Old Man @ The Movies

The second of my weekend movies was described as an action, comedy, mystery, thriller. The mystery designation is easily explained: The mystery is why it was made. The comedy? The ridiculous premise. An unpretentious, mild-mannered hero has a rare disease which makes him impervious to pain, so he goes through the movie getting beat up, kicked, stabbed, shot and otherwise maimed, and he doesn't feel a thing. In fact, when he is shot in the arm he probes the wound with a knife and is able to extract the bullet by himself. He does all these things because he's trying to rescue his girlfriend, whom he adores. who has been abducted. In my opinion, she isn't worth what he subjects himself to. Bottom line? It's a very silly movie, but there are some funny scenes that allow you to survive the nearly two hour farce. I'm not certain that producer and director thought they were making a comedy--or did they? Another reason it's described as a mystery to me is why critics (8...

I saw three films over the weekend, and if I were giving out stars for merit, the three combined would earn one star.  Am I getting too negative?  Maybe, so I may cut back in my viewing habits and will try to develop a positive attitude. Don't count on it.  BLACK BAG, with two top performers in Pierce Brosnan and Cate Blanchette, was disappointing. From the previews I expected a rousing mystery adventure story. What I saw was a marathon talking contest with the subject matter as boring as the people reading their lines. Six people, all employed by the British government as intelligence officers are associates and also friends. One of them, Brosnan, is charged with discovering which of his associates, one of whom is his wife, is a double agent, and upon finding the culprit, to bump the bad one off. The nothingness of the conversations and the lack of any real action, enabled the filmmakers to turn a one hour and 33 minute film into a sleep inducing spectacle that felt like...

For the third film I saw this weekend, I was alone. I had a companion for the other two and I feel obligated to apologize for dragging her to I Am Living Proof. And for this one, I read a little more than usual.  I noted that the director was a Korean who won an Oscar for his 2019 film Parasite. I actually went back to find my review (#184 on November 20, 2019). My review was most complementary. I wrote I liked it and might even have loved it and suggested that it might be nominated for one or more Oscars. Armed with this knowledge I viewed MICKEY 17, and like Parasite, director Bong Joon Ho's film was unusual and quirky. This one was a sci-fi movie about colonizing a distant planet with people who are created by 3D fax machines, die and are recreated. The leading character, Mickey, is on his 17th re-creation and is confronted by one of his previous characters which supposedly shouldn't happen. It is a social satire and, I felt, quite well done. I was not as enthusiastic about ...

I think I should read more or know more about the movies I see before actually going to see them. A case in point for the second weekend film I saw. This one was a documentary and very, very faith-based.  I AM LIVING PROOF is a blatant commercial for revivalism and did nothing to change my mind about faith healers. This 1 hour and 24 minute film about three people who find themselves in dire straits and are healed was written, directed and produced—and starred in—by a minister and faith healer. The last words you can attribute to me: They never use the term faith healer in the film but….  In my I guess you might call it naivety, I have long believed in miracles, but not those that occurred in a tent filled with hundreds or thousands of fervent "believers" as witnesses to healings. Having said that, I am willing to concede that the documentary was well done and the participants convincing. I still need to be convinced that it is not just another Burt Lancaster film I'm wat...