'Venom' Review

Venom oozes alongside journalist Eddie Brock as he tries to take down nefarious billionaire Carlton Drake. While investigating one of Drake's experiments, an alien symbiote named Venom bonds with Brock's body and bestows him with superhuman powers. Twisted, dark, and fueled by hunger, Venom seeks total control over his new host body, but the two entities join forces to foil Drakes's evil scheme once they realize their goals are aligned. 

By now, I'm sure you've gotten wind of the weirdness that is Venom. If not, then you're at least aware of its existence. Directed by Ruben Fleischer and co-written by Jeff Pinkner, Scott Rosenberg, and Kelly Marcel, Venom is the latest attempt by Sony Pictures to jumpstart a shared universe based on their Marvel IP. To set the record straight, no version of Spider-Man appears, and this isn't in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Well, Sony's efforts to kick-off their shared cinematic universe may prove successful considering Venom is poised to break the October opening weekend box office record. Whether it has legs in the weeks to come remains to be seen, but I suspect we'll see a sequel since studios like $$$... The word-of-mouth surrounding this flick is abysmal or MARVEL-ous depending whom you ask, but I'll say the weird stuff which happens in this film must be seen to be believed. Words alone don't do it justice. 

Regardless of where your opinion falls, you will laugh more than once in the theater. Whether it be with the movie's one-liners or at all of its unintentionally hilarious moments, you're sure to find yourself chuckling. Venom is The Room of comic-book cinema and easily the worst comic-book movie I've seen since Fant4stic in 2015. Aside from one serviceable action sequence, some occasionally decent CGI, and a couple of funny interactions between Eddie and Venom, there is little to salvage from this trashterpiece. The story's woefully generic, the dialogue is dreadful, the performances are lifeless except for Hardy, the action is often incomprehensible, and the film is filled to the brim with mind-boggling creative decisions. I didn't care about any of the characters, and my single source of enjoyment was taking in the peculiarity of whatever the heck was happening on screen. Venom seriously was a feature-length meme, and when viewed through that lens, it's enjoyable in the "so-bad-its-good" kinda way. 

You'll scratch your head and wonder, "Who in their right mind thought that was a good idea?" through just about the entire runtime. During the third act battle, you won't have any idea what's going on due to shaky cam, quick jump-cuts, and the simple fact you're watching two dark/metallic, goopy characters fighting each other at night. I would rather have watched a scene from a Michael Bay Transformers movie to be completely honest. Moreover, this isn't to say Venom is one of the worst things I've ever seen or anything to that effect. It's merely a film filled with flaws that I can't ignore in favor of a few good moments. I'd even watch a sequel because the Eddie-Venom dynamic was well-handled. 

The problem is that it takes way too long for Venom to show up, and when he does, he's not onscreen for long. The filmmakers were sure to conserve their effects budget as much as possible, as he often conveniently disappears by the plot's demand. He probably has 10-to-15 minutes of screen time, but it feels like more due to the inner monologue between him and Eddie. Regardless, a Venom sequel would negate the origin story elements so it could focus more on fleshing out the Eddie-Venom dynamic rather than world-building. Let's hope it seeks to improve in other areas though. 

Among the cast, only Tom Hardy seems fully committed to the material. Though Hardy goes all in on the insanity, his American accent as Eddie Brock is laughable and his Venom voice-over is often indecipherable due to the sound augmentation employed. It's an odd performance, but he's at least trying. As for everyone else, you would have thought they signed their souls away once they were cast. Riz Ahmed, Michelle Williams, and Jenny Slate are each relegated to the confines of portraying a cliché archetype and do so with little interest or personality. It's incredibly apparent they were only involved for the paycheck because they're all talented actors with impressive bodies of work. 

Venom is perhaps one of the more puzzling cinematic comic-book adaptations to emerge in recent years, and in the words of its titular symbiote, truly " a turd in the wind." As a fan of the character, I'd say this film simultaneously succeeds in capturing the strange spirit of Venom and fails at differentiating itself from the ever-expanding slate of comic-book movies. My seven-word consensus is the following: "Go see A Star Is Born instead."

Film Assessment: D

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Inception'

Sorry for the extreme delay in publishing this review. Before I begin, I'd like to update my readers on what's been going on behind the scenes. First off, I came up with an interesting idea for this review, but it just never took off, so that got abandoned. Secondly, Hurricane Harvey struck the Houston area back in August. This threw me off, of course, and I scarcely had time to sit down and work on reviews, much less any of my delayed ones. However, a sense of normalcy has long since established itself so I'm getting on to publishing these dreadfully delayed reviews online ASAP. Reviews you can expect to see in the near future include a Triple-R for Interstellar and Throwback Thursday Reviews over Stand By Me, The World's End, The Shining, the 1990 It miniseries, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, and Risky Business (1983).

'Inception' Review

Nominated For: Best Picture, Best Cinematography, Best Original Screenplay, Best Visual Effects, Best Art Direction, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, and Best Original Score.

Won: Best Cinematography, Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.

Inception follows Dom Cobb, a thief who utilizes shared dream technology to enter people's minds and steal secrets from their subconscious. This skill makes him incredibly useful in the world of corporate espionage, but has also been accompanied by substantial personal consequences for Cobb. While on an assignment, he's offered a chance at redemption so that he can finally return home and see his children again. All Cobb has to do is assemble a team to infiltrate the mind of a CEO and implant an idea in his mind. The task seems inconceivable, but the reward far outweighs the risk for Cobb, so he accepts and the quest to pull off the most impractical mind heist begins.

Inception was written and directed by auteur filmmaker Christopher Nolan, standing as his seventh feature length film and first follow up to the massive success of The Dark Knight. I think every successful storyteller has a defining point in their career where they prove themselves capable of more than just making remarkable movies, but also expanding exceptional, original ideas into fantastic feature length projects. For Nolan, I believe Inception is his quintessential film. 

I'm not necessarily stating Inception is his best work, but I believe it to be one of the defining points of his phenomenal filmography. I still haven't seen Following, Memento, Insomnia, or The Prestige so I can't quite speak on how those films impacted his career trajectory, but I do believe Inception exemplifies all the aforementioned points. 

For starters, everything originated from one of the most unique ideas ever brought to film that presents infinite opportunity for elaboration and development. What if people were able to infiltrate one-another's dreams? What would the implications of that be? What are the rules? Nolan knows all, and the fact he thought this all up still astounds me. It's wonderful world-building from the group up, and Nolan realizes he's gotta break it down for the viewer so he cleverly incorporates exposition in an incredibly interesting way. He shows as he tells, explaining the fundamentals clearly and concisely for those providing their full attention and willingness to think.  

Nolan doesn't forget that the human mind is complex though. He remembers that the past haunts us and our personal trauma will always trail behind, so he brilliantly pushes that idea forward as the driving narrative for our protagonist. The base premise of Inception centers on a heist, but at its core the film is all about letting go of the past. The way Nolan integrates this thread with the overarching story is utterly exceptional. The stakes in Inception remain personal in spite of elevated spectacle. Rather than focusing the film's climax entirely on the heist at hand, Nolan pits Cobb against the personal demons of his past, and forces him to confront them in an intense, emotionally charged resolution. 

Like nearly all of Nolan's other films, Inception is a masterpiece on a technical level with splendid cinematography, impressive editing, proficient practical production design, absolutely authentic visual effects work, superb sound mixing and editing, and a booming score from Hans Zimmer. There's not a single technical category that slouches amidst Nolan's especially ambitious magnum opus, and absolutely all of these involved elements have gone on to be incredibly influential (just look to last year's Doctor Strange for evidence of that).

Time is a reoccurring element in virtually all of Nolan's work. Though the way Nolan compounds time within the layers of dreams in Inception's pivotal dream-heist is simply astounding. Every talked-about technical technique accentuates the tension and importance of the cerebral stickup, but the sense of urgency is only emphasized and amplified by these filmmaking instruments, not fabricated by it. This perception that time elongates within each layer is best communicated through the slo-motion sequencing and tempo fluctuations in Zimmer's score. 

As for Inception's illustrious ensemble, the all-star talent bring their A-game. Accomplished actors including Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Dileep Rao, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Caine each provide sufficient substance to their respective roles and make especially favorable impressions with every moment onscreen. 

However, it's Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard who practically run away with the movie. DiCaprio absolutely authenticates Cobb's struggle to distinguish fiction from reality, and the fact his mind is constantly responsible for undermining his plans only strengthens the struggle. One outburst from him, in particular, is so powerful that you can feel Cobb's pain resonate through the screen. It's one of DiCaprio's few performances that exemplifies such a poignant balance between intellect, emotion, and subtle nuance. Cotillard is able to match him emotional beat-for-emotional beat though, demonstrating a strengthened resolve and etherealness to play Mel as a faint shadow of the woman Cobb remembers loving. She finds a strange sweet-spot between seeming real and unreal, so the viewer (like Cobb) will also have difficulty differentiating the hallucinations from flesh and blood.

Aside from expanding audience's minds in 2010, Inception stretched the limits of efficiently executing and innovating a director's most inconceivable abstraction. I realize I've used adjectives like "brilliant," "exceptional," and "astounding" quite often in this review, but there's simply no other way to describe Nolan's craftsmanship. He continually pushes the boundaries of every element of filmmaking to consistently deliver intellectually-stimulating entertainment. Inception remains to be ample evidence of just that, and so much more!

Film Assessment: A+

'Dunkirk' Review

Nominated For: Best Picture, Best Director; Christopher Nolan, Best Film Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Production Design, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, and Best Original Score.

Won: Best Film Editing, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.

The year is 1940 and Allied forces fighting in World War II have been driven back to the beaches of Dunkirk. The Germans have the British and French soldiers surrounded and the only hope of survival is an impossible escape. That's the dire circumstances our heroes find themselves in at the start of Dunkirk. Dunkirk then depicts the attempted evacuation of over 300,000 men by land, sea, and air.

Dunkirk is written and directed by auteur filmmaker Christopher Nolan, a man whose work's powerful enough to speak for itself. You're probably familiar with Nolan's other highly regarded films such as Inception, Interstellar, and The Dark Knight Trilogy, but you may not know that Nolan has yet to be nominated in the category of "Best Director" at the annual Academy Awards, or even win an Oscar for that matter (although he's received nominations for Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay and his films have faired well in the technical categories with a number of wins). 

Well, that's all about to change because there's absolutely no way the Academy would dare snub his work displayed in Dunkirk. While we still have a ways to go in regards to awards season, and it's a little early to speculate, I have yet to see any formidable competition arise. Dunkirk marks Nolan's first foray into the war genre and his experience with a big budget and practical effects carried over quite nicely. Nolan is accustomed putting his own spin on all his productions, and Dunkirk is no exception because Dunkirk is unlike any war film I've ever seen.

In Dunkirk, emphasis is placed on the event rather than the characters. You don't get the opportunity to know these heroes because Nolan thrusts the audience straight into the ensuing chaos. Dunkirk represents a glimpse of the events "in-the-moment" and I must say, I was enraptured from the get-go. There's no time to sit around the fire and talk about what's waiting back home because this is a struggle-for-survival. Time is of the essence for these soldiers and nothing communicates that better than a ticking timepiece, which Hans Zimmer impressively embedded into his swirling, epic score. Nolan then ensures that everything ranging from shot composition-to-an actor's expression conveys a sense of urgency to match Zimmer's harmonic pulses and it all culminates in a heart-pounding pressure cooker.

Dunkirk is probably the most expensive and authentic recreation of said-evacuation that divides its focus among three interwoven chapters, despite the fact each takes place at a different point in time;

1. The Mole, One Week.

2. The Sea, One Day.    

3. The Air, One Hour.    

Eventually, all of these ongoing events overlap and there are certainly some interesting intersections which your eyes will be more attuned to after an initial viewing. You'll find yourself thinking "Haven't I seen that already?" upon realizing the chapter title cards signified the location and duration of each chapter. On that note, it's worth mention that the dictionary defines a mole as a large solid structure on a shore serving as a pier, breakwater, or causeway (but there's also an underlying double-meaning that you should be able to wrap your mind around if you pay enough attention).

Occasionally the same events are shown a second or third time from one of the other primary perspectives and in an ordinary war-film that might wear the viewer down. However, this is Nolan we're talking about, and only a director with Nolan's skill and attention to detail is capable of captivating audiences with an intense inter-weaving of three different accounts. Even though Nolan is depicting the same event three times from a different perspective, he manages to integrate an overwhelming intensity that carries over nicely when he transitions among the tri-arched chronology. 

The performances across the board are certainly good, but are admittedly handicapped by Nolan's narrative. Nolan extrapolates some exceptional acting from his cast but I'll be honest in saying I had a hard time pinpointing particular stand-outs. The acting is largely reactionary and while the actors' work is commendable, no single performer blew me away. Fionn Whitehead, Aneurin Barnard, and Harry Styles showcased a surprising amount of range as the soldiers headlining the mole chapter, but none of them aren't offered enough character exploration for you to be entirely invested in the men-at-arms. Nolan has gone on the record comparing the casting of Styles to his decision to have Heath Ledger portray the Joker, but I'll go ahead and set the record straight that his performance is good, but nowhere near the leagues of Ledger's legendary turn. Familiar faces consisting of Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy, Kenneth Branagh, and James D'Arcy are also to be found among the ensemble and each actor carried their weight well.

Elsewhere, Tom Hardy once again finds his face obstructed by some sort of mask in Dunkirk and I did find it difficult to interpret exactly what he was saying on occasion. However, Hardy did a tremendous job expressing himself with essentially only his eyes. If you thought some frequent Nolan collaborators were missing from my breakdown of the performances, then listen carefully for Michael Caine's voice as it turns up once in the film's first act. 

Dunkirk is one of the year's most meticulously made movies that's undoubtedly elevated by the IMAX format. Nolan makes good use of the enormous screen's full aspect ratio and the spectacular sound design really explodes in IMAX's thunderous sound system. The heftier ticket price of an IMAX screening is certainly worth it and if you only plan on seeing Dunkirk only once, I'd go with the IMAX experience. However, the 70 MM print is also not to be missed for cinema enthusiasts as it was quite cool to see something projected on actual film opposed to the standard digital projection found in most theaters today. If you're curious, I saw Dunkirk in 70MM for my first go-around and my second viewing was in IMAX. I'd personally advise you to do the same because there's a lot you'll pick up on that you may not have noticed the first time around. But if you have to choose, pick IMAX.

In conclusion, Dunkirk is an exceptional example of why I found filmmaking so fascinating in the first place. In the hands of a less-capable artist, the events at Dunkirk would have probably come across as boring or generic, but Nolan's insistence to tell this story through unconventional means enables an intense, immersive experience you'd be hard-pressed to emulate or liken to anything else.

Film Assessment: A

Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Dark Knight Rises'

This week I'll be concluding my series of Throwback Thursday Reviews of The Dark Knight Trilogy with my review of The Dark Knight Rises. Next week look forward to a continuation of my Harry Potter Throwback Thursday Reviews with my review of  Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and the following week I will review Saving Private Ryan since Sully, a film starring Tom Hanks will be released. In the meantime, I'm currently unsure of Ben-Hur (2016) and this weekends releases so I may review a few of those films and I may not, it just depends on if I find time to see these releases. However, I did watch Sing Street recently and plan to post a review relatively soon in addition to a post detailing what I believe to be the 5 Hidden Gems & 5 Biggest Disasters of the summer movie season.

'The Dark Knight Rises' Review

The Dark Knight Rises is the epic conclusion to Christopher Nolan's exceptional Dark Knight Trilogy, finishing strong despite not living up to it's predecessors. The Dark Knight Rises takes place eight years after the events of The Dark Knight where the audience finds that the Batman hasn't been seen in some time, Bruce Wayne remains secluded in his estate, and the streets are cleared thanks to the prop-up of Harvey Dent as Gotham's hero but everything changes when a brute cunning terrorist Bane arrives on the scene to terrorize Gotham. 

Unfortunately, The Dark Knight Rises has gone down as the weak link in the Dark Knight Trilogy, when in fact it's a lot better than people give it credit for. Yes, the film has problems. There are quite a few plot-holes, and it's certainly not perfect, but it's entertaining and takes the journey Nolan began with Batman Begins full circle. Nolan once again directs the film and co-wrote the screenplay with brother Jonathan Nolan and shared story duties alongside David Goyer. The writers ensure the realized world they've created remains intact as they continue to inject both complex characters and intellectual themes.

Nolan and cinematographer Wally Pfizer brings some of their most striking visuals to date and the editing from Lee Smith helps to intersperse feelings of suspense throughout the film's runtime. Another element Nolan carries over is a reliance of practicality with believable action sequences and awesome gadgets for the Batman to utilize including the latest new vehicle, the Bat. As for the sound, Hans Zimmer brings about another exceptional score for the series that 's the epitome of the word epic. 

The performances from the capable cast are once again a highlight and some supporting characters get more time to shine. Christian Bale gets to do much more acting outside the suit as opposed to the preceding installments, and he brings a dynamic physical change in this film when he bulks up for his final confrontation with Bane. Bale's Bruce Wayne is made a more focal part of the story, a welcome change considering how character driven it made the story, while his Batman is terrific as well, showcasing Bale's ability to handle the duality of the role with relative ease. 

Michael Caine brings more sentiment to Alfred as his willingness to ensure Bruce carries on the Wayne legacy is brought to the forefront. Morgan Freeman is terrific in his role of Lucius Fox and Gary Oldman continued to be an excellent Gordon. 

Newcomers Anne Hathaway, Marion Cotillard, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt all have scene stealing moments as the enigmatic Selina Kyle, sophisticated Miranda Tate, and courageous John Blake. 

Admittedly, the biggest letdown in The Dark Knight Rises is without a doubt Bane. Tom Hardy's Bane is ruthless as he exhibits wit, brute strength, and a strategic mind in his fight to take Gotham, but a third act twist neuters the character of everything that made him so fascinating as he's ousted to merely be a love-sick henchman. Tom Hardy certainly exemplified physicality and intellect to make for an intellectual and physical threat when compared to the hulking abomination in Batman and Robin. However, the mask he wears makes some of his dialogue discernible. Hardy's Bane was never going to be able to live up to the complex anarchist nature of Heath Ledger's Joker, but he does quite well with what he had to work with. 

The Dark Knight Rises may be remembered as the worst film in the trilogy, but it's not inherently bad at all, and actually is a very competent piece of filmmaking due to the talent involved both in front of and behind the camera. If anything, the reality that The Dark Knight Rises doesn't measure up to the previous installments goes to show just how amazing those films are, considering how terrific the conclusion to the Dark Knight Trilogy proved to be. 

Film Assessment: B+

'The Revenant' Review

Nominated For: Best Picture, Best Director; Alejandro González Iñárritu, Best Actor; Leonardo DiCaprio, Best Supporting Actor; Tom Hardy, Best Film Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Production Design, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, and Best Visual Effects.

Won: Best Director; Alejandro González Iñárritu, Best Actor; Leonardo DiCaprio, and Best Cinematography.

The Revenant tells the story of American frontier fur trapper expedition that quickly goes awry after an indian assault and the expedition's navigator Hugh Glass undergoes significant trauma, both physically and emotionally, and then is left for dead. The remainder of the film follows his quest for vengeance against those who wronged him (I won't go into details because I'd rather refrain from spoiling the film). 

Alejandro González Iñárritu directs The Revenant hot off of his Best Director Academy Award victory last year for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue Of Ignorance) and I can confidently say that Iñárritu has now been cemented as one of my favorite directors working today as I loved both Birdman and now The Revenant. Iñárritu's proven he's quite a visionary director looking to stretch the boundaries of filmmaking and once again teams with cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki to create a visual pièce de résistance after their collaboration on Birdman. 

All of the cinematography in the film is breathtakingly gorgeous and very awe-inspiring. Something interesting to note about The Revenant is that it was filmed using only natural light, which lead to a prolonged production period since the cast and crew depended on sunlight to create the film. Iñárritu and Lubezki manage to bring some incredible sequences that borrow from some of the techniques used in Birdman, where in The Revenant one of the beginning action sequences appeared to be filmed in one take, rather than be piece milled together. 

All of the performances on display are terrific and in particular Leonardo DiCaprio just needs to be handed a golden statuette already (of course I'm referring to the fact that he has yet to win an Oscar). DiCaprio is given an opportunity to bring a unique more physical performance as Hugh Glass and he is spectacular. One scene in particular that I felt I should touch on in the review is one involving a gruesome bear attack on Hugh Glass. DiCaprio's dedication is present as he's so convincing in the scene making you actually believe that Glass was being brutally mauled by a bear. 

Tom Hardy portrays the film's antagonist John Fitzgerald and he certainly becomes a despicable human being. Hardy's infamous The Dark Knight Rises Bane voice slips in at some points along with some of his grunting seen in Mad Max: Fury Road but gives a outstanding performance nonetheless. The remainder of the main supporting cast Domhnall Gleeson and Will Poulter are superb each bringing great supporting characters to the film. 

The Revenant is not only a visual delight but is involves some sensational direction and performances that will maintain interest in it's two and a half hour runtime. I recommend it for fans of DiCaprio and  Iñárritu's work but be forewarned that there are some gruesome gory violence and blood so if you're sensitive to this, then I'd be wary of watching The Revenant  I loved the film and as of now it's one of my favorites amongst the film award contenders and certainly hope it will be appreciated by the Academy as well but we'll see in the coming weeks as nominations are announced, which I will cover  in a few blog posts including the announcement of the nominations, my predictions and the actual results. Once again, The Revenant is a phenomenal film that fans of cinema will certainly appreciate. 

Film Assessment: A+

'Mad Max: Fury Road' Review

Nominated For: Best Picture, Best Director; George Miller, Best Film Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Production Design, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, and Best Visual Effects.

Won: Best Film Editing, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Production Design, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.

Mad Max: Fury Road is everything the Fast and Furious franchise wishes it could be, an insane crazy action packed film with amazing visuals and a very sophisticated story. George Miller directs the film and really manages to bring this bizarre post apocalyptic world to life incredibly well. the film is charged by it's high voltage action that really helps to elevate the film throughout with some incredible chase action sequences filled with insane stunts. The cinematography is gorgeous and seamless from beginning to end and the visual effects are a delight. Miller also wrote the film and really managed to do a phenomenal job of bringing the more sophisticated themes to the surface of this film. The performances from the ensemble in this film are top notch, although there are a few weak links. Charlize Theron makes for an awesome female lead in the role of Furiousa as one of the best action heroines in film while maintaining a sense of emotional gravitas that really adds to the character. Tom Hardy portrays the character of Max and his performance was a little bland in my opinion as his character grunts quite a bit which I found to be so strange and a bit bothersome, otherwise I'd say Hardy did a great job but was really outshone by his costars. Nicholas Hoult was incredible onscreen with a very strange character, obsessed with the film's villain but still manages to provide a captivating performance with an interesting character arc for him that comes full circle at the end of the film. Now there are a group of women who are the villain's “breeders” portrayed by Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Zoe Kravitz, Riley Keough, Megan Gale, and Abbey Lee respectively. Each do a serviceable job in their roles but aren't ever really given too much to do aside from function as a plot device to propel the chase sequence into a full two hour film. The antagonist, Immortan Joe, was portrayed by Hugh Keays-Byrne and was hard to understand at times because of his character's mask (similar to costar Hardy's performance as Bane in the The Dark Knight Rises) and felt like a very static boring villain who never quite felt menacing or all that powerful but rather very selfish. I honestly had no plans to watch this film before it was released since it looked very strange and out there for me as a film and trust me it's pretty weird. I've heard tremendous buzz about Mad Max: Fury Road since it opened in theaters with critics essentially praising it as one of one of the best films ever made and I have to respectfully disagree. I do think that Mad Max: Fury Road is a great film but I don't think I'll feel compelled to watch it multiple times, which is a characteristic I feel is very crucial to a film. I would recommend it for those who at least have some relative interest in the film. For those who think the film looks too weird, I can only agree that it is indeed strange but suggest you at least attempt to watch it and if you can't make it past the first thirty minutes without being weirded out then it's not quite worth your time. 

Film Assessment: A-