Saturday, March 16, 2024

Movie Review: "Moonfall" 02/02/22

This is a movie review for "Moonfall", released February 2, 2022. I saw a clip of this on the TV (a Sci-Fi channel) on March 14, 2024, which grabbed my attention so I decided to watch this. I finish watching this March 16, 2024.

I find it hilarious that this movie was released 02-02-22. Is this trying to make a statement about life by releasing it on such a symmetrical numbered day? Probably just coincidence.




My Storytime Brief Video on This Movie






Trailer





Genre
Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi



Notable Cast
Halle Berry ... Jocinda Fowler
Patrick Wilson ... Brian Harper
John Bradley ... KC Houseman
Charlie Plummer ... Sonny Harper





Plot

Earth's Moon has had an incident where it is falling out of orbit. How can we stop it / fix the problem?Let's send acting NASA director Jocinda Fowler (Halle Berry), expert astronaut Brian Harper (Patrick Wilson), and genius nerd KC Houseman (John Bradley) in an attempt to save the Earth. It turns out that the Moon is a megastructure built by our far-past ancestors to help create/sustain an environment for raising organic life [humanity] and that the ancestors had a war with their AI which wants to take out all organic life. Their war has come to our planet and their AI wants to take out "two birds with one stone": take out the Moon which will take out the Earth and the chance for any other earth to be created.
Can Jo, Brian, and KC save the Moon and the Earth? Can their families survive the disaster from this whole thing?





Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.



4/5 - *SPOILERS*

I must give credit to the idea of this movie - the Moon is a MEGA STRUCTURE!! With a white dwarf in the middle of it! And a gyroscopic ring system to keep it in orbit and to help create/sustain the earth for human life. Absolutely awesome.
Oh, and the creators of this megastructure? Our ancestors from long long ago (in a galaxy far far away.....). But why is their mega scientific creation here and not them? Well, because AI rose up [surprise?] and decided to take out organic life or at least humans. They don't say whether the AI goes after animals too but they definitely say that the swarm of technology is going after organic life with electronic technology near them, aka "humans".
I have to argue that all creatures have some sort of electrical current/influence in their biology so maybe they mean organic with the intelligence to have created electronic technology? That would make more sense because, as far as we know, humans are the only ones to make tools with electrical workings.

Anyways, there were definitely some potholes in this movie plot. First off, I get that Brian's son Sonny was disappointed that no one would stand by him (Brian) after he testified about the swarm back 10-12 years ago attacking a space mission that he, Jo, and a third astronaut had been on and that had resulted in the loss of the third astronaut. However, that doesn't mean that Sonny just automatically would go for the bad-boy image lashing out, stealing cars, etc. I don't understand why they made him like that.  Then the movie tries to talk about his relation with his stepfather and the fact that he had never gone up to his mom's/stepdad's Aspen retreat (at a guard gate, he says to a shooter, "I'm Brenda's son." She shoots at him saying "I've never seen him before."), which was awkwardly set up. Sonny eventually tells his stepdad that he doesn't hate him, which is good because his stepdad does a self-sacrifice for one of his daughters (gives his oxygen tank to his daughter so she can breathe and continue walking to safety). At least his stepdad tried to be a good person and had the closure that his stepson didn't hate him.
Sonny, however, was still a bit of a mess with the information around him. We see him trying to be good and taking care of Jo's son and her foreign exchange student, in the way a friend's family looks out for another friend's family. Yet Sonny is still a weird hodgepodge of everything. The biggest pro going for him in this movie is the fact that his dad is the main character. If Brian wasn't his father, there would be almost no point to this character. Because of Sonny, Brian is still wanting to protect the world. True, Brian has been acting as a fallen-from-grace character since he was silenced about the AI swarm back at the last space mission. He's been running from landlords and hiding away. He's bitter but not completely without merit. Was he around much for his son? I don't know, though some would say that the grand theft auto stunt by his son would be an indication that maybe Brian wasn't there, though he would do anything for his son.

Secondly, it almost seemed like the creator of this storyline was using the fact that the Moon's megastructure had its own gravity to influence action scenes. Obviously, you're going to have to deal with gravity changes when you have two bodies so close to each other, but the rules of the gravity didn't seem consistent.
There's a Three-Stooges group of bad guys that come after Sonny, his stepdad and his mom, his half sisters, the foreign exchange girl, and Jo's son. I say Three Stooges because there are three, they are dumb, and their persistence on being a nuisance is ridiculous. These three steal Jo's son's backpack and the vehicle that Sonny had driven away from the rocket launch site and you'd think that was the last of them. They came back a second time to take the oxygen tanks from them (in a building) and Sonny reverses the theft, getting out of there. They come back for the third time, all three of them getting into vehicles to chase after our group because of the oxygen tanks. Spoilers but none of the Three Stooges survive and our group gets away from them safe.

In "Armageddon" (released 1998), they had the jump over the "Grand Canyon of this asteroid" but they had to use thrusters to land on the other side instead of floating up into space.
In this movie, however, they sped up the car to get across a drop. They fly upwards, bouncing off of a floating 'island' of ground that was being drawn upwards, then somehow find themselves on the other side of this drop with all the wheels down on the ground safe and sound. I guess you could say "well, the moon isn't directly above so the influence on the area is reduced which is why they didn't get grabbed by the moon's gravity field and that's how they landed", but that still doesn't make full sense to me. If we just had parked cars being moved by the moon, why wouldn't that influence the car they were in? Oh, maybe because they were in motion? Maybe the gravity of the moon was enough to make a jumping semi truck's jump further, over our group's car and into one of the bad guys, but not enough to grab on to a car that is skidding on snow and ice? Right, because snow and ice totally gives great traction.... [Being very sarcastic.]
The death of the first Three Stooge was great because it reminded me of "Twister" (released 1996) with the twister throwing big things, especially Jonas' death. Sorry, Jonas, but you were an idiot that should have listened and therefore died. This stooge died similarly, which was somehow satisfying.



Anyways, there are a few nods in the movie to other sci-fi movies.
- stepdad Tom switches his vehicle from Eco to Sport mode as Sonny is driving and says "Switch to warp mode"(Star Trek).
- KC at one point comments on the fact that their shuttle has gotten a speed update by saying "Ludicrous speed" (Spaceballs).




....I have more to say but cannot find the words to say, so I will be stopping this movie review here. If i remember what I wanted to say, I'll add it later.



Thank you for reading! More reviews to come eventually.



Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

Movie Review: "Damsel" 03/08/24

This is a movie review for "Damsel", released online on March 8, 2024. I watched this via Netflix on March 12, 2024. I think this is the soonest I have watched a movie after a release!



Trailer





Genre
Action, Adventure, Fantasy


Notable Cast

Millie Bobby Brown ... Elodie
Ray Winstone ... Lord Bayford
Angela Bassett ... Lady Bayford
Brooke Carter ... Floria
Nick Robinson ... Prince Henry
Robin Wright ... Queen Isabelle
Shohreh Aghdashloo ... Dragon (voice)




Plot

When an arranged marriage option comes up to save their people, Lord Bayford agrees to let his eldest daughter Elodie marry Prince Henry. The family she is marrying into is wealthy and mysterious. The prince is handsome. What could go wrong?
Well, how about the prince voluntarily throwing her in to a cave to be a sacrifice for a dragon? Damsel in distress situation with no one coming to rescue her... Can Elodie make it out? Can she survive? Can she uncover the truth behind the royal family's mysterious history?




Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.


4.5/5 - *SPOILERS* I know some have already said that this movie took a while to get to the point of the sacrifice and that it was already spoiled in the trailer but sometimes a slow start can be good. I enjoyed it. I liked watching the way that the Bayford family was enticed into the arrangement, but I did wonder what her father learned with the "we must talk about details" and he came storming out of a private meeting. Like, did he learn that she was going to be sacrificed? Or was it a "you will never see your daughter again and we don't want you here because you are a lower class of humans than we are", like Queen Isabelle was trying to tell stepmother Bayford? I have to knock it down a half star for that because he didn't feel right about this whole situation (how much did he know beforehand!?) but still let it pass. Her father, stepmother and sister see her marry Prince Henry in a reserved small ceremony and the newlywed couple is swept away in a fancy carriage up to the mountain. We're going to go "pay homage to my ancestors", which of course means 'let's get our scent and our blood on you so that the dragon doesn't know better, then toss you off into the cave to be a sacrifice'. This deserves all of the face-palm feels.

The way that Elodie comforted a burning bird in the cave, and apologized with the glow-worms when she realized they could heal, and the way that she dealt the final dealings with the dragon just made me so proud of Elodie. Like yes, this is how a good person should be! Even after all of the pain, struggling, and suffering, you can still have kindness, sympathy, and understanding. Stand up for what is right (showing the dragon that it was fooled and who did the fooling), not what seems right (taking the dragon down for causing pain on yourself).

In the end, her father tried to help her/ save her because she was worth more to him than the gold the royal family had paid him as "bride price", the royal family got what they deserved, Elodie acknowledged that her stepmother tried to warn her [called her "Mother" instead of "Stepmother"], and the hero rode off into the sunset with plans for the future.

Is this for everyone? No - fantasy violence, people/creatures burning alive painfully, sword-play, human sacrifice, lack of care for others' lives, etc.
For those that aren't put off by these things, I would recommend this movie if you like strong female characters and a twist on the typical "dragon with a damsel" theme.

I loved it! Would I watch it again? Yes. Have I already raved about it to a friend? Yes.

And I did a thing, for good or for bad.:






Anyways, that's my movie review. Thank you for reading! More movie reviews to come eventually.
Also, let me know what you thought about my "Story-Time" vid. Might have an OC of mine do more of these in the future.



Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, March 9, 2024

Movie Review: "The Addams Family" - 10/11/19

This is a movie review for "The Addams Family", released October 11, 2019. I watched this November 17, 2020 via Hulu. I was excited to watch this because I love the old school Addams Family show and the 1990s movies, so I had to watch this.





Trailer







Genre
Animation, Comedy, Family



Notable Cast

Oscar Isaac ... Gomez Addams (voice)
Charlize Theron ... Morticia Addams (voice)
Chloë Grace Moretz ... Wednesday Addams (voice)
Finn Wolfhard ... Pugsley Addams (voice)
Nick Kroll ... Uncle Fester (voice)
Snoop Dogg ... It (voice)
Bette Midler ... Grandma (voice)
Allison Janney ... Margaux Needler (voice)
Conrad Vernon ... Lurch / Priest / Spirit of the House / Dr. Flambe (voice)




Plot

Morticia and Gomez Addams have just recently been married but they don't want to have to deal with being ostracized in the old country, so they move to the United States. New Jersey, of all places. They set up in an old abandoned asylum and start building their family. Thirteen years later, the local town decides to drain a swamp which reveals the Addams house. Morticia, Gomez and their children Wednesday and Pugsley now have to figure out how to deal with the locals. Will it be another case of being run out of the area? Can Wednesday and Pugsley fit in with the other children?





Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.



2.5/5  - *SPOILERS*
Not for those that know the old show: Pugsley's character was too upbeat, Lurch's appearance and voice was not right, IT had arms and was too short, and Gomez's face looked like he was a potato.

"I wish something would liven up this already tedious day" says Wednesday - that was not how she was supposed to be!! Wednesday of the old black-and-white show was a vibrant, energetic yet gothic girl. This Wednesday is just a questioning preteen that is going against what her parents had set up for her - going to public school, making friends, hanging out with other girls her age, wearing a pink unicorn hairpiece.
Most of the movie revolves around Wednesday and her new friend - how can these two girls from two different walks of life become friends and prove to both Wednesday's parents and Parker's mom that this is okay? Definitely something aimed towards kids/preteens, and not just for "introducing the next generation to the Addams Family" due to the storyline. What the movie tries to push is the idea of "be yourself, not the same as everyone else". Aside that, there was not much plotline at all.

I thought this movie was atrocious. I was so excited to watch this but, during and afterwards, felt disappointed. True that I was able to get through the movie but I partially wished I hadn't. I'd rather stick to the old movies and the old black-and-white show, thanks.

....and there's a movie sequel out now? *smh* I guess it was popular enough to merit a try at creating a sequel, but I am not currently interested enough to watch it.


Is this family friendly? Yes. Should you watch it? That's your call. Would those that love the older stuff like this? That's a hit or miss, honestly. Would I rewatch? I personally would not want to!!




That's my movie review. Thank you for reading! More reviews to come eventually.


Posted by at No comments:

Movie Review: "Clemency" 01/27/19

This is a movie review for "Clemency", first released January 27, 2019 at the Sundance Festival. We watched this on November 17, 2020 via Hulu.


*WARNING* - This is not a movie for everyone due to the nature of the topic: death row inmates receiving the death penalty.



Trailer








Genre
Drama



Notable Cast

Alfre Woodard - Bernadine Williams
Aldis Hodge - Anthony Woods
Richard Schiff - Marty Lumetta
Wendell Pierce - Jonathan Williams



Plot


Some jobs are tough but none tougher than being a prison warden that executes death row inmates by order of the state. That is Bernadine Williams' job and it isn't easy - protestors, nasty letters, etc. just make it that much more difficult. On top of that is the question about what this work does to the warden's emotional state (or soul). As Bernadine detaches from things around her, the question becomes whether she can continue to do her job and still give the inmates respect.




Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.




3.5/5 - Honestly, I had a hard time remembering about this movie so I had to go back and read others' reviews on IMDB. Even so, this wasn't a very rememberable movie. I had rated it 3.5/5 with the only notes saying "Terrible ending that doesn't give us any closure to what happens to Bernadine". Someone had said that you could see her emotional/mental state slipping especially at the end of the movie, but I do not recall that.

Would I rewatch this movie? Maybe, but it isn't high on the list of priorities. Do I recommend it? Not for everyone. It was decent enough to watch to get an insight on what life is like for the warden executing inmates (and the horrors that haunt them afterwards). It also proves the point that J.K. Rowling said in her Harry Potter series - murder tears the soul apart. You can see that it affects Warden Williams throughout her whole life [it is hard to kill someone and then go have a joyful tea party a few hours later]. It makes one think about whether or not death row inmates should actually be executed. True, there are a few cases where their crimes are heinous/atrocious crimes against humanity, but does it mean that we should take *their* lives for what they have done? And what happens if/when the person that is accused is innocent?


On a side note, I heard recently (2024) that some people are saying prisoners sentenced to life without parole cost the state {I don't know which state(s)} too much money and should be executed. Excuse me?! Seriously, what are you thinking? There are still innocent people that are sentenced for things they have not done. And now you're saying that the state/government doesn't want to pay the taxes to keep those inmates alive, so we might as well just off them? What is the world coming to?!
Don't tell me that we've made our justice system better and more efficient, being able to precisely prove who is guilty and who is innocent. It may be better than back in the 1990s, but we are still not all-mighty and all-knowing. There are still cases of innocent people being thrown into jail. There are still people being accused of things without evidence. But you want to go and execute them because we can't afford to keep them alive?! WTF.
This burns me up so I'm going to end the review without going deeper into this argument.



Thank you for reading. More reviews to come eventually!


 
Posted by at No comments:

Movie Review: "London Has Fallen" 02/25/16 UAE

This is a movie review for "London Has Fallen", first released in the United Arab Emirates on February 25, 2016.


I was going to do the review for "Angel Has Fallen" (viewed back in 2020) but then realized that there was actually a 2nd movie between "Olympus Has Fallen" and "Angel Has Fallen". I then decided that I would watch this before doing the movie review for the third movie of the series. I rewatched "Olympus Has Fallen" on March 7, 2024 (with a friend), and we watched "London Has Fallen" on March 8, 2024, so here's the movie review!





Trailer





Genre
Action, Thriller

Notable Cast


Alon Aboutboul ... Aamir Barkawi (as Alon Moni Aboutboul)
Waleed Zuaiter ... Kamran Barkawi
Gerard Butler ... Mike Banning
Aaron Eckhart ... Benjamin Asher
Radha Mitchell ... Leah Banning
Morgan Freeman ... VP Allan Trumbull
Charlotte Riley ... MI6 Jacquelin Marshall
Bryan Larkin ... SAS Lieutenant




Plot

It has been years since the attack on the White House. The Prime Minister of the UK has passed away, within 24 hours since a major surgery. Leaders of the world have been called upon to come to his funeral, including USA President Asher (much to Secret Services agent Mike Banning's chagrin, especially with his first baby due shortly). President Asher says that he should go since England/UK has been one of their biggest allies over the years, so the Secret Services come up with a plan to get him there and back safely. This is the most "protected" event of the world: what could go wrong? 






Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.


5/5 - *SPOILERS*
Honestly, this was just a great movie all around. The action, the music, the character development, etc - all superb. It was great to see Mike Banning (played by Gerard Butler) back in action again. He tells the President, at one point, that he hates funerals. Considering all that they had to go through because of a world leader's funeral, I don't blame him!

Banning goes above and beyond to protect and rescue the President, seeing through the fact that there is a mole in the MI6, using a drone (that is "always above the President") to relay messages to the USA when communications go down, and going almost kamikaze against multiple attackers to get to the President with minutes ticking down to his execution. The funniest thing is that the man made of "bourbon and bad choices" is the best choice to get the job done. Even when the MI6 [England/UK's version similar to the USA's CIA) say "hold on, we'll get the job done", Mike says no, it needs to be done now, no matter what. He's right - if he hadn't gone in right there and gotten the job done right, the President would have been executed on live stream on the Internet [we see screens in NYC, London, etc with his video showing]. When the President's time is almost up, he hears the captors say something about their power system and he knows that Mike is coming. {It is rather cute to see his reaction, knowing that Mike is on the way. Could be seen as a bromance, if you will. It isn't just the President and the bodyguard - it is friendship. It is also very tastefully done so I do not oppose it.} Mike shows up just in time, kicks a**, recovers the President, finds evidence to connect a bad guy (#6 on the top 10 most wanted list) to this situation, explodes the building, and still gets to walk out of there alive. Two weeks later, we see him cooing over his new baby [named after the late Lynne Jacobs, his old boss that was supposed to be the godmother but had been killed when their helicopter went down in the UK]. He debates on putting in his resignation but changes his mind when he hears Vice President Trumbull say that we need to continue on to protect our children. Of course, being the brand new daddy, Mike deletes his resignation letter and continues being in the Secret Services.


Oh, and to top it off, we find out that yes, the Prime Minister of UK was assassinated, so this whole thing was a trap to start off with to throw the world into chaos. Why they didn't wait to investigate after his death? I'm not sure but it definitely helped move the movie along - "short timing, let's get together to honor him!"

The mole in the MI6? Well, he did it because their security protocols were flawed and the world is in trouble, and lots of money. Was he justified in doing so? No, but it just goes to prove that criminal actions can be made by everyone, especially with the means and motivation to do so.



Anyways, that's my movie review! Thank you for reading. Do comment below.
More to come in the future (especially "Angel Has Fallen").





Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, February 24, 2024

Movie Review: "The Pod Generation" 01/19/23

This is a movie review for "The Pod Generation", released January 19, 2023 at the Sundance Festival in the USA. I watched this February 24, 2024 via Hulu.



Trailer






Genre
Comedy, Romance, Sci-Fi



Cast
Emilia Clarke - Rachel Novy
Chiwetel Ejiofor - Alvy Novy
Rosalie Craig - Womb Center Director



Plot

Women nowadays are becoming more career-focused and ambitious. Even though they want children, they don't want to have to deal with the "side effects" of pregnancy like nausea, stretch marks, weight they cannot drop, etc.

In the near future, there is a solution to this need: The Womb Center. Have your baby and keep your body too! The Pegazus company has created a system that allows children to be grown within an artificial womb [a pod / "egg"].

Rachel, a worker for Pegazus, has been offered (as part of a promotion) help with the down payment for a child grown through the Womb Center. She is the main income for her and her husband, but that isn't the biggest barrier. Her husband is in a rare vocation in the day of 3D printed food, paying to being able to breathe pure air from a plant, and having AI everywhere helping with calendars/clothing/work. Alvy is a biologist and doesn't like the idea of an "egg baby". Why not stick to something more natural, like a real pregnancy?

Are they able to have a baby? Will they go with the Womb Center? How will this affect their relationship? Will they be able to bond with the baby in a pod?




Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.



4/5 - *SPOILERS*
I watched this because I saw it pop up on my Hulu. I brought it to the attention of a coworker/friend of mine and we had a discussion, considering I just posted the review about "Splice" this week and he had things to say about it. I said that Splice brought up the question about whether or not artificial wombs would be a thing in the future, not just for experimentations or for animals but for humans. Then I saw this on Hulu and I told him about it. We chatted a bit about this, whether it would be ethical or just to do this. I brought up the question about the connection between mother and child, considering the mother's immune system gives the child a protective shield for a little while after birth. This movie slightly touched on the connection issue but they never got into the medical side of things, which is one of the reasons why I knocked down the rating from 5 stars.

The first annoyance was the fact that it took over 2 minutes to get to the opening of the movie due to all of the brand names and company names that they were showing. The ending also ended over 7 minutes to the end of the film, according to Hulu. So that means that over 9 minutes were dedicated to credits etcetera. Annoying. Not a star reducer but definitely annoying.

Anyways, this was a good movie. For the first third of the movie, I was smacking my head going "wtf is this woman doing!" because she decided to sign up for a position at the Womb Center, visits them, and drops a $8,700 deposit on this Womb Center thing without consulting her husband. When she tells him, she nearly bulldozes him on the decision by showing off a friend of hers that has a pod. The friend is all like "this is the best decision ever. Society expects women to be all that but then, when she wants to make a stand and say that she doesn't want to deal with pregnancy yet have kids, she's considered a bitch". Super mega feminist vibes, let me tell you! Let's have a choice about whether or not we want pregnancy to mess up what we have. [Sounds familiar?]

So Alvy finally agrees to go with the decision to have the pod baby. Rachel is surprised but enthusiastic. They go to the Womb Center, sign the contract, and have an egg of Rachel's fertilized by Alvy's sperm. Voila, life! But it isn't very large, because zygotes are small.

Rachel starts pulling away from Alvy and her personality starts changing towards depression or some sort of "blah". Alvy, however, is slowly starting to become more accustomed to the idea of the baby inside the pod being able to hear/experience while in the pod. Mostly stay-at-home dad starts bonding with the baby, whereas working mom starts seeing declines in her work production levels. She gets frustrated and tries to take the pod to work, but a coworker says something to the effect of "you need to put your pod in a closet while you're at work or else you'll be seen as the 'distracted mom'".

Meanwhile, we are viewing a constant conversation in the movie about AI and virtual assistants (like Siri, but worse). The constant bombardment of technology clashes severely with Alvy's career of choice. He even, at one point, is told at the college campus that his greenhouse is costing the college too much so why don't we phase out the plants and put in holograms?

Between all of the little drops of hints and worries that Rachel feels, we start wondering if the technological approach to having a baby is even right. She sees a woman pregnant and she starts wanting to have that over having her baby in a pod. She feels that she can't connect with it and is very frustrated because she is the mother whereas Alvy is calling it baby instead of pod/egg. It is a strong shift from what the movie started off at and it is very interesting.

Rachel finally takes a turn towards wanting something more natural for the baby. She decides to go rogue, with Alvy agreeing but still wanting things to go right for the child. Rachel convinces him that they need to take the baby to their island house [that her dad had said "why don't you sell it since you have a child on the way" and Alvy had said, "I want our child to know nature".]. Alvy goes over to the Womb Center to prove that they want a 'home birth' and the Womb Center director says that it is not permitted because they need to make sure that the pod is safe [per the contract]. Alvy and Rachel take the pod, and an olive tree that he had given to the baby when it came home the first time, and head out to the island home. She reconnects with what he was saying about nature and survival and finally seems to come to herself. This is a huge thing because that says that technology isn't always the best thing for us and that we may need to be a bit more natural just for our own preservation.

Anyways, they finally get the sound from the pod that the baby is ready to come out but the Womb Center won't give up the birth code to open it up, so Alvy just takes a screwdriver and gently pries it open to take the child out. After a tense moment, they pull the child out and it cries. They are happy and have their child, thank goodness.

Rachel returns the pod via the mail to the Womb Center, returns to her little family and cuddles with her baby, content, and the movie ends. We are not told about if it is a boy or a girl, which I was curious about since the Womb Center director was shocked to hear that they didn't want to choose the gender of the child before conception. We are not told about the repercussions about the fact that they pried open the pod, nor if she lost her job because of this whole situation. I would have loved an epilogue but they just leave us flat with the fact that "yes, they had their kid, isn't that nice".



Personally, I felt like there would have been more dirt on the Womb Center. Like they insisted that the pod be at the Womb Center for a lot of the time. Are they programming the children or tampering with them while no one is there to take care of them? What kind of special procedures are they doing to deliver the children out of the pod? What other nefarious schemes are they working on?
They also promoted "indirect parenting", so parents don't need to connect with the pod/child. Pegazus also promoted children at school to have "art time" where the computers were doing the art and the children were only giving feedback. How is this childhood?! Yes, it is a statement about how technology might hurt our children/future, but how many people would go along with this without batting an eyelash?
I think that, in general, the villain was Pegazus and the Womb Center, but it could be said that they were just trying to help and improve the world. [The path to Hell is paved with good intentions?] We also see, within the ending credits, the CEO of Pegazus saying that they hope, in the future, that children can choose their own parents. Ummmm, really? I don't know what to say aside I did not like Pegazus, especially with the fact that they pushed Rachel to think about having a child but then made her put the pod in the closet!



I'm going to end this ranting because that is more than enough typing for me, lol. That's my movie review! Thanks for reading. I'd love comments. More reviews to come eventually.



Posted by at No comments:

Friday, February 23, 2024

Movie Review: "Suddenly" 09/17/54

This is a movie review for "Suddenly", released on September 17, 1954 in the United States and in London, England (UK). We watched this November 14, 2020.




Trailer







Cast
Frank Sinatra - John Baron
Sterling Hayden - Sheriff Tod Shaw
James Gleason - Pop Benson
Nancy Gates - Ellen Benson
Kim Charney - Peter Benson III "Pidge"




Plot

When the President of the United States comes to town, the area must be secured for the safety of the President. In the quiet town of Suddenly, the President is due to get off of his train and make an appearance. One of the unsuspecting families finds a few people appearing to FBI come over to their house, as it is the most likely location of a sniper shooting the President as he gets off of the train - on a hill with a clear view. When it is revealed that they are not FBI but are in fact there to assassinate the President, the family (widow, her father, and her son) have to figure out what to do. The widow is anti-violence and does not like that the Sheriff of town [Sheriff Tod Shaw, who is also trying to court her] gave her son a toy gun previously. How is she going to react to having blood-thirsty assassins in her house trying to kill the President of the United States? Can they survive this ordeal? Will they save the President, and how?





Rating Criteria

0/5 – No value whatsoever. Absolute waste of time.

1/5 – Barely worth any time.

2/5 – Pathetic but has a bit of something to hold the attention a little.

3/5 – Somewhat kept the attention but could definitely have used more.

4/5 – Good, but not awe-strikingly amazing. Could have maybe used a bit more to the movie.

5/5 – Go see it! Wonderful movie all around. – characters, music, theme, story line, etc.



4/5 - *SPOILERS*

I completely forgot that I watched this movie until it came up on the list. I had to do some digging, reading, and watching of the last 10 minutes of the film to remember about it.

First off, it is interesting to find Frank Sinatra as an actor. I am not familiar with him being an actor so this was a new world for me.

Anyways, this was a good movie. It isn't boring though it came out in 1954. Of course, it was slow in our modern standards but it was easy on the eyes.

The question about whether violence is always bad is brought up. The anti-violence widow has to come to terms that she is one of the very last person that can stop the assassins from killing the President. She has also seen the main assassin (Baron, played by Sinatra) shoot the guy that was fixing the TV as well as shooting the Sheriff. What would stop him from shooting herself, her father or her son? So she has to take up the gun [literally and figuratively] to protect her household too.

I wasn't around during the time of this release, obviously, but I think it is a good movie for what it is. There maybe could have been more "character development" but it keeps the focus on what is happening in the moment, instead of deviating to back story shots etcetera. In that kind of scenario, focusing on the situation is good to make the tension felt.

Could it have used more to make it more realistic/relatable? Yes. Don't go sending a guy out of the house when you have it under control, especially as the bad guy. Also, why didn't the folks nearby respond to the sounds of gunfire in the house? For a small town, you'd think they would respond more....


You're going to ask so I will put the spoiler out there: the assassins were averted (killed), the widow shot Baron to stop him from shooting from the window at the President, the Sheriff was injured but took up the gun after the widow and shot the last shot killing Baron, the family survived, and the widow and the Sheriff seemed to be starting to head for a date the next day.

I know this is short but that's the mystique of this movie review.


Is it for everyone? No, especially if you don't like old-old movies or have an issue with violence or need modern CGI effects / action.

Recommended? Sure. Go check it out on YouTube.







That's my movie review! Thank you for reading. More to come eventually.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)