"Good. Now gently remove your tampon and try again."

Year: 2009

Director: John Hamburg

Writers: John Hamburg & Larry Levin

"Friendless Peter Klaven goes on a series of man-dates to find a Best Man for his wedding. But, when his insta-bond with his new B.F.F. puts a strain on his relationship with his fiancée, can the trio learn to live happily ever after?"

- Summary written by iMDB editors.

I know I haven't been as active in June as I meant to be. So today I just said to myself, to hell with it, I'm gonna watch whatever I find on Netflix. And I think this is how I should go through July. 

The beginning of this story was kind of weak. You don't know who anybody is, and you are quite unsure why you should be interested in Peter or anyone else. That's kind of the problem with stories that start just like that. But in movies it's hard to start in a way that could just explain everything to the viewer just like that. It sure is hard, but the beginning of this movie was really, really weak. It got better though.

The characters however... Some of them were multi-dimensional, some of them weren't. In the end, I don't think I cared about any of the characters, they just were there. Of course I felt bad for some characters. but I didn't honestly care for them that much. Something was missing from them - they weren't really characters, they were the same "characters" that are in every comedy, they weren't original. They were types. It was kind of annoying.

But even though the movie was a really typical comedy, the story was interesting. It was a change - even though not too imaginary one - to all those movies where people are looking for their soulmate. It was refreshing seeing a character who has found love, trying to find a friend. 

Also this movie didn't really try to tell which one was more important, love or friendship. That was good. 

I Love You, Man was quite typical, but it mostly funny. There were jokes that weren't that great, but really this movie was refreshing and fun, easy to watch, but not an original masterpiece or anything like that.

 ☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

"I don't think Steve fucks skulls."

Year: 2007

Director: Gregg Araki

Writer: Dylan Haggerty

The main character is Jane F, who wants to be an actress. She accidentally eats pot cupcakes made by her roommate, so her day becomes one big weird adventure when she tries to a) Get money for the dealer b) Somehow make new pot cupcakes for the roommate and c) go through the audition.

I said few days ago I might watch this movie again, because Danny Masterson was in it. So now I watched Smiley Face again, the first ever movie I ever watched from Netflix (I got Netflix about a week ago so)

Last time I wrote about this movie, I said how it made me felt kind of high when watching it. That's how the movie was made. But the second time - nothing. It didn't affect me like that anymore. I don't know if it was the situation or if simply the movie gets boring after first time. 

The cinematography in this movie is good. The colours are great and of course the filming technique is weird in a good way. It helps to see the film from the point of view of a stoner. 

This movie is so absurd, I mean everything is absurd - not the start of the story where she eats the cupakes, but everything after that is really absurd. But still this movie doesn't manage to be that funny, it's mostly very boring, especially when you've already seen it.

Also it's quite frustrating to watch - you want to yell at the main character, because nothing she does is rational. That sort of is the point of the movie, but it's quite annoying.

So I think I won't be seeing this movie ever again. 

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

"The world's a playground. You know that when you are a kid, but somewhere along the way everyone forgets it."

Year: 2008

Director: Peyton Reed

Writers: Nicholas Stoller, Jarrad Paul and Andrew Mogel, Danny Wallace (book)

After his divorce, Carl has been neglecting his friends and life itself, until his friend makes him go to a seminar, after which he starts saying "yes" to every possibility he faces: and this is how he meets Allison.

I've watched Yes Man many times before. I actually grew sick of it, because I know almost every line and all that. But few days ago I learnt that Danny Masterson was in this movie, which is why I decided to watch it again. (This might make me watch Smiley Face again, because Masterson was in it (I don't remember that at all)). So my main question during this time was can I still like a movie I've grown tired of?

Weird thing is that this is based on Danny Wallace's book, which apparently is autobiography, because Wallace himself had a challenge to say yes to everything for an entire year. That's quite interesting, but since I haven't read the original book, I can't say how well the movie is adapted, but I have my doubts. I mean autobiography on such precise subject can be hard to adapt into a movie.

Well, the idea of this story is quite simple. It's not that good, but it isn't the worst. It's an average idea, that could turn out both good and horribly bad. In this movie, that idea turned out just decent.

But that's just the idea. Even though the idea is simple and just decent, other things work very well. The music in this movie is excellent, There are a lot of songs performed by Eels. The cinematography is good, but not excellent or brilliant. It's what you see in a lot in average movies.

This movie is really funny. Mostly the humour is what you'd expect from a movie starring Jim Carrey. There's a lot of fiddling, being clumsy. It's funny, but it's also pretty cheap, and gets old really quick. But I laughed out loud several times, so did everyone I watched this movie with. It's hilarious, but of course it won't be as funny if you watch it every day. Once or twice a year seems good, or even more rarely. 

I was kind of annoyed by the typical Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope again, but I can't be sure if Allison truly is a MPDG. Someone else might have a better answer to this, I'm waiting for your comments.

So shortly, Yes Man is funny, but the humour gets old. Mostly this movie is average. But I could still laugh and enjoy this movie, even though two or more years ago I was totally bored with this. So the answer to the question I presented myself was ironically: yes. 

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10

"'Manners maketh man.' Do you know what that means? Then let me teach you a lesson."

Year: 2014

Director: Matthew Vaughn 

Writers: Jane Goldman, Matthew Vaughn, Mark Millar & Dave Gibbons (Comic book)

"Based upon the acclaimed comic book and directed by Matthew Vaughn, Kingsman: The Secret Service tells the story of a super-secret spy organization that recruits an unrefined but promising street kid into the agency's ultra-competitive training program just as a global threat emerges from a twisted tech genius."

- Summary by 20th Century Fox

I've heard a lot about this movie on Tumblr mostly. First I didn't pay much attention, but then I started to get interested. I mean the people talking about it didn't stop, all the hype wasn't just for a while, people actually liked it and started to make their own headcanons and alternative universes. As I witnessed all this I realised I definitely want to see this movie.

The action scenes in this movie were amazing. They were kind of messy, but very detailed. The cool or funny - or however you'd like to describe them - details actually made up for the messiness. Even though it's hard to follow the whole thing, you get these little things and they make it easier to get the whole picture of the fight. I love that. Little details are definitely better than showing everything in explicit detail.

There were many interesting characters. Especially the villains. First of all, Gazelle, whose fighting style made her interesting. Also, she was kind of like the typical female villain, who is not the real big bad, you know. Still, Gazelle was way more dangerous than the main villain, who barely could shoot someone. Come on, the villain is magnificent! A villain played by Samuel L Jackson, a villain who can't even stand to see blood because he feels ill. Also he's the kind of extreme misanthropist, who things man kind should die because then the earth would be saved. That was just simply amazing. 

The story was fun. It just was great, it was typical yet original. It's amazing parody; it's a parody, but you can (almost) take it completely seriously. 

Music was amazing. It was modern day electronic action soundtrack meets traditional spy movies meets Kick-Ass. And no wonder, the soundtrack was made (partly?) by Henry Jackman, whose music is really amazing. 

I didn't figure out this movie was directed by Matthew Vaughn until the end credits. But I shouldn't be surprised. During the whole movie I kept thinking wow, this reminds me a lot of Kick-Ass. Something about the action scenes and, well, the atmosphere was just like in Kick-Ass and X-Men First Class. Also the humour is very close to Kick-Ass, but I don't know if that comes from Vaughn or Mark Millar So if you like those movies, be sure to watch Kingsman: The Secret Service.

There were many other movies this reminded me of. Of course it has elements from classic James Bond movies, but that you can expect. The action scenes sometimes were alike to those in Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes -movies, you know, when Holmes first calculated what he'd do and then he'd do it but so quickly we'd only see certain details. And when Eggsy was recruited, the tests started to kind of remind me of Men In Black, when J was recruited. 

This movie is fun and thrilling. But wow, I just... I guess I want more movies like this, and right now, please. If any of you can recommend a movie quite like this, please tell me.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

9 / 10

"I know what you're doing. I will not let you hurt my children."

Year: 2009

Director: Jaume Collet-Serra

Writers: David Johnson, Alex Mace (story)

After a family adopts a 9-year-old girl, some weird and dangerous things start to happen: weird accidents, people get hurt and even killed.

I remember when I was in middle school and we were skiing in P.E.. Few of my friends were and probably still are obsessed with horror movies, and they were talking about this movie. They actually told the whole plot, all twists, everything. I was fine with it, because I thought I would never watch this movie. But now, four years later, I watched this movie.

The first thing I noticed was the colours. Mostly the colours used were grey, white, black, brown... Neutral, earthy colours, except for when brighter more striking colours were used for certain effect. The use of colours in this movie was excellent, even though otherwise the cinematography was pretty average and typical.

I also pointed out the fact that the biological daughter Max was deaf. Her character didn't rely just on that fact, which is good. It's good to have disabled characters in movies for "no good reason", and it's even better to make their story not about being deaf. True, this movie was not about Max, but even if you look it from her point of view, it's not just about her being deaf. I like that. 

The orphan Esther has something in common with the whole movies. Neither of them is truly scary, just really, really disturbing. Esther's character is interesting, but not as interesting as many other villains in thriller movies. I think that might have something to do with how they revealed everything from her backstory, and she didn't have a good, interesting, unique motive. I think in the end they made her motive very cheaply, even though otherwise her story was very intriguing 

I first thought this was a horror movie, but apparently not. Well, typical style of horror movies was used a lot, but the plot and Esther are mostly from the thriller genre. Rarely the dialogue was like in horror movies, like I said about Poltergeist the other day. In horror movies the dialogue is relaxed and almost playful, when characters aren't talking about current events going on. But this movie was a very good thriller, I felt really charged during the movie.

Like I said before, I knew the whole plot. But did it ruin the movie? Actually it did not. The experience was still thrilling even though I knew all about Esther right away. I think this movie might actually require two viewings, if you don't know about Esther already, because when you watch it the second time, you have a different look on Esther since you know her motives, and what she is aiming for.

This movie was very intense, very disturbing, but all in all it wasn't a masterpiece. I had higher expectations, I think. Still, definitely worth seeing.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10

"They're here..."

Year: 2015

Director: Gil Kenan

Writer: David Lindsay-Abaire, Steven Spielberg (story)

A family moves to a new house only to discover it's haunted by poltergeists.

Please note that I haven't seen the original one. This is why I can't review this movie based on the original. My opinion on this film could change after seeing the 1982 movie. 

I mostly wanted to watch this because of the lovely Sam Rockwell, but I wasn't quite sure if I wanted to see a horror movie, I mean I've never enjoyed them too much and I'm scared easily. Or at least I was, I don't know for sure. But the day before yesterday I was looking through movies currently in cinemas, and then I asked my friends if they'd come see this with me.

The story isn't too original, though I don't know if it was original in the 80's. The idea of family going into a haunted house is used so often and so much. But like I said when I wrote about Coraline, they added some interesting details that made the typical idea more interesting. One example of this is when they flew the camera through the portal into the plane where the spirits were, that was interesting. Also the ending was good. I might have expected it going to different direction, but I'm pretty glad with how things ended.

Was this movie scary? Well, a little. Mostly it was the typical kind of scary, when everything is slow and quiet and you just know something is going to jump out or something like that. Those are easy to predict, but the waiting part is the worst. I have to admit there were several scenes I had to keep my eyes closed because I knew we were going to be given some horrible image which would've haunted me during the night. But I don't think this movie was too scary - if that's good or bad it's up to you.

One thing I've noticed from some horror movies is how real the dialogue is - considering when they are not discussing some supernatural phenomenon. It's almost playful.  I love it. 

Poltergeist was an alright movie. It's worth a watch, but it loses its charm after the first time. At least I don't think I'm going to see it again any time soon.

☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

There's one bad thing about going to the cinema: I can't take notes. It's harder to write about the movie when I have nothing to rely on but my memory.  

"How can you walk away from something and then come towards it?" "Walk around the world."

Year: 2009

Director: Henry Selick

Writers: Henry Selick, Neil Gaiman (book)

Coraline and her parents have moved to a new house. She feels bored, until she finds a small secret door which leads to Other World, where Other Mother is welcoming her with open arms. But soon something starts to feel off...

I've heard so much about Coraline. Most of what I've heard was how scary Coraline was considering it's "for children", an animation. So I finally decided to watch it. I had some expectations, and I'm pretty sure this movie met most of those expectations. 

The animation was so marvellous. This kind of animation is cute, but it also has the possibility to become very, very creepy, which is good if it's a movie like this one. All the movement is so smooth and the characters don't look too much alike (which is something Disney could learn from). The music was also both beautiful and creepy, depending when and what kind of music. 

The story is kind of typical, it was kind of like some distorted Alice in Wonderland. The idea of someone going into another world has been used a lot, but most of the time it's always left kind of vague - was it true or was it just a dream? Well, in Coraline it was pretty clear that everything was true and actually happening, not just a little girl's imagination. Even though the basic idea isn't too original, Neil Gaiman has added some details that made the story completely new, original and exciting.

The only one of my expectations that this movie didn't meet was how scary this would be. I wasn't expecting anything like horror movies for adults, but I was still waiting for something more. But no, this movie wasn't scary as much as it was... creepy and disturbing. You don't get scared so suddenly you scream a little, no, you just feel so disturbed and crept out by whatever is going on. And Other Mother? Totally creepy. 

But I haven't read the book. I have a feeling that everything wasn't told in the movie. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere how much scarier Other Mother was in the book. I definitely need to see that.

Coraline is wonderfully made, visually pleasing yet creepy movie. I recommend it to everyone, even those who don't like horror movies. Maybe this can be your way to start going towards horror movies.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"Remember, girls, no matter what happens... keep your eyes closed. And you men... take a good look."

Year: 2013

Director & Writer: Nicholas Winding Refn 

"Julian, a drug-smuggler thriving in Bangkok's criminal underworld, sees his life get even more complicated when his mother compels him to find and kill whoever is responsible for his brother's recent death."

- Summary written by anonymous

Mostly I watched this movie because it looked interesting. Actually I just now realised that it's directed by the same Danish director who directed Drive (and the Pusher trilogy I've been meaning to watch forever).

First of all, I am very surprised. If you think about the story as simplified as it is in the summary, this movie could be very simple, very simple and typical crime drama. But no, Only God Forgives was far from simple and typical. It was way more artistic than I thought it would be. 

This movie was slow, very slow, almost unbearably slow. It kind of reminds me of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining, and I'm not sure which one was slower. This movie was only an hour and a half, but it felt longer and shorter because of the pace. This is what I was kind of expecting when my father called David Lynch's style prolonged. But the pace works well, it's an interesting artistic decision.

The cinematography was interesting; it was colourful and mysterious. It added partially weird atmosphere to the movie.

Also this movie was much more surreal than I would've thought after quickly reading through the plot summary. The surrealism made it kind of hard to follow this movie, and sometimes it got really confusing. 

And when you combine the slow pace, amazing cinematography and the surreal feeling of the movie, the result was astonishing. I never would've thought that a crime drama with such a simple plot would turn out to be a really artistic movie. I was expecting something like Drive, but tiny bit worse and simpler. It felt like I was watching some kind of true art movie, where elements of Kubrick and Lynch and Tarantino were combined - a combination which usually would feel slightly weird, but turned out to be amazing. Most of this movie felt like some kind of more artistic, dreamlike scene you could add near the end of otherwise simple movie.

One other thing about this movie, it was really graphic. It was almost sickening, but I think that was a good touch. It was better than not showing anything or sugarcoating the most violent parts. Also the dialogue was as rough as needed. This movie probably isn't for anyone who gets easily disturbed by violence or "heavy-handed" dialogue.

The score reminded me a bit of the score of Gone Girl. It was amazing, and worked nicely with the pace and the surreal feeling of the movie.

Only God Forgives has a simple plot, but it has been carried out in the most amazing manner I could've imagined for such plain idea. I'm starting to really like Nicholas Winding Refn's work. I recommend this to anyone who has seen Drive, because even if this isn't the same, it's definitely worth seeing. Only God Forgives is weird, sometimes hard to follow, but still a tremendous, stunning movie. 

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"You can't keep putting aside what you want for some imaginary future. You've gotta suck it up and go with you gut."

Year: 2014

Director: Lynn Shelton

Writers: Andrea Seigel

In the throes of a quarter-life crisis, Megan panics when her boyfriend proposes, then, taking an opportunity to escape for a week, hides out in the home of her new friend, 16-year-old Annika, who lives with her world-weary single dad.

- Written by Anonymous

I found this movie because iMDB recommended it for me. I don't remember why, but I got interesting because of the cast: Keira Knightley, Chloë Grace Moretz and Sam Rockwell... I really like all of them, so why wouldn't I watch this?

I actually thought this movie would turn out to be much more hilarious, but it ended up being much deeper. It reminded me of Liberal Arts by Josh Radnor. Both movies dealt a lot with age and growing up and all that, even though the main characters were grown up in both movies. 

Megan is easy to relate to as character. Maybe your situation in life isn't exactly as hers, but the feeling she has is very familiar to most of us. Everyone feels at least once in their life out of place, not knowing what to do with your life, all that. That feeling is there most of the time, if you are Megan's age more or less. But dealing with this feeling is not too rare in movies about young adults (and others). But Megan had other traits too, she didn't felt like just a symbol for this one feeling, which was really good. I liked her character much more than I first thought I would. She could've been better though.

Even though this movie dealt with kind of deep stuff, searching your own place etcetera, it was light in a lovely way. Also it didn't give really an answer to how to find your place, the message was more like, in the quote, "go with your gut". Someone else maybe would prefer that the movie gave some reassurance rather than really simple message, but I really like this way too. The movie tells you to take it easy, it's okay if you don't have it all figured out, life changes and you change. ... There's a chance I'm looking too much into it, mostly because I'm afraid this review will turn out too short.

But Laggies was a fun, light but still deep movie with great characters. This wasn't at all what I was expecting (which is something I've been saying a lot I think?), This movie is entertainment you don't have to start analysing, but you still can, because it really does have a purpose. I warmly recommend it to anyone who every now on then or more often feels unsure about their life.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10