I know this is going to be unpopular, but I need to say it: The Notebook is the most toxic film I've ever seen, and honestly one of the worst, because people sincerely hold it up as the gold standard of romance.
Let's start with how the relationship begins. Allie says no to Noah. Not once, but multiple times. His response is to hang off a Ferris wheel and threaten to fall unless she agrees to a date. That isn't romantic, it's coercion. The film treats it as proof of how much he loves her, and that's the message: if someone says no, keep pushing.
Then there's the fighting. Their relationship is basically screaming match, breakup, makeup, repeat. They shout, they slam doors, there's even a slap. The movie tells us this is what "real passion" looks like. Two people who can't communicate without exploding aren't "challenging each other." That's just an unhealthy pattern, and it's sold as destiny.
Then there's the part fans love to skip. Allie is engaged to Lon, a stable, kind guy who has done nothing wrong, and she cheats on him. The film frames him as the boring obstacle and Noah as the "real love." So cheating is fine as long as the music is swelling.
Relationship experts have actually criticized the movie for this. Some say it sets unrealistic standards and teaches people that love has to be chaotic and painful to be real. And if you grew up watching it, you absorb that without noticing.
I'm not saying fiction can't show messy relationships. It can. But the film doesn't show this as messy. It shows it as the ideal, and millions of people quote it as "relationship goals."
Enjoy it as a movie if you want, but please don't take relationship advice from it.
Am I the only one who feels this way? 😅

I’m convinced Rotten Tomatoes’ score was a marketing tactic because their shit made my fat ass go watch this movie… LEGALLY.

And you know what? I ain’t mad about it.
The nostalgia was there throughout the entire movie!

Everybody knows that aside from the Van Damme movie, Street Fighter has always had its animated versions. And I’m glad they incorporated that into this film.

Instead of slapping a bunch of makeup on these actors to make them look younger, they went with anime sequences.

AND THE ANIME WAS AWESOME!

The fighting styles were there, too! They brought almost all the signature moves into the movie, and I appreciated that.

HADOUKEN! SHORYUKEN!

As for the storyline? It was okay. Nothing groundbreaking, but it centered around Ken and Ryu, and that worked for me.
Now, here’s where they need to improve.

THE AUDIO!

Some of the punchlines and smaller bits of dialogue were difficult to hear during the fights. When characters are talking while throwing hands, I should be able to hear what the hell they’re saying! Some of those punchlines got lost in the action.
Other than that, I enjoyed myself.
And there BETTER be a sequel.
Not Street Fighter Returns.
Not Street Fighter: The Next Generation.

STREET FIGHTER II TURBO.

Don’t fuck this up, Hollywood.

MOCHA METER: 3.2/5

Insert coin to continue.

What's everyone's opinion now on Mr Walken getting cast as our Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV Corrino

The Last Castle is a great movie, and James Gandolfini absolutely nails his role as Colonel Winter

I’m not saying the movie is perfect (personally my pet peeves are towards the final act). But my word, what a brilliant film!

There is no question this is Tom Cruise’s best performance of his career (he should 100% get nominated for it, and so far, he’d be my pick this year). His delivery is grandiose and grotesque, his charisma absolutely undeniable, and yes, that parliament scene is bonafide “great scenes of cinema history”.

John Goodman also delivers an incredible, Oscar worthy performance. This is one of the great roles of his career, and this is no small feat for an actor of his caliber.

Special mention to Riz Ahmed as well, whose voice of reason is absolutely pitch perfect. I only wish his character was given a proper send-off - but that’s on the writing.

The only actress that didn’t really land, weirdly enough, was Sandra Huller - whom I consider one of the best actresses of the moment. I don’t know, I think they tried too hard to make her the “younger sister”, and there was something a tad too forced about her acting this time.

Whether you like the movie or not, so many great performances are a first sign you’re watching something special. And Digger is undeniably special.

The production design is sublime - playing with its setting (which I won’t spoil) with absolute glee and a sense of effortlessness.

The photography is absolutely gorgeous, the music is both dramatic and restrained, and the choreography of it all is pure art.

Most important of all, it’s an extremely worthwhile addition to the canon of political and environmental satire. Inevitably, some people will complain about certain things being trite or trivial, but this is inevitable when tackling one of the most covered and (sadly) polarizing topics of our time. Digger goes deeper than we think, taking the side of levity when things are dark, and pure darkness when things seem fine. It’s not meant as a dissertation on climate change, but rather as a time capsule of 21st century hubris - and our needs as humans, actors and spectators.

Many describe it (rightfully) as Dr Strangelove meets Don’t Look Up. I’d add a touch of There Will Be Blood (not because of the oil, but because of the misanthropic brutalism of its oil man, and the fact it is, ultimately, an exploration of power and human nature - more than it is about climate or oil itself). It is definitely a movie that benefited from Birdman, and its unique approach to storytelling, unsettling at first, makes sure the movie lands as a one/two punch that knocks you out.

Digger isn’t the biggest bomb in Hollywood history: it’s the most undeserved bomb in history. It is most definitely going to end up on many lists of films that were not understood when they came out. And if you love cinema, I’d say there is a good chance you’ll kick yourself for having missed it when it came out.

My advice: you may not like it the way I did, but you won’t regret giving this oddity a chance. Rush before it’s too late. Unfortunately, like its subject matter, it’s running out of time…

I loved the first movie , but second one wasn't good at all . Madison is so annoying I hated inclusion off the new characters anyway . I loved the first because there was only 4 characters (and Bill Murray)

​

The movie is almost a one-man show. For the most part, there are no co-stars, no reciprocal dialogue, and no soundtrack, just a volleyball as his co-star. Yet, he managed to make me feel isolation, loneliness, despair, hope, and sadness, and even an emotional connection with that volleyball (Wilson).

Honestly, his performance was incredible and I thoroughly enjoyed it, but that’s just my opinion. What about your opinion?

I expected a suspenseful movie given the premise but was not expecting something that felt borderline horror. Whalefall will be triggering for those who have a fear of the ocean and claustrophobia. There was also some mild gore and many disgusting, unsettling moments. I would leave the kids home for this one. Nightmare fuel. With that said, overall solid movie with some good emotional moments.

Other Mommy, or Dumb Mommy, on the other hand felt more like a comedy than horror.

I was surprisingly impressed with tom cruise considering his current tendency to be a glorified stuntman/action hero

I'm also not convinced about Kirsten dunst in this but generally I think she's good (small soldiers has a place in my heart)

Appreciated the film though 7.5/10

What are some other vampire films that are good?

I’m going with Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice

I fully admit I went into "La Bola Negra" expecting to admire the film more than be moved by it. It seemed designed to be a movie that felt "good for you." Nothing could be further from the truth — this is a bold, ambitious, audacious film that takes creative risks with a complex structure. But every risk pays off in a movie as accomplished as it is genuinely, impossibly moving. Absolutely exquisite and recommend MOST highly.

My rating: ***** of *****

Keep scrolling for full my full review after the poster image.

La Bola Negra is something truly rare: a milestone film, a watershed moment for queer filmmaking, a grand and sweeping historical epic that places homosexuality at its center and makes no apology. It is an essential film for queer audiences. Whether it has crossover or mainstream appeal is irrelevant: it is a movie made by and for the LGBTQ+ community.

It's also a challenging piece of historical drama that is entirely comprehensible without knowing the specifics of the Spanish Civil War or the life of poet and playwright Federico García Lorca, but that invites curiosity and then deepens exponentially because of that knowledge.

All that may sound daunting, and I went into La Bola Negra assuming it might be a movie that I could admire more than love, that would be important without being genuinely moving. I was wrong on all counts. It's a remarkable story that is accessible and legible without any advance preparation. It is a movie that no queer person and nobody who cares deeply about film will want to miss.

It's so beautifully crafted and so visually impressive that even though it will appear on Netflix in December, it's well worth the effort to see it in a movie theater during its initial run. Directed by Javier Ambrossi and Javier Calvo, who share screenwriting credit with Alberto Conejero, La Bola Negra is complex, intelligent and profoundly moving.

Anyone who thought Digger was too "meta" may go apoplectic when they try to make sense of La Bola Negra, in which Lorca himself is a character and also the inspiration for the film's story, which is in part based on an unfinished (only four pages long) play he was writing at the time of his murder by Spanish Nationalists. Lorca's partner, Rafael Rodríguez Rapún is a major character in one of three interwoven narratives that make up the film.

In one, Rapún is a Spanish Republic soldier taken prisoner during the Spanish Civil War and watched over by Nationalist soldier Sebastián, who has no strong loyalty to the Spanish government. He became a solider after his village was destroyed by Italian forces, and finds himself strongly attracted to Rapún, who he does not know is gay. Their relationship deepens, but is threatened by the realities of war.

Even as Sebastián hides the secret of his sexual orientation, Rapún himself hides an even deeper secret — the play that Lorca was working on, and that Rapún has vowed to protect at all costs.

That play, La Bola Negra, or "the black ball," becomes a second storyline in the film, telling of a young man before the Civil War who must hide his own identity in order to gain admission to an elite society. His self-doubt grows when a man he may love, Enrique, tries to persuade him to renounce society and join the dissidents.

The third story takes place in the present, as a frustrated Madrid playwright named Alberto discovers he has come into an inheritance — one his embittered mother doesn't want him to accept. When he finds out what the inheritance is, the entire shape of this bold and ambitious film comes clear.

A huge cast, which includes Penélope Cruz and Glenn Close (largely speaking Spanish), is uniformly brilliant, especially Spanish musician Guitarricadelafuente and impossibly handsome Miguel Bernardeau as the ill-fated lovers caught in the war; and the seemingly more straightforward but ultimately intensely complex role of Alberto, the present day writer-researcher, that becomes quietly devastating in the hands of Carlos González.

La Bola Negra is about the legacy that persists on far beyond our human lifespan. It challenges the conventional wisdom that because we often don't have children or large families, and historically haven't lived openly, gay men are destined to leave less of a mark on the world. It recognizes and understands the fundamental pains of living life secretly, while also confronting broader generational trauma — not just of gay men but of everyone who lives through private and public wars — with dignity, grace and beauty.

Its story structure is massive in both scope and execution, but La Bola Negra reaches a simple and moving conclusion: We all matter. Every single one of us. No one's pain is less than any other, but some of that pain reaches through the decades to shape who we become. This is an astonishing, audacious film, certainly one of the very, very best in a remarkably strong year.

---

You can also read this review or more of my film writing at my blog www.thereinthedark.blogspot.com

Wow, wow, wow. I went to see the doc You Can See Everything last night and it was all kinda crazy.

All I really knew going in was that there was a Theranos scandal (which I was unfortunately involved in during game the early mid 20 teens when I was getting bloodwork done through them).

I knew who Lance Oppenheim was because I just watched Primetime a few weeks ago and Nathan was relatively unknown to me. Upon an IMDB search I think I saw The Rehearsal but I didn't really know who he was.

Back to the documentary. It is long and it is extremely unique and absolutely not boring for one minute of it's 2 hour 54 moniyte runtime. At times it was laugh out loud funny, at times my jaw hit the floor. Unbelievable. If I didn't know for a fact that this was a real thing, I would have thought it was the most ingenious mockumentary ever made.

One of a kind.

Recommend you watch it. Mind your bladder, it's lengthy.

One thing that stands out about The Thing from Another World (1951) is how the characters deal with the threat. They joke around, argue, and generally try to work together. There's tension, especially with the scientist who wants to preserve the creature, but most of the group is trying to solve the same problem.

Compare that with Carpenter's The Thing (1982), where nobody knows who to trust. In the original, the danger is something outside the group. In Carpenter's version, it could be any one of them. It's interesting how that one change creates two completely different kinds of horror.

I was genuinely shocked to find this out. Like, how is it even possible for Robert Pattinson to have zero Oscar, BAFTA or Golden Globe acting nominations at 40, despite delivering so many incredible performances over the years? Like Good Time, The Lighthouse and so many. Hopefully, this is finally the year, But what’s the actual reason behind this? Is it still the Twilight image holding him back, or has he simply been overlooked by the major award bodies for years?

When the original V/H/S and V/H/S/2 came out, they felt like a genuine jolt to the found-footage horror scene. They worked 'cause they felt dangerous in a way most horror filmss​ didn't. Everything was rough around the edges, unpredictable, and soaked in this grimy sense of dread. Every time a new tape started, you had absolutely no idea what kind of nightmare you were about to get thrown into.

Fast forward to the newer entries, and the franchise has turned into a wildly inconsistent mixtape. To be fair, it's not a simple "old good, new bad"split, even recent entries like V/H/S/94 managed to pull off some killer segments like "Storm Drain" or "The Empty Wake." But the structural integrity of the franchise as a whole has completely derailed in my opinion.

Honestly, the new ones just lost that gross, scrappy indie grit. Everything's got this slick, polished look now. Way too many segments go for goofy gore, lazy ideas, or flip into horror-comedy, and they feel less like scary little short films and more like demo reels from directors trying to get a Hollywood job. When it all looks that clean and expensive, the dread just drains right out. I didn't like it.

Joseph Zada as Haymitch, Elle Fanning as Effie, Jesse Plemons as Plutarch and Ralph Fiennes as Snow is a pretty interesting mix.

Obviously there's some I'm forgetting, these are just the ones I could think of off the top of my head

I like high-end productions that don't go full FOMO and are just normal movies that you enjoy for 2 hours and already forget about them. This is the prime example:

• Gets 5 on IMDB
• Has decent actors and looks very, very good
• Plot doesn't create controversy, it's predictable and you can easily watch it with friends and family
• On a cheap platform, no big buzz before it's launch, it's almost like it's labeled "Why not? Give it a try"

Indeed, if I would have to go to the cinema to watch it... Would be a different story. But for this type of consuming movies? Great! Totally recommend it! We actually need this type of movies, like it or not.

For me, it’s his performance in the Jason Bourne series. I can’t imagine anyone else in that role. Beyond his excellent acting, he also executed the action and fight sequences brilliantly, which, in my view, makes this series the best of its kind.

What about you?

With all the talk about the 51st state lately, I was reminded of this film from 2001.

Samuel L. Jackson plays an American chemist who travels to Liverpool to sell his new designer drug, only to get caught up in the local criminal underworld.

It's one of those strange early-2000s British crime films that I hardly ever hear anyone talk about anymore.

Anyone else remember this one? Does it still hold up?

One of the more upsetting movie scenes in recent memory is from James Gray’s Armageddon Time, where young Paul Graff (Banks Repeta) is beaten by his father Irving (Jeremy Strong) after being caught with marijuana at school. Irving only does so at the urging of his wife Esther (Anne Hathaway), but he shows no hint of trepidation when carrying out the punishment. He breaks down the bathroom door to find Paul hiding, roaring with rage as he whips his panicked, pleading son with a belt. The man we saw earlier in the film doing a goofy sing-along while cooking breakfast turns, briefly but unforgettably, into a monster.

What makes the scene so difficult to shake is the fact that the Graffs are not presented as abusive parents, at least not by the standards of Jewish-American New Yorkers in 1980. Irving, while ill-tempered and occasionally violent, is shown to genuinely want what’s best for Paul, all but pleading to God by the end of the film to give his son a break. Modern audiences understand that parenting has changed dramatically in the years since; Armageddon Time confronts them with the evidence, then still asks for the audience’s empathy. It’s a bold decision, and one that throws the shortcomings of a film like Fjord in sharp relief.

Fjord is a film about the Gheorghius, a family consisting of Mihai (Sebastian Stan), Lisbet (Renate Reinsve), and their five children. Mihai’s job as a computer programmer requires him to move the family from his home country of Romania to Lisbet’s home country of Norway, settling in the small town where Lisbet grew up. They are a neighborly, mild-mannered bunch, yet their new neighbors view them with immediate suspicion.

The Gheorghius, you see, are devout Evangelical Christians, with all the baggage that entails. They disdain homosexuality, only listen to Christian music, and pray every single night. That makes them an awkward fit for Norwegian society, which prides itself on its secular liberalism. Soon enough, Mihai’s strict parenting comes under scrutiny, from the “points” system he uses to evaluate his kids’ behavior to the bruises on the body of eldest daughter Elia (Vanessa Ceban). Eventually, social services knock on the Gheorghius’ door and inform Lisbet, in no uncertain terms, that they will be taking the children, even their breastfeeding infant.

Mihai and Lisbet are, understandably, devastated. It’s certainly painful to watch the authorities take the children and drive away, leaving Lisbet bereft and sobbing in the street. You will probably end up rooting for the family to be reunited, even after Mihai admits to occasionally striking his children. He is stern, but not cruel; his worldview is conservative, but his love for his children is true. What right does Norway have to tell him what is and is not acceptable?

This is a provocative scenario, and one that could have been genuinely thorny and uncomfortable in the right hands. But although Christian Mungiu (who won his second Palme d’Or for this film) tries to maintain a certain even-handedness, the film is too imbalanced to start any real conversations.

The Gheorghius, it turns out, are not actually that far out of step with modern society. They lightly physically discipline their children with the occasional spank or rap to the wrists, but they do not beat their children the way Irving Graff did in Armageddon Time. Mihai seemingly confesses to doing so, but only due to an old Romanian saying, “beating comes from heaven”, being mistranslated; the bruises on Elia’s body were the result of a reflexive response from Lisbet, who shoved Elia away after her rough-housing with her brother jostled her arm and caused her to scald herself with boiling water. We never see any physical punishment, so it’s at least theoretically possible that they’re lying, but nothing we see of them elsewhere indicates that that’s the case. (This is not to imply that lighter physical punishment is not “real” child abuse, or that it’s somehow acceptable; the film accepts the Gheorghius’ framing of these punishments as lesser.)

It’s one thing for Mungiu to soften up protagonists who enlightened film festival audiences might find unpalatable; it’s quite another to have them contend with a litany of foes who seem pulled from right-wing agitprop. The community at large treat the Gheorghius like they’re a car with a Kamala Harris bumper sticker in an Alabama suburb, and the teacher who reports the bruises to Child Protection Services (as well as another incident where a Gheorghiu daughter tells a queer student that she’s going to Hell) gives the impression that she was itching for an excuse. By the time a CPS agent scoffs at the idea of allowing leniency due to the case’s proximity to Christmas, you can practically see the Angel Studios’ “Pay It Forward” screen waiting for you at the end.

The film suggests two different things: that the state was far too overzealous in taking all five children, and that the Gheorghius were being discriminated against due to their religion. I can buy the former, but not the latter. The arrival of the Gheorghius doubtlessly caused friction, but based on the information the state had, some suspicion was warranted, even if they went nuclear too quickly. Presumably there have been a few secular liberal Norwegians who beat their children; are we to believe that CPS would just shrug their shoulders and let it slide because they don’t have a crucifix in their house?

Despite the Angel Studios comparison earlier, Mungiu does make some effort to complicate matters. The film concedes that disallowing your children from having cell phones in the modern day is a little draconian, and hints at a budding romance between Elia and her friend and neighbor Noora (Henrikke Lund-Olsen) which would put her at odds with her father. Most intriguingly, it shows Mihai deliberately playing up the culture war angle while soliciting support from conservative Christian groups; placed as it is late in the film, Mungiu implies that this chest-thumping is not a rousing effort to fight for Christian values but a desperate Hail Mary from a father trying anything to get his kids back. By this point, though, the deck is irrevocably stacked.

Fjord is not an awful film. It has two strong lead performances, with Stan in particular excelling; insofar as there is any ambiguity regarding the Gheorghius’ intentions, it comes from the simmering rage beneath Mihai’s soft-spoken exterior, apparent even before CPS gets involved. And it is framed as beautifully as you might expect from Mungiu, whose patient camera makes the most of the picturesque locale. You can call Fjord well-crafted, emotionally affecting, even thought-provoking. But can you call it “nuanced”, as so many critics have? I don’t think you can.

(Read this and other reviews on my Substack.)

For an actor with a career spanning over 250 films and TV shows and appearing in a lot of notable projects like Succession, Barry, and Office Space, it's a crime that he hasn't been nominated for even one Oscar yet.

As a Brit, I feel like we should have more big hit movies coming out. And whilst there are many reasons why that’s not the case, I think we have still had a massive impact on cinema over the years.

The gangster genre is arguably the UK’s strong suit and my favourite from this genre, and my favourite British film is one called Gangster No 1.

It has some brilliant individual performances in what is a fast paced and dramatic crime film about one man’s rise to the top, and his inevitable fall.

Sexy Beast is a close 2nd!

With Street Fighter coming out this weekend it got me thinking of the best video game movies. There’s been quite a few and tbh I haven’t seen many so what do you think?