Change Your Image
alvardecampos
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Better Call Saul: Waterworks (2022)
The Science of Change
It's been quite a ride since the beginning of this series, right?
The series spanning for such a long time, from 2015, gives ample space for the characters to change, but also for the viewers.
Think about where you were and who you were in 2015, and where you are, and who you are, now. Is it the same? I doubt it.
The difference of BCS and BB is that this change is gradual, more physical than chemical as it is in BB, so when we reach 2022 we don't realise how much we've changed, how much everything has changed. Only if we watch an episode from 2015, from the series or from our own lives, do we realise that.
Only great literature involves the reader/viewer in such a way, and BCS is on par with great literature. Like the 'ideal' crime novel where the reader is the murderer, in BCS the viewer sees through the characters' change throughout the episodes, and realises the parallel change of themselves in the same period. The series throws back the ball to the viewer and tells them that maybe, they're the protagonist or, even, the accomplice.
Enjoy the last episode.
Death on the Nile (2022)
Unwatchable
An atrocious, completely unwatchable movie. A textbook example of the destructive force of the woke mind virus at work. On the outside, you may find reasons to watch it: Kenneth Brannagh leading and directing, the beautiful presence of Gal Gadot, the fact that it is a new production, so, I don't know, effects, atmosphere; but, nothing, nothing can remedy this wreck of a movie.
As for the woke insertions, they are so out-of-place, so amateurish, like a freshman pulling at a panty girdle, to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter. Actually, Dr. Chilton would be a demigod-level genius compared to the writers of this thing.
In any case, I still can't believe I watched this torture, this insult to my intelligence and my dignity for two hours; I surely wouldn't have watched more than 20 minutes had I watched it alone. So, trust almost every other review in here and don't make the mistake of watching this movie for any reason.
Jaws (1975)
A Classic
What can one say about this movie? It's an absolute classic. Still so enjoyable after all these years and all the viewings. I'd like to stand on one great aspect: the non-shark content; the dialogues, the characters, the "guys" part of the movie (the part on the boat, that is); Robert Shaw's unforgettable performance, my favorite; the small and happy lives of the islanders, oblivious to the great predator visiting them... I think there's an allegory there. I think there are lot of allegories and tributes in the movie.
The only bad thing about this classic is that it 'spawned' (not by its fault) an endless bunch of stupid shark films.
The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999)
A classic
This film is a classic, even though it's not that old, and has the air of a classic, from-another-era film. It is aesthetically pleasing even more: the setting in Italy, the bon-viveurism, the stylish clothing, the boats, the jazz. Maybe it's not perfect, but it's in so many ways superior to modern garbage, that I can't dare to say anything negative about this piece of gold.
The Invitation (2015)
High expectations, lousy result
As others have indicated, this film starts somehow interestingly, and tentatively scary, but (anti)climaxes with a really dumb plot 'twist'. So, don't waste 2 hours to see it. Don't be tripped (like me) by the relatively high metascore.
Viking (2016)
Worth watching
I party can understand the low rating, it is a bit strange movie, and maybe partly inaccurate (I'm not an expert on Russian history; a Russian friend I asked wasn't very convinced about the whole Viking dominance thing depicted in the movie in that period of history, but anyway). I gave it 7 stars for something that I think needs mentioning: it is one of the very few movies out there to include Byzantium. Hollywood doesn't even know what that is. 'Historical' american movies know only: Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, and maybe some thing up until the fall of the Western part of the Roman Empire at the most. After that: the complete vacuum. Well, at least this movie shows a very historically rich period. I liked the scene where the Russians talk with the Romans regarding marriage arrangements, where the Roman envoy speaks Greek, as was the case back then (and they're correctly called Romans in the movie, thus avoiding the anachronism typical of almost all English-speaking historical movies). In summary, definite must see for those interested in Byzantium.
Roman Empire (2016)
Season 3 : atrocious
First of all, 4 stars comes from 1 star for season 3, 5 stars for season 1 and 6 starts for season 2. This review is for S3.
Where to begin with the travesty of season 3... Beginning from the least worst: anachronisms. Romans of early 1st century AD talking about the "throne" and the "emperor", in other words using anachronistic terminology. But that's just fine print. If only this was their only fault. There are far grater monstrosities, apart from the terrible softcore-movie-style acting. Even blatant lies where it's supposedly a "documentary". What I hated the most is the fact that they used interviews with respected and top historians and intertwined them with the atrocious acting part. I really can't understand how on earth Tom Holland for example, one of the top historians out there, agreed to take part in this farce. I'd prefer to think that they duped him without giving him any details about the kind of "documentary" it was, instead for going along knowingly.
Season 1 was mediocre, and season 2 fairly watchable. But even seasons 2 and 1 are strictly entertainment shows, not historical documentaries.
Rise of Empires: Ottoman (2020)
Subjective but also accurate (for the most part)
First of all, it's essentially a biography of Mehmet II , and sees the whole event from his (and the Ottomans') perspective. So, it's quite subjective. On the other hand, it says in the title: "Rise of empires: Ottoman", not "Fall of empires: Roman". So, the subjectivity is expected, somehow. Apart from that, it's fairly historically accurate, for the greatest part (it may be accurate in all parts, it's just that for many events regarding the Fall of Constantinople we have contradicting accounts from different sources, for example the supposed duplicitous behavior of Loukas Notaras, which brought his end upon him). I liked the accuracy of calling the Byzantine empire Roman empire, which is the historically accurate thing to do. In other words, it is some orders of magnitude better than the atrocious Nextflix docuseries about Caligula, which was full of anachronisms and blatant lies and distortions. Here we have a far more careful work. The acting, effects, atmosphere and general quality of production is also remarkably high. Surely, a must see for all interested in that event in history, taken maybe with a small pinch of salt.
The Invisible Man (2020)
Don't see it
Saw this movie due to its somewhat high rating, both on users' rating and on metascore. Well, 2 hours of my life lost. Incredibly dumb, unconvincing acting, and even dumber directing and script. I mean, what kind of "thriller" gives away its most central point right at the beginning of the movie? They mustn't think high of the intelligence of their target audience, to put it mildly.
The Meg (2018)
Painfully horrible
This was an unbelievably and probably consciously dumb movie. But I guess what bothers me most is that having read Steve Alten's book when it was published many years ago, I eagerly expected the movie adaptation; for which there was always talk, as the book was made in a DanBrownian, I'm-ready-for-movie, style. Now mind you, the book was not a literary masterpiece; it was a mediocre but entertaining and even slightly informative book, and mediocre books can make really fine movies under a clever director and cast. I don't know where to start from: The complete deviation (more like abusing) of the simple but decent plot of the book. The university professor-diver of the book turned badass macho man in the movie; even the most standing feature of the book plot, which is what the name of the protagonist hints to (JONAS), was completely left out in the movie and changed to a completely ridiculous alternative suitable to Expendables; which makes me wonder, why on earth didn't the director change the protagonist's name from Jonas to, well, Tucker or Jack? In order to be faithful to the book? (audience laughs). The fact that the movie tries to be scary and funny, without of course accomplishing any of these. It somewhat reminded me of Sharknado, but Sharknado was at least honest in its trash substance. The complete inaccuracy of the film (a 100-feet shark swims casually below swimmers in shallow waters and no one notices anything, no vortex created, nothing, guess it's a ninja shark).
In any case, don't make the mistake of seeing that movie and losing about 20 IQ units, you'll need some time to get them back. I do recommend the book Meg, though, even though it has some scientific inaccuracies, but compared to the film it's "mustard", as Jason Staham said in a movie that didn't have him appear as mentally incapacitated.
Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told (2013)
Neonazi piece of junk
This is a pseudo-historical neonazi excuse for a 'documentary', and many nazi sympathizers have horded in to vote in favor of it.
Holocaust denial is illegal in many civilized countries, and I am astonished to see how easy it is for a nazi sympathizer to produce a so-called documentary and spread it over the Internet.
The lies that appear in that 'documentary' are very easy to discard, requiring that you have a minimum of critical thinking abilities. Humanity has gone through the greatest crime in all its history, which is not only the Holocaust, but Nazism in all its dimension. If anyone feels nostalgic and wants to repeat Nazism, let them come forward and try it.
"Never again".