Everything Everywhere All at Once

A fresh breath of air in the film scene. At least from what I have seen.

These guys (D. Scheinert, D. Kwan) made Swiss Army Man - that movie was a bit too much for me.
Everything Everywhere All at Once - very enjoyable.
If you are ready for lots of absurd and quirky stuff, action packed sequences with a touch of lightness - this should be a movie for you.

 

Only bad thing I came out thinking of was that at the end they dragged the story a bit too long. So, cut 20 minutes off towards the end and it would have been amazing.
Probable Oscar nomination for original screenplay (...and some acting..?). Mark my words...Or don't. 

 

Rating: ★★★★

DUNE

 First of all, the title should be " Dune: PART I" so people are ready before they enter the cinema. Dune WILL leave you hanging, but...IT IS SO WORTH IT.

With that said when a movie is two and a half hours long but you don' t notice - it's good. Denis Villeneuve (my favorite director FYI. Thanks for Prisoners, Enemy, Arrival, Sicario and Blade Runner2049) this time brings us quality, slow-paced sci-fi action drama I would say. 

The story is set in somewhat far future and tells us about Paul (played by lovely Timothée Chalamet) - a young man who's born in a "royal"  family and is brought up to be ready to take over his fathers duties when the time comes. Sounds familiar? Yes. But. It' s not that simple. Paul has something special and there is a reason for that. And we get to see plenty of stuff, not only of Timothees'  character. So now we get to the place where I tell you, without plot spoilers, what I liked: 

- We get to see BEAUTIFUL, very detailed different types of lands (planets), carefully thought out ships, buildings and outfits...The DESERT looks awesome. Basically everything is an eye candy. Since Arrival I enjoy how Denis has the ability to make people seem so tiny and irrelevant even when they are very important to the story. He knows what should actually look and feel BIG. 

 

 

- Jason Momoa. ALWAYS.

 

 

-Did I say it's visually pleasing? But besides that, it is very nice to follow a story and not get bored at any second. It kind of seems "seen" but there are so many little things (script wise, cinematography-wise, CGI of course too) that refresh everything and makes the experience unique. Dune leaves you with a loooong lasting, satisfying aftertaste.

But. Where there's good, there's usually something bad-ish. What I wish was different? Music (score) felt a bit too loud or too much at some points. Also, Zendayas'  story-line. After the film I wondered how her shooting went, must have been quick, at least for this part. So, Zendaya-s fans - lower your expectations. Annnnd..I'm not a fan of Rebecca Ferguson. She did good, but she is just not my cup of tea. 

Overall:  

MUST SEE ON THE BIG SCREEN (Where your chair sometimes trembles from the music :)).

Rating: ★★★★

Parasite

No, it's not about real parasites as we know them. It's a people-movie.
Story is about a financially struggling but close family where one member gets a job  in another, very wealthy family. He then seizes the opportunity and in a short period of time: the whole family now have different jobs in this household. What's so interesting about it? The way it's been told and shown. And how the story itself unfolds.
"Parasite" starts off as an everyday drama with some comical additions/events.The cool thing about it is it changes it's feeling overtime and what starts out as something simple ends in a quite different way.
Now I know. For now I can call Bong Joon Ho my favourite South Korean director (and writer). He has previously made Snowpiercer AND Okja. Thanks for those too.

It's hard to find a good movie nowadays. At least for me it is. Everything basically is a Marvel/DC whatever (not that those might not be good) or a reboot...
This was a good piece of art. So, if you're up for some 2 hour subtitle reading - this one is a film to see.

Rating: ★★★★½

P.S. If this helps: It received Palme d'Or at Cannes this year (that's the highest prize awarded at the Cannes Film Festival...if you didn't know. No judgement.). Oscar nomination sure should happen later on.

Booksmart

First movie for one of my first Hollywood crushes --> Olivia Wilde!
I think it' s been too long since I've seen a proper senior year of high school themed movie. This was close to a perfection.
No offense to Olivia, but as from a director didn't see anything outstanding. The writing however...That I was fond of. It wasn't bubbled up, overly dramatic, nor it was too basic or overly filled with non educated language. It was just as it should've been for a late-teen movie. Enjoyed. Laughed. Cringed. Had fun.
What's the plot you ask? It's about the last day of high school for two besties who were for all these school years really concentrating about getting good grades all the time and realized at some point - they've been missing out some fun parts of their lives. So they attempt to change something on the last day.  That's it. It's great.
Kaitlyn Dever shined for me.
If you feel like seeing a feel-good-late-teen-movie: this is definitely it!

Rating: ★★★★

The Favourite

Yorgos Lanthimos!!!! You are my Greek beast!!
And you have gathered a fantastic team of talent around you!! 10 Oscar nominations (don't need all to be "winning ones") is truly adequate.
   The Favourite is an unordinarily funny, visually (production design, costumes, cinematography and editing. Yes, all these things!!!) mesmerizing piece of art that is carried out by a wonderful, dedicated and crafty cast. It tells a story about a somewhat weak (emotionally and physically) queen (Olivia Colman), her strong and bossy "right hand" (played by Rachel Weisz, my darling) and a newcomer (Emma Stone) who starts her journey into this as a maid, their interactions while there is some sort of war/peace negotiations going on in France. Movie is based on some true facts I won't be able to tell you which ones or how accurate these things were. I was watching to fill my art-aching heart nothing more. Also, my knowledge in history is lacking.
Anyhow.
This is one of those rare movies where I can't even pick out what I didn't like. There were, however, some classics that caught my eye, like:

• Acting. It's such a great pleasure to watch and enjoy a movie where actors are doing their best by seemingly effortlessly portraying something they are not. All three ladies - Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, Emma Stone -, Nicholas Hoult and Joe Alwyn were glorious. I watched and I smiled. The script, music and make-up had a part in this no doubt.
• Sound effects. How nice it is to sometimes just hear life-like sounds like birds chirping, fireplace burning, earrings tinkling, gun firing etc. No music - sound effects. Music was weird and I liked it too though. 
• Screenplay. I have one word. Witty. Wittiness is life. Also, men and ladies had juicy characters.
• CINEMATOGRAPHY AND EDITING. I found it so interesting and lets say "new" how they chose to edit the scenes (at times I felt a sense of calmness..because of the way it was edited. Editing made me feel. That's new) and put them together..Switching from "standard" to wide lenses and choosing the way cameras were moved around and how they were moved.
• Just read they shot the whole thing with only natural light. That's impressive. 
• Production design. THE FILM LOOKED BEAUTIFUL. 

So soon you will see my rating and maybe ask - why not 5 stars? I'll tell you. I am not sure I got the ending..That might be my fault, but the fact remains.
All in all I believe the movie does deserve 10 nominations and it is worth a watch..When you don't feel like Hollywood drama, Hollywood comedy, Hollywood anything.

Rating: ★★★★½

First Man

I am not sure if it wasn't for how much I enjoyed Whiplash and La La Land I would've gone seen this "First man on the Moon" biographical piece. But boy how glad am I to trust Damien Chazelle won't make bad movies. It's been a long time since a film left me with such strong and lingering aftertaste.Thank God.

About the plot: We get to follow the life of Neil Armstrong (played by wonderful Ryan Gosling) from 1961 up until his landing on the Moon in 1969.
There is plenty to enjoy, so let's break it down. I will try to list everything that worked for me in the order of appreciativeness:

▲ THE MOVIE GOT TO MY GUTS! IN TWO DIFFERENT WAYS!! 3 times each!!! At different times I noticed I was tensed-up and holding my stomach or leg tightly. For this I can thank the team consisting of the director, cinematographer, operator and editor. Ryan was shaking, I was too. The other "gut-thing" was emotional. Got myself choked up in different parts of the story. As I am not good in history (wasn't interested at school, this is the only way I get some historical facts, basically), some of the "revelations" (for me those were revelations, probably there are plenty of people who know them) hit me hard and couldn't help myself feeling intense empathy. So for that big thanks goes to the director, Ryan Goslings performance and writers.

▲Ryan Gosling. Man, he can act! The power of transcending the character out of the screen and into your life for a couple of hours - not everybody can do that.

▲Music and sound effects. And also the lack of it when needed. Justin Hurwitz (soundtrack master in this one) also made music for Whiplash and La La Land. I enjoy the fact that I guessed that while watching and later proved myself right with fact-checking. I choose to highlight soundtracks because there are plenty of movies who somehow mess it up. For me the music should complement and enrich the visual experience, sometimes it should set you in specific mood, but not give away "what's about to happen". I think Mr. Hurwitz is on the same page here.

▲Mood of the film. Overall you get this calm, melancholic vibe and time from time you get thrown out by suspenseful and action-like parts. Interesting mixture that works. 

▲Couple of supporting role actors - Kyle Chandler and Jason Clarke both caught my eye. Luke Winters who played older Rick Armstrong (Neils son) also out-stood. He had just a couple of scenes but he delivered those neatly.

▲ I couldn't shake the movie off for some time after end credits. Considering it was a space related movie, it's even more surprising.

Was there something that didn't work for me? Yes. Although Clair Foy did a solid work, her character had substance I somehow didn't feel her and her relationship with anyone. Also I don't find the story itself (the part about landing on the Moon) that exciting.

Damien Chazelle, you have lifted the bar even higher for yourself. Three movies made. All three kind of epic. I have said enough.

P.S. To enjoy the movie, don't listen to me and lower your expectations.

Rating: ★★★★½

A Star Is Born

First things first:

DEFINITELY A CINEMA MOVIE. Can't imagine how you will get "the right feeling" at home as this is music-filled piece.
Now the seconds:
A Star is born starts off with some strong and powerful string filled tunes that most possibly will give you chills (CHILLS!!) which to me is a rare experience. After that nice blast of bass, drums and cool vocals the story about experienced and popular musician who has somewhat typical rockstar problems keeps moving into a direction where he meets/discovers very talented wannabe singer. And the next is quite typical.
The thing is - while almost everything could be predictable (if you tried to guess and not enjoy what is in front of you) it is made that fluently and the characters feel so natural that predictability does not really bother you.
Bradley Coopers debut as a director (yes, you heard me. DIRECTOR) is all right, plot touches on some popular problems show business might bring - personal and within relationships. As I mentioned previously - nothing new. Cooper and Gaga did a solid acting, no argument there.
There were things that lowered my overall feeling, one of them - plot being very "I feel like I've seen this 15 times before...oh, wait..there is something different...yet still feels like I've seen this." (didn't bother me much, but I noticed). While main characters were strongly built, supporting ones were weak. Also think the ending could have been 15 minutes before it was and that would have been so much better. There was a great space where to finish it without making another cliched grand finale that kind of typically tries to suck everything out of you. Felt unnatural. Less is more I would say.

Good movie. Good music. Gagas' pipes and Bradley's voice - very enjoyable.
I should highlight that this was a cliched piece that I unexpectedly could enjoy. I blame the music.

Rating:★★★½

Searching

Went to see this without knowing that it will be "Searching" what I was going to see (that's the magic of movie theater showing "secret pre-premieres" where people go in blind and just figure out what film it is going to be by it starting to play. Only thing they do know - it will be something fresh and not available yet for audiences for a week, or two or something).
Anyways.
Searching is a story about a loving father whose daughter suddenly goes missing and his actions in order to find her in this media/mobile-oriented life we have now.
It's an alright movie for the most part. The visualization of it is different, very "video call", "web search from ones perspective" filled. Some bits here and there are comic-like because most audience definitely can relate to "parents on internet" subject. I've checked and critics have enjoyed this piece.
HOWEVER, I did not. I found the story to be something out of  "I've seen this! This is nothing thrilling whatsoever!" bag. Did not like the way how it unfolded and what turns along the way it took. And don't get me even started on the ending part. Feel quite strongly in a negative way when in a reasonable, realistic movie illogic appears and f*cks everything up, especially if it happens at the end. WHYYY. Ending part took away one whole rating star, no doubt. Soundtracks were tacky and too obvious for situations.
John Cho was good. I enjoyed his performance (speaking of John Cho. Columbus was a good indie movie. Watch that instead).
I can only dare you to go see this movie and then come back and tell me "your taste sucks!"...Or, you know, there is also an option of "you were right".
Cheers!

Rating: ★★

P.S. Movie is in Latvia's theaters starting 14th of September.

Ocean's 8

I think there are two ways to watch this IF you want to leave with some sense of enjoyment:
1) Get up somewhat early in the morning, take a cup of tea or coffee and go to the cinema (cause it's dark there and quality is way better then at home.....well, most of the homes I presume). And as it is morning, you don't really want to watch something deep, dark, incredibly clever or meaningful, right? I think you should be wanting something professionally made, easy-breezy plot-wise with some light touches of humor here and there, not too much action or detective-like..Right? Oh, and a good cast. That goes without saying and basically you should be wanting that no matter what time of day it is. This is option number 1 and this is the one I chose. I see another way how this can turn from mediocre to good:
2) On a windy, rainy or any other way uneventful/unpleasant Friday (or Saturday) evening take your bestestestest friend or couple of just good ones, take some alcoholic beverages (beer, cider, wine or something else I don't know about) and just let loose! But not too much, it's still a public place.

I guess you already gathered that this is nothing epic or outstanding. At least for me it wasn't except for the cast. All the ladies (I have to mention them all - Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Sarah Paulson, Mindy Kaling, Anne Hathaway, Rihanna, Helena Bonham Carter and Awkwafina) were awesome and chill and very lovely to watch. The plot is very easy to understand I won't even tell you. There are no major turns, surprises, thrilling scenes, it's just pleasant and easy...like an Ocean film should be.
As for a 10AM movie - I did like it and the anti-complications in it. I give this one a YES.
Movie is in Latvias' theaters starting from 15th of June.

Rating: ★★★½

Detroit (2017 release)

Usually I "review" movies that are freshly in cinemas or show up on Netflix but as I haven't seen anything good there in past month or so (except Annihilation...which I think I will watch again and then write something) I have decided to briefly introduce you to Detroit - a movie from Kathryn Bigelow (known from Zero Dark Thirty, The Hurt Locker and probably others).
Detroit shows us some events during riots (actual events, just more dramatized, maybe..we will never know) that happened in 1967 in Detroit. It's a solid 2.5 hours a watch that starts kind of slowly but somehow you are thrown into action at the same time. Main thing is what went down in one motel.
During you get to see some footage from actual time there which is subtly edited into the movie. Enjoyed that decision.
What is this movie is about? Basically - racism and injustice. All I can say is that once again I felt angry, sad and hurt. Personally, I think the film found a way how to silently climb up on me and then at one point started to crush me down. And in a twisted not so twisted way I liked it.
I am grateful I didn't have to experience what they had but couldn't help myself to feel for the characters that were involved.
This might not be a movie for everyone (there are others out that in a way are similar to this plot/similar events. Racism and injustice in USA is nothing new etc.) nor everyone will like it as much as I did. But. The thing is.
I did. So I decided to type something here.

Rating: ★★★★

Professor Marston and the Wonder Women

Well that's a mouthful for a movie title. Anyhow..
I am sitting here and not typing for about 5 minutes now. I just don't know how to correctly express of what I'm thinking. Maybe I just haven't recently seen anything that is what this movie was...Which was....argh..Fuck it. Let's start from another angle.
The film is based on true events and it shows us a later (his mid thirties and later) part of Harvard psychologists and professors William Moulton Marstons life with his wife....and a student of his. During the runtime of the movie not only we get to see what was his input in creating lie detector test, how the idea and invention of Wonder Woman arose, we also get to experience quite juicy, richly described and visualized relationships of his.
In first minutes I already could tell that it will be a good time in front of the screen. How come you ask? I only had heard a few dialogues but already felt that the shown characters were deep, well established and diverse in their qualities and flaws. Okay, the flaw part might have been similar. But that is not that important.
What is important to say is that it is multilayered, passionate and also educational piece of art. All three main characters are so strong, smart, independent and played wonderfully by the attractive cast - Luke Evans,  Rebecca Hall and Bella Heathcote. They did a great job filling the room with different kinds of emotions and transcending them to the opposite side of the screen. I felt what they were feeling, thank you.
I can't really comment on music, cinematography or editing (wasn't bad, wasn't also anything unordinary) or anything else really. Costumes were fair I guess, the chosen color spectrum was nice as well but I was in it for the characters and the story. Don't want to get into more details about the characters (what I liked and what not) or the story itself. See for yourselves, that's the best thing to do.

A well written, interesting and passionate movie.

Rating: ★★★★

Mudbound

And once again Netflix brings us good cinema. Just when I started to doubt them. Thank goodness.
Mudbound is filled with hatred, hurt, heart and compassion and it tells a story of two families who try to make a living on the countryside of Mississippi. One is a family of color, other is not. Timeline when this happens is a bit during and mostly after World War II. Both of these families had one member joining and returning from duty. They both struggle, just in different ways. And that is what this piece is about.
I hadn't seen anything else from the director Dee Rees beforehand but this movie has me assured I will give a try from anything she makes in years to come.
When it comes to acting I am ready to praise the villain of the movie - played by Jonathan Banks. When a character can bring out such strong emotions out of me it deserves a notice. This is the time when I can say I loved that I hated someone.
Not in the spotlight for me but Rob Morgan, Carey Mulligan, Garrett Hedlund and Jason Clarke also brought in some fine, diverse and believable performances portraying very different people in different life situations. I thank everyone.
Enjoyed hearing some of that gospel type of singing. What is more, I always appreciate seeing hard work done. And by hard work I mean labor, that getting-down-and-doing-the-dirty-ground-work not sitting in front of piece of paper, computer, phone, you name it.
Apart from seeing things I also enjoyed hearing quite a lot of monologues that went on in their minds. That was pleasant and felt like a little but cool change from other movies I have lately seen (and not written reviews, forgive me).
What I found as a problem was that it was too dark at times. And I mean literally-it lacked some lighting, especially at the beginning of the movie. It was almost pitch black and I couldn't see what was happening. I hope it might be a Netflix brightness thing or something. Another little thing was that some scenes felt too long.

All in all this was a strong enough movie to compete in getting some Golden Globes. I truly believe it. Not sure about the Academy Awards (though I would be happy to see it nominated).
This one got my attention and even reached my feeling hiding place. I cared. It deserves a review. Thank you. Thank you Mississippi and your damn heavy rain which brings trouble to farmers (not the main plot of the film, don't get excited).

Rating: ★★★★

Logan Lucky

When it comes to Steven Soderbergh ("Ocean" movies, "Magic Mike" and my favorite from him  - "Side Effects")  I like noticing how he has his "favorite actors" to work with (I know it's not only his thing, there are many directors out there who like to collaborate with specific actors). So again we get to see Channing Tatum in action (quite different from Magic Mike, be aware).
Logan Lucky has an easy plot  - two brothers (Channing and Adam Driver) decide (okay, one of them decides and the other one just jumps in) to pull off a heist during a NASCAR race somewhere in the South of the USA.
For this one I can praise the work of Mr. Tatum and Mr. Driver. They were just spot on. To see such working chemistry is a delight - they were awkward enough and had big hearts. Thank you guys. Riley Keough (my somewhat new discovery) had some characteristic clothing, make-up AND nails..Also good to see. I couldn't admire the work of Daniel Craig because it was overshadowed by Tatum and Driver. He had cool hair color. All I remember. I have nothing else to say - I enjoyed it.

It's a bit silly, it's a bit serious with some action on the side. It's a Steven Soderbergh movie: a good one to wind off to.

Rating: ★★★★

The Beguiled

Sofia Coppola has brought us some good cinema before (Lost in Translation, The Virgin Suicides etc.) and The Beguiled is not about to break that pattern.
It tells us a story about different aged women who stay at somewhat abandoned girls school during American Civil War. One of the girls while picking mushrooms finds a badly wounded soldier "from enemy lines" and decides to take him in. Then we see everyone interact with him and each other and so the story unfolds. It's a proper drama.
There were a few things besides the story itself that I enjoyed:

• I pretty much LOVED the visual tones that were set. Such deep, slightly cold and saturated colors were like candy to my eyes. Ahhh, very appealing. 
• Although I am a fan of Elle Fanning, Kirsten Dunst stole the show for me when it comes to acting (and writing I guess). She was so believable in her facial expressions. Great job.
• Colin Farrell. YES. 

Main thing I did NOT like was seeing the same shot at least two times (you can see it in the image I've added. It's a beautiful scene...but I believe there are different angles that look also astonishing). I don't believe it had a hidden message, it just felt lazy. And with that repeated shot later came an upgraded version which was filmed from the same spot. It might have been first time I've noticed something like this. Did not like it at all.

All in all it's a good drama with diverse and interesting human interactions in private and in group settings.

Rating: ★★★½

The Glass Castle

I really enjoyed Destin Daniel Crettons' directed Short Term 12. It was very subtle, had a very nice tone to it and felt like an "indie movie".
The Glass Castle felt like a "Hollywood movie". Is that a good thing? When combined with the plot and the mood of the film - no.
About the movie: The Glass Castle is not linear - it switches between two timelines in Brie Larsons portrayed Jeannettes (main character and we basically follow her and her observations) and her family's life. You see the present time but the past is the one which leads the whole thing. You get to see the messiness and how it got that way. It's just a story (based on true events) about an... unusual family (somewhat hippy-like parents with issues and as a result - a bit damaged children) and their different struggles.
Despite the good work from mainly Brie La
rson, Naomi Watts and Woody Harrelson it was just too predictable and filled with cliche moments that I couldn't fully enjoy their performances. Or maybe the script was lacking, I will never be able to tell. Also - Max Greenfields character felt like an upgraded Schmidts version from New Girl. Don't know who's at fault there.
It's a proper drama however it was either filled with too many messed up sh*t together or just should've been even longer to completely resolve everything (why resolve you ask? Remember the "Hollywood movie" factor I mentioned? Well there you have it).
From a time-jumping perspective it was quite decent. It was pretty easy to follow the story.
What is a bit interesting to me - I couldn't stand hairstyle choices for "the present time" there. Usually I don't even comment on such things as hair and make-up but this time it (hairdo) was just so into my face and so not good looking/appealing that I noticed.

Anyways, it's not a bad one, it had some good punch lines here and there but overall I left the theater with a bit of a letdown feeling.

Rating: ★★★

Dunkirk

Thank you Christopher Nolan for making another very enjoyable piece of art! Enjoyed the way it started, continued AND especially how it ended. It kept me tense and on my toes from very first minutes - a very rare state when it comes to cinema experience.
Hard note: I believe you must see this movie in cinemas to truly feel it. Otherwise your judgement won't be completely honest (or respected by me). Just like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Movie is based on true events that happened during a battle in Dunkirk (France) in World War II.
What hit me the most (and in the best way possible) - sound. While watching I couldn't believe that I was not only into the story but also could find time to admire sound effects and music. There should be at least two or three Oscar nominations right there. Thank you Hans Zimmer, I felt you and didn't find you were falling asleep at the Organ this time.
The second best thing that comes to mind is...well, actually there are two which somewhat mix together. I loved how tense and up in my seat it could make me feel without showing any (maybe there was some but it wasn't that noticeable) blood or "raw injuries". Also another a bit different approach that spoke to me - never really seeing the enemy. This movie was purely showing us one side of the battle and everything that was happening on this one side. Unordinary and great.
There is not much to say when it comes to the script as there were not many dialogues happening (nor there should've been!). As the movie felt so honest you know the script was well done.
I also don't really have anything to say about the characters except that they felt very genuine and without saying much (as I told you there weren't many dialogues) they somehow felt well developed with strong backgrounds. All these men felt like real and diverse soldiers and that is all I want to see and experience.

An excellent film.

Rating:★★★★½

Baby Driver

Baby Driver comes from Edgar Wright (a guy who I connect with Scott Pilgrim vs the World and as Anna Kendricks ex-boyfriend) who has his own style... but is it for everyone?
No. But is there anything that is for everyone (except for basic human needs of course)? Anyways, back to the movie.
Before going to the cinema I tried not to rewatch trailers, tried not to know anything about it but still could see the very good reviews (didn't read them) coming in. I thought it will be one good, easy-going movie with a sense of light spirit over it. Baby Driver did not live up to my expectations. I would describe it as a car chasing, light heist action movie with silly romance on the side, filled with men and two weak women characters. Boom! Done! Okay, let's make it longer.
Here goes the good stuff:
- Soundtracks were cool.
- John Hamm. There is no wonder why he was so fitting for the role, (portraying a somewhat cocky macho criminal) he was playing as it was written FOR him (found that out just before the movie started). Splendid job, John, splendid.
- Some car chasing scenes were also enjoyable.
- All in all it was entertaining. Not the most fun I've had though.
Here comes the not necessarily bad, but let-downs:
- I can't see why it has such great ratings. It wasn't that fresh - yes, some plot parts were new for me but overall it had high predictability percent.
- It was a men-movie. Weak, weak women characters (did I mention they were basically two there? TWO...and maybe like two others somewhere in the background). I can't. Imagine you meet a guy two times and see clearly that something's off and already are in love and ready to ruin your life and just run off to wherever? Really? That's just a bit (or very) upsetting. I call b*llsh*t on this.
- Male characters weren't that great either. 
- Not enough heisting and scheming (I know it's a DRIVING movie but it is about a guy driving a getaway car so I had hopes..)
- There were other disturbing character changes that I did not approve of.

Overall, as it has that many good reviews, I think you should see it and prove me wrong. It wasn't bad but it definitely wasn't that "fresh" or amazing. No.

Rating: ✮✮✮

Song To Song

Terrence Malick is not my favorite director but there is one thing he always delivers for me - beauty. This was once again an eye-candy. Visuals, sights, wide angles - thank you very much.
There are barely dialogues there, usually voice-overs because the story is being told  from a diary point of view I would say. We hear character thoughts and reflections and basically all dialogues are "silenced out". It's appealing. Casting hit the bulls eye for me.
What could've been better: the script (somehow through all the expressed emotions it still felt shallow for me), songs they used could've been less but played for longer periods of time or something..Also - editing. Film felt very chaotic and so I couldn't really attach to anyone or anything (except for the nature shots).
Conclusion: It had the potential of being unbelievably amazing but in the end it is just beautiful with excellent cast and too much "cutting" and "putting it back together".

Rating: ✭✭✭

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

Some of us already know something about Arthur and his beloved sword in the stone and its' strength. Some of us don't. It doesn't matter. What matters is that this movie was quite great!
What good things you will possibly see or get out of this:
 - Great, interesting operator work AND editing! The different angles and ways the cameras were turned and then cut and cooked up again in such a pleasant way..tiny bulbs of joy popped inside of my soul because of the likeness of what my eyes saw and brains comprehended. So prepare for nicely done visuals.
- LANDSCAPES
- Jude Law as an evil character was a bit funny to see. He did a good job. Just still find it funny.
- It's a Guy Richie movie (previously famous for different movies, most popular - Snatch). It goes without saying - there will be some good and funny punch-lines. Enjoyed the screenplay.
- Modern yet with a sense of medieval times soundtracks - lovely and appropriate.
- As I have no intention of spoiling anything... but I also can't not speak..Oh well, whatever - In an early stage of the movie there is a montage about the little Arthur and how he grows up and what happens in the mean time. I found it to be a very cool way of showing things that are important to get but not that important for the main story. So I was happy of what I saw and also about how much time out of the movie these scenes took.
- Also a teeny, tiny thing at the end of the movie that just made me smile and is not a spoiler - I saw dirty fingernails. It may sound a bit odd but it is nice to see these little but realistic things in movies.
What bad things to expect?
- I can't really name any. I wasn't ecstatic or on the edge of my seat all the time, there were little parts were the movie felt flat but they were just for a very short period of time.
Here it goes - Medieval tale-ish movie about king-to-come Arthur and the sword told (and definitely shown) in a bit of a nowaday-way. Entertaining.


Rating: ★★★★

Get Out

Get Out was interesting. Genre wise it's not my favorite (horror, mystery. Although I wasn't scared for a second) but the story and where it was going was quite interesting and original.
The story begins when African-American man accepts to visit his Caucasian girlfriend's somewhat rich family somewhere off-road. He is the first African-American man who she takes there. Family itself seems legit (....but are they?), the staff is being off-putting a bit (...but are they?) so you get curious of why is that..Well, let's say the journey begins there and I don't want to give anything away anymore. It's interesting.
Won't be able to tell you that soundtracks were great (didn't notice them), or the operator did a fantastic job (didn't notice the work) or that acting was superb (didn't feel like it, didn't even care) but I will say again - it kept me intrigued.
So if you are not a person with weak nervous system I can suggest you go and see this film.

Rating: ★★★½