This is one of those films where you hear the premise and your reaction might be "oh yeah that's a cool idea I'll watch that" and so you watch it and it's a good premise but it's not a film. It's an episode of The Expanse where Holden lands on a planet and there's already people there and this is what's happening.

It's got no atmosphere (lol the moon) and that is made worse by the fact that Sam Rockwell is not a leading man by any stretch, and there's a really uncanny valley feel to some of the parts later in the film. Plus I can see Kevin Spacey's shit-eating face every time I hear his stupid computer-voice.

Entirely predictable from start to finish, and ends just as it might get good but then someone somewhere would've needed to put pen to paper and actually write a story.

Had never seen this before. It's basically a proto Fast and Furious film. Some of the dialogue is absolutely dreadful but if you're watching films like this for their dialogue then you're going to have a bad time.

Not sure if it's the sort of film I'd rewatch - I find a lot of these older action films like The Last Boy Scout are enjoyable but they're not as easy a watch as something more modern. I guess the genre in general has been an exercise in refining that formula to the point that it is a rollercoaster and you can ride it as much as you want.

There's like two decades of cinema that could never have been made at any other time and I'm so glad they were because this is pure, brain-off, rollercoaster fun.

Had never seen this before, but it's exactly what I want from this kind of film, and I would happily watch only this type of film.

Aged surprisingly well. I had completely forgotten about Kirstie Alley. Remember when she was in everything?

Completely lacking in atmosphere, character, pacing felt so rushed, Danvers' disdain for Mrs. de Winter totally understated, Maxim is aggressive rather than cold. None of it is how the source material landed with me, even down to the visual details. It's still a good story though.

I need to watch the Hitchcock one. An optimist would say this isn't bad, but an alternative view is that it just isn't good.

I get a sense, when watching Shane Carruth, films that I've missed something important, or something happened that I didn't fully understand and I maybe need to watch two or three more times to really appreciate what's going on. It's interesting to me that his films are able to do this because, on the surface Upstream Color is very sparse and it doesn't seem like lots of things are going on that need your undivided attention, but the visuals and interconnected narratives are so dense and detailed that you absolutely do benefit from paying constant  attention.

I immediately read quite a bit about this film after I finished it, and I feel like I have come away with a sufficient understanding of the plot and what happened and why, and it's another fascinating sci-fi film from Shane Carruth that feels both familiar and completely different to anything else I've seen before.

I find it really tricky to write about films that don't really focus on a specific story, because that's normally what I'd focus on. Instead, Upstream Color is about taking control of your own life as it tends to chaos, how our lives intertwine, and how something beautiful can come from something truly traumatic. How can you review that?

To me, this is a very beautiful, unsettling, bittersweet film about losing control of your life through no fault of your own (really the malice of others), taking back control, and breaking the cycle for your own sake and the sake of others. It's not easy to watch - my emotions were very close to the surface throughout, but it's something I'd recommend if any of the above sounds like something you'd like. It's one of those films where the score is essential but I don't think it'd stand alone on headphones.

What a contrast from the others. John Cena steals this, in an exceptionally strong cast. I love Margot Robbie as Harley, and Idris Elba does a pretty decent job as Bloodsport. I get the impression that low effort, disinterested trope is bordering on type-casting for him now. He was Stringer Bell - he doesn't need to show up for roles any more.

The thing that got me about this film is how effectively they are able to hint at a tantalising level of character depth without having to actually deliver on it. I came away feeling like there was so much more to Harley, Peacekeeper and Bloodsport in spite of there being very little evidence!

Genuinely laugh-out-loud in a lot of places (especially Cena - I loved him in Trainwreck and he significantly expands his comic timing and delivery here) and a fairly competent story (if a little derivative - but if you watched this for the story you may have bigger problems upstream). This is a great Friday night movie. Definitely one to rewatch.

Loved this. Tense, fast, thrilling. Feels like a South American Lord of the Flies in the 21st century. Very dark, creepy, brutal. Super unsettling soundtrack. There isn't much here in the way of depth of characters but a lot happens and it drags you along with it.

The story is either all-over-the-place or multi-faceted. It feels like it swirls around trying to decide what it's going to be for a while, before eventually settling on something.

Without The Big Lebowski, this film would not exist. And it's not even a very satisfying crime reveal or anything. It's really just a bunch of things that happen to a guy who keeps showing up in the wrong place at the right time.

Look, it's Josh Brolin and Joaquin Phoenix and it's 2 hours 40, and there is always music playing, and Eric Roberts is there and so many names (Owen Wilson, Joanna Newsom, Maya Rudolph) and there's minidresses and Joaquin Phoenix looks just like Johnny Galecki and this review is not entirely unlike the film. You get the impression that the person telling you the story was pretty out of it when they experienced it (I was on my bike), and they're telling you things as they remember them. And, honestly, if you're going to give that person a grade, it's not going to be high (or even passing), but I bet you were into the story whilst they were telling it!

Oh and the ending makes no sense and Owen Wilson might as well not be in it, but I did enjoy all of it. Sometimes all you need is a bunch of things happening to some good characters and that's enough.

For real though I think the soundtrack runs constantly through this film. I don't think I've ever seen that before. I looked it up and it doesn't seem to be a thing, but there is no silence in this film. There's always some music playing.

You know I think it's so important to constantly remind children that it's OK to be yourself in spite of what your parents might want for you (or, vicariously, for themselves), that I'm not even mad that literally every kids film seems to be about that at the moment. When my daughter grows up and figures out her own path, I will know I've done a passable job at the very least.

Plus there is absolutely no Lin Manuel Miranda in this film; I promise.

Let's just get it out the way. I watched this a few days ago but I wanted to get some of my thoughts into some order because I do think this is important. I know nobody reads any of this but that doesn't mean I don't want to get it right. And I want to preface all of this by saying that I don't know anyone with Tourette's. I've never met anyone with Tourette's. If I say something that upsets someone, it is absolutely unintentional. It is not your responsibility to educate me, but if you feel like it, please reach out to me because I don't want to piss people off - I want to do better.

Every review of Motherless Brooklyn should have two parts. The part that addresses the problems surrounding Ed Norton playing a character with Tourette's, and the part that actually reviews the film. Everyone involved in this film had to know that this was what would happen.

The problem with Ed Norton's portrayal of someone with Tourette's is quite circular in my mind, and that is seeded in the fact that it's based on another story. If there wasn't external source material then I would just pose the question: "why did you make this character this way, if you're planning to have Ed Norton play them?" and be done with it. But you can't remove a Tourette's character from an existing story without incurring a totally separate (and arguably much worse) wrath.

So we have a character with Tourette's (and if I'm critiquing the source material or maybe the screenplay, his condition has almost no impact on the story), and the issue with Tourette's is control. When you're making a film, you need your actors to be able to mould their character around the character and the schedule. If you hire someone with Tourette's, it seems very unlikely to me that you're going to find an actor with Tourette's who's going to be able to turn it off at will, to be able to actually make a film. They are not the character, so their tics will not match the tics of the character. And, I suppose, that is why you have actors!

So you need to find an actor who is going to inhabit the character and play it with sensitivity and authenticity and not feel like they're mocking the condition. For me, Ed Norton does achieve that. It never feels like cheap shots, but it does sometimes feel like they sneak in a tic to remind you that Lionel has Tourette's. During the parts of the film where levity and gravitas (OK, no Tourette's) are required, you get Ed Norton as Ed Norton. And Lionel feels like a layer on top of that character, rather than the actual character.

You might be able to tell that I've been turning this over and over in my head, but I think this is important. I firmly believe that people getting good and faithful representation in media is crucial to not only feeling like you're part of a species, but also allowing people to see you and live some of your experience with you. And in order to do that, it has to be an authentic performance otherwise it's just "this is what I think it's like".

Ultimately, Ed Norton's performance in this movie fluctuates between the exceptional quality I expect from him, and something that makes me feel very uncomfortable because I feel like he's playing it as a tourist. This may be my liberal snowflake showing, but that's just how it lands for me.

With all that being said, and with that constantly in the back of my mind, damn it this is such a good Noir/conspiracy drama with an incredible cast, beautiful photography, a jazz soundtrack that I actually like (I hate jazz), and a lovely platonic relationship that could, so easily, have awkwardly skewed romantic and I am very glad they resisted that temptation.

The pacing of the story is absolutely perfect. You can tell that the editors watched it over and over, and aggressively cut it to ensure that it moves along in the right way. I genuinely wouldn't cut a moment of it.

But damn it I wish there was a way we could've approached Tourette's sensitively. I feel like this wasn't it, but is potentially as close as you can get.

Has some brilliant ideas but doesn't do anything with them. Has that classic immediate-acceleration-to-extreme-violence that got me even though I absolutely knew it was going to happen, but for me this misses all the marks that Midsommar hits.

This is a film about a dead cultist who uses her family to bring the spirit of one of the guardians of hell to earth, and yet there's almost nothing about the conspiracy, the cult, the spirituality, any of that. It's all just hinted-at then you get five minutes of detail at the end and it's over. There's an interesting story begging to break free here but it's never allowed out. I don't know a lot about films like this, though, so maybe some people like that sort of thing.

It has the hallmark exceptional photography and soundtrack, but I prefer Midsommar in every way. However, I do think if Hereditary was the story I wanted, I would prefer it.

It's definitely worth a watch, I just think there's better stuff out there.

I'm glad I watched this in two halves. The first half spends too much time scene-setting nomad life and taking swipes at Amazon, and not enough time building Fern's character. She feels more like Louis Theroux dipping a toe into vanlife culture, than an actual real person. I said after the first half: "I don't care about any of these characters or what happens to them".

But that changes significantly in the last 45 minutes, which are packed with character and relationship building on Fern's family, life, struggles, and personality and I grew to identify with her and care about what would become of her. Nomad life is almost entirely inconsequential, apart from being a catalyst for Fern contacting an estranged family member.

You could argue that nomad life is a metaphor for how lives drift into and apart from each other as you get older, and that it's an important visual that allows you to view all relationships as ephemeral. It's a bit pessimistic, but I don't disagree. It just feels to me that it only exists to give a blue-collar poverty backdrop to the story that is not all that relevant to the main attraction of this film, which is Fern's character and identifying with her.

The shift in focus turns this from a documentary on nomads to an emotional study on people who struggle to find their way in life, with who they are, and where they belong, and this is where it shines brightest. The choice of music, poetry, photography, and pacing wonderfully illustrates the cyclical and ultimately futile nature of life (especially relevant right now!) and Fern's decision to break free from her past and her memories and get on with her life. It doesn't matter what she decides to do; what matters is that she takes control and does it for herself.

Was surprised by how much I enjoyed this. Score (another) one for low expectations. We watched it on a tiny TV in an Airbnb and I would be interested to watch it again on our big screen at home as I feel like it has strong visuals that were a bit lost on the smaller screen.

It's very hammy in places, for sure. And it's one of those films where actors say loads of made-up words and you get a strong impression that they're just reciting a script rather than actually inhabiting a character. But it was an enjoyable action film that will definitely go into Friday night rotation!

I love Daveed Diggs as a rapper. His enunciation, content, and rhythm are second-to-none.

I've been having a problem with him as an actor, though. His speaking voice is so clear that anything other than perfect diction feels forced and fake with him. Something about every line he delivers feels like he's about to dive into a Clipping verse, which actually happens a couple of times in this film. And once, in the climax of the film. I feel like it could've been delivered as a rant or a monologue or an argument, but everything Daveed Diggs says sounds like a verse to me. Which is great for a rapper, but pulls me out of the moment in a film.

Everything else about this film, though. It nails the mark scene after scene. It's 1.5 hours, so it can't afford to waste a moment and it doesn't. The pace is perfect; it pushes you then gives you time to breathe, the pushes you more and a little less time to breathe. Performances are incredible and to covers such a wide breadth of topics that it's almost impressive that they did all this in one hour thirty. We've got gun violence, police brutality, racial profiling, but we've also got the rarely-seen impact of a conviction on the people surrounding the convicted. We have the tension of living every moment like it might be your last free, or just last. It really is a brilliant piece of cinema from start to finish, and I can even forgive the self-indulgent lyrical interludes.

One thing media is not getting right for me at the moment, is the portrayal of the treatment of black people by the police and society. It's either corny and preachy when it doesn't need to be at all (this stuff is actually happening - that's the angle!), or it's contrived and it really doesn't need to be. Blindspotting does not suffer from any of these issues. Happily recommend it to anyone.

You can see how much this has inspired, but it's been done better since (mostly by The Sopranos, and with largely the same cast). It's difficult to be too critical of it, as it's based on a true story, but I just wasn't really impressed by it and didn't really enjoy it.

We got to 1.5 hours and there was another HOUR left and I'm sorry I'd rather waste my life rewatching Brooklyn Nine-Nine than watch another minute of this contrived nonsense. I mean fucking hell who is this even for.

As a shameless lefty it's fun to watch however many hours of gratuitous self-praise.

Imagine you're in a huge argument with your significant other, or some other pillar of your current lifestyle. You know you're right, and you have shitloads of evidence to back it up. Feels good.

But they're maybe not smart like you, or they're a little paranoid. And they're tired of your superiority complex. And they leave you.

And now you're alone and you have nothing except the fact that you were right. And I want to remind you that you would've been right regardless of who knew it.

I don't like it but truth or right or wrong doesn't matter right now, and all the sneering and eye rolling is just fuel for the fire. I know science is right, but the problem is that half of us have been convinced that science is wrong and they might even be more passionate about it than me. This sort of thing is a comfort when I feel like logic might be insane, but it's not helping.

It's OK. I didn't enjoy it but I didn't not enjoy it. The biggest treat for me was how great Stephanie Beatriz was. I'm growing increasingly tired of Lin Manuel Miranda's songwriting. He's like the Van Halen of musical songwriting; it's impressive but I don't like it and actually I would just rather it wasn't there.

Baymax + Mitchells = Ron

It just about gets a pass because it's a pretty good take on our increasing obsession with screens, how internet fame can affect people very negatively, and how having a tonne of online connections doesn't mean you have real friends. I'm glad Tabitha saw it, given that she's about to enter that whole world.

This is an absolutely beautiful film. Straight away it's one of my favourite sci-fi because I like it slow and with purpose. I don't need a tonne of story, subtext, all that. I just want something coherent with a ridiculously talented director of photography.

This immediately goes up with 2048 and Arrival as beautiful, simple stories of substance. If you liked those then I don't see how you wouldn't enjoy Dune. It's so beautiful and intentional I just don't see how you could not like it. Like if you don't; fine, but we're unlikely to see eye-to-eye on any films.

It felt like this was about 4 hours long. It's an entertaining amalgamation of multiple films and it is pretty unashamed of it.

Honestly, Ed Sheeran's cameo is about the most funny thing in it. Look I get it - Dwayne Johnson looks like a meathead but he's smart and funny. Ryan Reynolds is handsome but he's smart and funny. Gal Gadot is beautiful but she's smart and can kick your ass.

Aren't you tired of this shit? Of being repeatedly sold the same fucking thing, and you watch it because it seems like something you'd like, and they take that view as affirmation and make it again and again and then you watch it again and again. Is this what movies are now? $200m cash grabs designed to waste my fucking Friday with a Venn Diagram of shit I've already seen? Sunrise, sunset. I'm over it.

One of the better Marvel films, but it did feel long. Loved the fight choreography, and the editing. Anything that intersects with Doctor Strange does it for me.

Wasn't expecting to like this in the slightest but ended up loving it. A shame that they sent Emma Stone to the Dick van Dyke school of British accents, but everyting else was a very conceivable origin story. Beautiful costumes, set design, and an incredible soundtrack. Emma Thompson plays a wonderful Evil Julie Andrews. And I've never wanted to see three dalmatians die before. I normally love dalmatians. Before you get on at me, I know it's not the dog; it's the owner.

Enjoyed this. I mean it's deep as a puddle, and the premise is almost incomprehensible, but it was fun and had some pretty decent bits of choreography.

My main criticism is Jared Leto's Joker. I feel like he is capable of making this character his own, but this Marilyn-Manson-impersonating-Heath-Ledger angle was not good at all.

Other than that, I'd watch a sequel. Which is fortunate as I think they made one.

The top review says "like every Lin-Manuel Miranda project, it could've used less Lin-Manuel Miranda", and I can't agree more with that. The guy is lyrically Van Halen - it's all very technically impressive, but after a while it becomes noise.

You can tell a Lin-Manuel Miranda song a mile away: lots of cool wordplay, syncopation and internal rhyming. It must take a lot of work to write a song like this, but when you catch yourself thinking "I bet they set this in Miami just for this wordplay", maybe it's not difficult; maybe it's just contrived.

I always conflate this with Sunshine, and have never seen it before because I'm always like "I've seen it".

Absolutely loved this. And what a ridiculous cast. Not exactly sure when I started to enjoy films like this but I really do now.

The trailers made this look a bit like something designed to make you cry and nothing more, but it was so relatable in so many ways. The screenplay is really amazing, with how it shows you the perspectives of all the characters. I would have loved some more closure on a couple of the threads, but it had to end at some point. Really recommended but I was crying basically the whole way through. I am a crier at movies though.

Couldn't help feeling like parts of this were incredibly unrealistic (the end, for instance), but I still enjoyed it. Feels like it was on the verge of trying to make a really big point about many things that I should have a better awareness of, but just didn't.

And Hindi is such a beautiful language. I love how they randomly cut between it and English and everyone just keeps up, but understanding someone who's just speaking English is a challenge.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. We recently watched every Marvel film in internal chronological order, so they're all very fresh in my mind. There's obviously a lot of variety in these films, and there are many I would rewatch for all sorts of reasons, but this one doesn't make any of those lists.

Feels less like a coherent or compelling story, and more like just a bunch of things that happen. When Marvel is putting out things like Loki, it's hard to take this seriously.

At the end of season three, I felt there was a need for this film. I wanted to see how everyone's story ended but we all know how it ends. It ties everything up nicely and neatly, and exactly how you'd expect from every character.

But I can't help but feel disappointed. It's hard to feel satisfied with a reminder of the futility of everything. We're all doomed to sacrifice so much in the name of progress whilst others profit. We're all doomed to lose things we love, unfairly and at random. And we're all doomed to die.

So I suppose the inevitability of each character's arc is as much a comment on life as it is lazy storytelling. We each make our beds, then spend our lives using the enormity of change as an excuse to stay there until it's too late. Each of our stories as on-rails as the trains that carried the progress Deadwood feared, but to which they ultimately acceded.

Awful. Just watch the first one again.

Every time I see a new Miyazaki film, there's one prevailing takeaway: why didn't I watch this sooner? His ability to drag beauty from banality is unparalleled in any medium. Visually these works are incredibly beautiful, and the story is so simple but so lovely.

I feel like this is a lesser-known Ghibli and that's a mistake. It's easily up there with some of the more fantastical stuff they've produced.

I will never understand why this film is so highly regarded. Dialogue delivery so emotionless it's got Hayden Christensen looking like DiCaprio. Never, at any point, was I under the impression that Bond feels anything for Vesper, or vice versa.

The only redeeming feature of this film is ripping into it with Charlotte, which is always fun.

I'm going to need some time to think about this one. Damn this guy knows how to make a film though. Engaging story; just-about-followable in places, beautiful cinematography, loved the soundtrack. Reminded me of Dark and Primer in the format and theory. Super satisfying film.

Another solid Spider-Man. I absolutely hate reality-altering stuff though. Hated it in Batman, and hate it in this. It really stresses me out.

Still I love Jake Gyllenhaal, and I still love Tom Holland. I love Zendaya and it was nice to recognise Angourie Rice from The Nice Guys. Another super fun action film. I wish they were making more with Tom Holland but I don't think they are.

Enjoyed this a lot. These Into the Spider-verse folks really know what they're doing. Solid road trip story for kids, great soundtrack, and one part made me laugh so hard. Definitely one to rewatch.

We watched every Marvel film in chronological order but I didn't log any of them, for some reason. I might go back and do it but I don't think Disney+ will give me dates.

I loved this. Been indifferent to the past Spider-Man films but Tom Holland was really good, and it was just a fun film. And Michael Keaton isn't allowed to be in bad films so this had to be good.

It's a good thing this film laid out early on that it had no intention of making me think even for a second. Two very flat social commentary jokes saw to that, and I was free to switch my brain off and watch all the pretty explosions and plot points that come from nowhere and disappear just as quickly.

This is an action movie, sewn from leftover threads of movies that had much loftier goals, and it's just fine the way it is. I read a few reviews of this a while ago that seem to have been disappointed that it wasn't The Matrix or Inception or something, but you don't need very long with the film to know that it isn't trying to be that. It's big stupid fun and I enjoyed it as that.

There can't be many of these I haven't seen by now. I do enjoy Miyazaki's "learn to live with the earth or be consumed by it" stories. He's like a Japanese David Attenborough who makes me care about being better, but doesn't make me feel like I'm the problem and it's all mine to solve.

The soundtrack on this is very eclectic as well, which I appreciate. It's usually the classic symphonic score but this also has an interesting mix of 70s and 80s electronic and late 80s rock/metal which is surprising since it was made in Japan in 1984.

I really enjoyed this the first time I watched it. But that was a lot of years ago now. The score is absolutely beautiful though.

Enjoyed this a lot. Concise, doesn't try to explain impossible things. You can see it all coming a mile off, but that's OK. Ethan Hawke is great.

There's so much to dislike about this but I feel like you're supposed to. Absolutely loved the ending even if it was a complete slog to get there.

If George Lucas isn't a socialist, he's the most cynical piece of shit in existence.

Pointless film. Constantly spools up like it's about to make some grand reveal then repeatedly lets you down. I watch films to escape life's futility but all this did was remind me about it for two hours.

I just don't know if it's worth the time spent on it. It's entertaining enough, which almost distracts from the fact that it's 17-year-old deep. Almost. Like I get it. Everyone's a slave somehow. And every slavemaster doesn't see their slave as a person, and that's a problem. And it's never going to change. And when it looks like it might change: surprise; it's the same. But that's also slavery. When you look at it from the outside, the solution is very simple. Let's just not any more.

If you're looking for subtext, this is The Matrix for people who prefer period dramas to sci-fi. I can't help but compare it to The Fountain, which deals with similar themes from a different angle. Unlike The Fountain, however, The Wachowskis aren't able to drag convincing performances from their comically overrated Big Names. Aronofsky gets an emotional performance from Hugh Jackman in The Fountain, and it's beautiful in spite of his shortcomings. He's an everyman, overwhelmed by his predicament. I think I'm right in saying that Halle Berry and Tom Hanks have never given a convincing performance. There are times in this film where, if you'd told me Halle Berry was reading an autocue, I'd believe you.

I will say, though. Ben Wishaw is beautiful in this. He's so convincingly tortured, right to the very end. Won't even let himself have one final bit of happiness in case it changes his mind.

I think it's important to note that someone smarter than I am could potentially call this a brilliant piece of film-making. But for me, an armchair intellectual, it presents too many disconnected notions and never attempts to tie them together. It's all very beautiful and Wachowski-ish, but I'm not 17 any more. Maybe 17-year-old me could explain it to 35-year-old me.

I absolutely loved this. I wasn't expecting to but I couldn't say why. I love these slices of real life that just tell a story, but this one is a goddamn all-you-can-eat buffet in terms of characters. Every character is so deep and, most importantly, so real. Performances are amazing all round. I don't think there's a single weak performance in the whole thing.

In the interest of not being obsequious, it annoys me how the timeline jumps around all over the place. I don't know if that's present in the source, but I found myself a few times watching a scene and then realising that we were in a different time than I thought. It was a bit irritating, but not so much that it'd put me off emphatically recommending this wonderful film.

I feel like such an idiot for not watching this sooner.

The most ridiculous plot, and so very 90s. Russia and North Korea conspiring to steal technology from the US, only to be foiled by a child?! If I had a penny for every film with this plot! But it was fun - we all enjoyed it.