20151031: Fantasy Review--Zhongkui

Name: Zhongkui: Snow Girl and the Dark Crystal (2015)
IMDb: Zhongkui

Genres: Fantasy   Origins: Mainland China

Cast: Chen Kun as Zhong Kui/Demon King, Li Bingbing as Snow Demon/Little Snow, Winston Chao as Zhang Dao Xian, Zishan Yang as Zhong Ling (Kui's sister).

Directed by:  Peter Pau, Tianyu Zhao.  Written by: Chen Kun, Li Bingbing, Winston Chao.

The Three Acts: 

Initial Tableau: Every 1000 years at July 15, a period of travel among Hell, Heaven, and Earth ensues, where travel is done by reincarnation.  Devastation results as demons reincarnate near the village of Hu on Earth.  The powers that be in Heaven dispatch a volunteer, Zhang Dao Xian, to help out the humans caught in the crossfire.  Zhong Kui steals the 'Dark Crystal' from an active ceremony in Hell itself, and is spirited away by Zhang, one of the gods.  The Snow Demon volunteers to the Demon King to fetch back the crystal.  Her sister, Little Snow, is being held captive by the King, so her compliance is assured.

Delineation of Conflicts: Snow Demon wants the crystal for her King.  Heaven wants to keep it, so as to restore all the souls taken by demons.  Zhong Kui is assigned to protect the Dark Crystal as it lies hidden within Hu.  When a traveling troupe of entertainers arrives from the west, Zhong finds that Little Snow came with it.  Can Zhong help free Little Snow from Hell, or will she seduce him away from his primary duty to Heaven?  Will he successfully defend the Dark Crystal and the captured souls within it?

Resolution: There are some major reversals during the final segment as resolution approaches.  Those were quite well done.

One line summary: Grand fantasy, Chinese style, from the video game of the same name.

Statistics: 

Cinematography: 8/10 Variable.  Most of it is quite good.

Sound: 8/10 Some instrumental sections of the background music are way too florid for my tastes.

Acting: 7/10 Again, quite variable.  Some of the bit players are not very skilled.

Screenplay: 7/10 Being a fantasy involving three realms, the film has to deliver a lot of context in a short time.  I watched this on Netflix, and was glad to be able to roll back and clarify points now and then.

SFX: 7/10 Quite variable. Some of the effects are amateurishly bad. The majority look mature and impressive.

Final Rating: 7/10

20151030: Horror Review--Heartless

Name: Heartless (2009)
IMDb: link to IMDB

Genres: Horror, Mystery  Country of Origin: UK

Cast: Jim Sturgess as Jamie Morgan, Noel Clarke as A.J., Timothy Spall (Wormtail in the Harry Potter films) as George Morgan, Clemence Poesy as Tia, Joseph Mawle as Papa B, Eddie Marsan as Weapons Man, Luke Treadaway as Lee Morgan, Justin Salinger as Raymond Morgan.

Written and directed by:  Philip Ridley

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau: Jamie's face is dominated by large birthmarks, plural.  The largest one covers his whole left eye area.  Jamie does 'real' photography with film, and chemical development where he works with his brother.  While trolling for photo opportunities at night, he runs afoul of some bipedal reptilians, who look like gangsters, while they kill two people and set them on fire.  Jamie lives with his mother.  AJ is Jamie's new neighbor; for lack of other candidates, AJ hopes to become Jamie's friend. Jamie's father George is 10 years dead, but still has a presence in his life.  Jamie seems quite alienated by his life, his deformities, his job, is living arrangement, and his lack of prospects with women.

Delineation of conflicts:  This is somewhat difficult to describe.  Why?  Because the protagonist seems to be insane.  Just how much of this is real?  It's hard to get interested in characters when it is not clear what is real and what is feverish imaginings.

Let us suppose that what is presented is real. Jamie gets a gun to protect himself after the gang beats the hell out of him and burns his mother alive.  The reptiles rake AJ's abdomen with a deep claw attack.  The whole setup is to justify Jamie's descent into cooperation with dark forces to solve his self-perceived problems.

Jamie would like to have female companionship, marriage, and children. How is that going to happen?  Does the dark pact with Papa B help out this problem?  Can he back out?

If the protagonist is insane, on the other hand, one hopes the conflict in his mind ends before the movie does.

Resolution: The protagonist is a broken toy.  The usual resolution for broken toys is that they stop working.

One line summary: Yet another deal with the devil gone bad.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 2/10 We have here some really fine VHS shooting.  Or is this some really bad current cinematography?

  b. Sound: 1/10 Too loud, too intrusive, and not all that interesting.

  c. Acting: 4/10 Joseph Mawle and Eddie Marsan were good.  I liked what little I saw of Timothy Spall.  Jim Sturgess was way over the top, and most of the rest of the cast I could have done without.

  d. Screenplay: 2/10 The first monolog by Papa B was rather good.  However, things go downhill into a flurry of cliches after that.  There is nothing new here, nothing interesting, just the lies made up by an insane mind.  This film was not as bad as the much more pretentious Babadook, but it is still a rotten mess.

Final rating: 2/10

20151028: Action Review--Iron Man 3

Name: Iron Man 3 (2014)
IMDb: link to IMDb page

Genres: Action, Thriller   Country of Origin: USA

Cast: Guy Pearce as Aldrich Killian, Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin (Trevor Slattery), Miguel Ferrer as Vice President Rodriguez, William Sadler as President Ellis, Don Cheadle as War Machine, Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark, Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, Rebecca Hall as Maya Hansen, Stephanie Szostak as Ellen Brandt, Ty Simpkins as Harley Keener, Paul Bettany as JARVIS (voice).

Directed by:  Shane Black. Written by:  Shane Black, Drew Pearce.

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau:  We open over a decade ago in Switzerland.  Tony Stark participates wildly in end-of-the-year celebration parties.  He meets Maya Hansen and Aldrich Killian, who try valiantly to convince him to be interested in technology developed by the think tank, AIM.  Tony hardly listens, partly from buzz, partly from arrogance.  He writes out a few equations which forward the effort considerably, gives them to Killian, and promises to meet Killian on the roof to develop the ideas further.  But Tony breaks his promise.

In the present, after Tony participates in The Avengers action in New York City, there are multiple attacks by 'The Mandarin.'  Tony is not all that involved until his friend Happy Hogan is nearly killed by one of the attacks.  Tony declares war.  The Mandarin is backed by individuals who have the Extremis treatments developed by AIM.  They can melt Tony's suits from the heat of their bodies, regenerate severed limbs, and many other things.  Tony has his work cut out for him.

Delineation of conflicts:  'The Mandarin' strikes first, destroying Tony's palatial estate on the California coast.  Tony loses his armour, his labs, his base of operation, and soon enough, JARVIS and his suit. Or so it would seem. Tony has to figure out who the Mandarin really is, what AIM does, and how to counter the effects of Extremis, initially without his armour.  Worst of all, the Extremis-enhanced folk capture Pepper, and start making her one of them.  They kidnap War Machine (renamed Iron Patriot) and the President, whom they intend to replace using their own candidate.  To make things even worse, Tony has recurrent PTSD from the action in New York.

Resolution:  Will the Extremis transformation applied to Pepper be reversible?  Will the President be recovered alive?  Will Colonel Rhodes get free to fight alongside Tony?

One line summary: Tony's past comes back to haunt the USA.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 9/10 The SFX were not perfect, but on the whole, this was a smooth visual mix that I enjoyed.

  b. Sound: 10/10 No problems, and some good music.

  c. Acting: 8/10 Guy Pearce's performance was the centre of the dark side of the film, and I liked it quite well.  Ben Kingsley, Don Cheadle, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Robert Downey Jr were lots of fun to watch in this one.  Paul Bettany as the voice of JARVIS was again a delight.  Ty Simpkins was better than I expected.

  d. Screenplay: 9/10
Pros: The story had me guessing on a couple of points to within minutes of the conclusion of the film, which is different than most live action comic book films.  This was a nice follow on film after watching John Wick the day before: massive public violence after massive private violence.  As one might hope from an action-thriller, the plot moved forward without any long pauses, and the hero's team had truly formidable obstacles to overcome.  Even to the last few minutes and the final fight, the feeling of jeopardy was present, since Tony had little hope of defeating Killian one-on-one.

Cons: The comic history of the Mandarin is trashed, utterly and completely. Without some revisionism, the Mandarin will not be able to be used in future Marvel endeavors.  This has many people up in arms.  I quite understand this; it is how I feel about Fox's vile treatment of the Fantastic Four.  This might be a problem for Marvel downstream.  The film's portrayal of the Iron Man suit was also inconsistent with its portrayal in The Avengers, where the suit could withstand attacks from Thor's hammer.

Summary: I never cared for the Mandarin, so I do not care about the portrayal of the Mandarin in IM3.  I despised the character in the comics, and later hated the character in the animated series to the point that I gave up following Iron Man for a time. Only the Tony Stark films with RDJ in the cockpit got me interested again. What made Iron Man 1 great was the portrayal of Tony Stark coming back, against all odds, to defeat enemies of his own country, and enemies of his individual person. Iron Man 3 was a return to form after the wretched Iron Man 2. The third film was about Tony Stark, about his friends, about his fans who helped him when he was down, about the power of enduring love, which is what saved Stark in the end.

Final rating: 9/10

20151027: Action Review--John Wick

Name: John Wick (2014)
IMDb: link to IMDb page

Genres: Action, Thriller  Country of Origin: USA

Cast: Keanu Reeves as John Wick, Michael Nyqvist as Viggo Tarasov, Alfie Allen as Iosef Tarasov, Willem Dafoe as Marcus, Dean Winters as Avi, Adrianne Palicki as Ms Perkins, Omer Barnea as Gregori, Toby Leonard Moore as Victor, Bridget Moynahan as Helen, John Leguiziamo as Aurelio, Ian McShane as Winston, Bridget Regan as Addy, Lance Reddick as Hotel Manager (Charon).

Directed by:  Chad Stahelski and David Leitch.  Written by: Derek Kolstad.

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau:  In modern day greater New York/New Jersey, John Wick's wife Helen suddenly dies of a long lingering illness.  His old acquaintance Marcus gives his condolences after the burial.  He grieves for an interval.  In the days after the wake, a puppy, Daisy, is delivered with a note from Helen.  John and Daisy get to like each other.  While out with Daisy getting gasoline, two Russian mobsters stop for gas at the same time. Iosef admires John's Mustang, and offers to buy either the car or the dog or both.  John declines, and an older associate calls Iosef off.  Iosef and two friends break into John's house, beat him up, ruin beautiful things, shoot Daisy, steal the Mustang, badly damage his newer car, and steal the bracelet of Helen's that John kept near him.

Delineation of conflicts: Daisy was John's last living link with Helen.  The necklace had similar importance.  John wants vengeance on Iosef and on Viggo.  Aurelio informs Viggo of Iosef's actions.  Viggo understands the problem that Iosef has created.  "That fuckin' nobody is John Wick." he informs Iosef the idiot.  He advises Iosef to get out of his sight.  He asks his associate, Avi, to task all his available men to take on John.  When that fails, he sets a bounty of 2 million USD on John's head, and also asks Marcus to do the job as soon as possible.  Will Viggo live through this?

Resolution:  The many conflicts were resolved in what I thought were reasonable ways.  I recommend this film to anyone who likes the genre.

One line summary: Excellent action/revenge film.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 6/10 This would be one of the weaker parts of this film.  I do not like filters, and there were too many minutes of that.

  b. Sound: 9/10 There are some great music tracks in this film, and the incidental music was well-chosen.  The actors were well miked, and I had no problems picking up dialog.

  c. Acting: 8/10 I liked Dafoe as always.  This was a great role for Keanu Reeves.  I have only liked him in The Matrix before this film, and was glad to see another film that suited him so very well.  Michael Nyqvist was superb as Viggo.  Ian McShane, John Leguiziamo, and Lance Reddick were all very good.

  d. Screenplay: 10/10 For a revenge movie, this was a fine script.  The direction and the plotlines certainly raised my hopes that John would succeed in everything that he tried.  Plus, the end of Iosef is something I looked forward to from very early on.  I seldom get that engaged with revenge films.  I loved the humour between old pairs of friends while there were lulls in the action.

Final rating: 8/10

20151026: SciFi Review--Jupiter Ascending

Name: Jupiter Ascending (2015)
IMDb: link to IMDb page

Genres: Horror, Mystery

Cast: Mila Kunis as Jupiter Jones, Channing Tatum as Caine Wise, Eddie Redmayne as Balem Abrasax, Sean Bean as Stinger Apini, Douglas Booth as Titus Abrasax, Tuppence Middleton as Kalique Abrasax, Charlotte Beaumont as Kiza, Doona Bae as Razo, Nikki Amuka-Bird as Diomika Tsing.

Written and directed by:  The Wachowskis

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau:  Before Jupiter is born to a British astronomer father and a Russian mathematician mother, her father is killed and her mother's life destroyed by PC thugs in Russia.  The film jump shifts to the 'present' (our future) in Chicago.  In some impossibly rich other world, brothers Balem and Titus spar over opaque issues.  Within this context, Earth is an extremely valuable bauble to be 'harvested'; this involves genocidal removal of all inhabitants.  Jupiter is at the heart of this, since her DNA somehow blocks all transactions that the brothers quarrel over.  In Jupiter's own life, there is little but hard work, poverty, and lack of mobility.

Delineation of conflicts: Balem owns Earth, Titus wants it, and Kalique conspires behind them both.  Balem is drawn to Jupiter from past associations, but he intends to kill her to free up his harvesting of Earth.  Titus hired Caine to find Jupiter and protect her from Balem.  Someone has hired Apini; this takes a while to become clear.  Jupiter has a lot of lost memories that filter back at odd moments.  Worlds collide when Jupiter tries to sell some of her eggs for cash: her DNA is up for analysis.

Resolution: The conflicts go on and on, and do eventually resolve.  It just takes a long time to get there.

One line summary: Poor script and acting undermine the lavish production.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 8/10 Most of the film is lovely to watch.  The CGI, though ridiculous, is pretty to the eye.

  b. Sound: 8/10 Mostly professionally recorded and assembled into the film.

  c. Acting: 4/10 Mixed bag.  Sean Bean and Nikki Amuka-Bird were fine.  Channing Tatum was terrible.  Doona Bae was even worse than usual.  Eddie Redmayne was onscreen entirely too much.

  d. Screenplay: 4/10 Based on the script, I answered the following questions.  Whom do I identify with?  No one.  Whom do I empathise with?  Again, no one.  Is there a single character that I care about?  No.  Do I care about the fate of the future Earth?  No, this is all clearly fantastical nonsense.  Do I care about the society of ultra rich pampered aliens who treat Earth as a coal mine?  No.  These factors make 130 minutes of film seem terribly long.

Final rating: 5/10

20151025: Horror Review--The Atticus Institute

Name: The Atticus Institute (2015)
IMDb: link to IMDb

Genres: Horror, Mystery  Country of Origin: USA

Cast: Rya Kihlstedt as Judith Winstead, William Mapother as Dr. Henry West, Sharon Maughan as Susan Gorman, Harry Groener as Lawrence Henault, John Rubinstein as Marcus Wheeler, Julian Acosta as young Robert Koepp, Franklin Dennis Jones as Robert Koepp, Rob Kerkovich (NCIS: New Orleans) as Agent Barnes.

Directed by: Chris Sparling  Written by: Chris Sparling

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau: The (fictional) Atticus Institute was founded in the early 1970s to study exceptional persons who might have ESP abilities: telepathy, clairvoyance, telekinesis, for instance.  They find hundreds of subjects, find a few weak espers, and get conned at least once.  Then they meet Judith Winstead.

Delineation of conflicts: West's children still care about their distant father, and are discouraged when the Institute clearly has a bad effect on him.  The Institute staff have great talent, but dealing with an incredibly bad-tempered test subject is quite a challenge.  As they continue to observe Judith, it becomes clear that they are dealing with something besides ESP.  Just what is it?  They call in an expert from the DIA (defence intelligence agency), Robert Koepp.  His presence seems to make it much worse.  Will Judith's ability be diagnosed correctly?  If so, what will the DIA (and DOD) decide to do with it during the Cold War?

Resolution:  The attempts of 1970s science to deal with the supernatural were worth a watch.

One line summary: High-handed DoD personnel fail versus the supernatural.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 4/10 VHS level, 240p, perhaps.  Even on a mockumentary, why?  There is more time spent in hand-held mode than I cared for.

  b. Sound: 8/10 Much better than the video.

  c. Acting: 8/10  Good.  John Rubinstein and Harry Groener are long time favourite actors of mine, and they delivered.  Rya Kihlstedt was quite something as the possessed Judith Winstead.  Julian Acosta did well as young Roepp.  I liked the actors who played Henry's two children.

  d. Screenplay: 6/10 Proceeded in reportorial style.  The motivations were reasonably well mapped out, except for the starting points.  How things would proceed once the military took control made sense, but how Judith came to the early state (when she first entered the Institute) was still murky to me at the end.

Final rating: 6/10

20151024: Horror Review--Altitude

Name: Altitude (2010)
IMDb: IMDb page for Altitude

Genres: Horror, Mystery   Country of Origin: Canada

Cast: Jessica Lowndes as Sara, Julianna Guill as Mel, Ryan Donowho as Cory, Landon Liboiron as Bruce, Mike Dopud as The Colonel, Jake Weary as Sal.

Directed by: Kaaren Andrews   Written by: Paul A. Birkett

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau: The film opens to a short vignette about the doomed flight of a light airplane.  Then we jump shift to the present.  Five twenty-somethings gather to fly to a concert.  Sara is the pilot; Bruce sits in front next to her.  Mel films with her handheld in the back, next to the jock/thug Sal, who steals Bruce's comic book.  Cory is also in the back as the fifth wheel.  Sara is a bit light on experience, but things seem to be going well.

Delineation of conflicts: Rough weather comes up, and Sara is not rated for instrument flying.  Two other problems arise: their total weight is too high to get above the clouds, and Sara forgot to assure that the fuel tanks were full before leaving.  There is a screw loose, which means an elevator fin does not respond to control.  Bruce's childhood trauma about flying surfaces; this involves Sara in a strong way.  Those are not the only problems; the film is qualified as a horror film for some solid reasons. They are not alone in the storm, or are they?

Resolution:  Well, watch the film.

One line summary:  Inexperienced pilot versus monsters from the id.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 7/10 Consistently saturated with teal, even during the long dark sections of the film.  The point of this not clear. Framing and focus were usually fine.

  b. Sound: 9/10 I had no problems hearing dialog, and the background music was a plus.

  c. Acting: 5/10 Better than I expected.

  d. Screenplay: 4/10 There's a good 15 minutes of story here.  Hijacking the end story of Forbidden Planet (1956) was discouraging, though.  The plus four was for the ending, which I rather liked.

Final rating: 3/5

20151011: Horror Review--Wolfman

Name: The Wolfman (2010)
IMDb: The Wolfman

Genres: Horror, drama, thriller  Country of origin: USA

Cast: Benicio del Toro as Lawrence Talbot, Anthony Hopkins as Sir John Talbot, Hugo Weaving as Inspector Francis Abberline, Emily Blunt as Gwen Conliffe, Art Malik as Singh, Antony Sher as Dr Hoenneger.

Directed by: Joe Johnston.  Written by: Andrew Kevin Walker and David Self (screenplay).

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau: Lawrence's mother dies during his childhood in the village of Blackmoor.  This traumatizes him; his wealthy father sends him to an asylum, then exiles him to New York.  Years later, Gwen (Lawrence's brother's fiancee), finds him in New York and begs him to return to Blackmoor to aid in locating his missing brother.  Back in England, Lawrence learns that his brother is dead from mauling by an animal.  In this sad setting, Lawrence tries to renew his relationship with his estranged father, Sir John.  This works to some degree, but Lawrence himself is bitten.  He survives, which is unfortunate, as it turns out.

Delineation of conflicts: Inspector Abberline wants to confine Lawrence as a threat to society.   Reverend Fisk would like the unholy acts of the werewolf stopped. Dr Hoenneger wants to expose Lawrence to his professional colleagues as an insane man whose obsessions make him commit heinous acts, not some supernatural creature.  Lawrence wants to stop the effects the full moon has on him.  Gwen would like to help Lawrence, but it is not clear on just how to do that.  Sir John has his own issues with Lawrence.

Resolution:  Well, watch the film.  It's beautiful to behold, and horrible at the same time.  The ending has considerable strength.

One line summary: Even better than the superb The Wolf Man (1941).

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 10/10 Excellent filming and SFX for atmosphere and human reaction shots.

  b. Sound: 9/10 The dialog is clear, and the background music is fine for the situations.

  c. Acting: 9/10 Hopkins, del Toro, Malik, Weaving, and Sher were just great in their roles.

  d. Screenplay: 9/10 Wonderful.  The exposition of motivations was rather direct and clear.  The direction and the performances by the actors made the script come alive.

Final rating: 9/10

20151011: Drama Review--Sphere

Name: Sphere (1998)
IMDb: Sphere

Genres: Drama, Mystery, SciFi  Country of Origin: USA.

Cast: Dustin Hoffman as Norman Goodman, Sharon Stone as Beth Halperin, Samuel L. Jackson as Harry Adams, Liev Schreiber as Ted Fielding, Peter Coyote as Harold Barnes, Queen Latifah as Alice Fletcher.

Directed by: Barry Levinson.   Written by: Michael Crichton (novel), Kurt Wimmer (adaptation).

The Three Acts: 

Initial Tableau: Dr Goodman is being escorted out to sea to aid distressed survivors of an airplane crash.  On the way, he sees many naval vessels, which increases his curiosity.  Then he is put into isolation, after which he meets old friends: Dr Halperin (biology), Dr Adams (mathematics), Dr Fielding (astrophysics).  Along with Captain Barnes, they are taken to a facility 1000 feet below sea level.

Delineation of Conflicts:  The site the team is taken to was constructed to study a huge space ship discovered on the seafloor.  The people in the team were chosen to match a report that Norman wrote some ten years before.  Hence Beth, Harry, and Ted all blame Norman for anything that happens during their current predicament.  In his report, Norman had chosen people he knew well for each position in this 'first alien contact' team.  As the work progresses, Barnes has choice words for Norman as well.  Besides the human interactions stemming from past choices, the team has to face the enigma within the space ship, and do their best to survive its considerable power.

Resolution: Working through the puzzle is well worth the time.

One line summary: An intelligent first contact film.

Statistics: 

Cinematography: 10/10 Looks professional, which I seldom see.  The use of practical effects, plus the near absence of CGI helped greatly.

Sound: 8/10 Not much of an issue.  This is a movie executed through dialog, not mood music.

Acting: 10/10 The stellar cast delivered.

Screenplay: 8/10 Well done.  The second act might seem a tad long, but the short third act is well worth it.

Final Rating: 9/10

20151010: Comedy Review--Take Care

Name: Take Care (2014)
IMDb: link to IMDb

Genres: Comedy, Drama, Romance  Country of Origin: USA.

Cast: Leslie Bibb as Frannie, Thomas Sadoski as Devon, Elizabeth Rodriguez as Nurse Janet, Nadia Dajani as Fallon, Marin Ireland as Laila, Betty Gilpin as Jodi.

Written and directed by: Liz Tuccillo.

The Three Acts: 

Initial Tableau: Frannie has been in an auto accident.  She broke an arm and a leg. She gets incomplete help from her sister and friends.  After too much of that, she appeals to 'the devil'; that is, her ex, Devon.  Devon contracted cancer some years back, and Frannie had cared for him for two years until he was cured.  So she gives him a sufficient guilt trip...and he acquiesces.  His new girlfriend is not exactly understanding.

Delineation of Conflicts:  Frannie's friends do not trust Devon.  Devon wants to get rid of the guilt debt.  Devon's new girlfriend wants his fairly tenuous relationship with Frannie to end as soon as possible.  Devon's feelings of gratitude are a bit limited, but Frannie's sense of being owed (big time) is even larger than she thought, especially when she expounds on all the things she did for him.  Frannie and Devon get the opportunity to be honest with each other, which was not fun for them, but changes everything.  As time progresses, Devon spends more, rather than less, time with Frannie.  How is his new girlfriend going to take that?

Resolution: Well, watch the film.

One line summary: Frannie guilts her ex into caring for her post auto accident.

Statistics: 

Cinematography: 10/10 Looks professional, which I seldom see.

Sound: 7/10 Not much of an issue.  This is a movie executed through dialog, not mood music.

Acting: 5/10 I could have done without the actors who performed as Frannie's friends and sister. I liked Thomas Sadoski quite a bit.  Leslie Bibb's role was awkward and difficult.  She did the awkward part really well.

Screenplay: 5/10  I usually do not care for studies in awkwardness, and this is no exception.  Still, the film has a beginning, a middle, and an end.  The exposition of motivations was probably its strong point.  At least this one made some sense.

Final Rating: 6/10

20150908: Action Review--Alien Outpost

Name: Alien Outpost
IMDb: Alien Outpost main page

Genres: Action, SciFi, Thriller  Origins: UK, South Africa.   Release: 2014.

Cast: Joe Reegan as Omohundro, Adrian Paul as General Dane, Brandon Auret as Savino, Reily McClendon as Andros,  Douglas Tate as The Heavy, Rick Ravanello as Spears, Matthew Holmes as North, Sven Ruygrok as Frankie.

Directed by: Jabbar Raisani.  Written by: Blake Clifton, Jabbar Raisani.

The Three Acts: 

Initial Tableau: Earth has been invaded, somewhat successfully.  The United Space Defense Force (USDF, not much to do with the once United States) was formed to respond after most human governments were rendered useless. Strong counter-attacks by the USDF sent most of the aliens packing, but bastions of aliens remain.   USDF funding dropped after the departure of most of the aliens, and the further fall of the world economy.  However, a reduced number of aliens are still about and are still dangerous.  The USDF does what it can on a shoestring budget.  The main action of the film is set in territory once part of an Islamic nation, probably Pakistan or Afghanistan since the locals speak Pashto.  The year is 2033.

Delineation of Conflicts:  The USDF personnel have to fight the aliens in a high-tech (aliens) versus low-tech (USDF) setting.  The USDF has to deal with the often unfriendly locals in a low-tech versus no-tech setting.  The particular outpost where the action occurs has to deal with shortages of munitions, trained (or any) replacement troops, food, and weapons.  The support of the outpost from distant, better funded bases seems spotty at best.  Are the outposts and the bases even on the same team?

Who will 'win' the wars of attrition? Will it be the desert, the locals, the USDF, or the aliens?  Or will the USDF and the aliens lose to the patient desert?  Will there be any changes in alliances?

Resolution: Well, watch the film.

One line summary: Earth military vs stranded aliens.

Statistics: 

Cinematography: 5/10 This varies widely through the progress of the film.  Some of the CGI is well done; some is not.  The shaky cam footage is counter-productive as always.  The segments of traditional filming were reasonably well done.

Sound: 8/10 Usually good.

Acting: 7/10 Most of the players I have not seen perform before, but most of them did rather well.

Screenplay: 5/10 The elements of the film are not all that well put together.  This includes: CGI intervals, ex post facto troop interviews that were expertly shot, intertitles with expository text held onscreen for long periods, discussions among troops during ordinary times (cleaning guns, washing dishes, sleeping, and so on), and shaky cam action sequences.

Final Rating: 6/10

20150908: SciFi review--Infini

Name: Infini (2015)
IMDb: Infini main page

Genres: Horror presented as science fiction.

Cast: Daniel MacPherson as Whit Carmichael, Luke Ford as Chester Huntington, Grace Huang as Claire Grenich, Luke Hemsworth as Charlie Kent, Bren Foster as Morgan Jacklar, Harry Pavlidis as Harris Menzies, Dwaine Stevenson as Rex Mannings, Louisa Mignone as Philipa Boxen, Tess Haubrich as Lisa Carmichael, Kevin Copeland as Seet Johanson.

Written and Directed by: Shane Abbess.

The Three Acts:

The initial tableau: The film is set in the 23rd century, in some branch of our current timeline.  The greatest source of wealth is mining in interstellar space.  Travel is done by slipstreaming; that is, one encodes people as information, then sends the information via FTL transmission; at the destination, the information is decoded into people.  Some of the mining sites 'enjoy' high gravity and very noticeable time dilation relative to Earth.  One such site is struck by disaster.

An unexpected number of cascading failures forces a search and rescue team to search for any survivors, as well as a way to stop a scheduled payload from colliding with Earth.

Delineation of conflicts: Much of Earth's interstellar travel infrastructure has been destroyed.  Earth itself needs to be saved from a scheduled collision of terminal strength.  One of the unexpected failures that prompted the mission was a breakout of fast acting deadly plague.  How many of the team will survive, given that those infected all turn violent and do their best to kill anyone else?  Will anyone figure out the plague, if that is indeed what it is?

Resolution:  Well, watch the film.  This one has a fairly rousing conclusion.

One line summary: Horror presented as science fiction.

Statistics:
  a. Cinematography: 6/10 This is a mixed bag.  Much of the film is dark or sad-looking with a strongly depleted palette.  Other parts have sufficient light, good framing, nice focus, and reasonable set design. Here and there shaky cam showed its ugly head.

  b. Sound: 8/10 The dialog is clear, and the background music is fine for the situations.

  c. Acting: 7/10 Harry Pavlidis, Luke Ford, and Daniel MacPherson were rather good.  Most of the other actors were not on camera that much.

  d. Screenplay: 5/10 The central cliches are present; that is, of horror that is presented as science fiction.

Final rating: 6/10

20150907: Horror Review--The Pact II

The Pact II

1. Fundamentals.
1. Title: The Pact II
2. IMDb: Users rated this 4.3/10 (1,711 votes)
3. Rotten Tomatoes:
   25% of critics liked it of 8 critical reviews posted
   15% of viewers liked it from 227 viewer ratings
   Critics Consensus: No consensus yet.


4. Status: Released
5. Release date: 2014-09-05
6. Production Companies: Preferred Film & TV
7. Tagline: It's Starting Again...


8. Budget:  Budget estimate not available at review time.
9. Revenue: Revenue figures not available at review time.
10. Runtime: 96 minutes.
11. Genres: Mystery, Horror, Thriller


12. Written and directed by: Dallas Richard Hallam and Patrick Horvath.


13. Starring: Camilla Luddington as June Abbott, Caity Lotz as Annie Barlow, Scott Michael Foster as Officer Daniel Meyer, Haley Hudson as Stevie, Amy Pietz as Maggie Abbott, Patrick Fischler as FBI agent Terrence Ballard, Nicki Micheaux as Lt. Eileen Carver


14. TMDb overview: The sequel is set just weeks after Annie Barlow's deadly confrontation with the Judas Killer. In this elevated sequel, we meet June, a woman whose carefully constructed life is beginning to unravel due to lucid nightmares so awful they disturb her waking life.



2. The three acts.


1. Setting the initial tableau: June is an artist who illustrates the dark visions she has.  She is also a crime scene cleaner for hire.  The film opens to her scrubbing up the mess in Annie's apartment after the first film.  Some weeks later, there is a semi-copycat killing.  June's boyfriend is Officer Meyer from the local police force.  Early on, they squabble about June's spending time with her mother Maggie.  He tells her about the latest bloody crime, and the arrival of FBI agent Ballard.  He agrees to recommend her as the cleaner for this latest mess.


2. Delineation of conflicts:  Maggie has many needs, and expects daughter June to fulfill them, but she is not that good at notification in regards to scheduling.  June gets tired of her professional schedule being squeezed.  Officer Meyer thinks the FBI agent Ballard is a high-handed pain; Ballard thinks Daniel is a low level factotum.  June keeps venting her dark visions through illustration, and lets Ballard know her low opinion of him.  Ballard has plenty of demands for Lt Carver, but little to offer in return.
   
   Ballard delivers some information bombshells to June about her mother and her connection to the original crimes of the Judas Killer. This increases June's distress, and everyone's hard feelings in general.  As one might expect from such films, more bad things start to happen.
   
   As the second act deepens, the petty irritations are still there, but pale in comparison to the quest to identify and stop the murderer.  Is June the murderer, or perhaps Ballard?  Is the supernatural truly involved, or do we have odd behaviour due to stress?  Will it actually help to bring Annie and Stevie (both from the first film) back to consult?


3. Resolution: Well, watch the film.


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Murders continue in the sequel.
2. Three of ten.  Early on I thought 6/10, but the jump scares, shaky cam, the back biting, and the screenplay in general wore me down to 4/10.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 4/10 The film has the TV movie-of-the-week look.  This is not a compliment.  It has a few passages of shaky cam, which never fares well with me. 


2. Sound: 3/10 I can hear the actors, which is sometimes a good thing.  The background music does contribute some creepiness.  However, jump scares are what I consider cheap jack stupid tricks: the viewer is shocked by slamming into a sudden upward facing cliff of sound.  Worse yet, the residue of each such collision is that the protagonist looks like a weakling or a fool; neither of these makes me more interested in the film.


3. Acting: 4/10 I predict that this film will receive no award nominations for good acting.  None of the players were terribly bad, but the director did not get good performances either.


4. Screenplay: 2/10  On the one hand, there was nothing inventive or new.  On the other hand, there were plenty of cliches, irritation instead of suspense, unexplained phenomena, and unconcluded conversations.

20150906: Comedy Review--Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Name: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)
IMDb: Hitchhiker's Guide main IMDb page

Genres: Comedy, Adventure, SciFi, Romance

Cast: Martin Freeman as Arthur Dent, Yasiin Bey (Mos Def) as Ford Prefect, Zooey Deschanel as Trillian, Sam Rockwell as Zaphod Beeblebrox, Anna Chancellor as Questular Rontok, John Malkovich as Humma Kavula, Alan Rickman as the voice of Marvin, Bill Nighy as Slartibartfast, Helen Mirren as voice of Deep Thought, Stephen Fry as Narrator.

Written by: Douglas Adams (novel); Douglas Adams and Karey Kirkpatrick (screenplay).
Directed by: Garth Jennings.

The Three Acts

1. The Initial Tableau: We start on Earth, where an ordinary fellow (Arthur Dent) soon discovers that his house is about to be demolished for the sake of a bypass.  His friend Ford Prefect drops by to inform him that Earth is about to be blown up.  While Arthur's house is completely demolished, Ford prepares him for leaving Earth.  During this short stint, Arthur tells Ford about his feeling of loss over Tricia McMillan, whom he had recently met.  However, she ran off with some fellow who claimed he had a spaceship.  Ford and Arthur barely escape before Earth is destroyed.

2. Delineation of Conflicts: The Vogons do indeed blow up the Earth.  Ford and Arthur are tortured by having to listen to Vogon poetry.  They are about to be executed because Arthur insulted the poetry written by the torturer.  By a massive coincidence (one of many), they are rescued by Zaphod Beeblebox, the president of the galaxy, and Trillian, who once called herself Tricia McMillan.  So, all is well, and the film ends, right?

Well, no. Arthur learns that Ford and Zaphod are old friends and also aliens from worlds other than Earth.  Ford is a writer who is doing research for a new edition of Hitchhiker's Guide.  Zaphod had stolen the one vastly expensive ship Heart of Gold whose engine is the improbability drive.  Rontok is after Zaphod for kidnapping the president (Zaphod; figure that one), and she sends the Vogons after him.  Zaphod has some unfinished business with Humma Kavula (his previous political opponent), which causes him to search out Deep Thought and ask for a particular gun that Humma demands.  While with Deep Thought, we get entangled with the quest for the question to life, the universe, and everything.  Deep Thought knows the answer (42), but not the question.  Zaphod, Arthur, and Trillian wrangle about why she left Earth (and Arthur) with Zaphod, and about who ordered Earth to be destroyed.  The clinically depressed robot Marvin laments all the pieces.

3. Resolution: Some issues are resolved in this film.  The book that spawned the film was only the first in a series, after all.  When Arthur meets Slartibartfast (played brilliantly by Bill Nighy), the third act takes off.  Slartibartfast works for a concern that builds planets.  Perhaps all this could be put back together, but will it?

One line summary: Slow start, strong finish.

Statistics
a. Cinematography: 10/10 Taken as a whole, this is a beautiful film.  Even the charts were a visual asset.

b. Sound: 8/10 The dialog is clear, and background sound added to the proceedings.

c. Acting: 8/10 Malkovich was brilliant in a small role, as were Rickman, Mirren, and Fry as voice actors.  Bill Nighy gave a wonderful performance.  I liked Ms Deschanel better than I usually do.  Mr Freeman played the character he usually plays, an ill-equipped ordinary being who somehow perseveres to see tough goals achieved.  So, he was a fine choice to play Arthur Dent.

d. Screenplay: 6/10 This is an odd duck.  The beginning was so slow it almost demanded yawns.  However, the building of context through the film led to a brilliant and dense comedic impact in the last 20 minutes.  The start, though, was so bad that the wife and I nearly abandoned the film to watch, well, anything else.  I am glad to have stuck with it, but would not watch it again.

Final Rating: 8/10

20150831: YA Review--Mortal Instruments: City of Bones

Name: The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (2013)
IMDb: City of Bones

Genres: Fantasy, YA female,  coming of age, romance, comedy

Cast:  Lily Collins as Clary, Jamie Campbell Bower as Jace Wayland, Kevin Zegers as Alec Lightwood, Jemima West as Isabelle Lightwood, Robert Sheehan as Simon Lewis, Lena Heady as Jocelyn Fray, Jared Harris as Hodge Starkweather, Aiden Turner as Luke Garroway, Godfrey Gao as Magnus Bane, CCH Pounder as Dorothea, Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Valentine, Kevin Durand as Pangborn, Robert Maillet as Blackwell.

Directed by: Harald Zwart.  Written by: Cassandra Clare (book), Marlene King and Jessica Postigo (screenplay).

The Three Acts

The initial tableau: In New York City, young Clary starts having problems.  She sees people and things that others cannot.  She obsessively draws strange symbols in her room.  She gets in trouble with strangers at a club and sees impossible actions.  Her friend who is a young man is interested in her in a way that she is not interested in him.  To top it all off, unknown forces kidnap her mother and ransack the apartment where the two of them lived.

The delineation of conflicts:  Clary discovers that she is a Shadowhunter, a dying breed who have fantastic magical powers, but are fully mortal.  That is, they age normally and they die fairly easily. Shadowhunters fight and kill demons as best they can.  They get their magic from inheritance (parents were Shadowhunters) or transformation (drinking from the Cup of Raziel). Drinking from the Cup also confers the ability to write runes on one's body; these often yield magical assistance.

Their recruiting has been weak of late since two of the most powerful of their members  (Valentine and Jocelyn) have gone off the rails.  Valentine consorted with demons to gain their powers.  Jocelyn hid the Cup to keep it away from Valentine.  Valentine wants the Cup back, and goes to all sorts of foul actions to get it.  Clary needs to go from her 'mundane' (ordinary human) state to being the most powerful and inventive of all the Shadowhunters in order to stop Valentine.  She's shorted on time, since Valentine and his henchmen move things forward quickly.

Simon is in love with Clary, Clary is in love with Jace, Jace is in love with Clary, but Valentine convinces Jace that he is Clary's sister.  Oi.  Magnus and Alec might be attracted to one another, but there is so much going on.

The resolution:  Well, watch the movie.  Many things get resolved, but not all.

One line summary: Reasonable coming of age #fantasy.

Statistics: 

  a. Cinematography:  8/10 Good looking film.  There are plenty of SFX, but not the massive destruction type.  Rather, the up close and personal type of SFX, showing the unexpected.

  b. Sound:  7/10 Not a hindrance, but not much of a help, either.

  c. Acting:  7/10 I liked most of the performances, both from the young crew (particularly Collins, Bower, and West) and the older crew (especially Heady, Harris, Turner, Gao, and Pounder).  The triumvirate of villains (Valentine, Pangborn, and Blackwell) was a very effective block of trouble for the young heroes to overcome.

  d. Screenplay:  4/10 There seemed to me to be just too much going on.  I do not fault the actors, but rather the script/book.  For this film, we inherit structure from werewolf, vampire, and warlock lore.  We inherit structure from biblical warrior angel lore.  But wait!  There's more!  On top of all the rules and logic already involved, we have the invented Shadowhunters.  Much of their baggage is not all that well explained.  Where did the portal come from?  How did they get all that real estate?  How do they keep the real estate when there are so few of them, and none of them work, apparently.  Where did the underground group dealing with the dead come from?  How are they connected?  Anyway, much as I liked the film, I thought it was dreadfully short of reaching sufficiency on exposition.  Since there is likely no second film matching the books, explanations will likely remain lacking.

  e. Final Rating: Six of ten

Concluding remarks: This is the film version of a six book series written by Cassandra Clare; City of Bones is the first book of The Mortal Instruments series.  In 2014, Constantin Films, which owns the film rights to the series, decided not to make a film from the second book.  Rather, they are opting for a Mortal Instruments TV series  in 2015.

20150831: YA review--Beautiful Creatures

Name: Beautiful Creatures (2013)
IMDb: Beautiful Creatures main page

Genres: Fantasy, YA female, coming of age, romance, comedy

Cast: Alden Ehrenreich as Ethan Wate, Alice Englert as Lena Duchannes, Jeremy Irons as Macon Ravenwood, Viola Davis as Amma, Emma Thompson as Seraphine, Emmy Rossum as Ridley Duchannes, Thomas Mann as Link.

Directed by: Richard LaGravenese.  Written by: Richard LaGravenese (screenplay),  Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl (book).

The Three Acts:

Initial tableau: Ethan lives in Gatlin, South Carolina and visits high school there.  He bemoans the fact that he has little prospect of leaving, and has applied to a number of colleges.  The town seems stuck in the past, particularly the Civil War.  His mother is dead; his father is next to catatonic. His welfare is looked after by himself (somewhat) and Amma (mostly).  One day a new girl arrives in his class, Lena Duchannes.  Her family founded the town some centuries ago, and still owns everything of importance in it.

The delineation of conflicts: Ethan wants to get to know Lena, which immediately creates separation between him and almost all of his former friends in town.  Ethan visits Lena at home, which creates immediate tension between him and her uncle, Macon Ravenwood.  The Ravenwood/Duchannes clan are gathering at the family compound to witness the coming of age birthday of Lena.

So far, this all seems rather ordinary.  The fantasy element is that all members of the Ravenwood family are casters; that is, beings who cast magical spells, often with considerable power.  At the sixteenth birthday, Ravenwood teenagers reach their full power as casters, and choose between the dark and the light sides of casting.  Lena would rather not be a dark caster like her mother Seraphina, but fate seems to have marked her to be such.  Ethan would like to be Lena's husband, but has the full opposition of everyone in Lena's family.  Amma would like to help Lena and Ethan to their best possible outcome.

Resolution:  Well, watch the film.  The resolution was brilliant in my opinion, but what do you think?

One line summary: Well done coming of age fantasy.

Statistics:

  a. Cinematography: 8/10 I thought the lighting and camera work were fine, and the limited use of CGI was good.  It was not world destruction style CGI; rather, just enough to support the story.

  b. Sound: 8/10

  c. Acting: 9/10 The veteran actors were excellent and the younger ones did well enough.

  d. Screenplay: 8/10 I've seen this film compared to Twilight, which is odd.  This film has good acting and a witty script.  I do not remember laughing while plowing through Twilight, but this one is much better.  I anticipated some of the outcome, but not all, and the route to get there was a fun ride.

  e. Final rating: eight of ten

20150830: Commentary on media ownership

A reply to 'disks are old hat, sorry.'  MOVIES and BOOKS WORLD, 20150830.

I would strongly agree with this, but as part of a larger question of ownership.

1. Kindle/Amazon.  When one pays for a book, one gets the virtual copy immediately, and one can start reading.  Cool?  Sure.  However, if Amazon gets in a huff with a title's author, the book can disappear from your Kindle just as quickly as it showed up.  If someone hacks your Amazon account, and does bad things posing as you, your Kindle inventory might just all disappear.

Do you own purchased Kindle content?  No, not at all.

2. MMO video games.  These days, one

  a. buys into the game for a certain one-time price

  b. pays a monthly charge to keep playing.

Your game client is refreshed at every logon.  If anything goes south on your account (hacking, false complaints, game server belch), then your client will not longer work.  Your privileges and database records are sealed off from you.  Only direct telephone contact plus authentication plus straightening things out will restore this.

Do you own such a game?  No, you do not. The days when one bought a disk, installed from the disk, and repaired/recovered from the disk are gone.

3. Upscale software tools for individual users.

Professional tools have long been sold on a subscription basis.  A corporation (individuals or small companies could not afford this) would pay a fixed purchase fee plus a monthly fee for technical support, documentation, training, and upgrades.  For example, at one corporation where I worked, the build/version control tool we used cost 100,000 USD per seat plus monthly fees.  It was a dynamite tool, though.

At the other end, one had consumer tools like Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Access, etc) and Adobe image tools (Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, etc) that could be purchased on disk.  One owned these.  They could not be taken away. One could bite the bullet and actually own these.  Tech support and training might be extra, but were available at prices much less than the giant corporation tools.

In the years 2014/2015/2016, the private ownership by individuals of such products is being phased out.  Even individuals have to buy a subscription (monthly fee) to continue using the latest tools from MS and Adobe.  If one stops paying the fees, one is locked out.  There are no disks, there will be no functionality that you own.

So, ownership of such products will completely end in a few years.  The earlier versions that one owns on optical disks will eventually not work with current operating systems.

4. Movies.

Wow.  This is one of the last, if not the last, frontier of consumer ownership in media.  There are hundreds of millions of optical disks out there for movies and music.  So there is more inertia to keep it that way.  However, stuff changes.  Do we still use 8-tracks?  No.  Laserdiscs for movies?  Probably not.  Cassette tapes for music?  Not too likely.  Try buying a cassette player!  VHS tapes for movies?  Cringe!!  DVDs?  Passe, and they have such low resolution.  Blu-ray?  Hm, I would have to buy a 1080p monitor, a blu-ray player, and, well, all those damned disks, again.

When my wife and I saw that DVDs were outmoded, we started our transition to streaming rather than blu-ray.  We bought a 1080p monitor and an AppleTV.  At first we were mighty disappointed at the small amount of content that actually justified the move.  After a while, though, we got hooked on 1080p, and are continually disappointed at DVDs, VHS, and at least half of cable television.

About two years after that decision, we moved house, this time a compression move (downsizing?), and we had to trim our belongings. The 8-tracks left, as did the VHS tapes, some of the cassette tapes, and some of the DVDs.  We owned that media, and we still had players, but...the results are so disappointing!

Going forward, we did not want to invest heavily in anything that takes up space.  Further, blu-ray 1080p will be replaced in ~5 years by blu-ray 4k.  Do I want to buy a whole galaxy of 4k blu-ray disks?  No, I have space constraints.

5. Movies and ownership.

As opposed to Kindle, video games, and software tool packages, it seems there will still be a path to continued ownership of movies.  That is, owning

   a. VHS, DVD, blu-ray 1080p disks, plus owning an appropriate player that likely cannot be replaced or serviced
   b. blu-ray 4k disks plus player--for the best there is.

However, I'm not sure these routes will do all that well.

Smartphones and tablets do not have optical drives.  Yet one still sees movies on them through streaming services.  Phones and tablets are used quite a bit in watching films, despite the small screens, and neither device uses optical media.  These devices naturally cut into the market penetration of disks.

When I look forward with trepidation to replacing my Mac laptop, I see that my next one will not have an optical drive.  Personal computers will not play movies from disks without the purchase of an external optical disk reader.

Why would Apple make a decision like that about their Macintoshes?  Well, they would like to sell you content that resides on their servers.  Even better, they would like you to rent movies that reside on their servers.  If you want to see a film multiple times, you will need to rent it multiple times.

It's not just Apple.  Microsoft (see above), Adobe (see above), Amazon (their instant video), and Google (see Barry Ward's post) are all into streaming rentals, not selling optical disks.  This is one of the biggest reasons that disks are old hat for movies.

Then there is Netflix, which offers only rentals.  One pays subscription fees and gets on demand properties...but only when Netflix offers them.  You do not own them since you do not have disks for the properties.

So, the big media corporations are clearly moving toward the 'we own it, you never will' model with movies.  Amazon and Apple have some options for 'buying' media content, but these are somewhat difficult to trust.  Your 'owned' content resides on their servers somewhere.  Whenever I switch devices or have some OS update event, I often have to download the property again from the servers, which is a pain for HD content.  I imagine UHD will be much worse.  Also, if the corporation hosting your movie gets hacked, one might just not be able to reclaim your content.

6. Summary

Disks represent a cut in profits for large companies.  So they are doing their best to move forward the phasing out of disks, and the ownership of copies of films.

20150827: Drama Review--The Babadook

The Babadook

1. Fundamentals.
1. Title: The Babadook
2. IMDb: Users rated this 6.9/10 (79,570 votes)
3. Rotten Tomatoes:
   98% of critics liked it: 168 critical reviews liked it of 172.
   73% of viewers liked it based on 29,186 ratings
   Critics Consensus: The Babadook relies on real horror rather than cheap jump scares -- and boasts a heartfelt, genuinely moving story to boot.


4. Status: Released
5. Release date: 2014-05-22
6. Production Companies: South Australian Film Corporation, Screen Australia, Smoking Gun Productions, Causeway Films
7. Tagline: If it's in a word, or it's in a look, you can't get rid of the Babadook.


8. Budget:  2,000,000 USD
9. Revenue: 4,222,200 USD
10. Runtime: 93 minutes.
11. Genres: Drama, Thriller, Horror


12. Written and directed by: Jennifer Kent.


13. Starring: Essie Davis as Amelia, Noah Wiseman as Samuel, Daniel Henshall as Robbie, Tim Purcell as The Babadook, Hayley McElhinney as Claire, Cathy Adamek as Prue, Craig Behenna as Warren, Benjamin Winspear as Oskar, Chloe Hurn as Ruby, Tiffany Lyndall-Knight as Supermarket Mum


14. TMDb overview: A single mother, plagued by the violent death of her husband, battles with her son's fear of a monster lurking in the house, but soon discovers a sinister presence all around her.


2. Setup and Plot


1. Amelia's husband dies while she is pregnant with Samuel. Losing the husband is a huge traumatic spike, and raising the now unwanted child as a single parent is strong ongoing stress.  She does not impose practical boundaries on the child, who responds by pushing her well past the limit.  That is, she is a terrible parent, and the child makes her and everyone around them pay for that fact.


2. At age six, Samuel starts broadcasting his dislike of the way he is treated. His aberrant behaviours at school and around town invoke additional stressors to Amelia's already weakened mental state. When mother and son find a book with a pop-up character, they make the mistake of reading it together at night.  Their lives get worse by this simple foolish choice that could be revoked at any time.


3. Will Amelia heal herself and flush all this ridiculously obvious nonsensical cluster of lies?


3. Conclusions


1. This is a psychological drama where the protagonist refuses to resolve her own self-generated difficulties.  There was no character to identify with in the film.  As the film progressed to the ten minute mark, my empathic response to the self-destructive protagonist had already evaporated.  So, who cares?


2. Netflix classifies this hot mess as Thriller, Independent Thriller, Psychological Thriller.  At least they did not mark it as 'horror.'  Also, Thriller?  Really?  There is nothing thrilling (or even engaging) about this descent into the outer boundaries of stupidity.


3. The Movie Database (TMDb) calls it Drama (yes), Thriller (no), and Horror (no).  The film had no body horror, no serial killers, no gorefest.  The madness aspect was all fake, so the supposed supernatural elements were each and every one fake.  What aspect of horror is this misstep supposed to represent?


4. Rotten Tomatoes marked the genres as Drama, Horror, Mystery and Suspense.  There is no suspense here since there were no real threats involved.  The protagonist's pathology was set clearly during the first 45 seconds.  The mystery, I suppose, was whether she would decide to get well.  The other mystery is why RT rated this dog so highly.


5. There are so many dull stretches in this film. At times I thought I was watching Paranormal Activity without the jump scares. Also, watching full-screen, low resolution badly taped ancient television is just boring, whether or not the protagonist thinks she sees something in the childish images. There is nothing there, just the wandering consciousness of a sleep-deprived weakling who has given up on life.


6. One line summary: This film is 93 minutes of witnessing ongoing willful self-delusion.


7. Zero stars of five.  This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. Why it received sacred cow status is a mystery.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 0/10 Oh my, dark and evocative?  Well, no.


2. Sound: 0/10 Unfortunately, I could hear the dialog.


3. Acting: 0/10 I suppose most of the actors accomplished the tasks the director set them.   In that way, this film resembles some of Wes Anderson's horrible early works.  The actors did what the director wished, but that was just the problem.  The director's flawed vision trumped any and all of the actors' efforts, rendering the net effect of acting as zero, nada, zilch.


4. Screenplay: 0/10 There are no real threats, no real suspense, no real anything.  This film is 93 minutes of witnessing ongoing self-delusion.  I did like the line where the child says to a potential suitor that she won't let him have a birthday party and won't let him have a dad.  Of course he hates her, deeply, strongly, and forever.  This all could have been done in much less time.  Apparently the auteur director had already done that: Babadook was an expansion of Monster (2005), which clocks in at 10 minutes.

Babadook is an anagram for 'a bad book,' but 'a bad author' might have been better. As Amelia bragged to her friends in one passage, Amelia wrote the problematic book, and constructed it out of ordinary materials. Then she foisted it on her unsuspecting child.