RJR99SS
Joined Sep 2004
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings18
RJR99SS's rating
Reviews16
RJR99SS's rating
I enjoyed the first movie, though i felt the whole social messaging angle it took at times was definitely the weakest element of the film. In this movie, we get basically nothing but social messaging and very little murder mystery. It is kind of annoying to watch something which is attempting to critique the dumbest elements of our culture, but yet at the same time seems to be absolutely fascinated and narcassitically in love these same things (keep in mind, I would say that this movie itself and its overall message seems to be made by the exact type of social "disruptors" that the movie claims to critique).
As for the film itself, there's some pretty strange pacing choices. Right in the middle of the film they decide to basically just drop the mystery then go on a 45 minute explanation to the backstory of the mystery. Then there's a lame solution to the mystery and then we end with a pretty darn overt hammerfisted suggestion that society needs to burn, literally. Just 'cause.
I would take that message a little more seriously if the film wasn't made by the exact same type of jackasses who actually do buy 5 million dollar personalized sports cars and customized island mansions, which, once again, the film claims to despise.
Other than that, the story is kind of convoluted, lots of things don't really make sense on rewatching, and the biggest disappointment is Daniel Craig actually doesn't do all that good of an acting job, despite being amazing in the last film.
As for the film itself, there's some pretty strange pacing choices. Right in the middle of the film they decide to basically just drop the mystery then go on a 45 minute explanation to the backstory of the mystery. Then there's a lame solution to the mystery and then we end with a pretty darn overt hammerfisted suggestion that society needs to burn, literally. Just 'cause.
I would take that message a little more seriously if the film wasn't made by the exact same type of jackasses who actually do buy 5 million dollar personalized sports cars and customized island mansions, which, once again, the film claims to despise.
Other than that, the story is kind of convoluted, lots of things don't really make sense on rewatching, and the biggest disappointment is Daniel Craig actually doesn't do all that good of an acting job, despite being amazing in the last film.
Right off the bat, I'll say that this show is light years ahead of all the other Disney star wars shows in terms of quality production, writing, acting, and just about any other metric you can think of. While the other Disney series looked slapped together and low effort, this show looks like a meticulous amount of work went into it on all levels, it even looks like somebody actually cared about this production, for a change.
In terms of the overall look, the cinematics, this show actually delivers, and there's none of the corny cosplay costumes you might have seen in The Book of Boba Fett. My only complaint is that as good as it looks, it still doesn't really look Star Wars. The aliens, the ships, the architecture, it all looks off, and at times looks more like Blade Runner than Star Wars. This is a minor complaint though, after all the eyesores of Disney series and movies they've come out with so far, any progress is welcome. And i suppose, fans are just going to have to accept that Disney are going to be the ones who dictate what Star Wars looks like from here on out, as they do have many copyrights they have to work around after all.
As for the writing of the show, it's pretty darn impressive. We actually do get quite a lot of good, believable dialog, and the plot has a clear direction and logical steps that get us there. They might be a little too proud of their writing however, as there's a whole lot of lines that get said that admittedly are great lines, but probably should have been cut as they just distract from the overall scene they're in. Disney hasn't figured out editing yet, apparently, even though if you think about it, that's what their entire company was founded on.
I had a sinking feeling right from the start that this show would degrade in quality as it went on, and that it's impressive beginning was just a trick to snag some disillusioned fans back, but I think i was only partially right about that. The later episodes do tend to drag, and I think they could have easily made this a 10 or even 8 episode season, but it stayed pretty high quality even still, although they could have definitely focused on the characters and elements they already introduced rather than constantly adding new ones.
Overall, this is probably the only star wars product since the 1990s that I actually enjoyed. I'm not sure that making one good show every 25 years is a good basis for keeping this franchise alive, and I think Disney and star wars in general has a huge hole they need to dig themselves out of in order to win their fans back, but it's still a good watch.
In terms of the overall look, the cinematics, this show actually delivers, and there's none of the corny cosplay costumes you might have seen in The Book of Boba Fett. My only complaint is that as good as it looks, it still doesn't really look Star Wars. The aliens, the ships, the architecture, it all looks off, and at times looks more like Blade Runner than Star Wars. This is a minor complaint though, after all the eyesores of Disney series and movies they've come out with so far, any progress is welcome. And i suppose, fans are just going to have to accept that Disney are going to be the ones who dictate what Star Wars looks like from here on out, as they do have many copyrights they have to work around after all.
As for the writing of the show, it's pretty darn impressive. We actually do get quite a lot of good, believable dialog, and the plot has a clear direction and logical steps that get us there. They might be a little too proud of their writing however, as there's a whole lot of lines that get said that admittedly are great lines, but probably should have been cut as they just distract from the overall scene they're in. Disney hasn't figured out editing yet, apparently, even though if you think about it, that's what their entire company was founded on.
I had a sinking feeling right from the start that this show would degrade in quality as it went on, and that it's impressive beginning was just a trick to snag some disillusioned fans back, but I think i was only partially right about that. The later episodes do tend to drag, and I think they could have easily made this a 10 or even 8 episode season, but it stayed pretty high quality even still, although they could have definitely focused on the characters and elements they already introduced rather than constantly adding new ones.
Overall, this is probably the only star wars product since the 1990s that I actually enjoyed. I'm not sure that making one good show every 25 years is a good basis for keeping this franchise alive, and I think Disney and star wars in general has a huge hole they need to dig themselves out of in order to win their fans back, but it's still a good watch.
People, apparently still to this day, like to think of Elvis as a symbol of purity, and assign any misfortune he suffered in his life to evil forces that were exploiting him. That's the basic premise of this film, and over the years tabloids and biographers have blamed just about everybody, Parker, Dr. Nick, the mafia, etc, for Elvis' downfall. The truth is, of course, that Elvis was way more responsible for his own demise than anyone else in his life who was exploiting him (which was most everybody around him).
That's one thing I was hoping the film might capture, in that yes Elvis was at heart a shy "Aw Shucks Maam," good ol' boy, but he was also an incredibly manipulative person, he had all the making either to become a celebrity or a cult leader (some would say he became both), and while many people took advantage of him, he also took advantage of many people. He had a definite dark side that was just as greedy and exploitative as Colonel Parkers'. There's a lot of details the film tends to leave out, like how Elvis drug addictions started long before the film depicts, like how his marriage to Priscilla began to flounder almost as soon as it started, and the simple fact that as lovable as Elvis was, he was also a flat out drug addled lunatic for much of the later 20 years of his life. This is a Hollywood film of course, and it brushes aside anything inconvenient to the narrative that Elvis never did anything wrong.
As for the movie itself, it's a bit disjointed and all over the place. They may have done better to just focus on one aspect or period of Elvis' life rather than a biography of his whole life that ultimately feels pretty shallow. Austin Butler does an amazing job as the King, but once again, I kind of miss the fact that they barely touched the fact that Elvis was flying high, rambling, and out of his mind for several decades, which honestly I've always found the most endearing thing about the guy.
Tom Hanks puts in a pretty confusing depiction of Colonel Parker, Elvis' dutch con man manager. He decides to use the strangest accent I think I've heard since maybe Charles Bronson in the Great Escape. If you watch clips of the real Colonel Parker, he didn't have an accent at all, he spoke perfect English with a convincing American accent. Ultimately, it's Tom Hanks though, even his bad performances are still pretty good, and I can't complain.
All in all, well acted, a bit spastic and jumbled, a bit too polished and too idealistic depiction of the king, and often falling short with its style over substance approach, but Austin Butler's performance makes it all worth it.
That's one thing I was hoping the film might capture, in that yes Elvis was at heart a shy "Aw Shucks Maam," good ol' boy, but he was also an incredibly manipulative person, he had all the making either to become a celebrity or a cult leader (some would say he became both), and while many people took advantage of him, he also took advantage of many people. He had a definite dark side that was just as greedy and exploitative as Colonel Parkers'. There's a lot of details the film tends to leave out, like how Elvis drug addictions started long before the film depicts, like how his marriage to Priscilla began to flounder almost as soon as it started, and the simple fact that as lovable as Elvis was, he was also a flat out drug addled lunatic for much of the later 20 years of his life. This is a Hollywood film of course, and it brushes aside anything inconvenient to the narrative that Elvis never did anything wrong.
As for the movie itself, it's a bit disjointed and all over the place. They may have done better to just focus on one aspect or period of Elvis' life rather than a biography of his whole life that ultimately feels pretty shallow. Austin Butler does an amazing job as the King, but once again, I kind of miss the fact that they barely touched the fact that Elvis was flying high, rambling, and out of his mind for several decades, which honestly I've always found the most endearing thing about the guy.
Tom Hanks puts in a pretty confusing depiction of Colonel Parker, Elvis' dutch con man manager. He decides to use the strangest accent I think I've heard since maybe Charles Bronson in the Great Escape. If you watch clips of the real Colonel Parker, he didn't have an accent at all, he spoke perfect English with a convincing American accent. Ultimately, it's Tom Hanks though, even his bad performances are still pretty good, and I can't complain.
All in all, well acted, a bit spastic and jumbled, a bit too polished and too idealistic depiction of the king, and often falling short with its style over substance approach, but Austin Butler's performance makes it all worth it.