Posted Using INLEO

After You've Gone (S1x07)

Airdate: 2 March 2014

Written by: Nic Pizzolatto Directed by: Cary Jo Fukunaga

Running Time: 53 minutes

Matthew McConaughey's triumph at the Academy Awards serves as rather a splendid recommendation for anyone yet to witness his extraordinary work in HBO's True Detective. One suspects that whilst his performance in Dallas Buyers Club may have delighted critics and Oscar voters alike, in decades to come it shall prove rather less enduring than his portrayal of Rust Cohle. Of course, those tempted to sample this particular programme on the strength of McConaughey's recent accolades ought to be advised: one must view the preceding six episodes before attempting this seventh instalment. As with many of HBO's genuinely superior offerings—or "limited series," as they are fashionably termed nowadays—the uninitiated shall find little sense here, and any attempt to compensate through spoilers and plot summaries gleaned from the internet shall rob the viewer of a richly rewarding experience.

At first glance, this penultimate episode—tasked, naturally, with preparing the ground for the inevitable finale—appears somewhat leaner than its predecessors. There are no "shocking" revelations here, nor any soap-operatic twists in the narrative. Director Cary Joji Fukunaga proves wise enough to present some of the potentially most repugnant and unsettling imagery indirectly, relying upon the viewer's imagination and, crucially, upon Woody Harrelson's superlative performance—his reaction to these horrors speaks volumes without uttering a word.

If one were to identify the principal virtue of this episode, it would surely be its economy and simplicity. Screenwriter Nic Pizzolato, to judge by his work here, is not one of those Hollywood scribes who feels compelled to reinvent the wheel, nor to over-season what already promises to be perfectly serviceable material. This latest episode, situated entirely in the "present" of 2012, depicts its characters as unusually normal—or at least as having evolved in a normal fashion since 1995. Rust Cohle has thus progressed from being a nonconformist, headstrong investigator unencumbered by rules to becoming, quite naturally, a nonconformist, headstrong vigilante pursuing justice through his own devices. Marty Hart, meanwhile, has evolved from a conservative policeman who disliked "making waves" into a conservative middle-aged chap with one foot already in retirement, his life increasingly revolving around fishing, golf, microwave meals, and television.

Yet the most significant matter is that this episode must necessarily pave the way for the mystery's resolution. Here the creators do rather well in suggesting that the grand solution shall likewise prove "normal"—that is to say, devoid of supernatural or fantastical elements, and certainly not featuring the sort of dramatic twists that would completely alter the moral character of our protagonists, as has been widely speculated online beforehand. The ritual murder that nominally set the plot in motion is, admittedly, part of a broader and deeply disturbing whole; yet even the conspiracies and bizarre cults depicted in this episode appear realistic—entirely conceivable in the backwaters of rural Louisiana. The closing scene, suggesting that our two investigators have in fact encountered the true murderer, implies that the evil in this series, as in life itself, is actually rather banal. One can only hope these suggestions shall not prove mere misdirection before the creators of True Detective subject us to some typically Hollywood "exploitative" conclusion. Neither this series, nor McConaughey and Harrelson, deserve such a fate.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)

(Note: The text in the original Croatian version is available here.)

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

LeoDex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

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

Hola amigos || Hello friends

El impacto visual de la serie te captura desde el primer capítulo y es que sin duda estamos acostumbrados a un género de superhéroes bastante predecible y con batallas limpias por así decirles. Pero Invincible, sale de lo cotidiano rompiendo esos esquemas desde el primer capítulo. La crudeza que ofrece a nivel de sangre, de violencia y batalla es un verdadero baño de sangre. Doris se reía de mí porque cuando veía las batallas y ver que los golpes eran muy enserio y verlos romperse los huesos de verdad sentía cada dolor de los personajes. La verdad es que la crudeza es bastante o quizás como dice Doris, ya estoy viejo para esas cosas ja ja ja. Lo que sí, es que Invincible es una seria sin límites de acción. Sin embargo lo que realmente me atrapó y me hizo ver más allá de la violencia que nos presenta fue su trasfondo humano.

^{Image source}

The series’ visual impact grabs you from the very first episode, and the truth is, we’re certainly used to a superhero genre that’s pretty predictable, with “clean” battles, so to speak. But Invincible breaks away from the ordinary, shattering those conventions right from the start. The raw depiction of blood, violence, and combat is a veritable bloodbath. Doris used to laugh at me because when I watched the battles and saw that the blows were so intense and watched them actually break bones I really felt every bit of the characters’ pain. The truth is, the brutality is quite intense or maybe, as Doris says, I’m just too old for that kind of thing, ha ha ha. What’s certain is that Invincible is a series with no limits when it comes to action. However, what really hooked me and made me look beyond the violence it presents was its human backdrop.

Y es por eso que considero que lo que logra la serie más allá de las peleas que son sin duda brutales, es como logran des mascarar la figura del súper héroe, esos salvadores que parecen incorruptibles, perfectos y emocionalmente inquebrantables. Y es lo que diferencia a Invincible de todas las que ya conocemos pues aquí nos vamos en encontrar que a pesar de poseer poderes extraordinarios, no se alejaran de la realidad de la vida, los problemas cotidianos, las dudas existenciales y con errores emocionales.

^{Image source}

And that’s why I believe that what the series achieves beyond the fights, which are undoubtedly brutal is how it manages to demystify the superhero, those saviors who seem incorruptible, perfect, and emotionally unshakable. And that’s what sets Invincible apart from all the others we already know, because here we’ll find that despite possessing extraordinary powers, they don’t stray from the reality of life, everyday problems, existential doubts, and emotional mistakes.

Nunca me hubiera imaginado ver a un súper héroe llorando pues desde niños nos enseñaron que ellos eran seres perfectos y es por eso que muchos de nosotros de niños quisimos ser Batman o Superman. Eran un ejemplo a seguir, pero acá, en Invincible, los personajes sufren, lloran, se equivocan y toman malas decisiones por miedo, orgullo o simple inmadurez. Lo que nos muestra una realidad que siempre nos quisieron ocultar pero que existía. La serie no la considero acta para un niño pues parece más serie para un adolecente debido a la altísima tasa de violencia que veremos en esta serie.

^{Image source}

I never would have imagined seeing a superhero cry, because as children we were taught that they were perfect beings, and that’s why so many of us wanted to be Batman or Superman when we were kids. They were role models, but here, in Invincible, the characters suffer, cry, make mistakes, and make bad decisions out of fear, pride, or simple immaturity. This shows us a reality that they always wanted to hide from us but that actually existed. I don’t consider the series appropriate for a child, as it seems more suited for a teenager due to the extremely high level of violence we’ll see in this series.

Esta serie cuanta con 4 temporadas que me pude disfrutar muy poco a poco y esperaba llegar al final el cual pensé que sería en la 4 temporada pero no fue así. La misma dejó un buen cierre para el inicio de una nueva temporada la cual se estima sea para el primer trimestre del año próximo. La 5 temporada para mí estará muy buena. Veremos a Mark Grayson (Invincible) lidiar con la presión gigante de heredar el legado de su padre, mientras intenta descubrir quién es él realmente y a su vez lidiar con una decisión que descubriremos que consecuencia tendrá en la siguiente temporada.

This series has four seasons, which I was able to enjoy little by little, and I was hoping to reach the end which I thought would be in season 4 but that wasn’t the case. It left off on a strong note, setting the stage for a new season, which is expected to premiere in the first quarter of next year. I think season 5 is going to be really good. We’ll see Mark Grayson (Invincible) deal with the immense pressure of inheriting his father’s legacy, while trying to discover who he really is and, at the same time, grappling with a decision whose consequences we’ll find out in the next season.

Pero Mark Grayson (Invincible) no está solo, existen personajes que lo acompañan. Otros héroes listos para cualquier batalla tanto para sus vidas personales como para poner a salvo la tierra. Existe un grupo de héroes como los vengadores que conocemos, solo que acá los conoceremos como Los Guardianes. Hay muchos personajes que se les hará muy familiar pero lo interesante es que aquí nadie se escapa de los problemas de la vida y cada uno de ellos también nos revelarán que no son tan fuertes como pensábamos.

^{Image source}

But Mark Grayson (Invincible) isn’t alone; there are characters who stand by his side. Other heroes ready for any battle whether in their personal lives or to save the Earth. There’s a group of heroes like the Avengers we know, only here we’ll know them as The Guardians. There are many characters who will seem very familiar to you, but the interesting thing is that here, no one escapes life’s problems, and each of them will also reveal to us that they aren’t as strong as we thought.

Si me preguntas, Invincible logra un balance perfecto entre la historia tanto que te mantiene al borde del asiento con esas grandes y despiadadas batallas. Te conecta con la historia a través de un drama familiar y personal y como ya he dicho, rompe las reglas de aquellas clásicas historias de buenos contra malos. Aquí vas a enocntrar una exploración de los matices grises de la moralidad y el deber. Entonces sí, si buscas una serie que desafíe el concepto tradicional del héroe y no tenga miedo de mostrar el lado más oscuro y real de salvar el mundo, tienen que ver Invincible. Bueno, está bien. Como toda serie tiene sus capítulos aburridos pero que son parte importante de la historia que nos quieren mostrar ahora.

If you ask me, Invincible strikes the perfect balance between storytelling it keeps you on the edge of your seat with those epic, ruthless battles. It draws you into the story through family and personal drama, and as I’ve already mentioned, it breaks the rules of those classic good-versus-evil tales. Here you’ll find an exploration of the gray areas of morality and duty. So yes, if you’re looking for a series that challenges the traditional concept of the hero and isn’t afraid to show the darker, more realistic side of saving the world, you have to watch Invincible. Well, okay. Like any series, it has its boring episodes, but they’re an important part of the story they’re trying to tell us right now.

Imagino que muchos no la han visto asi que bueno, igual que siempre, esta es solo mi opinión, y los invito a compartir la de ustedes.

I imagine that many of you haven't seen it, so, as always, this is just my opinion, and I invite you to share yours.

Image Source

Low Movies-Tv Watching Season

Should I Marry a Murderer? (6.6/10)

The premisse of this series is pretty interesting in that a women falls in love with a guy head over hills, when he asks her to marry she says that of there is something she needs to know, now is the time to tell. The guy follows that up by stating that he accidentially killed someone in a car accident a couple years ago. So the question the series poses is what you do at this point as the one who hears this.

Things go a step further though as it tured out that the body was still burried on the estate and the guy who got killed was someone that the community really liked while his parents are with no clue what happened and such. So it becomes a dilemma to turn give the info on the police and lose the love of your life or to become an accomplice.

Things go much further than that but I won't go into any spoilers.

Conclusion:I enjoyed the fact that this was a documentary based on real life stories with a very interesting setup. It's only 3 Episodes long of ~50 minutes each. I would say if the setup intrigues you, it might be interesting to watch. Overall a bit more that a week later it has kind of passed me by. So still an ok 6.6/10

Dax (S01E08)

Airdate: 13 February 1993

Written by: D. C. Fontana Directed by: David Carson

Running Time: 46 minutes

From its inception, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine distinguished itself from its predecessor, The Next Generation, through its stationary setting and a deliberate embrace of moral ambiguity. Where the USS Enterprise’s mission of exploration naturally lent itself to tales of first contact and cosmic wonder, the fixed outpost of Terok Nor—a battered Cardassian station under joint Bajoran and Federation administration—created a different dramatic crucible. Here, characters could not simply warp away from their problems; they were forced to live with the consequences of their actions amidst a tangled web of political and personal loyalties. This environment made the series far more prone to episodes wandering into the genres of the murder mystery and the courtroom drama than TNG ever was. Yet, DS9 consistently used these seemingly generic scenarios not as mere filler, but as rich opportunities for worldbuilding and profound exposition on its core themes. One of the earliest and most telling examples of this approach is the first-season episode, Dax.

The episode opens with a characteristic moment of youthful folly, as the infatuated Dr. Julian Bashir makes yet another clumsy attempt to woo the formidable Science Officer, Jadzia Dax. His efforts are brutally interrupted when a trio of aliens abduct Dax, leaving Bashir injured in the scuffle. Captain Benjamin Sisko acts with characteristic decisiveness, using the station’s tractor beam to haul the attackers’ ship back and force Dax’s release. The leader of the abductors, Ilon Tandro (Gregory Itzin), introduces himself as the son of Ardelon Tandro, a revered military hero of the planet Klaestron IV. He presents a warrant for extradition, claiming that thirty years prior, his father was murdered by Curzon Dax—the previous host of the Trill symbiont now joined with Jadzia. Sisko is immediately thrust into a complex legal and diplomatic quagmire. While the Federation has an extradition treaty with Klaestron IV, Bajor—the planet which technically owns the station—does not. Forced to improvise, Sisko temporarily requisitions a section of Quark’s bar to serve as a courtroom, where a Bajoran judge, Renora (Anne Hanney), will preside over an extradition hearing.

The ensuing legal debate forms the heart of the episode. Sisko, for whom Curzon Dax was once a dear friend and mentor, argues passionately that Jadzia and Curzon are two distinct persons. He posits that the joined Trill, while inheriting memories and experiences, cannot be held legally accountable for the crimes of a previous host. Ilon Tandro counters with a compelling, if chilling, pragmatic argument: if this reasoning were accepted, a Trill symbiont could evade justice indefinitely simply by moving to a new host, rendering any notion of accountability meaningless. As this philosophical duel unfolds, Constable Odo travels to Klaestron IV to investigate. There, he meets Ilon’s mother, Enina Tandro (Fionnula Flanagan), and uncovers a more personal layer to the mystery: Curzon and Enina were engaged in an extramarital affair, providing a potent motive for murder. Enina subsequently travels to DS9 and, in a dramatic turn, provides Curzon with an alibi, testifying that he was with her at the time of her husband’s death. The hearing concludes without a definitive legal resolution, leaving Jadzia free. In a poignant final scene, Enina tells Jadzia that the full truth of that night will likely never be known.

Dax holds a notable place in Star Trek lore as the franchise’s final credited work from the legendary D.C. Fontana. One of the most celebrated authors from the original series and a key writer on TNG’s early seasons, Fontana brought her seasoned understanding of character and ethical dilemma to this script. Directed with competent assurance by David Carson, the episode is indeed well-constructed. It serves its primary functions admirably: providing crucial exposition on the nature of Trill symbiosis (a concept still being fleshed out in the show’s first season) and using the legal framework to explore profound questions of identity, continuity of consciousness, and moral responsibility. The performances are generally strong. Gregory Itzin, who would later achieve fame as the duplicitous Vice President in 24, makes his first of several Star Trek appearances here, bringing a credible, grief-fuelled intensity to Ilon. The esteemed Irish actress Fionnula Flanagan is solid, if somewhat unremarkable, in a role that requires her to embody dignified sorrow and buried secrets.

However, for all its strengths, "Dax" suffers from a significant, and quite obvious, dramatic drawback. While both sides present logically sound arguments, Sisko’s defence lacks the rhetorical fire and philosophical gravitas that made Captain Picard’s plea in TNG’s The Measure of a Man so iconic and emotionally resonant. More critically, the entire suspense of the hearing is undercut by a fundamental narrative inevitability. As a television audience, we know with absolute certainty that Jadzia Dax, a regular character introduced only seven episodes prior, will not be found guilty of murder and extradited to her death in the show’s first season. This foreknowledge drains the proceedings of genuine peril. Instead of wrestling with the unsettling possibility of a guilty verdict, the script, perhaps recognising this limitation, opts for a rather convenient, soap-operatic resolution. The deus ex machina revelation of Curzon’s alibi, delivered by the grieving widow no less, feels like a tidy mechanism to extricate the plot from its corner without forcing the characters or the audience to confront the darker implications of its central question.

This points to what is ultimately the episode’s missed opportunity. A more ambitious and dramatically daring script might have stirred the pot considerably. What if Enina’s alibi was a lie, fabricated to protect the memory of her lover? What if she was, in fact, complicit in the murder herself? Such suggestions would have deepened the mystery, compounded the moral ambiguity, and left Jadzia—and the audience—in a far more psychologically complex and troubling space regarding the legacy she carries. Yet, introducing such radical ambiguity regarding the innocence of a symbiont’s past host, and by extension casting a pall over a main character so early in the series’ run, was apparently a step too far for the fledgling DS9. The need to preserve Jadzia’s integrity as a hero won out over the chance to explore truly murky ethical terrain.

Consequently, "Dax" ends as a solid, mildly entertaining, and professionally executed piece of Deep Space Nine, but it is ultimately not particularly remarkable. It fulfils its remit of worldbuilding and character introduction adeptly, yet it pulls its philosophical punch at the crucial moment. It demonstrates the series’ potential to use its confined setting for weighty, talk-driven drama, but also highlights the cautious conservatism that would only fully fall away in later, grittier seasons.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

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

LeoDex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

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

Aimee and I went to the cinema yesterday to see the new Star Wars film, the first one released in about 7 years.

I have to say, before starting this review, we were both a bit disappointed with it, and below I'm going to list a couple of reasons why we felt that way.

It was such a good feeling being in the cinema for a new Star Wars movie.

A Really Strong Opening

The movie kicks right into the action as Mando infiltrates an Imperial Base and annihilates everyone inside.

His mission, as told in the opening title, is to hunt down ex-imperial officers and bring them to justice.

He makes easy work of fighting his way through the base, and then he mounts a walker, charges down a steep hill on it, (Why didn't he just use his jetpack - because spectacle.)

When he reaches the bottom of the hill, he destroys 3 AT-ATs and kills his target.

Mando is portrayed as near invincible, in this, like some sort of video game character.

In fact, after this intro, there is a bit of a title sequence as he goes back to the rebel base to get his new contract, and it very much felt like the opening of a video game. Where you do your first mission/ tutorial, then the titles come up, and the game truly starts.

Was the opening cool? Yes. Was I excited for the rest of the film? Yes.

When Did It Stop Being Enjoyable?

For me, personally, it was when he reached the planet, Shakira, or Shakari, or whatever it was called.

He goes to this world in search of Jabba the Hutt's son.

The music of this planet was like a weird sci-fi mumble rap backtrack/ lo-fi song. It was strange and just didn't feel like Star Wars.

It was just too, this world, and not a galaxy far, far away...

In fact, there were lots of things in the movie that were too, this world.

Source

Too This World

Two major things in this movie were way too close to home for my liking.

Shakari, was one of them.

I could almost hear the writers sitting down together in the room and saying,

Writing Committee Member 1 - "Hey, you know what would be so funny! Imagine having New York in Star Wars."

Writing Committee Member 2 - "Yeah, that would be so awesome, we can even hire Martin Scorsese to play a monkey character in it."

Writing Committee Member 3 - "I've crunched the numbers, people like New York, Martin Scorsese and Monkeys."

Writing Committee Member 4 - "People also like Japan, so can we combine the two cities?"

There were just too many times when I could hear the writers saying, "Hey, you know what would be funny," and it was just annoying.

Creativity is just dead, not just for Star Wars, but for nearly every franchise.

It's a lot of people sitting around who want to reference and nod to the past, or our world, rather than thinking outside the box and creating something different.

Another annoying one was the Louisiana swamp person on a rocking chair. Cool stop motion puppetry, but again, the writers were in the background saying, "You know what would be funny."

They can only reference and nod to things from this world, and it's annoying. That's not even just an issue for this movie, but it's an issue that has appeared numerous times in this Franchise since Disney bought it.

Source

Creativity

The OT and Prequels had some amazing designers working on them, and they didn't have half the money at their disposal that Disney has, yet we can't seem to create something new.

They took Phil Tippet's monsters from the chessboard in the original and added them to the gladiator pit, which was nice to see.

They brought back the Razor Crest, which is arguably one of the only things the new creators have created for Star Wars. It was a bold decision to destroy it in the show, but they reversed that now.

There was a bit of a dogfight where they were chased by 3 fighters, and those fighters (I think) are the same ones from the Jedi Starfighter game, which was a cool reference.

But that's all they seem to be able to do, reference. Either their own IP, other IPs, or our world.

I wish they would just hire a band of misfits, give them a warehouse and a bunch of material, leave them there for 2 years, and see what they come up with. I guarantee, they'll produce some really cool stuff.

I'd love to see Disney gather a bunch of passionate, bright-eyed students or dropouts and give them a chance to work on Star Wars.

What they are and have been doing these last 13 years just isn't working.

Star Wars has inspired me so much since I was a kid; it inspired me to write, create, build stuff and imagine. The documentaries about the crew who worked on it opened my eyes to so many possibilities.

What is the new Star Wars inspiring exactly? It's not even inspiring people to open their wallets and by the figures anymore.

It's Okay

It was okay, it was basically an extended episode, the characters go on a mission, they complete it, and they live to go on another mission.

The only thing that has changed now is that Mando has the Razor Crest back. So, we've essentially reverted back to Season 1 of The Mandalorian.

It was uninspired, and there was a lot of time wasted in the film to bulk out the runtime. There were just too many conveniences for the characters and no tension.

Mando is invincible, until the writers need something to happen, and then he isn't.

He can breathe underwater, like in the TV show, but gets knocked out by gas.

He can wipe out 3 AT-ATs and an Imperial base, but gets bested by 1 bounty hunter.

He gets poisoned, but it just so happens that Baby Yoda stole fish from the right person, who just so happens to have the makings of an antidote.

He needs to destroy the twins' base singlehandedly, but has no weapons... Oh, wait, here is the Gunrunners' entire arsenal... luckily, no one raided these useful weapons.

He was looking for an elusive imperial officer, "Oh, Coyne, that's the guy you were just talking with."

There are too many moments like this that let the movie fall flat on its face.

One big gripe with the film was Rota the Hutt. His voice went through me for a shortcut. Worst. Casting. Ever. Irritating, and in general, his dialogue was nearly as bad as his delivery. They should have just had him speak Huttese.

Also, for a big portion of this, it felt like I was watching the Minions movie.

"It's for kids." Piss off, Mando is murdering everyone that steps in his way, and Yoda is popping eyeballs. So, really? Is it intended for babies?

If Kaleb and Ollie were older, we would have brought them, because I'm genuinely curious about what they would think.

To me, it seems to be intended for kids, but the runtime is way too long for a little kid. Also, there is a lot of dialogue, so I don't think it would keep their attention.

I believe it was trying to be for everyone, and ended up being for no one... like nearly every Disney Star Wars show or movie.

In an era of increasingly fragmented popular culture, where niche audiences scatter across streaming platforms and viral trends, the attainment of genuine cult status for a film has become a remarkably elusive feat. Such status is now almost invariably conferred despite a picture’s commercial performance or mainstream fame, emerging instead from a potent alchemy of obscurity, idiosyncrasy, and obsessive fan engagement. A quintessential example of this modern cult phenomenon is David Robert Mitchell’s 2018 opus, Under the Silver Lake. A sprawling, paranoid mystery-thriller that baffled distributors and divided critics upon its release, it has since fermented in the darker corners of cinephile discourse, evolving from a misunderstood box-office casualty into a revered object of fascination and fevered decipherment.

The plot, set in a sun-bleached Los Angeles during the summer of 2011, follows Sam (Andrew Garfield), an aimless thirty-three-year-old man subsisting on pop culture detritus and conspiracy theories. So engrossed is he in these shadowy narratives that he neglects to pay rent, facing imminent eviction from his apartment complex, a microcosm of Los Angeles eccentricity populated by figures like a perpetually topless neighbour (Wendy Vanden Heuvel) who tends to her parrot. Sam’s listless existence is jolted by the arrival of Sarah (Riley Keough), an attractive young woman who becomes the object of his sudden, intense fixation. Their nascent connection is abruptly severed when Sarah and her roommates vanish overnight, leaving Sam with a void he feels compelled to fill, thus igniting the film’s central mystery.

Sam’s investigation begins with the only clue: a man (Don McManus) seen removing items from the vacated flat. This leads him to a decadent party attended by Millicent Sevence (Callie Hernandez), daughter of a recently disappeared millionaire, and the enigmatic Balloon Girl (Grace Van Patten), a member of the band Jesus and the Brides of Dracula who knew Sarah. The mystery deepens grotesquely with the news that Jefferson Sevence allegedly died in a car crash with three women, all burned beyond recognition—one potentially being Sarah. From here, Sam descends into a rabbit hole of cryptic clues scattered across Los Angeles landmarks, piecing together a baroque conspiracy involving urban legends of dog killers, a supernatural nude assassin known as the Owl’s Kiss, and subliminal messages encoded within popular music.

Mitchell arrived at this project with considerable expectations, having achieved critical acclaim four years prior with the low-budget horror film It Follows, a masterful blend of genre tropes and contemporary anxieties. Under the Silver Lake was a deliberate and radical departure: a far more ambitious undertaking with a significantly larger budget and a cast headlined by former Spider-Man star Andrew Garfield. The supporting roles are peppered with recognisable faces, including Topher Grace, Jimmi Simpson, and a pre-Euphoria Sydney Sweeney in a small role as an escort. This elevation in scale underscores Mitchell’s clear intent to craft a major, statement film.

That ambition manifests most palpably in the film’s reckless genre synthesis. On a basic level, it functions as a neo-noir mystery thriller, but it persistently destabilises this framework with intrusions of supernatural horror, biting satire, and pitch-black comedy. Further setting it apart from typical Hollywood fare of its time is its unabashed, often confrontational eroticism. Female characters are frequently nude, and sexual acts are depicted with a matter-of-factness that feels both of-a-piece with the film’s seedy milieu and deliberately provocative. This carnal atmosphere is punctuated by scenes of graphic violence and visceral biological humour, creating a sensory experience that is as grubby as it is mesmerising.

Mitchell’s desire to distinguish his work extends to a pervasive surrealism and a deliberate embrace of anachronism. The production design is a clutter of obsolete gadgets and retro aesthetics, while the narrative is steeped in references to Hollywood’s past. Homages range from the silent era to the angsty teen landscapes of Rebel Without a Cause (1955). A particularly striking sequence features Riley Keough explicitly channeling Marilyn Monroe’s final, unfinished film Something’s Got to Give. Complementing this time-warped visual grammar is the superb score by Richard Vreeland (Disasterpeace), which eschews contemporary sounds for the lush, romantic strains of a 1940s or 1950s thriller, further heightening the sense of disconnected nostalgia.

However, as with many films that prioritise stylistic bravura, Under the Silver Lake frequently threatens to buckle under the weight of its own affectations. At times, the dedication to quirky mystery overwhelms narrative coherence, emphasising style over substance. Sequences such as Sam’s bizarre audience with a reclusive, paranoid songwriter (Jeremy Bobb), who explicates the secret codes in pop hits, or the over-stylised moonlight skinny-dipping encounter with Millicent, feel like indulgent digressions. They are fascinating vignettes in isolation but contribute to a middle section that sags under its own eccentricity. The film is ultimately rescued by Mitchell’s conviction; he wisely avoids a conventional resolution, opting for an ending as ambiguous, melancholic, and strangely poetic as the journey itself, providing a payoff that validates the viewer’s patience.

The film’s path to audiences was as unconventional as its plot. It premiered at the 2018 Cannes Film Festival to a mixed reception, but its US theatrical distribution was delayed for nearly a year. When it finally saw a limited stateside release, it was pulled from theatres after a mere handful of days, quickly transitioning to video-on-demand. This fate rendered it one of the more obscure major studio releases of its time, yet this very obscurity became part of its allure, lending it an additional layer of mystique for the dedicated few who sought it out.

The reasons for its commercial neglect are multifaceted, but one can speculate that its central theme—the systemic exploitation and mysterious disappearance of young women in Los Angeles, orchestrated by a cabal of wealthy, powerful men—struck a nerve far too raw for comfort. Released in the wake of the burgeoning #MeToo movement and on the eve of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal becoming mainstream news, the film’s conspiratorial cynicism perhaps felt less like absurdist fiction and more like a grotesque reflection of a reality the industry was not yet ready to confront so directly.

Paradoxically, it is this very quality that has cemented Under the Silver Lake’s cult status. In a rare and remarkable achievement for a modern film, it has inspired a devoted fringe of viewers who treat its labyrinthine cluesas a genuine puzzle to be solved. Online forums are dedicated to deciphering its symbols, maps, and codes, with some devotees attempting to apply its logic to real-world mysteries. This transference of the film’s paranoia into the audience’s reality is the ultimate testament to its unique power. It failed to conquer the box office, but it succeeded in creating a self-sustaining mythos—a rare and precious artefact that proves cult cinema, in its truest sense, is very much alive, lurking just under the surface.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)

==

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

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

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

Posted Using INLEO

When people discuss the greatest action movies ever made, Die Hard is almost always at the top of the list. Released in 1988, the film was a massive success and helped change what audiences expected from action heroes. More than thirty years later, it remains one of the most entertaining and influential films ever made.

The movie was directed by John McTiernan, who would later become known for directing several action classics. His work on Die Hard was outstanding because he understood how to balance suspense, humor, action, and character development. Instead of relying solely on explosions and gunfire, he made audiences care about the people involved.

Bruce Willis stars as John McClane, a New York City police officer who travels to Los Angeles to spend Christmas with his estranged wife, Holly. What begins as an attempt to reconnect with his family quickly turns into a nightmare when terrorists seize control of the Nakatomi Plaza building.

Bonnie Bedelia plays Holly Gennaro McClane, while Reginald VelJohnson appears as Sergeant Al Powell, a police officer who becomes McClane’s most important ally from outside the building. The supporting cast is excellent and helps make the story feel grounded despite the increasingly dangerous situation.

Of course, no discussion of Die Hard would be complete without mentioning Alan Rickman as Hans Gruber. This was Rickman’s first feature film role, and he immediately created one of the greatest villains in movie history. Hans is intelligent, calm, sophisticated, and ruthless, making him the perfect opponent for McClane.

The plot is simple but incredibly effective. A group of heavily armed criminals led by Hans Gruber takes everyone inside Nakatomi Plaza hostage during a company Christmas party. Unknown to them, John McClane is loose inside the building and determined to stop their plans.

One of the reasons the movie works so well is that McClane feels like an ordinary person. Unlike many action heroes of the era, he isn’t invincible. He gets tired, injured, scared, and frustrated. Watching him struggle makes every victory feel earned.

The action sequences remain impressive even today. From rooftop explosions to intense shootouts and hand-to-hand fights, the movie keeps the tension high from beginning to end. John McTiernan’s direction ensures that every action scene serves the story rather than existing solely for spectacle.

The film also contains a surprising amount of humor. Bruce Willis delivers countless memorable lines, and his sarcastic personality helps separate John McClane from other action heroes. That sense of humor gives the movie additional charm and makes it even more enjoyable to revisit.

Another reason Die Hard has endured is its pacing. The movie wastes very little time and constantly moves the story forward. Every scene feels important, and the tension continues to build as McClane and Gruber move closer to their inevitable showdown.

The relationship between McClane and Al Powell is another highlight. Most of their conversations take place over a radio, yet their friendship feels genuine. Those quieter moments provide emotional depth and help balance the nonstop action.

Over the years, countless action films have tried to copy the formula that made Die Hard successful. Many have come close, but few have matched the combination of great casting, smart writing, memorable characters, and expertly crafted suspense that this film delivers.

For me, Die Hard remains a great film because it succeeds on every level. The cast is excellent, the direction is outstanding, the action is thrilling, and the story never loses momentum. It is the kind of movie that is just as entertaining on the tenth viewing as it is on the first.

More than three decades after its release, Die Hard continues to stand as one of the greatest action movies ever made. It influenced an entire generation of filmmakers and introduced audiences to one of cinema’s most iconic heroes. That’s why it remains a true classic and a movie I never get tired of watching.

Pillion

Harry Lighton's film follows a young man, Colin (Harry Melling), who meets Ray, a mysterious man who frequents a gay bikers' club. A spark of attraction develops between them, and as their sexual relationship deepens, an inevitably one-sided love begins to emerge.

Is it worth watching?

🟢🟢🟢🟢

• Alexander Skarsgård is excellent in the role, even better than I expected.
• He provides a great contrast to Harry Melling, who is incredibly expressive.
• Strong chemistry between the leads.
• The BDSM aspect is handled quite well.
• I really liked the ending chosen by the screenwriter; it worked for me.
• Surprisingly emotional, largely thanks to Melling's performance.
• It's less a story of sexual awakening and more a journey of romantic self-discovery.
• A bold story to bring to the screen 👏.
• Despite its explicit nudity, it never feels vulgar.

🔴🔴🔴🔴

• The ending and some of the characters' decisions may disappoint certain viewers.
• The ending also felt a little rushed to me, though not enough to be distracting.
• I think the film's marketing is somewhat misleading, which may work against it.
• From a directing standpoint, it's simply okay 🤷‍♂️.

Freakier Friday

Twenty-two years after stepping into each other's lives, Tess and Anna discover that the phenomenon might happen again. Is this just another unnecessary sequel, or does it bring something new to the table?

🟢🟢🟢🟢

• The cast seems to have had a great time filming, and it shows.
• Jamie Lee Curtis is always a plus in any movie she appears in 😉.
• Unnecessary, perhaps, but at least it's charming. It's an easy and enjoyable watch.
• It really finds its rhythm in the second half.

🔴🔴🔴🔴

• I've never held Lindsay Lohan in particularly high regard as an actress, and this film doesn't change my mind 🤷‍♂️.
• It contains all the expected clichés of the genre.
• It follows pretty much the same formula as the original movie.
• For the most part, the screenplay feels uninspired.
• There are very few surprises.
• The first half hour is pretty meh.
• I can't say I was particularly impressed by the humor.
• It probably should have been released directly to streaming.