched you, even if it wasn't always the most comfortable thing in the world. Believe me, I've been turning it over in my head. To begin with, let's talk about Jesse Eisenberg. We can all remember him, the actor who speaks really fast, with that semi-neurotic energy in "The Social Network" –his Mark Zuckerberg was crazy– or the endearing survivor, against all odds, in "Zombieland".
He has that very particular vibe, and it's really interesting to see him now jump into the director's chair. It's not just a movie where he acts; He also wrote and directed it. This is his second film as a director, after When You're Done Saving the World, so I was intrigued to see how he'd evolved. And wow! You can really notice the change here. He's definitely got the hang of it, his voice is more grounded, and the plot sounds pretty laid-back to begin with. Eisenberg plays David, who is basically the typical Jesse Eisenberg character we've come to expect: anxious, kind of clumsy, deep in his own problems. He reunites with his cousin, Benji, played by the brilliant Kieran Culkin, after a long time without seeing each other. The reason for their reunion? His grandmother, the woman who was sort of the breadwinner of the family, died recently. She was Polish, and to remember her, they decide to travel to Poland to connect with their roots and say goodbye in a more intimate way, visiting the places where she was from.
Now, Benji... Benji is the other side of the David coin... he's extroverted to the max, impulsive, charming, but one of those who gives you a bit of a thrill, and honestly, a "time bomb." You're never quite sure what the guy is going to do or say. Imagine that friend who turns every outing into an adventure, but who can also get you into a little trouble here and there... that's Benji, so these two cousins, who have nothing to do with each other, embark on this trip, which is not just any old stroll. They join a guided tour focused specifically on Jewish heritage and Holocaust-related sites. The trip is set up to end with a visit to the Auschwitz-Birkenau extermination camp. This part, apparently, is super personal for Eisenberg; his own grandmother was Polish, and it's clear that he brought a lot of his own history, that desire to connect with all of that, that personal touch feels strong in the film.
Hola a todos, querida comunidad de Movies and TV Shows, espero que estén super bien, en esta ocasión, les voy a hablar un poco de una película que me gustó mucho, hoy les daré mis opiniones personales de la película: A Real Pain.. le entré con curiosidad, más que nada por los nombres que sonaban, y salí sintiendo que había vivido algo que de verdad te toca, aunque no siempre fuera lo más cómodo del mundo.. créanme, le he estado dando vueltas en la cabeza, para empezar, hablemos de Jesse Eisenberg.. todos lo ubicamos, el actor que habla rapidísimo, con esa energía medio neurótica de "La Red Social" –su Mark Zuckerberg fue una cosa de locos– o el sobreviviente entrañable, contra todo pronóstico, en "Zombieland".
Tiene esa onda muy particular, y es bien interesante verlo ahora saltar a la silla de director, no es solo una peli donde actúa; también la escribió y la dirigió él.. esta es su segunda película como director, después de "Cuando termines de salvar el mundo" así que tenía intriga por ver cómo había evolucionado. Y ¡wow!, sí que se nota el cambio acá.. definitivamente acá se nota que ya le agarró más la mano, tiene una voz más plantada, la trama, de entrada, suena bastante tranqui.. Eisenberg hace de David, que es básicamente el personaje típico de Jesse Eisenberg que ya nos imaginamos: ansioso, medio torpe, súper metido en sus propios problemas, se reencuentra con su primo, Benji, interpretado por el genial Kieran Culkin, después de un buen rato sin verse las caras.. la razón del encuentro? Su abuela, la señora que era como el sostén de la familia, se murió hace poquito, ella era polaca y, para recordarla, deciden viajar a Polonia, como para conectar con sus raíces y despedirse de una forma más íntima, yendo a los lugares de donde era ella.
Ahora, Benji… Benji es la otra cara de la moneda de David.. es extrovertido a más no poder, es impulsivo, encantador pero de esos que te dan como cosita, y sinceramente, una "bomba de tiempo", nunca estás muy seguro de qué va a hacer o decir el tipo. Imagínense a ese amigo que convierte cada salida en una aventura, pero que también te puede meter en uno que otro problemita.. ese es Benji, así que estos dos primos, que nada que ver el uno con el otro, se embarcan en este viaje, que no es solo un paseíto cualquiera. Se unen a un tour guiado enfocado específicamente en la herencia judía y los sitios relacionados con el Holocausto.. el viaje está armado para terminar con una visita al campo de exterminio de Auschwitz-Birkenau.. esta parte, por lo que se ve, es súper personal para Eisenberg; su propia abuela era polaca, y se nota que metió mucho de su propia historia, de esas ganas de conectar con todo eso, ese toque personal se siente fuerte en la peli.
Well, people, if there's one thing that truly is the SOUL of this movie, it's the vibe between David and Benji... the chemistry between Eisenberg and Kieran Culkin... ugh, it's crazy, really... it's not that you say "oh, they act so well", no! It's that you believe it, it feels like it's the real them, they fight, they hold hands when you least expect it, they get gray hairs, but YOU FEEL like there's a whole life shared there, a bond that, no matter what happens, won't break, Eisenberg, playing David, is more quiet, observing, processing everything... he gives Culkin a ton of material, and how generous of him! Because, Kieran Culkin's work is amazing... seriously, if you saw him in "Succession" he makes you laugh out loud, frustrates you to the point of exhaustion and breaks your heart, sometimes all in the same damn scene!
He already won a Golden Globe for this role in "A Royal Pain." He draws you in, you can't take your eyes off him; every little thing he does, every gesture, is so... so him! There's a scene on a train, it's that simple, and the way he relates to people, that mix of "I'm taking on the world" with something half-broken inside... brilliant, really! The truth is, he shoulders a lot of the emotion and comedy of the film. He's one of those characters who, even though you know he's a bit of a walking disaster, you can't help but love him a little, right? But be careful, it's not just your typical buddy comedy or just another family drama. Eisenberg comes up with some really interesting ideas. One of the things that struck me the most was the criticism, sometimes half-hidden and other times, BAM!, in your face, of what we could call "tragedy tourism."
You know, that wave of people, let's say, with more facilities, who go to visit places where there was so much pain... the film isn't afraid to show how uncomfortable it all is, that half-acted, show-like thing about some of these tours. There's a scene right at the beginning where Benji wants to take a selfie at a memorial, and David wants to die. It's one of those moments that makes you feel like, "Oh...", but it makes you seriously think about how we stand in front of history, especially such a messed-up history, when we're outsiders. Are we really feeling something, connecting, or are we just there as onlookers, consuming other people's pain as if it were just another product?
Bueno, gente, si hay algo que de verdad es el ALMA de esta película, es la onda entre David y Benji.. la química entre Eisenberg y Kieran Culkin... ¡ufff, es una cosa de locos, de verdad.. no es que digas "ay, qué bien actúan", ¡no! Es que te lo crees, se siente como si fueran ellos de verdad, se pelean, se dan la mano cuando menos te lo esperas, se sacan canas verdes, pero SIENTES que hay toda una vida compartida ahí, un lazo que, pase lo que pase, no se rompe, Eisenberg, haciendo de David, es como más callado, observando, procesando todo.. le da un montón de material a Culkin, ¡y qué generoso de su parte! Porque, lo de Kieran Culkin es para sacarse el sombrero.. en serio, si lo vieron en "Succession" te hace reír a carcajadas, te frustra hasta decir basta y te rompe el corazón, ¡a veces todo en la misma bendita escena!
Ya se llevó un Globo de Oro por este papel en "Un Dolor Real", te atrapa, no le puedes quitar los ojos de encima, cada cosita que hace, cada gesto, es tan... ¡tan él! Hay una escena en un tren, así de simple, y la manera en que se relaciona con la gente, esa mezcla de "me como el mundo" con una cosa ahí medio rota por dentro... ¡brillante, de verdad! La verdad, él se echa al hombro gran parte de la emoción y la comedia de la película, es de esos personajes que, aunque sepas que es medio un desastre andante, no puedes evitar quererlo un poquito, ¿no? Pero ojo, no es solo la típica comedia de amigos o un dramita familiar más del montón, Eisenberg se mete con unas ideas bien interesantes, una de las cosas que más me pegó es la crítica, a veces medio escondida y otras veces ¡PUM!, en tu cara, a lo que podríamos llamar el "turismo de tragedia".
Ya saben, esa onda de gente, digamos, con más facilidades, que va a visitar lugares donde hubo muchísimo dolor.. la película no teme a mostrar lo incómodo que es todo eso, esa cosa medio actuada, como si fuera un show, de algunos de estos tours. Hay una escena al toque, al principio, donde Benji se quiere sacar una selfie en un memorial, y David se quiere morir, es de esos momentos que te hacen sentir así como "ay...", pero te deja pensando en serio sobre cómo nos paramos frente a la historia, sobre todo una historia tan jodida, cuando somos ajenos a ella. ¿De verdad estamos sintiendo algo, conectando, o solo estamos ahí de mirones, consumiendo el dolor ajeno como si fuera un producto más?
And then, people, comes the visit to Auschwitz... this is where the film gets heavy, seriously, Eisenberg explores this idea of feeling... or well, of NOT feeling what you're supposed to feel in a place like that... I mean, how the hell do you begin to process something that doesn't even have a name, that madness, that level of horror? The film tells you that sometimes, faced with something like this, the characters (and maybe we too, right?) feel like... blocked, like anesthetized... don't expect to see great tears and heartbreak. On the contrary, there's a silence that leaves you frozen, that makes you uncomfortable, honestly, it's a decision through and through, because most films would go for the liberating tears, that moment of "okay, it's over!"
Here, it's more about the procession that goes on inside, how no reaction you have seems to be enough, this, precisely, connects with something that I thought was brilliant about how the film is put together. Technically, it's a road movie, two guys who are like water and oil on a trip, and you hope they end up different, that they change radically, that they emerge as close friends, with all their problems resolved... think of "Green Book" or a thousand of those movies that leave you smiling. But A Real Pain sort of sets it apart; there are changes, yes, but it's not THE magical revelation where everything is perfect and neatly arranged... that, people, seemed brutally honest to me. It's more about the tiny internal changes, those "clicks" that make you understand something, rather than a 180-degree shift...
Now, I'll be frank, some may find it a little slow, perhaps even a little dense at times, as if the ideas were more densely packed in the script than on screen... it's not a movie that's constantly throwing in plot twists to keep you on the edge of your seat. It's more about keeping you thinking, more focused on the characters. But for me, the pace makes sense; it felt intentional, and the fact that it's short—less than an hour and a half—is a plus. It doesn't drag on; it gets to the heart of the matter and leaves you thinking, like a good, well-written story. Honestly, I thought it had its own vibe, its own rhythm, and it worked perfectly that way, calm but powerful.
Y después, gente, viene la visita a Auschwitz.. acá es donde la película se pone heavy, en serio, Eisenberg te explora esa idea de sentir… o bueno, de NO sentir lo que se supone que tienes que sentir en un lugar así.. o sea, ¿cómo carajo empiezas a procesar algo que ni siquiera tiene nombre, esa locura, ese nivel de horror? La película te tira que a veces, frente a una cosa así, los personajes (y capaz que nosotros también, ¿no?) se quedan como… bloqueados, como anestesiados.. no esperen ver grandes llantos y desgarros. Al contrario, hay un silencio que te deja helado, que te incomoda, la verdad, es una decisión con todas las letras, porque la mayoría de las pelis se irían por el llanto liberador, ese momento de "¡listo, ya pasó!".
Acá, va más por la procesión que va por dentro, de cómo ninguna reacción que tengas parece alcanzar, esto, justamente, se conecta con algo que me pareció una genialidad de cómo está armada la película. Técnicamente es una "road movie", dos tipos que son el agua y el aceite en un viaje, y uno espera que terminen siendo otros, que cambien radicalmente, que salgan de ahí hechos íntimos amigos, con todos sus quilombos resueltos.. piensen en "Green Book" o en mil pelis de esas que te dejan con una sonrisa. Pero A Real Pain como que lo hace diferente, hay cambios, sí, pero no es LA revelación mágica donde todo queda perfecto y con moñito.. eso, gente, me pareció de una honestidad brutal.
Va más por los cambiecitos chiquitos por dentro, esos "clics" que te hacen entender algo, más que un cambio de 180 grados.. ahora, les voy a ser franco, puede ser que algunos la sientan un poco lenta, quizás hasta un poco densa por momentos, como que las ideas eran más densas en el guion que en cómo se ven en pantalla.. no es una peli que te esté tirando plot twists a cada rato para mantenerte al borde del asiento. Es más de quedarse pensando, más enfocada en los personajes. Pero para mí, el ritmo tiene su lógica, se sintió que era a propósito, y que dure poco –menos de hora y media– es un puntazo a favor. No se te hace eterna, va al hueso y te deja pensando, como un buen cuento, bien escrito. A mí, la verdad, me pareció que tenía su propia onda, su propio ritmo, y que funcionaba perfecto así, tranqui pero potente.
Look, there's a scene that sticks in my mind, where David and Benji are on a hotel terrace, and David tells him that he would give anything to be like Benji, like that, so loved and with that charm that comes out of him without meaning to... it's such a... such a real moment, that feeling we all know of looking at someone else's life and thinking "things always go better for the other guy." Those moments where they show themselves as they really are, amidst the discomfort and the most dense themes, are what make the film reach you, touch a nerve... so, it's not that masterpiece that blows your mind and redefines cinema... but it is a VERY, VERY good film.
It leaves you thinking, it's intelligent, and it moves you when you least expect it. The ideas it throws at you are strong, although, as some people said, perhaps they don't always make the most of them visually... but the heart of it all – that relationship between the two cousins, who absolutely destroy it with their acting – is so powerful that it holds your hand throughout the entire film... I'd give it an 8/10, well done. It made me think, it made me feel everything: uncomfortable, I laughed, I was sad, and even a kind of strange hope... it's the typical movie that later gives you time to talk about it with friends, to debate for a while, it's a movie about grief, about family, about the weight of history and how, often half-stumbling, we try to connect with that and with each other... in a world full of Hollywood tanks that are pure noise, we appreciate a movie that dares to be more calm, to be a little uncomfortable and to ask you difficult questions without always giving you the easy answer, if you're looking for something that is more than entertainment to pass the time, something that will stay in your head for a while, then give it a chance... and well, that's all for today, I hope you liked it! See you in the next reviews, take care!
Miren, hay una escena que me quedó grabada, donde David y Benji están en la terraza de un hotel, y David le suelta que daría lo que fuera por ser como Benji, así, tan querido y con ese encanto que le sale sin querer.. es un momento tan... tan de verdad, esa sensación que todos conocemos de mirar la vida del otro y pensar "al otro siempre le va mejor". Esos momentos donde se muestran tal cual son, en medio de la incomodidad y los temas más densos, son los que hacen que la peli te llegue, te toque una fibra.. entonces, no es esa obra maestra que te vuela la cabeza y redefine el cine.. pero es una MUY, MUY buena película. Te deja pensando, es inteligente y, te conmueve cuando menos te lo esperas. Las ideas que te tira son fuertes, aunque, como dijeron algunos por ahí, quizás no siempre las exprimen al máximo visualmente.. pero el corazón de todo –esa relación entre los dos primos, que la rompen toda actuando– es tan potente que te lleva de la mano toda la película.. yo le pondría un 8/10, bien puesto.
Me hizo pensar, me hizo sentir de todo: incomodidad, me reí, me puse triste, y hasta una especie de esperanza medio rara.. es la típica peli que después te da para charlarla con amigos, para debatir un rato, es una película sobre el duelo, sobre la familia, sobre el peso de la historia y cómo, muchas veces medio a los tropezones, intentamos conectar con eso y entre nosotros.. en un mundo lleno de tanques de Hollywood que son puro ruido, se agradece una película que se anima a ser más tranqui, a ser un poco incómoda y a hacerte preguntas jodidas sin darte siempre la respuesta fácil, si andan con ganas de algo que sea más que entretenimiento para pasar el rato, algo que les quede dando vueltas en la cabeza un tiempito, entonces denle una oportunidad.. y bueno, esto es todo por hoy, espero que les haya gustado! Nos veremos en las próximas reseñas, cuidense!
Tell me... have you seen this movie? Has it caught your attention? Tell me what you thought of this review with my opinion, and tell me if it has made you want to watch this movie. You can leave me in the comments your recommendations for future publications! 😊
📲 My social media:
See you next time! 👀🎞💗
Traduced with DeepL
Banners y separadores hechos con Canva Pro. Banners and dividers made with Canva Pro.
Written by: Jaron Summers, Jon Powill & Michael Hurley
Directed by: Rob Bowman
Running Time: 46 minutes
The inaugural season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, frequently dismissed as the weakest of its seven-year run, nonetheless achieved the monumental task of resurrecting the Star Trek franchise for a new generation, dealing with unforeseen production hurdles and audience scepticism. Yet, for this revival to truly ascend to the status of a Golden Age for Star Trek, the sophomore season demanded a significant and demonstrable leap in quality, ambition, and storytelling maturity. Regrettably, the season two premiere, The Child, signalled that this crucial evolution would prove far more arduous than optimists hoped, delivering instead a profoundly disappointing episode that squandered its potential and exposed deep-seated creative frailties at a critical juncture.
The narrative thrusts the audience immediately into a state of flux: Dr. Beverly Crusher, a cornerstone of the ship’s dynamic, has departed for Starfleet Medical, replaced by the acerbic Dr. Katherine Pulaski (Diana Muldaur). The Enterprise-D’s mission – a seemingly routine retrieval of volatile plasma plague samples from Starbase Aucdet IX for urgent vaccine development – establishes a backdrop of scientific responsibility. This procedural setup, however, is swiftly upended by the arrival of an energy-based alien entity. In a scene of unsettling intimacy, it infiltrates the sleeping quarters of Counselor Deanna Troi, merging with her. The following morning delivers the bombshell: Troi announces an inexplicable pregnancy. Pulaski, confirming the bizarre reality, declares the foetus is developing at a accelerated rate, necessitating birth within thirty-six hours. The infant boy, named Ian (R. J. Williams), defies all biological norms, rapidly maturing into an eight-year-old possessing not only advanced cognitive abilities but an uncanny, almost prescient understanding of the Enterprise itself – knowledge seemingly derived from Troi’s own mind.
This central, fantastical premise intertwines problematically with a concurrent crisis: the plasma plague containment fields aboard the ship begin deteriorating at an alarming rate, threatening catastrophic contamination. Geordi La Forge, now promoted to Lieutenant and Chief Engineer, battles alongside technician Hester Dealt (Seymour Cassell) to diagnose the inexplicable energy drain. The resolution proves tragically mundane: Ian’s unique biology is inadvertently emitting radiation that destabilises the containment systems. The crisis abates only with Ian’s sudden, rapid decline and death in Troi’s arms. His final revelation – that he utilised Ian’s body as a vessel to experience humanity firsthand, purely for observational study – provides a cold, clinical explanation that utterly negates any emotional catharsis, leaving Troi with nothing but grief and a corpse.
The Child possesses one of the flimsiest scripts in the entire TNG canon, a fact rendered ironically stark by its pedigree. Originally conceived by Jaron Summers and Jon Povill for the unproduced 1970s series Star Trek: Phase II, the story lay dormant in the archives until the exigencies of the 1988 Writers Guild of America strike forced producers to resurrect it. Maurice Hurley hastily rewrote the decades-old concept as a convenient, expedient solution to restart production, a decision that prioritised speed over narrative coherence or thematic depth. The core failure lies in its egregious trivialisation of the profound personal and ethical dilemmas Troi’s pregnancy should provoke. Viewers, acutely aware of the episodic nature of 1980s television, instantly recognised the inherent temporariness of the situation; Ian’s accelerated life cycle guaranteed his swift departure, a narrative cheat that robbed the pregnancy of genuine stakes. The script mercifully avoids depicting Ian as an elderly man, yet the emotional devastation of his death occurring off-camera, while perhaps intended as tasteful, ultimately feels like an evasion of the trauma Troi would realistically endure. The episode fundamentally fails to grapple with the psychological aftermath for its central character.
Furthermore, the scenario is riddled with deeply problematic, unexplored implications. The conception bears stark, uncomfortable parallels to both the immaculate conception narrative and, more disturbingly, a form of non-consensual impregnation – a quasi-rape scenario the script pointedly ignores. Worf’s pragmatic suggestion that the rapidly developing, potentially dangerous entity be aborted for the ship’s security – a logical step given Starfleet protocols and the perceived threat – is summarily dismissed without meaningful debate. This evasion is particularly jarring for a series that otherwise frequently engaged with contemporary ethical quandaries, including the very real cultural and political battles surrounding reproductive rights raging in the United States at the time. The plasma plague subplot compounds the script’s weaknesses. Hurley’s apparent belief that a 24th-century starship, equipped with advanced technology and contingency protocols, would lack the capacity to jettison and safely destroy the contaminated cargo via phasers strains credulity to breaking point, reducing a potential tension driver to a mere plot device clumsily tied to Ian’s existence.
Fan reception was further poisoned by the conspicuous absence of Gates McFadden’s Dr. Crusher. While Diana Muldaur, a distinguished actress with notable prior Star Trek credits (The Original Series’s Return to Tomorrow and Is There in Truth No Beauty?), delivered a competent performance, her Dr. Pulaski proved a deeply unpopular replacement. Pulaski’s inherent coldness, cynicism, and antagonistic friction with Picard and Data starkly contrasted with Crusher’s warmth, empathy, and integrated presence within the senior staff, creating a palpable void that alienated a significant portion of the audience. A rare positive note emerged with Wesley Crusher’s (Wil Wheaton) decision to remain aboard the Enterprise rather than follow his mother to Starfleet Medical – a choice frustrating to many fans but crucially facilitating his first meaningful interaction with the newly introduced Guinan (Whoopi Goldberg) in the debut appearance of Ten-Forward, establishing a vital recurring character and location.
Visually, The Child benefited from a modestly increased season two budget and the capable direction of Rob Bowman, one of the series’ most skilled helmers. Bowman endeavoured to elevate the Enterprise’s aesthetic, imparting a slightly more cinematic, filmic quality to the sets and lighting, notably in the intriguing alien point-of-view sequence introducing the entity. Cosmetic changes, such as Commander Riker’s now-permanent beard, were implemented. Yet, these superficial enhancements proved utterly hollow. They could not mask the fundamental rot within the narrative – the weak script, the unresolved ethical morass, the emotional vacuity – rendering the production upgrades mere window dressing on a structurally unsound foundation.
Ultimately, The Child remains watchable only as a historical curiosity, a stark marker of TNG’s ongoing growing pains. It represents a profound waste: the squandering of a genuinely intriguing high-concept premise (alien impregnation for study), the misapplication of Rob Bowman’s directorial talent, and, most lamentably, the underutilisation of Marina Sirtis’ considerable acting abilities. Instead of launching season two with the bold, mature storytelling required to cement TNG’s legacy, it delivered a muddled, ethically shallow, and narratively lazy episode that reinforced the worst criticisms of the show’s early struggles. Far from heralding a Golden Age, The Child starkly illustrated how much further the series needed to evolve, proving that resurrecting Star Trek was merely the first step; crafting its future demanded far more than hastily rewritten relics and cosmetic tweaks. It was a stillborn hope, emblematic of the difficult labour still ahead for the Enterprise-D to truly earn its place among the stars.
Me puse a ver películas de Jim Carrey, me dio por ahí :)
Esta película no la había visto, ni sabía que existía, por lo que pude recopilar, a unos les gusta a otros no.
Particularmente la primera vez que la vi me causó como angustia, más que todo en la escena del borrado de memoria. Me sentí incómodo. Pero luego tuve que volverla a ver a los días y la volví a ver por tercera vez.
🧠 El proceso de borrado de memoria - escena impactante
Me puse en el lugar, ¿te imaginas que sea cierto y puedas borrar de tu memoria todos los recuerdos que tuviste con alguien? Si ya de por sí uno se olvida de cosas 🤣.
Lo cierto es que no sé si lo haría, pienso que sería una decisión difícil, pero creo que es mejor recordar las cosas positivas de las personas que las negativas.
Pero cada persona es un mundo. Retomando la película, particularmente me terminó gustando. Claro es un papel diferente a lo que veníamos acostumbrado de Jim Carrey, la comedia más boba llena de muecas, pero aquí es una película seria!
Además la protagonista es la del Titanic (Kate Winslet) no la reconocía, tan bien está Hulk jovencito (Mark Ruffalo) el hobbit (Elijah Wood) que me cayó mal su personaje por querer aprovecharse de la situación en la película. También participa la novia de Spiderman (Kirsten Dunst). Así que con un casting de lujo se filmó esta peli.
Un dato para el que no haya visto la película, si quiere entenderla desde el principio, igual yo hice trampa y le fui a googlear la peli después de verla, sería buscar el significado de los cambios de color de cabello de Clementine. Igual les voy a ahorrar la búsqueda y se los escribo por acá más abajo, si no quieren saber nada, salten esa parte, pero pienso que eso ayuda a entenderla desde un principio y no sería spoiler aquí voy:
🟢 Verde: Simboliza el comienzo de todo, los recuerdos de los primeros encuentros entre Joel y Clementine, y los nuevos inicios.
🔴 Rojo: Representa la pasión y los momentos más felices en su relación, cuando el romance estaba en su apogeo.
🟠 Naranja: Indica el desgaste de la relación y los recuerdos más recientes de Joel y Clementine, marcando un periodo de dificultad.
🔵 Azul: Es el color del presente en la película, cuando Joel y Clementine se reencuentran sin recuerdos de su pasado juntos, representando la tristeza de la separación y un nuevo comienzo.
Para mi esta es la mejor escena, la portada de la peli una postal increíble:
Porque lo digo, la película no está en orden cronológico, hay que prestar atención a esos detalles. Algunos dicen que es la mejor película de Jim Carrey otros votan más "The Truman Show" que ya le hice una review y también te dejan pensando a pesar que esta es más cómica.
Para cerrar este bloque, Si no la has visto, te la recomiendo, tienes sus partes divertidas también.
Aunque es dramática, tiene sus momentos de humor
⚠️ ALERTA DE SPOILER
Aqui viene Spoiler, así que si no las has visto y la quieres ver, puedes regresar luego que la veas, si no adelante:
Bueno el final queda abierto a interpretación, y en este punto es donde me da la impresión de que quedaron en un bucle, ¿por qué? si notas el final que se despiden luego de enterarse los dos de como son, Joel le dice que se espere, hablan y la última escena que se ven contentos en la nieve, se repite la escena varias veces, dando a entender para mi que van a seguir cometiendo los mismos errores que los llevaron al declive de la relación y van a seguir intentándolo eternamente con el resplandor de una mente sin recuerdos.
🇺🇸 ENGLISH VERSION
Hello film community! 👋
I got into watching Jim Carrey movies, just felt like it :)
I hadn't seen this movie before, didn't even know it existed, from what I could gather, some like it others don't.
Particularly the first time I watched it, it caused me something like anguish, especially in the memory erasure scene. I felt uncomfortable. But then I had to watch it again days later and I watched it for the third time.
🧠 The memory erasure process - impactful scene
I put myself in their place, can you imagine if it were true and you could erase from your memory all the memories you had with someone? If we already forget things as it is 🤣.
The truth is I don't know if I would do it, I think it would be a difficult decision, but I believe it's better to remember the positive things about people than the negative ones.
But each person is different. Getting back to the movie, I ended up liking it particularly. Of course it's a different role from what we were used to with Jim Carrey, the silly comedy full of facial expressions, but here it's a serious movie!
Plus the protagonist is from Titanic (Kate Winslet) I didn't recognize her, also there's young Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) the hobbit (Elijah Wood) whose character I didn't like because he tried to take advantage of the situation in the movie. Spiderman's girlfriend (Kirsten Dunst) also appears. So with a luxury cast this movie was filmed.
A tip for those who haven't seen the movie, if you want to understand it from the beginning, I cheated too and googled the movie after watching it, it would be to search for the meaning of Clementine's hair color changes. Anyway I'll save you the search and write it here below, if you don't want to know anything, skip that part, but I think it helps to understand it from the beginning and it wouldn't be spoiler here I go:
🟢 Green: Symbolizes the beginning of everything, the memories of the first encounters between Joel and Clementine, and new beginnings.
🔴 Red: Represents the passion and happiest moments in their relationship, when romance was at its peak.
🟠 Orange: Indicates the wearing down of the relationship and the most recent memories of Joel and Clementine, marking a period of difficulty.
🔵 Blue: It's the color of the present in the movie, when Joel and Clementine meet again without memories of their past together, representing the sadness of separation and a new beginning.
For me this is the best scene, the movie cover an incredible postcard:
I say this because the movie isn't in chronological order, you have to pay attention to those details. Some say it's Jim Carrey's best movie others vote more for "The Truman Show" which I already reviewed and also leaves you thinking even though that one is more comedic.
To close this block, If you haven't seen it, I recommend it, it has its funny parts too.
Although it's dramatic, it has its humorous moments
⚠️ SPOILER ALERT
Here comes Spoiler, so if you haven't seen it and want to watch it, you can come back after you see it, if not go ahead:
Well the ending is open to interpretation, and at this point is where I get the impression that they were left in a loop, why? If you notice the ending where they say goodbye after both finding out how they are, Joel tells her to wait, they talk and the last scene where they see each other happy in the snow, the scene repeats several times, suggesting to me that they're going to keep making the same mistakes that led to the decline of the relationship and they're going to keep trying eternally with the sunshine of the spotless mind.
💬 What about you?
Have you seen it? Would you erase any memory?
Leave us your comment! 👇
🎥 Posted in C/Cine | 🧠 Psychological drama | 💫 Dramatic Jim Carrey | 🎭 Stellar cast
My friend Rodrigo tells us that a couple of years ago, on a trip to Mexico, he had the opportunity to visit some Mayan ruins, far from the hustle and bustle of tourism. Walking among those stones, feeling the humidity of the jungle and the weight of the silence, immediately transported him back to Apocalypto. The film had captured that atmosphere so tangibly that his real-life experience was an echo of the fiction. That's the magic of the technical aspect of this film: the photography, the sound, the use of the native language… everything converges to create total immersion. It's not a "pretty" film; it's an authentic film.
Cuenta mi amigo Rodrigo que hace un par de años, en un viaje a México, tuvo la oportunidad de visitar unas ruinas mayas, lejos del bullicio turístico. Caminar entre esas piedras, sentir la humedad de la selva y el peso del silencio, le transportó inmediatamente de vuelta a Apocalypto. La película había capturado esa atmósfera de manera tan tangible que su experiencia real fue un eco de la ficción. Esa es la magia de su aspecto técnico de esta cinta: la fotografía, el sonido, el uso del lenguaje nativo… todo converge para crear una inmersión total. No es una película "bonita"; es una película auténtica.
Mel Gibson directing a film in Yucatec Mayan? It sounds crazy, I know. And I thought about it when someone suggested I watch it a while back. I assure you, what I discovered was an experience that will be etched in my memory forever. This is one of those cinematic gems that leaves you breathless, and years later, I can still feel the mud, hear the gasps, and throb with the desperation of escape.
¿Mel Gibson dirigiendo una película en maya yucateco? Suena a locura, lo sé. Y lo pensé cuando me propusieron verla hace un tiempo ya. Les aseguro que lo que descubrí fue una experiencia que se me grabó en la memoria para siempre. Esta es una de esas joyas del cine que te deja sin aliento y, años después, todavía puedo sentir el barro, oír los jadeos y palpitar con la desesperación de la huida.
Apocalypto isn't simply a chase movie. For me, it's a journey to the heart of the human condition, a brutal proposition that reflects us in our most primitive and, paradoxically, most modern state. The plot, on the surface, is simple: Jaguar Paw, a young hunter, sees his village destroyed and is captured to be sacrificed in a great Mayan city. What follows is an epic and grueling escape back home, through a jungle that is both sanctuary and death trap.
Apocalypto no es simplemente una película de persecución. Para mí, es un viaje al corazón de la condición humana, una propuesta brutal que nos refleja en nuestro estado más primitivo y, paradójicamente, más moderno. La trama, en su superficie, es sencilla: Jaguar Paw, un joven cazador, ve su aldea destruida y es capturado para ser sacrificado en una gran ciudad maya. Lo que sigue es una huida épica y agotadora de regreso a casa, a través de una selva que es a la vez santuario y trampa mortal.
The Mayan city—my goodness, what a stunning and terrifying sequence! It's not just the monumental scale or the impeccable historical recreation, it's what it represents. It's the fiercest critique of a civilization devouring itself. The contrast between the simple life in harmony with nature in Jaguar Paw's village and the opulent, corrupt, and bloodthirsty decay of the city is the philosophical core of the film. Gibson shows us an exotic and glorious empire; A society in decline, obsessed with power, that appeases its gods with the blood of innocents, while around it the earth is wasting away and plagues spread. Sound familiar? It's impossible not to see the parallels with our own civilization, with our excessive consumption and our disconnection from what's essential.
La ciudad maya, ¡dios mío, qué secuencia tan impresionante y aterradora! No es solo la escala monumental o la recreación histórica impecable, es lo que representa. Es la crítica más feroz a una civilización que se devora a sí misma. El contraste entre la vida simple y en armonía con la naturaleza en la aldea de Jaguar Paw y la podredumbre opulenta, corrupta y sanguinaria de la ciudad es el núcleo filosófico de la película. Gibson nos muestra un imperio exótico y glorioso; una sociedad en decadencia, obsesionada con el poder que aplaca a sus dioses con la sangre de inocentes, mientras a su alrededor la tierra se agota y las plagas se extienden. ¿Suena familiar? Es imposible no ver el paralelismo con nuestra propia civilización, con nuestro consumo desmedido y nuestra desconexión de lo esencial.
Apocalypto speaks of fear, like a fuel that burns you from the inside out. After the initial carnage, the silence is more terrifying than any scream. It's in these moments that Gibson forces you to connect with pure terror, paralyzing you while simultaneously sharpening all your senses. You're breathing fear. That's the genius of the narrative: it penetrates deeply into the character's psyche without the need for long monologues. Their eyes, their panting breaths, are all the dialogue you need. The characters, from the holy priest to the power-mad hunter, are not deeply developed individuals in the classic sense, but archetypes, perfect tools for exposing these universal themes.
But all of this would be merely an intellectual framework if it weren't driven by a relentless narrative engine: the chase. The second half of the film is a pure survival thriller. Every jump, every trap, every encounter with jungle wildlife speaks volumes about the fact that nature is the supreme court. The camera runs, falls, and gets dirty alongside Jaguar Paw. Every wound hurts, you feel the exhaustion in your very bones. And it's here that the simple premise reveals its depth: it's not just about escaping the executioners, it's about a race against time, about fighting for family, for the future. It's the oldest story in the world told with renewed ferocity.
Apocalypto habla del miedo, como un combustible que te quema por dentro. Después de la masacre inicial, el silencio es más aterrador que cualquier grito. Es en esos momentos donde Gibson te obliga a conectar con el terror puro, te paraliza y al mismo tiempo agudiza todos los sentidos. Estás respirando el miedo. Esa es la genialidad de la narrativa: cala de lleno en la psique del personaje sin necesidad de largos monólogos. Sus ojos, su respiración jadeante, son todo el diálogo que necesitas. Los personajes, desde el sagrado sacerdote hasta el cazador enfermo de poder, no son individuos profundamente desarrollados en el sentido clásico, sino arquetipos, herramientas perfectas para exponer estos temas universales.
Pero todo esto sería solo un marco intelectual si no estuviera impulsado por un motor narrativo implacable: la persecución. La segunda mitad de la película es un puro thriller de supervivencia. Cada salto, cada trampa, cada encuentro con la fauna de la selva no habla de que la naturaleza es la corte suprema. La cámara corre, cae y se ensucia junto a Jaguar Paw. Te duele cada herida, sientes el agotamiento en tus propios huesos. Y es aquí donde la premisa simple revela su profundidad: no se trata solo de escapar de los verdugos, se trata de una carrera contra el tiempo, de la lucha por la familia, por el futuro. Es la historia más antigua del mundo contada con una ferocidad renovada.
And the ending... it's simply perfect. It's one of those jaw-dropping endings, resonating with a symmetrical and poetic force that brilliantly brings the thematic circle full circle. It's a beacon of hope in the most absolute darkness, an affirmation that life, against all odds, persists, even if it brings more terrible, more terrifying persecutions.
El final… es simplemente perfecto. Es uno de esos finales que te dejan con la boca abierta, que resuena con una fuerza simétrica y poética que cierra el círculo temático de manera brillante. Es un faro de esperanza en la oscuridad más absoluta, una afirmación de que la vida, contra todo pronóstico, persiste, aunque con ello traiga persecuciones más terribles, aterradoras.
Apocalypto is a primal scream on celluloid. A lesson in cinema, storytelling, and humanity. It exhausts you, moves you, and, above all, makes you think. It forces you to look into the abyss of our own history and recognize ourselves. If you haven't seen it, do so. Let yourself be carried away by the rhythm of the drums and the heartbeat of the jungle. It's an experience I promise you won't forget.
Apocalypto es es un grito primal en celuloide. Una lección de cine, de narrativa y de humanidad. Te agota, te conmueve y, sobre todo, te hace pensar. Te obliga a mirar al abismo de nuestra propia historia y a reconocernos. Si no la han visto, háganlo. Déjense llevar por el ritmo de los tambores y el latido de la selva. Es una experiencia que, les prometo, no olvidarán.
¡Hola amantes del cine! Como empieza el mes del terror hoy les traigo esta recomendación de una de las películas de terror que más me han gustado y que es interesante de ver: “Barbarian”
Hello, movie lovers! As the month of horror begins, today I bring you this recommendation for one of my favorite horror movies, which is well worth watching: “Barbarian.”
Sinopsis/Synopsis
Barbarian es una película de terror escrita y dirigida por Zach Cregger. Se estrenó en las salas de cine el 9 de septiembre de 2022. Esta protagonizada por Georgina Campbell, Bill Skarsgård y Justin Long. Arnon Milchan, Roy Lee, Raphael Margules, y J.D. Lifshitz se desempeñan como los productores de la película.
Barbarian is a horror film written and directed by Zach Cregger. It was released in theaters on September 9, 2022. It stars Georgina Campbell, Bill Skarsgård and Justin Long. Arnon Milchan, Roy Lee, Raphael Margules, and J.D. Lifshitz serve as the film's producers.
Una joven viaja a Detroit para una entrevista de trabajo y alquila una casa para pasar la noche. Sin embargo, cuando llega en medio de una tormenta muy tarde en la noche, descubre que la casa ya está reservada por un hombre, que ya se ha instalado allí. No consigue un cuarto en ningún hotel por lo que decide quedarse.
A young woman travels to Detroit for a job interview and rents a house for the night. However, when she arrives in the middle of a storm very late at night, she discovers that the house is already booked by a man, who has already moved in. He can't get a room in any hotel so he decides to stay.
La película transcurre con la presentación de dos personajes, los lleva a un clímax y se produce un corte donde se introduce otro personaje con otra historia distinta. Nunca había visto este recurso antes y uno queda un poco defraudado, preguntándose qué ocurrió, no obstante esta herramienta produce que uno se enganche mucho más a la película, ya que desconoce lo que vendrá o lo que ocurrió con los otros personajes. La película expone las profundidades del horror humano y el extremo a dónde puede llegar una mente corrompida y las consecuencias de los actos más viles del que un hombre es capaz.
The film begins with the introduction of two characters, builds to a climax, and then cuts to another character with a different history. I had never seen this technique used before and was a little disappointed, wondering what had happened, but it does make you much more engaged in the film, as you don't know what will happen next or what happened to the other characters. The film exposes the depths of human horror and the extremes to which a corrupt mind can go, as well as the consequences of the most vile acts a man is capable of.
En cuanto a la trama se divide en dos historias, que transcurren en paralelo y parecen no conectarse:
As for the plot, it is divided into two histories that run parallel and seem unrelated:
Primero nos presenta a una joven (Tess) que llega durante una noche a la casa que acaba de alquilar por poco tiempo, para descansar y prepararse para una entrevista laboral al día siguiente. Sin embargo, se encuentra con que ya está ocupada por otra persona (Keith), quien asegura que también la alquiló. La joven intenta sin éxito conseguir un cuarto en un hotel por lo que decide quedarse. Pronto descubre que no se encuentran solos en la casa y, tratando de descubrir quién es el huésped, termina descubriendo un extraño cuarto en el sótano. Aquel sólo posee una cama, una cámara y un bote vacío.
First, we are introduced to a young woman (Tess) who arrives one night at the house she has just rented for a short time, to rest and prepare for a job interview the next day. However, she finds that it is already occupied by another person (Keith), who claims that he also rented it. The young woman tries unsuccessfully to find a room in a hotel, so she decides to stay. She soon discovers that they are not alone in the house and, trying to find out who the guest is, ends up discovering a strange room in the basement. It only has a bed, a camera, and an empty jar.
Luego se introduce la historia de un productor de Hollywood (AJ), que es acusado de abusar de una actriz. Su carrera termina con la mala publicidad y decide desaparecer de la ciudad. Va a visitar la casa que le dejó su abuelo de herencia en Detroit. La casa terminan siendo la misma que alquilaron los dos personajes anteriores. Allí se conectan las historias. AJ pronto descubre que allí había inquilinos y se extraña de su ausencia. En un momento baja al sótano y se encuentra con el horror que allí habita.
Then we are introduced to the history of a Hollywood producer (AJ), who is accused of abusing an actress. His career ends with bad publicity, and he decides to disappear from the city. He goes to visit the house his grandfather left him in Detroit. The house turns out to be the same one rented by the two previous characters. That's where the histories connect. AJ soon discovers that there were tenants there and is surprised by their absence. At one point, he goes down to the basement and encounters the horror that dwells there.
Las circunstancias ponen a prueba a los personajes al enfrentarse a los extremos a los que los lleva, generando preguntas acerca de la moralidad cuando la vida está en peligro. ¿Qué seríamos capaces de hacer? Se puede llegar a ser realmente “bárbaro” en las acciones, según la situación. Todos pasan por la equivocación, la paranoia y el peligro, despertando sentimientos e invitándonos a padecer las malas decisiones. Una película ideal para esta época.
Circumstances test the characters as they face the extremes to which they are driven, raising questions about morality when life is in danger. What would we be capable of doing? Depending on the situation, one can become truly “barbaric” in one's actions. Everyone goes through mistakes, paranoia, and danger, awakening feelings and inviting us to suffer the consequences of bad decisions. An ideal film for this time of year.
Sylvester Stallone!! This man just can't stop working. He is incredible. SYLVESTER STALLONE is not just Tulsa King. He is HOLLYWOOD KING too.
When I first sat down to watch Tulsa King, I thought I knew exactly what I was getting—Sylvester Stallone playing another tough guy, maybe something like Rocky meets The Sopranos with a cowboy hat thrown in. But within the first few scenes, it hit me: this wasn’t just another mobster show, it was something rawer, stranger, and kind of heartbreaking. Stallone plays Dwight “The General” Manfredi, this old-school New York mobster who’s been locked up for 25 years. Twenty-five years. Imagine that—spending a quarter of a century behind bars for a family that doesn’t even really have your back. And when he finally steps out, instead of being welcomed home, kissed on both cheeks, and handed his slice of the empire, they ship him off to Tulsa. Tulsa. Oklahoma.
And that is the first gut punch, seeing Dwight digest what is taking place. His loyalty is too great, his pride too great, too great to be submissive or to inquire, but you can find it in his eyes: this is exile, this is penalty in the form of opportunity. And that is when you see how brilliant it is, how the entire performance is built around this conflict, this fish out of water gangster attempting to create an empire in a city where no one even takes him seriously.
The initial episodes establish the atmosphere. Dwight is an Irish-American who comes to Tulsa with his instincts, swagger, and iron fists only. He is unfamiliar with the land, unfamiliar with the people but familiar with the laws of power; fear, respect, leverage. And when he takes up, the first time, a dispensary owner and strong-arms him to pay his protection, you feel the spark. Not that he is cruel--Dwight can give him that weird honor. He’s brutal, yes, but fair. He provides shelter, he forges connections, he sees possibility in those that are dismissed by other people. It’s morbid, but you sympathise with him.
And the whole supporting cast--God, they are what make this story pop. One of my favorites is Tyson, the young Black boy who turns out to be a driver to Dwight. Initially, you believe that Tyson is a mere kid out to make easy money, but the relationship between him and Dwight turns into a father-son relationship. There is this scene where Dwight is offering advice to Tyson and he is being treated as his own person, as one who can be more than what Tulsa expects of him to be. And it is mean since Dwight, with all his violence and imperfections, is knowledgeable in loyalty and picking people up. It is nearly sweet--unless you bear in mind that he is also teaching Tyson how to conduct a criminal enterprise.
And then there is Stacy Beale the ATF agent who turns out to be this weird love interest and moral foil. Their connection is a big, sticky, affair since Dwight is not a free man, he is a criminal, and she is meant to do away with individuals like him. However, the chemistry between the two, how she views him not only as a gangster but this tired man who has been spat upon by life- it is soft in a manner not typical of Stallone.
However, it is not only a show about Dwight creating a new empire. It’s about the weight of time. He is 70 years old and he is entering a new world that is now different in every way. He is not smartphone savvy, does not know how people hustle now, and you can sense that pang, how much he has lost, how much was stolen out of him. This scene is a heart breaking one in which Dwight attempts to reunite with his daughter who has fallen out of favor with him. You can tell how painful it is in his face when she does not want him around, when she reminds him of all the years he was not there due to the decisions he made. And that is when you understand that Tulsa King is not only about crime but also about regrets, about making attempts to write a new history when the pages are nearly finished.
I mean, but don’t misunderstand me--this show knows how to make the heat. The violence contained in the action is rough, earthy and bloody. Dwight does not fight like a young man, he fights like somebody who has learnt to live, and effective and unmerciful. One scene is when he fights a gang of bikers, it is not flashy and it is gritty and bloody and you can feel the punches. And then when the biker gang forms one of his greatest competitors it becomes this time bomb. These are not cartoon villains, these are dangerous, ruthless men, and all the experience that Dwight has is outnumbered and outgunned.
What kept me hooked, though, was the balance. For every violent showdown, there’s a quiet moment of Dwight trying to figure out who he is outside of “The General.” Watching him sit at a bar, reflecting on his past, or awkwardly navigating modern life—it made me feel something I didn’t expect: empathy for a mobster. You start seeing him less as a criminal and more as a man who’s paying for his loyalty in ways that might never end
The twists make the tension alive. Dwight is not only battling with other gangs but he is battling betrayal by the people he thought he could rely on. His own mob family in New York? To them it does not matter whether he lives or dies. And when reality finally sinks on him, it is fatal. The very people that he gave his life to, discarded him like garbage. But, instead of falling apart, he chooses to construct his own family in Tulsa, stone by bloody stone.
By then, at the end of Season 1, you cannot stand the tension. Dwight has made his own reality, something that almost passed as a second chance, only to have the past to reassert itself. I will not spoil the last moments, but I will say that it was a gut punch ending which left me staring at the screen, heart racing, whispering, No, no, no, it can not end on this note.
And that’s the whopper of Tulsa King. It’s not just mob drama. It’s not just action. It is this very human tale of growing old, regretting, being loyal, being disloyal, and having the impossible job of trying to begin again when the world has already passed by you. Never has Stallone merely acted out Dwight, he breathes him. Every line, every moan, every savage blow assures you, this is a man who has fought too many battles, who will not give up.
Watching it made me feel torn. Dwight was part of me and I cheered him on and hoped he was going to win, and create something beautiful out of being an outcast. A different segment of me sat in silence, plagued by the inevitability of it all--because deep down you know that stories such as this do not have happy-ever-afters. They culminate in blood, in treachery, the sad burden of decisions made years ago.
Written by: David Simon
Directed by: Alex Zakrzewski
Running Time: 58 minutes
One of the most intellectually rigorous and narratively sophisticated achievements of The Wire lies in its profound rejection of conventional television’s reliance on artificial, cathartic cliffhangers. Unlike mainstream dramas that resolve tension through abrupt, often implausible interventions, David Simon’s Baltimore saga operates on the grinding, indifferent logic of real-world institutions. Consequences here unfold with glacial inevitability, frequently occurring off-screen or emerging from the mundane accumulation of pressure rather than a single dramatic pivot. This approach imbues the series with unparalleled verisimilitude; in the slow-moving bureaucracy of Baltimore, actions rarely trigger immediate, neatly packaged resolutions. Instead, characters who, by the rules of network television, would have been summarily ejected from the narrative for their transgressions linger, their fates suspended in the institutional limbo of police procedure, political calculation, or street pragmatism, only to be discarded later in ways that feel, in retrospect, chillingly preordained. Season 3’s Slapstick? masterfully exemplifies this principle, weaving together threads of institutional decay, personal tragedy, and pragmatic survival where the true drama resides not in if consequences arrive, but in how and when the machinery of consequence finally grinds a character into dust.
Nowhere is this narrative patience more devastatingly realised than in the arc of Detective Roland "Prez" Pryzbylewski. His survival past the previous season – where he infamously punched his father-in-law and powerful patron, Major Stan Valchek, in the face – should have been unthinkable within the rigid hierarchy of the Baltimore Police Department. Convention demanded his swift, ignominious dismissal. Yet, through unseen bureaucratic manoeuvring, Prez not only remained but was redeployed to the Major Case Unit, a sanctuary for his cerebral, desk-bound talents. His utter incompetence in street policing – a liability that should have ended his career long before the Valchek incident – was conveniently overlooked. This reprieve, however, was merely a stay of execution. Fate, operating with the cold precision of an algorithm, finally catches Prez not in a moment of deliberate malice, but in the chaotic fog of a police response. Rushing to the scene of a reported officer shooting alongside Jimmy McNulty, Prez confronts a figure he believes to be the perpetrator. In the split-second terror of the moment, he fires, only to discover his victim is Derrick Waggoner, a respected Black plainclothes officer. The horror is absolute: Prez hasn’t just made a tragic error; he has committed the ultimate institutional sin – killing a fellow officer, however accidentally. Valchek’s pathetic, last-ditch attempt to intercede rings hollow against the unassailable reality Lt. Cedric Daniels grasps instantly: Prez’s value to the BPD is now precisely zero. Daniels’ quiet advice to "get a lawyer" isn't mere procedure; it’s the death knell for Prez’s career and, as Daniels fears, potentially his life, given Prez’s shattered state. The episode refuses the easy catharsis of immediate punishment; instead, it forces us to sit with the crushing weight of institutional abandonment, the slow, silent dismantling of a man whose usefulness has expired.
This same principle of pragmatic, hidden fracture governs the Barksdale organisation. Despite the explosive, near-fatal confrontation between Avon Barksdale and Stringer Bell at the end of the previous episode – a rupture seemingly beyond repair – they present a united front to the outside world when confronted by Brianna Barksdale over the suspicious circumstances of her son D’Angelo’s death. Avon’s cold dismissaland Stringer’s calculated silence are not signs of reconciliation, but a stark demonstration of institutional survival instinct. Avon, acutely aware of the existential threat posed by Marlo Stanfield’s relentless Eastside aggression, cannot afford internal warfare. The fragile truce with Proposition Joe’s Co-Op, offering Marlo a slice of the product-sharing pie to stave off total war, hangs by a thread. To fracture publicly now would be suicidal.
This enforced unity, however, cannot mask the rot within, a tension made horrifically manifest in the disastrous attempt to eliminate Omar Little. Gerard (Mayo Best) and Sapper (Brendan T. Tate), spotting Omar escorting his grandmother to church, violate the sacred, unspoken "Sunday truce" – a concept introduced here that profoundly complicates the audience’s perception of the drug trade, revealing an unexpected layer of social code beneath the brutality. Their botched hit, shattering Omar’s grandmother’s hat and violating the sanctity of Sunday, incurs Slim Charles’s furious rebuke. Omar’s subsequent, laser-focused vendetta against the Barksdales is thus not merely personal; it’s a direct consequence of their soldiers’ breach of street protocol, demonstrating how even seemingly minor transgressions within this ecosystem trigger devastating, inevitable fallout.
Major Howard "Bunny" Colvin’s Hamsterdam experiment similarly teeters on the precipice of collapse due to consequences operating on their own bureaucratic and political timetable. While Colvin wins over the initially sceptical Deacon, the community leader’s anxiety about the initiative’s fragility proves prescient. Colvin’s impending retirement renders Hamsterdam vulnerable to abandonment by any successor lacking his radical pragmatism. This vulnerability becomes acute when a young dealer is shot within Hamsterdam’s borders – a direct challenge to Colvin’s controlled environment. Desperate to conceal Hamsterdam’s existence from Homicide (and thus higher command), Sgt. Carver orders the body moved six blocks, a grotesque act of institutional denial. Herc’s subsequent decision to leak the truth to The Baltimore Sun, driven by his own frustration and moral confusion, represents another consequence – the internal rot of the detail itself. Colvin’s frantic damage control, pressuring Hamsterdam dealers to produce a shooter and quick confession, is a masterclass in institutional triage, highlighting how the scheme’s survival depends not on its moral justification, but on its ability to absorb and neutralise consequences within the system’s own corrupt logic. The episode chillingly demonstrates that even well-intentioned radical solutions are ultimately devoured by the very institutions they seek to bypass.
Amidst this pervasive institutional collapse, glimmers of fragile hope emerge through bureaucratic struggle. The Deacon’s successful advocacy for Cutty Wise’s boxing gym – navigating the Kafkaesque permit process with the help of Reverend Frank Reed and State Delegate Watkins (Frederick Strother)– offers a counterpoint. Watkins’ interest stems less from community spirit and more from the gym’s location within the district of his political ally, Marla Daniels, cynically linking grassroots initiative to electoral calculus. Yet, this hard-won progress, like Hamsterdam, remains precarious, entirely dependent on the shifting sands of political will and institutional tolerance.
David Simon’s script for "Slapstick" commences with a brutally efficient cold open that epitomises the show’s grounding in messy reality. McNulty abandons his sleeping sons during a weekend visit to engage in hurried hotel sex with political consultant Theresa D’Agostino. This scene serves multiple critical functions: it ruthlessly establishes McNulty’s self-destructive prioritisation of lust and escape over familial duty; it provides unapologetic fan service showcasing Brandy Burre’s nudity; and, crucially, it anchors the narrative firmly in the specific socio-political moment of the 2004 US Presidential election, as D’Agostino watches pundits dissect Kerry and Bush. McNulty’s later expressed apathy towards both candidates, much to D’Agostino’s frustration, reflects a pervasive cynicism about political solutions that permeates the entire series – a cynicism rooted in the characters’ daily confrontation with systemic failure.
Furthermore, the episode’s exploration of law enforcement’s frustration with wiretapping burner phones – voiced by the usually unflappable Rhonda Pearlman and even the FBI’s Agent Fitz – offers a startlingly prescient commentary. Their admitted impotence against the technological barriers erected by phone companies in 2004 provides a stark lens through which to view contemporary debates on privacy and surveillance. What was then a niche procedural headache now resonates as a foundational moment in the ongoing, unresolved tension between state power and individual rights, demonstrating The Wire’s uncanny ability to diagnose systemic weaknesses long before they became mainstream crises.
Finally, Slapstick possesses a profound meta-literary quality. Prez’s accidental shooting of Officer Wagonner directly mirrors a near-identical incident in George Pelecanos’ 2001 novel Right as Rain, a work by one of The Wire’s key producers. This isn't mere homage; it’s a deliberate weaving of the show’s fictional reality with the source material of its creators, blurring the lines between drama and the documented reality that inspired it. Similarly, the Major Case Unit’s discussion of legendary detectives, name-dropping David Worden (the real-life homicide detective from Simon’s Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets and co-creator Ed Burns), roots the narrative in the authentic, lived experience that forms the bedrock of The Wire’s authority.
Slapstick is not a chapter defined by explosive action, but by the quiet, relentless pressure of consequence. It showcases The Wire at its most masterful: revealing how fate in Baltimore is rarely a sudden slap, but the slow, inevitable tightening of a noose woven from institutional indifference, personal error, and the unyielding logic of systems that discard the broken without ceremony.
