Category: Netflix (page 24 of 27)

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! The Mutant Chronicles

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/mutant_chronicles.mp3]

Adaptations are a good way to cull an established audience from one medium and transplant them into another to generate more revenue and attention for a given work. Just look at the success of The Lord of the Rings, Iron Man and even Twilight. Novels, comic books, even toys have had some success moving from some iteration of the living room to the big screen. Tabletop games, on the other hand, have had a rougher time, and given the disappointment of The Mutant Chronicles, it’s not getting easier any time soon. The film stars Thomas Jane, Ron Perlman, Devon Aoki, Sean Pertwee, Anna Watson and John Malkovich.

Courtesy Isle of Man Films
“We’ve got the Punisher, Hellboy, a ninja whore, an elf princess and Cyrus the Virus. We can’t miss!”

The year is 2707. Cataclysmic events on Earth have transformed it into a wasteland, where what resources still exist are fought over by four mega-corporations: Bauhaus, Capital, Imperial and Mishima. An artillery exchange between two of these forces causes the unveiling of an ancient, massive and evil machine that turns the dead and dying into vicious mutants. The horde of the machine’s creations spill out onto the world and soon it’s apparent that conventional warfare can’t stop them. Brother Samuel (Ron Perlman), a senior member of a secret religious order on guard against the emergence of the mutants, assembles a small squad of brave men and women to travel into the heart of the machine and put an end to its evil. In exchange, the volunteers are given visas for family or loved ones to depart the Earth for one of the mega-corporations’ colonies on Mars or beyond. To keep a promise made to a battlefield brother, Sergeant Mitch Hunter (Thomas Jane) volunteers for the holy suicide mission, despite the fact he’s the polar opposite of Samuel. While the warrior-monk is courteous, penitent and hopeful, the soldier is apostate, sarcastic and brutal. Still, before the end Mitch shows that he’s a good man, or at least good enough to be chosen by God.

Courtesy Isle of Man Films
“Right, so my motivation for this scene is ‘Finish it so I can go back to pretending to whore myself instead of doing it for real.’ Got it.”

From my perspective, The Mutant Chronicles had a lot going for it. The aesthetic is an interesting mix of World War I and post-apocalyptic steampunk, and it works in giving the film a feel that is at once unique and familiar. The cast is, by and large, character actors who turn in good performances. The film’s opening sequences, with Ron Perlman’s always excellent narration followed by the trench warfare scene, seemed to indicate the movie was aiming high and might hit the mark. And there’s also the fact that you have Anna Watson and Devon Aoki together in the same flick. It can’t go terribly wrong, right?

Courtesy Isle of Man Films
“Devon, I don’t know if they’re going to go for this.”
“Anna, honey, you’re a luscious action babe who doesn’t talk. Trust me. They’ll go for it.”

Unfortunately, as the film goes on, the CG gets progressively worse, the writing takes a bit of a nose-dive and every character killed off takes some of the viewer’s enthusiasm with them. The ending is somewhat predictable, there’s no major character growth or even much character exploration, and the novelty of the aesthetic wears off once the team is in the old city and it becomes another expedition into your standard-issue dark rocky corridors. A lot of this, in my opinion, can be chalked up to bad direction. The director, Simon Hunter, makes the mistake of trying to focus on the spectacle rather than the story. Now, in this case, the story isn’t that great either, but it bears mentioning that even movies with huge budgets in comparison to The Mutant Chronicles fall into this insidious trap.

Let me take you on a tangential example. Say you have a couple of script-writers. They write two different scripts, which get made and released in the same year. One is lambasted by critics despite being a commercial success, and the other is lauded by audiences and the majority of critics alike. Logically, this cannot be the fault of the writers alone. Yes, both scripts have some issues and similarities in style that can have critics calling both films “poorly thought-out and kinda stupid.” However, the first film in our example is directed by someone who is known – perhaps even infamous – for distracting the audience from the weaknesses in the story with massive explosions and slender, panting actresses. The second is directed by more of an auteur, his visions on both the small and big screen noted for their innovation, strong characterization and level of mystery. The latter focuses on the characters, the situations they are in and works to have the audience invested in what happens to them. The former, on the other hand, goes the “tits and explosions” route. The Mutant Chronicles isn’t quite that blatant, but it does fall into the former category.

That’s a shame, really. There are good things about the film, and while I did feel it was overstaying its welcome towards the end, I didn’t consider having watched it a complete and utter waste of time. If nothing else, it’s reinforced my opinion that the good things about a film, be they actors, the script or the overall concept, can be let down when they’re put in the hands of someone inexperienced or incompetent. I’ll elaborate more on these points in tomorrow’s post, but for now, I will say this. If you like any of the listed actors, or want to see a dark future where capitalism is shown to be pretty damn evil, or if you like the idea of steam-powered flying machines, queue up The Mutant Chronicles in Netflix. On the other hand, if you’ve played the tabletop game, you might want to skip this. You might find things to like about it, but on the other hand, you might be like those fans who went to Stark Trek this summer and declared it RUINED FOREVER.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! The House Bunny

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/house_bunny.mp3]

I’m going to begin with a confession. This is not the sort of movie that finds its way onto my Netflix queue. However, when I find myself at my parents’ house for the holidays, I tend to be more at the mercy of what’s on their big-screen TV. The House Bunny ended up being on during Christmas Eve, and rather than treat it the way I do most modern American comedies – with cynicism and contempt – I thought I’d give it a fair shake. Seemed only fair, since on more than one occasion the ladies were shaking things themselves. The film stars Anna Faris, Colin Hanks, Emma Stone, Kat Dennings, Christopher McDonald, Beverly D’Angelo, Katherine McPhee and Hugh Hefner.

Courtesy Columbia Pictures

Shelly Darlingson (Faris) is a Playboy bunny. She’s not centerfold-worthy despite being sexy, vivacious and in her twenties. At twenty-seven, however, she’s told she’s too old to be a bunny and gets kicked out of the Playboy Mansion. Downtrodden, she comes across attractive women living together in a sorority, but they kick her out because she’s not a student. Shelly washes up at a sorority of misfit girls, and having learned that older women become house mothers for sorority girls like these, takes it upon herself to transform the house to a mansion all its own, and the girls within to beautiful heart-stoppers that become the talk of the campus.

Despite the somewhat generic university misfits becoming awesome plot, this movie works as a fun little comedy most of the time. If it weren’t for Anna Faris’ honest and well-paced delivery of her lines and the way the others play off of her performance, this concept would utterly fail. The buoyancy she brings to the writing and direction has less to do with her ‘assets’ and more with her experience and sincerity. As honest as Faris and her co-stars are with themselves, they’re also smart enough not to take themselves too seriously. While some of the jokes and gags fall flat, which is an inevitability when you’re dealing with ground that’s been tread before in comedy, the ones that work do so well enough to keep us interested long enough to expect the next one – or is it the T&A? Sometimes it’s hard to tell.

Courtesy Columbia Pictures

Again, this isn’t the sort of thing I’d normally watch. Sure, sex is funny. To paraphrase Alan Rickman as the Metatron in Dogma, consider some of the faces people make in the midst of coitus. And mixing the inherent comedy of women that get by on their looks alone with the tried & true formula that worked for Animal House, Revenge of the Nerds and PCU sounds like another one of those chocolate/peanut butter combinations. I honestly believe that Anna Faris, the best and most consistent thing about the Scary Movie series, is the reason this movie works as well as it does. It has good things to say about female empowerment not unlike Miss Congeniality and Legally Blonde – the latter film being borrowed from heavily when Shelly needs to, like, learn stuff. In fact this movie is more a casserole than a Reese’s treat – so many things left over from other movies are mixed together to make this one. But it’s a dessert casserole, sweet and decadent and offering a bit of substance, like a cake that’s more frosting than cake but has just enough cake to still be called a cake. If that makes any sense.

I have another confession. I was secretly hoping this movie would be horrible. I was hoping I’d be able to tear it apart the way a lion tears apart a wildebeest. But there’s just enough in The House Bunny to save it from having its dessicated carcass join the likes of In The Name of the King in the back of my little Internet den. It’s not earth-shattering or breaking any new ground or pushing any envelopes, but it’s not utter dross or completely brainless or heartless either. It takes turns being funny, cute and sexy, and while it never completely hits the mark on any of those turns, it’s not a total miss. There isn’t any real danger to our girls of anything horrible happening, and Shelly changes her mind quite a few times in the film’s third act. In the end, though, while it didn’t make me think at all, it made me laugh at times and that’s the goal of a comedy. You’re really not missing anything if you don’t add The House Bunny to your Netflix queue, but if you like your collegiate comedy wearing a bikini and pink bunny ears, you could do worse. And there’s nothing wrong with seeing Anna Faris in that outfit.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! Snatch.

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/snatch.mp3]

I’ve stated in some previous reviews that Jason Statham is a badass. I’ve also mentioned him in his work with Guy Ritchie, of which Snatch is the prime example. It’s also arguably Ritchie’s best film to date, often compared to Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels the way Pulp Fiction is compared to Reservoir Dogs. But before I start drawing parallels between two directors and lose what few readers & listeners I have, let’s talk about Snatch. The movie, not anything else. The film stars Jason Statham, Benicio Del Toro, Alan Ford, Stephen Graham, Dennis Farina, Rade Serbedzija, Mike Reid, Vinnie Jones, Lennie James, Robbie Gee, Ade and Brad Pitt.

Snatch, courtesy Columbia Pictures

Jason Statham is an underground boxing promoter in London by the name of Turkish. (Take notes, Dr. Boll, as he is not named “Boxer” or “Promoter”.) He and his partner Tommy (Stephen Graham) are trying to get their fighter, Gorgeous George, into the ring for a fair fight with one of the boxers promoted by local kingpin and pig enthusiast Brick Top (Alan Ford). Meanwhile, Frankie Four-Fingers (del Toro) has stolen a gigantic diamond from Antwerp to the delight of his boss Cousin Avi (Farina) and is heading to London to discuss his ill-gotten gains with Doug the Head (Reid). Aware of his arrival is Boris the Blade, aka Boris the Bullet-Dodger (Serbedzija), who taps two guys from a pawn shop to intercept Frankie before he can offload the rock. Brad Pitt is a fast-talking semi-Gypsy bare-knuckle fighter, Jones is a cold-as-ice bounty hunter named Bullet-Tooth Tony and Ade is the world’s largest getaway driver. We never learn the name of the dog.

If you’re not confused yet, I’m impressed. The film juggles these disparate plots while standing on one foot and telling off-color jokes. If you’re easily offended by foul language, particularly the word “fuck,” you probably don’t want to watch this film. Or even be in the next room if it’s playing. The liberal use of “fuck” throughout the film might be explained away by some as a lack of intelligence since smart people find other ways to express themselves, but the adept balancing of the various plots and the three-dimensionality of most of the players indicate that plenty of higher brain functions were being engaged in this film’s creation.

While some movies struggle to cohesively tell one plot from start to finish, Snatch handles quite a few, which begin on separate tracks but slowly begin to weave in and out of each other. As I mentioned, most of the key players are given depth and characterization. Turkish, in particular, shows a gamut of emotions, from grim sarcastic satisfaction to almost palpable desperation. Brick Top is charismatic and even funny while being menacing, especially in a scene towards the middle of the film. The guys from the pawn shop are trying to move a body (I won’t say whose) when Brick Top appears and instructs them on an efficient and organic way to deal with such things: feed the body to pigs. After his informative if somewhat macabre tutorial, he rises from the couch and asks simply, “D’you know what the word ‘nemesis’ means?” Despite the comical tone of most of this film, Alan Ford’s delivery can be downright chilling. We’ve seen how ruthless and unhinged Brick Top can be by this point, so his quiet, understated question has all of the bite and discomfort of a circular saw dismembering a corpse in preparation for a piggy feast.

But as much as I love the characters of Turkish and Brick Top, the film is very nearly stolen entirely by Brad Pitt’s turn as Mickey, the Pikey bare-knuckle scrapper. Pikies are modern-day nomads, living out of caravans as they move from one campsite to another. They speak in an accent that is, in the words of Turkish, “not exactly English and not exactly Irish.” And most of them speak fast. Very fast. It’s part of their plan to pull the wool over the eyes of people with whom they do business, but it has the side effect of being absolutely hilarious. And the way we are introduced to this class of people is the same man who portrayed the dead-eyed reluctant predator in Interview with the Vampire and the gritty, ambitious detective Mills in Se7en. He’s bombastic, energetic, quick-witted and funny, yet also finds time to show a range of emotion from heartbroken rage to cold and calculating. If you don’t think Brad Pitt can act, you should see this movie. Then hit yourself in the face with a cricket bat.

Guy Ritchie’s writing and direction in this film are at their zenith. The jokes are funny, the characters are believable and the stories move along just fast enough to keep us off-balance without being terribly confusing, my condensed recap of the opening act notwithstanding. The action and violence grow organically from the story and setting, rather than appearing out of nowhere. You actually have to think, as the film speeds along, about what is happening to whom as the different plots begin to mix. Even the soundtrack is pitch-perfect, from Massive Attack’s haunting “Angel” to Oasis’ high-energy rocking “Fucking in the Bushes.” We even have great camera angles, fantastic framing and some of Guy Ritchie’s trademark jarring interludes. Pay attention whenever anybody mentions gambling to Frankie Four-Fingers to see what I mean.

Now, as I’ve mentioned, the language might be a little too intense for some people. And the frenetic pace and slightly offbeat nature of both the writing and direction might be a turn-off to others. If these are obstacles to seeing Snatch, however, I consider that a deplorable shame. This is some of the best cinematic storytelling I’ve had the pleasure to watch. The word ‘caper’ doesn’t quite do it justice. It’s smart, funny, gritty, intense and awesome from start to finish. Not one moment or shot is wasted. You may have seen Snatch already if you’re a regular reader or listener of my material. If you don’t own a copy, you should, but if you need convincing, toss it on your Netflix queue. And if you haven’t seen Snatch before, you should not only add it to your queue but bump it right to the top. It’s not just brilliant – it’s fucking brilliant.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Seige Tale

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/dungeon_siege.mp3]

The more new movies come out, the more it seems that Hollywood is almost completely out of original ideas. Even James Cameron’s Avatar is only slightly original, as we’ve had the “humans are assholes invading peaceful aliens” plot as recently as earlier this year with Battle for Terra. And then there’s the news that they’re planning to make the board game Battleship – Battleship – into a feature film. If you want an example as to why this is a bad idea, why you shouldn’t take something with no plot and very straightforward gameplay into the realm of cinema, look no further than In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale. The film features Jason Statham, Leelee Sobieski, John Rhys-Davies, Ron Perlman, Claire Forlani, Kristanna Loken, Matthew Lillard, Ray Liotta and Burt Reynolds.

Courtesy Brightlight Pictures

With a badass like Jason Statham, a fantasy veteran in John Rhys-Davies and the years of experience under the ever-expanding belt of Burt Reynolds, there should be something here to save this film. But alas, all of this talent from the four corners of the globe is under the direction of Uwe Boll. Before this, Dr. Boll directed House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, Alone in the Dark II, BloodRayne and BloodRayne II: Deliverance. He had established a track record of taking video games and turning them into bad movies. With Dungeon Siege, he’d gotten his grubby hands on what is essentially a clone of Diablo stripped of the well-written plot and composed entirely of repetitive hack-and-slash gameplay. There aren’t that many dungeons in the game, and nothing resembling a siege, which makes the title a little bewildering. So instead of making a movie out of a video game with a hackneyed or paper-thin plot, he’s made a movie out of a video game with no plot whatsoever.

Anyway, Jason Statham plays a farmer named… well, Farmer. The names in the movie are awfully creative, as you can tell. His village is attacked by nightmarish creatures called the Krug. Elsewhere, the King (Burt Reynolds) is dealing with an uppity and annoying nephew (Matthew Lillard) who is in cahoots with an evil magic-user (Ray Liotta) who is – get this – responsible for the Krug attacks on the populace! It’s a SHOCKING twist!

Okay, the only thing that’s really shocking about this film is how awful it is. I went into it knowing it’s an Uwe Boll film, the same way I went into Revenge of the Fallen knowing it was a Michael Bay film. But even knowing that, overall, I liked that film. Yes, there was gratuitous fan service with the heaving bodies of svelte slender women, even more gratuitous explosions and characterizations that didn’t make much sense in light of the previous canon of Transformers. On the other hand, the action does work on some levels, some of the jokes did make me laugh and the visual effects are impressive enough to smooth over some of the rough patches. While that movie’s blown out of the water by District 9, it isn’t a total failure.

This film is a total failure. The story is cribbed almost entirely from margin notes of old D&D adventures from somebody’s high school campaign. As a matter of fact, I think the idea of the evil wizard projecting himself into a suit of armor to act all macho is something I came up with – when I was TWELVE. Seriously, did the screen writing team employed by Dr. Boll need to put this stuff down on paper protected by plastic so they wouldn’t constantly get Cheetos stains on the script? It’s predictable and bland – kind of like a packet of unflavored oatmeal. It’s also hackneyed. It makes some of the more dreadful episodes of Star Trek: Enterprise look like they were written by Ronald D. Moore.

And then there’s the direction. Now, Dr. Boll isn’t going to care about what I’m going to say. He finances his own projects and regularly tells people like me to fuck off. After all, opinions are like assholes – everybody has one, and they all stink. Regardless, I feel justified in saying that, in my opinion, Dr. Boll couldn’t direct kittens to scratch a piece of furniture. He has no idea of how to frame shots, show compelling action or underscore dramatic tension. In this film, the shots cut at odd times, the action is so disorganized that the combat in Revenge of the Fallen seems like the scripted but clear engagements of the WWE by comparison and you cannot get dramatic tension out of actors when you’ve injected them with tree sap. By that, I mean the acting is wooden. It’s so wooden I could take these people into a workshop and emerge with a dining room set complete with end tables and a china cabinet.

Each of these sins drives the film deeper into the depths of failure. But there’s something that causes it to sprout a drill bit the size of a dinner plate and bore a hole even deeper beneath the basement to place it at a new low. You see, In The Name Of The King came out in the wake of the Lord of the Rings films. Apparently unsatisfied with video game trappings and D&D notes that smell like an adolescent boy’s sock drawer, Dr. Boll thought it was an absolutely brilliant idea to make sure we had sylvan elves, orc-like enemies, powerful wizards and John Rhys-Davies to tap into that market. Now, tapping into an established market isn’t necessarily a bad idea, but you do it by extracting some of the good bits with a fine syringe, and injecting it into your work in a subtle fashion, and smooth it over with original ideas so you avoid being derivative. Dr. Boll taps into Tolkien’s work with a God-damn shovel, burying any enthusiasm we might have had and making anything intended to be dramatic or awesome turn out comical. And it’d be comical in a good way, even campy in the way of Flash Gordon, but this movie drags on. And on. And on. For two and a half hours, Dr. Boll assaults our vision, our hearing, our intelligence and our good sense without a hint of irony or tongue-in-cheek execution. Everything is to be taken completely seriously, like this is some sort of fantasy epic that Peter Jackson needed three movies to tell properly.

Dr. Boll, you are not Peter Jackson. You’re not Michael Jackson. You’re not even Andrew Jackson or Latoya Jackson. You, sir, are an asshole. And In The Name Of The King is the biggest, smelliest, most disgusting steaming crappile you have ever produced. I may never have the money to finance my own films, snort drugs off the body of a prostitute or even have the security to tell Internet critics they’re full of shit – which, in this case, is the pot calling the kettle a turd. If this is what it takes to have those things, I’m better off without them. And if you have all the money and power you contend, Dr. Boll, I want just one thing from you.

That two and a half hours I spent watching this shit? I want those back.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! Valkyrie

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/valkyrie.mp3]

Historical thrillers work if the story, acting and direction can draw you into their world and make you forget about the fact you know how the story’s going to end. Titanic, for me, fails because I kept waiting for the boat to hit the iceberg and sink. Oh – sorry, spoiler warning there. Anyway, the effective historical films I hold up as examples of working well include Changeling and The Last Samurai, and now I’d like to add Valkyrie to that list. The film stars Tom Cruise, Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighy, Terrance Stamp, Tom Wilkinson, Thomas Kretschmann and Eddie Izzard.

Courtesy United Artists

Valkyrie is the story of Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg and the role he played in the plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler, which took place on 20 July 1944. A war veteran wounded and somewhat mangled in action, Stauffenberg became embittered with the war and the motivation behind it. Contacted by the resistance movement within the Wehrmacht, Stauffenberg becomes one of the key figures in the assassination plot. The conspirators believe that Hitler’s Germany is not the Germany of their fathers, nor is it one they wish to see continue, a sentiment which Stauffenberg shares. He helps in planning the assassination, delivers the explosive device to the meeting with Hitler and his aides and coordinates the resulting coup effort. If you’re at all familiar with history, I think you know how it turns out.

Despite our foreknowledge of how this story ends, Valkyrie is still well presented and provides dramatic tension while fleshing out these historical figures who might otherwise be static images and two-dimensional accounts of their actions. This is due in no small part to director Brian Singer. The man who brought us The Usual Suspects again juggles a talented ensemble cast with great success, employing their skills to slowly build the tension before unleashing it on the audience with an almost blinding fury.

Normally this would be where I rag on Tom Cruise. However, like his performance in The Last Samurai, his personality and the drama surrounding him takes a back seat to the storytelling. Instead of dominating the picture simply by being Tom Cruise, he immerses himself in the role, the time period and the subject matter, which is dark and heroic at the same time. Moments and lines that could easily be blown out of proportion by another actor are handled with aplomb, and I don’t recall Cruise chewing on the scenery once.

What stands out in Valkyrie, in addition to the ensemble storytelling and Cruise’s grounded performance, is Hitler. The images and videos we tend to see is of a ranting madman. We know, in our minds, the atrocities he inflicted upon the world and to millions of innocent people. However, in this film, Hitler neither launches into bombastic diatribes nor cackles with delight at the slaughter of his enemies. Here, in pacing around a planning table or holding discussions with those few men he trusted, Hitler is quiet, seeming to choose his words carefully and evaluating the worth of human beings as if he was sizing up a pair of new shoes. His restraint and stature make him seem all the more menacing. It completes the package of the film, and contributes to its overall success.

If you have any interest in the second World War, the idea of Germans within the Nazi party fighting against the perceived desecration of their country or some extremely good portrayals of historical figures, Valkyrie belongs on your Netflix queue. It’s a powerful story, well-acted and told without much hyperbole. It’s a story for our time and it’s well worth yours.

Oh, and additional spoiler warning: if you’re not a fan of Tom Cruise, you get to see him blown up, strafed, nearly blown up again, wounded in a gunfight and finally executed by firing squad. That alone might be worth the price of admission.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2024 Blue Ink Alchemy

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑