Change Your Image
damajacj
Reviews
Napoleon (2023)
Epically... dull
That Ridley Scott has masterful technical craft and artistry in cinema, is unquestionable and it is still evident in Napoleon. So, I can only conclude, after watching his latest oeuvre, that he actually wanted to make a statement about how a near legendary historical figure, such as Napoleon, can actually be pretty ordinary. Perhaps there's something worthwhile to a parable like that. Probably is. But, he didn't have to dumb down the characterisations and storytelling, and dramatic entertainment to such a degree and for such a long duration, as he has done with this movie. Precisely 20 minutes in, the characters are already flat lining. By the (exceedingly expensive, as was much of it I expect) climax, some two hours later, the point has already long been exhausted and sent out to pasture before one of the dullest climactic battle scenes I've ever seen in a professional movie. If the enemies of Napoleon (Wellington et al) had wanted to release an anti-Napoleon propaganda movie in the early 19th century, to strip him of any worshipful fame in history, this would have been the perfect commission. Not depiction of dastardly deeds, infamy, or inhumanity; just dull mundanity, to bore you out of interest in him. Scott would have achieved that quite well, and with a few more flourishes of drama, maybe a convincing tantrum or two, it might have been worth the watch... if it had been about the length of one of Scott's early, short movies: about 15-30 mins.
Saltburn (2023)
Shallow mashup, nothing new nor original
Just a mashup between Talented Mr. Ripley and Brideshead Revisited. Much less complex or sophisticated than the former and much less subtle, scathing and authentic than the latter (not that Waugh was even that notable for subtlety anyway).
To be fair, Evelyn Waugh is nodded to quite openly straight away, in an early dialogue, so it's not blindly done. But hopes for a sly, deep, updated satire, with a cleverly conscious and original synthesis, is flatly unfulfilled.
After a promising first act, character depth, development and plot plausibility, give in to director/writer's self-preening, vacuous provocation, implausible & weak plot patching, till coasting to a self-congratulatory ending. Actors do well overall with what they're given. But the hand of the writer/director is always upstaging them.
Watch if you're as bored as the film's characters are.
Good Omens (2019)
S1 great! S2 rubbish (IMDB should allow separate ratings for each season!)
I gave Season One 8/10, but season two is barely a 4/10 !
What on earth happens with 2nd seasons, of late?! The creative and talented do the first season and then what, the accountants and clerics take over, or something?! Michael Sheen and David Tennant are still good and entertaining, as I don't think they are capable of anything else. Some other nice bits by Hamm and Richardson, and there's a nice bit of camera work here and there and some okay effects at the beginning of episode 1, but otherwise... it's lame, hammy, and amateurish. Waste of my time and the money and time of those who made it and could have been doing something so much better, as was done in the first season. Sad.