Cloyphish S

1/4 of the way through it and I’m definitely enjoying it more than I thought I would. The new battle mechanics are interesting but lacking in strategy. I can tell that it may get awfully repetitive. I would have liked to see normal battle mechanics and having the new battle mechanics reserved for the “battle royal” and rogue mega Pokémon, but alas, it’s just all the same. I’m giving really giving it a 4 because it exceeded my expectations, but the bar was quite low to begin with. Legends Arceus is definitely much better, but this has a certain freshness and novelty to it, which I’m sure will wear off. Reason why I’ve given it a 5 here is to balance out all the people whinging

Amazing. That is all. One of the best tv series of all time. Amazing character development, suspense, storylines. This should be up there with Breaking Bad as acknowledged as one of the best tv series ever.

Excellent adaptation of the stage musical, with some slight changes keeping it fresh, but true to the story. Both actresses do an amazing job and I’m so excited to see how part 2 is presented. The empathy and emotion created with regard to the animals is top notch. So good!! This could have been a flop, but they actually pulled it off.

I’m only watching this so I can get better at Spanish. I kinda get all the one star reviews and I’m just half way. It’s like it was low budget and the background music, sound effects, and when they enter are just lame.

Released when I was 3 years old, didn’t watch this until 2024!! And this deserved all the accolades it received! The tension built in this movie is phenomenal, and Foster and Hopkins were marvellous. Watching from a contemporary lens, I picked up on some troublesome stereotypes created for members of the lgbtqia+ community. I believe that these are mitigated through viewing the issues more objectively and really listening to Hannibal’s character regarding his troubled patient (“Buffalo Bill”). Unfortunately, this movie may have been more cause for damage due to the kinds of people who make their own bias interpretations. Still incredibly impressed!

This is a cool psychological thriller for its time, but it feels rather outdated when viewed from today's perspective. Watching it now, you can't help but sympathize with Alex's character. Her portrayal as a villain seems unfair, especially without any acknowledgment of potential mental health issues. The film contains some intense scenes, including raunchy moments and graphic content, which might not be suitable for all viewers. While the plot is interesting, it can feel somewhat predictable. Glenn Close and Michael Douglas deliver stellar performances, adding depth to the characters. This movie would have absolutely had a stronger impact in 1987. Overall, it's worth a watch for fans of psychological thrillers, but be prepared for its dated elements.

"Rope" starts off with a murder right off the bat, committed by a pair who quickly reveal themselves as a same-sex couple with a massive power imbalance. It's unclear if viewers back in 1948 picked up on the undertones of Brandon and Phillip's relationship, but the fact that Brandon, who is quite controlling and unpleasant, somehow maintains his friendships is baffling. The movie, based on a play from the 1920s, shows its age in storytelling. The characters are bizarre, with little clear reasoning behind the protagonist's ability to solve the murder mystery—well, not much of a mystery to us viewers, of course. Brandon plays the fool, treating Phillip not as an equal but as something less, which screams of an abusive relationship, confirmed with a slap. As always, Hitchcock's talent for suspense doesn't disappoint, with several scenes crafted masterfully within the confines of a single setting, making the 80-minute runtime creatively engaging. 3 stars. If you've got 80 minutes to spare, it’s worth a watch just to see how Hitchcock pulls this off.

Steve Martin plays an overprotective and seemingly unreasonable character. But is he really? Yes. Yes he is. He's rightfully upset, but his reasons are misplaced. This scenario is so quintessentially 90s: A guy and a girl meet, and just 4 months later, they're engaged. Everyone is on board except for the grouchy "overbearing father" George. While he's portrayed as wildly unreasonable, the film glosses over the genuine concerns about the whirlwind nature of the relationship. If this film were made today, the fiancé, Bryan, might not be seen so favourably. This film’s romanticisation of love at first sight definitely hits a cringe-worthy note.

A classic with a few funny moments, but at its core, this movie romanticizes toxic masculinity. Good ol’ ocker Mick Dundee is a local who does things his way. He’ll punch people without warning and behave inappropriately by grabbing and kissing without consent. He shows off his cockiness by waving around knives. Yet, when a gang of hooligans in New York holds him up, he just shrugs it off as “kids having fun.” Oddly enough, this makes him attractive to an American woman who’s 20 years younger. You might think she has a complex history to be drawn to such a man, but apparently, everyone in Walkabout Creek and New York is cool with his tough-guy act. As a result, the movie has some sloppy writing and character development. His Dr. Dolittle-like skills with animals are barely explored. The leading lady, Sue, seems to lack self-worth, falling for Mick while still in a (presumably) monogamous relationship. She keeps falling harder for Mick every time he flexes his manliness by confronting someone, without much background on her current relationship. “Why do you always make me feel like Jane in a Tarzan comic?” she asks (before cheating on her partner). That’s because she’s portrayed as a damsel in distress falling for an exotic, rough-edged white man with rocks for brains. This makes it seem like the movie was written to reinforce stereotypes where men can act recklessly and still attract women. I wonder how many young boys this movie has influenced? Nevertheless, 3 stars because it was somewhat entertaining, and I really tried to watch it with the era in mind. Just keep this in mind while watching: Don’t be a Richard by being like Mick!

Surprisingly good movie. The sci fi/psychological aspect really makes this. Unfortunately, there are some stupid aspects like where the robot is just inexplicably tough to destroy.