In order for you to understand my review for the new Hellboy, I need to embark on a quick journey through time to acknowledge both Hellboy (2004) and Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008). Both of these I’ve only seen once so far, but I remember liking them very much. But even though I liked them, I never understood the hype (at least around mid 2000’s) around Guillermo del Toro – sure, he is stunning visual director, but surely anyone would be able to do what he did with that kind of property, right? How foolish was I…

The latest (would this be considered a remake?) take on Hellboy was supposed to be darker, yet it was trying to stay funny. Emphasis on trying. And sure enough, the movie isn’t shy from being dark (blood, plenty of gore) and have “dirty” fun (plenty of swearing, which I don’t mind) but it’s somehow not jelling well together and it comes across as boring. I know I should not compare the previous movies to this one, but I make the rules around here on this… really tiny blog, so I say why not compare two directors and how they approached the “same” material.

I think the biggest difference is Guillermo del Toro isn’t normal, in the best possible way. He’s by his own admission, into weird things, you could consider him a geek, an enthusiast into monsters, creepy things and he’s managed to make a carrier out of it, standout from the crowd. And that is why his take on Hellboy works much better – because, on some level, he is Hellboy, he understands him better. He’s the guy who no matter what, will always standout, not because of his psychical appearance, but because of how he thinks about things such as camera work, monster design, trying to make them unique… From what I remember about his two Hellboy movies, they both looked visually great, they had that unique feel that I foolishly believed it was so “simple” to achieve with that kind of material…

Let’s go to this Hellboy, shall we? Nothing here looks unique (except maybe one sequence I will talk about soon) and the story is kind of all over the place. There are couple of twists in the movie, but one is twist for a sake of being a twist and the other, at the very end, is just plain dumb. I did say “seriously?” when the twist happened, but not the excited version, like what you’d say to your significant other when asked “I have more chocolate stashed in a cupboard, do you want more chocolate?” It was more along the lines of your boss asking you to do overtime for no money, that kind of vibe.

The only memorable thing about this movie for me was the Baba Yaga sequence. Not only it felt more “horror-like” (which I wouldn’t mind if most of this movie felt like this) but I actually liked the Baba Yaga’s monster design, as that actually looked unsettling. So, whoever has done that, really great job to you.

The rest of the movie is just a mix of bland CGI with some blood and guts, with David Harbour trying his best, but missing the mark big time. I know this was probably the direction he was given, so I don’t really want to say he did a bad job, but this version of Hellboy didn’t work for me, as there wasn’t much to grasp, the whole “I’m different, and yet I fight for those who hate me for it” didn’t hit me the way it did with the previous movies. The same goes for Milla Jovovich – I really, really admire her and everything she’s done, but she wasn’t really given much to do here and the movie is worse for it. Shame movie, for wasting two great actors like this.

And it’s a movie’s fault really, as I believe the biggest problem was with the tone. Either Neil Marshall or the producers tried to balance comic book movie with horror/action/comedy and the result is something that’s trying to be all of the above, but fails horribly in every genre. For a comedy it’s not funny, for a horror, it’s no scary, for an action movie, there isn’t enough action. I wouldn’t mind having just a darker interpretation of Hellboy, with little to no jokes, more skewed towards horror, like that Baba Yaga sequence. That would at least differentiate itself from its predecessors and gave us, the audience, something truly unique and definitely better than what we’ve gotten now. This mixed bag of nothingness, that somehow managed to take really popular and beloved actor from Stranger Things and make him… really meh. Don’t even get me started on waste of Milla’s character (what was her screen time in total, 10 minutes…?)

Would I recommend watching the new Hellboy movie? Yes, I would, but only if you’ve seen the previous two movies. Not because they are connected (they are not) or because this one is great (it is not) but to make more people see why Guillermo del Toro is considered one of the best directors alive right now and to give him (albeit retrospectively) the credit he deserves. And yeah, also for the Baba Yaga sequence.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

I still don’t understand what happened – on paper, Miss Bala had everything necessary to succeed – Catherine Hardwicke is definitely capable director, Gina Rodriguez is so fit I would believe her being able to kick some ass after only a few days of being captured by Mexican gang… so why is this movie so below average?

I think part of the issue is not enough character work for us to care about what happens to Gina’s character – the movie wastes literally no time to throw her into a really bad situation, but we only get to know her on basic level, where any kind of danger she’s subsequently in, we are not as invested. I don’t blame Gina herself, she’s doing pretty much anything she can to make this movie watchable, and the movie “moves”, so it never feels still, but yet, somehow, despite all the action scenes, colourful settings, and the fact Gina’s character is in some kind of danger every 3.5 minutes (on average, I did the math so you don’t have to), you find yourself pretty bored.

Because of that boredom, I started to notice the scenery more and more, and this is how you know this movie is not that great – Miss Bala is about a woman, who gets, by a complete coincidence, mixed up with a cartel, really dangerous one (even though that’s kind of given, isn’t it? I don’t think there are cartels that would solely be focused on petting puppies and muffin sales) and yet, this movie didn’t pull me in, and therefore I had all the time in the world to see the beautiful Mexico and I want to go visit it even more than before watching this film! And that (I’m pretty sure) is the opposite reaction of what I was supposed to feel right after finishing this movie. Yes, somehow, I can actually imagine using this film to advertise holidays in Mexico! You know, just ignore all the cartel stuff, or the corrupt police, and you’ll be fine… probably.

The movie itself advertises the fact this is based on a Mexican movie with the same name, Miss Bala from 2011. And I honestly want to see the original, out of morbid curiosity, just to see if it’s any good and what happened, because then, maybe, just maybe, it will help me understand, how this movie, that has plenty of pretty decent action scenes, Gina Rodriguez, and is being directed by somebody, who knows what they are doing, could turn up so… painfully below average, where you don’t really care about anyone in the movie.

I do feel the need to apologise to any of you, dear readers, as I feel like this entire review is really bland, but then again, so is this movie. I’d tell you to go watch it to understand why I am struggling to come up with something, except I can’t recommend this movie with good conscience to anybody, other than (maybe?) some hardcore fans of Gina Rodriguez. And even they would probably be disappointed.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

There are movies that are ageless, and if it wasn’t for something (old piece of technology, a specific word/lingo we don’t use today) you wouldn’t even notice, how old they are. And then there are movies like Changing Lanes, a movie that took a concept that was really popular in the early 2000’s (car accident affects lives of several people) and made it in hyper edited, pseudo dramatic early 2000 way, that it’s hard to watch.

Changing Lanes is really frustrating movie, as it’s trying to have it both ways – it wants to talk about good and bad, with characters who are both in between being good and evil (even though you could argue Ben Affleck‘s character has passed the edge and went to the dark side with occasional glimpse of remorse) but everything this movie is trying to say/show is so on the nose it’s basically punching you in the face with it. Subtlety is not a word this movie knows.

Unlike movies like Amores Perros (2000) or Crash (2004), the car accident in this movie is more of a fender bender, so there is not much at stake, nobody’s injured. It’s more about the time to do the right thing in that situation, where both men are rushing to get to court (what a coincidence!) and Samuel L. Jackson wants to do the right thing (exchange the information, etc.). Ben Affleck is in a rush, so he just writes a blank cheque for Samuel to repair his car, but during the chaos, he forgets his red folder, that’s of course, the crucial piece of evidence for his case and trial he’s already late for, even prior to this accident.

From there on, is where the film starts being really melodramatic, as plenty of times if people had just waited for couple of minutes, they would’ve saved themselves plenty of problems, but they don’t. Which is not necessarily bad idea, but the execution… I don’t know whether the studio was interfering with shooting, or giving the director some notes, but the approach Roger Michell went with (half drama, half thriller on crack) didn’t work for me. Not only the pacing felt all over the place, but what the movie was trying to say was just too on the nose, and if you didn’t get, you will get it re-hashed at the end of the movie again, just to make sure you got it.

The other thing that totally didn’t work for me was Ben Affleck’s character, who I didn’t trust at all. To me, that was the typical Hollywood’s idea of “morally ambiguous” character, who knows he’s more on the evil side, but then he sees a family on the sidewalk crying for their dad, and that makes him realise the scope of his evil actions. Yep, that exact scene happens in this movie. I guess, I can’t disprove the fact there might be people like that, but usually people who do things that are… morally questionable, they realise the scope of everything they are doing. They just know how to justify it to themselves, how to disconnect from anything and everything, so people like that wouldn’t get shaken up by something like that.

That’s why the film doesn’t work for me overall – it seemed like it was afraid to either go deeper with Ben’s character, or to allow itself to have moments of quiet reflection, where you could see/believe Ben’s character is about to “break” for the better, not just a few seconds on the street. Unfortunately, the movie did neither, and that’s why it feels unearned.

Side note – if you are still asking “how on the nose can this film be?”, know this – the title literally comes from the accident, where the main characters were… changing lanes on a motorway. Yeah. Subtlety be gone.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

This review will contain spoilers (not that it matters that much, as most of it can be predicted by a semi-intelligent toddler).

Where to start… The Circle is an okay movie, that thinks it’s smart as fuck motherfucker. But it isn’t. This movie has some really capable actors, but only 3 are trying their best (Emma Watson, Karen Gillan and Tom Hanks) and one isn’t given enough space (John Boyega). I would like to discuss Tom’s performance in this movie for a bit, to make you understand why I was really underwhelmed with this film.

I really wish more people (especially in a movie like this) would act the same way as him – he’s probably the only “bad” character there that isn’t “cartoonishly” (yep, that’s 100% a word, believe me! I have words, many words, the best words…) bad, because he actually tries to come from a place where he plays this character like a good guy (at least for most of the movie). The others, supporting characters around him, they are paint by number weird, cult-like acting people and look, I do understand the point that “The Circle” made them that way, to the point they don’t realise how they’re behaving, but Jesus-Pole-Dancing-Christ, it doesn’t always have to be so on the nose. Because whatever message you’re trying to send, audience isn’t receiving.

I am not quite sure why was this film pitched, written, or even shot – it feels more like a rejected episode of Black Mirror (if you are looking for something that actually shows you various dangerous of technology, without being preachy or over the top, this is a brilliant show) which was around for 6 years (technically 5 years, as movies tend to take time to be filmed, edited etc., but you know, technicality) by the time this movie was made. And for the life of me I can’t figure out who actually thought they are making something “high-stake”? I mean, honestly?

When comes to movies like this, I genuinely hope all the actors got paid good money, as there was only one thing I’ve enjoyed about this movie (read, didn’t feel predictable), the SoulSearching sequence felt like something that was a pretty good idea. It’s a shame they didn’t surround the movie around this, maybe development of this, and eventually using this to track down more people. But no, instead we get this wannabe Facebook, that hammers us with the same message, that somehow thinks it’s original…? I’m honestly lost with this movie.

What I always do after I finish a movie, is go to Trivia section on IMDb to read them and see, if there is anything interesting. And this one really caught my attention:

The ending was changed significantly for the film adaptation. In the novel, Mae, fully believing in The Circle’s goals and mantras, betrays Ty in his attempt to bring down the company and he is effectively silenced.

Can I just politely ask one, quite simple question? Why the FUCK would you change it to that Hollywood ending? I am honestly curious who thought this paint by numbers movie needed a generic ending. If they’ve kept this ending, focusing more on Mae’s character getting lost in “The Circle”, so it’d make sense for her to do that, it could’ve been a pretty decent, non-generic movie, with an interesting twist at the end. Shame, as this way by the next week, I’ll probably forget everything about this movie, as nothing stands out.

And BTW, if you hire John Boyega, can you maybe give him more than 10 minutes of the movie time, especially if he’s supposed to be the founder (I know he’s in hiding and what not, but still…) People who’ve seen Attack the Block know he can carry a movie with no issues.

This is all for this movie. What did you think? Was I too harsh? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke