Coming Soon

Hello everyone!

Here I am with a brand new column dedicated to the new trailers that came out last week. Let's check them out together!

Thor Ragnarok

I loved this trailer. I'm not a fan of Thor as a superhero but I find quite interesting how Marvel has decided to re-brand this film. Thor meets Guardians of the Galaxy. The beat of the 80s dominates this trailer. Thor meets Doctor Strange. The overall aesthetic seems more elaborated. Thor meets Spiderman Homecoming. After Spiderman and Iron Man, here we are with Thor and Hulk. Can't wait.

Brad's Status

I didn't know anything about this film. But I'm really curious to discover a brand new Amazon product.

The Vault

A horror and mainstream version of Good Time with James Franco. Captivating.


What do you think about these new trailers?

Let's talk about: Music Films

Hello, everyone!

I'm back with three brand-new reviews! Check them out!

I decided to watch this film on a hot Saturday night. It was 10 PM and I needed to watch something not too long. The label music film misled me.

The Music in Me is a 2015 TV film directed by John Bradshaw starring the famous pop star Debbie Gibson. Honestly, I don't even know who she is.

The film attempts to tell the story of a talented middle age musician-singer who gave up her career to help her parents. After a series of events, she will return to her passion helping the church choir. Illness and poor situations will complicate the whole situation.

I didn't enjoy this film for three main reasons. First, the use of music. Music is not the main element of this film, it's just a side feature. In a film named "The Music in me", this should not happen. Second, the use of melodrama.We all enjoy watching melodrama. But, a fake melodrama based on an illness that is so easy to cure is one of the worst things in the world. Third, the love story. They wasted the only thing that they could achieve with this TV format and budget.

The positive side? Amy Forsyth in the role of the homeless Alice. The negative side? A music film without music.

This is how a biopic should be done. Great Balls of Fire! is funny, dramatic, entertaining and rock.

The 1989 film directed Jim Mcbride and starring Dennis Quaid and Winona Ryder tells the story of the crazy life of the rock hero Jerry Lee Lewis: from his early career to his scandalous marriage with his 13 years old cousin.

The film succeeds in creating an interesting portrait of the singer because of the balance and mixture of film genres. The film is a comedy because it is exaggerated. It is a drama because of its themes of drugs, failure, and sexual abuse. It is a rock musical because the beat is a narrative element.

The positive side? Rock. The negative side? Extreme exaggeration.

Are you a Bob Dylan fan? Then this the right film for you. Otherwise, you will not understand it.

I'm not there is a 2007 film, first screened at the Cannes Film Festival, directed by Todd Haynes and starring Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett and Heath Ledger. The film portrays several aspects of Bob Dylan's life through the storylines of six different characters.

I don't know Bob Dylan very well. Consequently, for me this film was a challenge. I tried to get a general overview of this icon, Nobel prize winner, through this film. On one hand, the film succeds in creating an accurate impression of the song writer. On the other, the film is very slow with a non-linear plot and an artistic cinematogrophy. It's not a film for everyone. But, I think that it's worth spending one afternoon watching it.

The positive side? Cate Blanchett as Bob Dylan. The negative side? Non-linear plots.


What do you think? Have you seen this films?

See you soon!

Let's talk about: Music Films

Hello everyone!

After one week I'm back with brand new suggestions for this hot summer!

This 2006 film portrays the real story of a dance teacher who believed in the talent of a group of problem kids.

This is the typical film to watch during a family night while eating pizza and drinking beer. Your old grandparents, your parents and your little siblings will love it in the same way. Dancing scenes and a good Banderas will entertain you for one night. But don't think to preserve this story in an angle of your heart for more than 90 minutes. The show must go on.

The positive side? Jenna Dewan Tatum before her breaking performance in Step Up. The negative side? Stereotypes.

Studio 54 tells the story of a famous 70s NYC nightclub through the eyes of a young employee.

54 is Magic Mike in 1998. This is not a praise. Sex, drugs and 70s songs are a perfect combination for a summer night. Still, the film doesn't work. The screenwriter and the director failed to make us care about the three main characters: a young bartender, an aspirant singer and an owner always high. The only goal that the director achieve was the tale of the club.

The Positive Side?... The Negative Side?...


Have you seen these films? What do you think about them? Let me know!

At the cinema : The Mummy

Hello, everyone!

Here is my new review:

While I was watching this film, I asked myself: what are the good premises to create a new cinematic universe? Originality, continuity and a good love story. The Mummy, directed by Alex Kurtzman, fails all these fundamental premises to set up the Universal Dark Universe. 

At the beginning of the film, an ancient princess is awakened from her crypt beneath the desert, bringing with her malevolence grown over millennia, and terrors that defy human comprehension.

The main problem of this film is that the screenwriter and the director haven't added nothing new to the old films about the Mummy that we all know. Probably, they thought that having a female mummy was enough. It wasn't.

Tom Cruise. He's not the right choice for this role. If this is a Dark Universe, then the genre of all the films should be the horror. This is an action movie. No suspense, no shivers. It's more Mission Impossible meets Indiana Jones. There is not continuity to the roots of the classic monster films. Such a waste.

I don't know how to call the relationship between these two, but this is not a love story. The two actors have no chemistry at all and their lines are terrible. The romantic turn of the ending is one of the worst things you will see at the cinema this summer.

Was it necessary? The introduction of Dr. Jekyll does not make any sense in the storyline. This is the first film of a whole universe. We don't want to know everything because we still don't care about the characters.

Overall, for me, this film was a complete waste.

What do you think?

Let's talk about: Music Films

Hello, everyone!

Here I am with a brand new column! It's summer and I think we all deserve to be entertained by nice music films while we sip an iced green tea!

Here my suggestions:

The film follows the adventures of Chili Palmer, a disenchanted film producer who tries the music industry. He meets and romances a widow of a music executive on the way and he also deals with LA gangsters. 

Be Cool (2005), directed by F. Gary Gray, is a collective film. The audience can enjoy this film also just trying to identify the actors behind each character. Believe me, this is not a great film, but it's entertaining. I think that in some way it offers a reflection about the music industry that it is not so granted. 

The positive side? Uma Thurman and John Travolta together after Pulp Fiction. The negative side? The happy ending. 

This film follows the story of a schoolteacher's struggle to teach violin to inner-city Harlem kids. 

I know, we have heard this story a thousand of times. Still, it's a story with good feelings, good music and an amazing Meryl Streep. I think that this story is in some way the "first" of its genre, it was directed by Wes Craven in 1999.  So why don't go back in time to re-discover an underestimated cult? 

The positive side? A fantastic Michael Angarano when he was young. The negative side? The fast ending. 

Have you seen any of these films? What do you think?

Review- Alice through the looking glass

Hello, everyone!

Here is my new review! Check it out!

I had the opportunity to re-watch Alice through the looking glass last week. I remember that when last year it came out people used the words "flop" and "terrible" to describe it. Although I'm aware that this sequel it only has commercial purposes, I enjoyed it.

Here is the plot: Alice returns to the whimsical world of Wonderland and travels back in time to help the Mad Hatter.

What I liked most of the whole film is the idea of the story. Of course, the screenplay is not perfect. There are vague dialogues and too many explanations, but for the first time, there is an attempt of developing an original story for a famous fairy-tale. Alice is an excellent female character, a good model for rebel children.

Then, I appreciated the development of the relationship between the Mad-Hatter and Alice. Everything that Alice does for the mad-hatter makes sense. The audience really cares about these two characters.

I also found interesting the idea of using the Time as the enemy in this Alice's adventure: Alice is becoming a woman in real life and her attempts to trick the Time in Wonderland just makes her realise of who she is and of who is becoming. This is not only a film for children because it proposes a beautiful reflection about life in the adult world.

From an aesthetic point of view, the film is not original like the first episode. No Burton, no mad settings. Still, I think that the new director found a good balance between classical Disney colours and a Burtonian atmosphere.

What do you think?

Review- Breaking Dance

Hello everyone! Here is my review! Check it out!

Honestly, I have not much to say. Breaking Dance is just an ugly film. It could have been called Step Up infinity and nothing would have changed. It is not even that kid of ugly films like Dirty Dancing when at least after you see it you can reflect on something. This film has no qualities at all. 

The plot is very easy: She wants to be a star. He is her best friend. She meets a manger. She looses her friendshisps and dances to get them back. They kiss. 

Why did I watch it? Masochism. Seriously, not even the choreographies were good!!  

Please, avoid this film like if it was a plague!

Dirty Dancing (2017)- Review

Hello, everyone! Here is my review!

I shouldn't have seen this film. Still, I did it. I was curious, especially after I read so many negative opinions about it. I was sure it was not a great film. But I did not though it could be so bad.

I do not like the idea of remakes. I think that a remake can work only if the original film is a complete failure. Why should we watch a remake of a five-stars film? Recently, I have read an essay by Leitch: "Twice-Told Tales", about the rhetorics and types of remakes. According to the writer, there are four main types of categories: homage, update, re-adaptation and true-remake. I reflected on his generalisation and I believe that the most successful remakes are homages and true remakes. I loved LA LA LAND even if it is based on the tradition of American and French musicals. On the other hand, I could not love Dirty Dancing because the production intentions are not clear. It is not an homage. It is not an update. It is not a re-adaptation. It is not a true remake. 

The film is not an homage to the cult film of the late '80s because it imitates its scenes. It's all a big imitation. There is nothing new. Nothing that was inspired by the original film. I did not appreciate the choice of using the same lines all the time! Of course, the film wanted to blink an eye to the fan, but it was an exaggeration. I was really annoyed by this choice, also because the acting is not credible at all. 

Abigail Breslin and Colt Prattes have not chemistry at all. He seems his father and the love scenes between them (and also the dancing scenes) are disturbing. The only character that I enjoyed is Baby's sister played by Sara Hyland. The film develops her storyline but there is not update. The film is longer but it does not explore themes that are relevant in today's society: abort, gender gap, sexuality etc... 

Moreover, I do not appreciate the choice of making this cult film a musical. The songs are not memorable and the singing of "Time of my life" is almost embarassing. The singing gives rythm to the film but they do not involve the audience in the story. 

Finally, I found the ending scene useless and granted. It seems that the films wants to give the audience a non-credible message with an actress like Abigail Breslin that is 21 years old but appears to be a fifteen girl pretending to be a woman in her thirties. Such a waste of time. 

10 years- Review

Hello, everyone! Here is my new review!

Have you ever thought what can happen to the stereotypical main characters of a typical American teen-com after 10 years? 10 years, directed by Jamie Linden in 2011, tries to satisfy our curiosity.

The plot follows the adventures of a group of friends that realize they still haven't quite grown up in some ways the night of their high school reunion. It sounds interesting, right?

Well, unfortunately, the film is not. It lasts only 1 hour and 40 minutes, but it seems longer. Nothing happens. The revelations are not so intriguing and the second act lacks climax.

The film imitates the model inaugurated by Carnage (Polanski, 2011): one night, a group of characters and a confrontation. The problem of this film is that it is that the confrontation is not well-written and it is not relevant.

However, I think that the film has a good casting. Channing Tatum, Chris Pratt, Rosario Dawson, Oscar Isaac. All of them were very credible in their roles.

Overall, the film is not a complete disaster. It's very boring but it provided a good reflection on missed chances in life.

In My Dreams- Review

Hello!

Here is my opinion of the TV film "In My Dreams". Hope you enjoy it!

I warn you: if you find this title, please skip it. Don't waste your time. This film is not going to ruin your day but not even to make it better. "In My Dreams is a 2014 American film for television (ABC), directed by Kenny Leon. Now you can also forget these details. There is nothing new in this film. Moreover, it also has not particular features that make it remarkable and memorable.

The plot is very linear: Natalie and Nick are frustrated with their luck in romance. After tossing coins into a fountain, the two then begin dreaming about each other. But, according to mythology, they only have a week to turn those dreams into reality.

Does it sound familiar? Of course!

However, the story is not as funny as the comedy by Mark Steven Johnson in 2010. The ABC production has a more melodramatic insight on love and mythology. A melodramatic tone with several scenes that could have been cut in the post-production process. 

The script is a shame. The second act is all centered on how the two characters cannot be together because "it's all a dream". Seriously?! After they get to know the legend of the fountain, they do not even try to ask each other where do they live! By the way, they live in the same city!

And also the acting... it's everything so fake. I don't think that we will ever hear again about these actors. 

For your mental health, please, avoid this film!

What do you think? Have you seen it?

Ruby Red III

Hello, everyone!

Here is my review of Ruby Red III!

I was fifteen the first time I read Kerstin Gier's Ruby Red trilogy. I remember that I was amused and fascinated by these books about time travellers. When the first film came out, I was surprised and disappointed at the same time. It was 2013. The year of Warm Bodies, Beautiful Creatures, Divergent, Catching Fire and so on. I was disappointed because the film had nothing to do with the book I loved as a teenager. But I was surprised because it was different from the other young adults. A German production that went worldwide. I waited for the second film. A total waste. I didn't expect much from this third adventure. But at the end, I enjoyed it very much.

Gwendolyn and Gideon, two time-travellers, fight to save the world and their love. As you can imagine, the plot does not stand out for its originality. Still, it had a couple of twists that I enjoyed. I loved the way the main female characters learn to fight going back in time and the development of her relationship with her cousin Charlotte, her enemy since the first film.

The main problem of the film is that it is very cheap. Special effects and costumes could have been improved. But I couldn't complain after I have seen Fallen. At least, this was a film released on demand. It was not made for a cinema screen. And it's for this reason that I loved it so much. It's a film for a TV screen, with no many ambitions but well structured.

The film portrays the world of this time-travellers very well. In one of the first scenes, the meeting between Gwendolyn and Shakespeare is hilarious! I also enjoyed the bantering between the two lovers. Of course, the time travels were the best thing of the whole film. The final party in the 20s was  such a smart choice to end this trilogy.

Overall, the film is not the best in the world. But it remains an interesting attempt from the German production studios to create what the Americans are used to do.

Hamlet in London

Hello, everyone!

These are two pictures I took when I went to see Hamlet in London a couple of years ago! I hope you enjoy them as I loved this show!

The Dressmaker- Review

Hello, everyone!

Last week I watched "The Dressmaker". Here is my opinion:

"The Dressmaker" is that kind of films that makes you ask why. Why has the production to waste a wonderful actress such as Kate Winslet in a B-movie? Why her love interest, Liam Hemsworth, needs to pretend to be twenty years older? Why the plot is driven by low-level climaxes? I could go on forever.

The film is about revenge. It tells the story of a glamorous woman who returns to her small town in rural Australia. With her sense of fashion, she transforms the women and exacts sweet revenge on those who did her wrong.

"The Dressmaker" has a good premise. Still, it lacks an original evolution of this premise centered on revenge and women. The setting, Australia in the '50s, are anonymous. Yes, the dresses hint that the characters live in the golden age of Chanel, Dior and Balengacia. But, there is not authenticity. I think that the viewers can feel that nothing of what is shown is real. These are '50s clothes made in the 21st century.

The film is based on a novel by Rosalie Ham. I haven't read this book, but I think that both the director and screenwriter, Jocelyn Moorhouse and P.J Hogan,  did a mediocre job in adapting the story for the big screen. Although we all know that melodrama films are based on the excess of emotion narratives and non-sense cliffhangers, the film does not find a balance. For this main reason, I regard it as a failure.

Moreover, I did not appreciate at all the choice of Liam Hemsworth as the love interest. I know what are you thinking: why am I criticising a film where for the first time is the woman to have a younger boyfriend. The answer is very simple: he pretends to have the same age of Kate Winslet. His role in the story is to die to save the damsel in distress. Nothing new under the sun. Probably, the producers just needed a male bare chest to attract a younger audience. 

Overall, the film is enjoyable. But it has not depth. It is a pointless journey of fake emotions in the desolate lands of Australian in the '50s. 

What do you think?

Here is the trailer: