Change Your Image
akwonghuynh
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Designated Survivor (2016)
Mixed bag but still worth a watch.
Season 1 and 2, Designated Surivor introduced plots and narratives that were a mixed bag. Some were enthralling and alluded to bigger plots, but ultimately led to nowhere, or went out with a whimper. Other elements led to unforseen twists which spiced up the story.
Without any spoilers, there were plots that I had hoped were expanded upon or developed further, rather than being conviniently wrapped up by the end of the episode with little consequence. However, with that being said, there were little details that turned into something big and added a bit of danger to the story.
Maybe this was due to budget constraints or ABC oversight from preventing the series from becoming too dark, because I don't believe that the writers who brainstormed some pretty solid ideas, wanted those ideas to pan out the way they did.
Season 3, is helmed purely by Netflix, and it shows. That's not necessarily a good nor bad thing. The season still suffers from the "long build and anti-climatic whimper" the first two seasons had. Some story points just wrapped up too quickly after they build up they were given. In essence, great concepts but poor execution still plagues this series.
The language is a bit vulgar and gratuitous, hitting me like a freight train roaring down a mountain. The showed laid it on heavy, probably wanting to hammer home that Designated Survivor is now Netflix's new dark-gritty baby and potential heir to House of Cards.
The series practically broke the fourth wall when a certain character swore.
The language was toned down later on in the season, and the writers reserved its usage to add a punchier effect.
Another thing I noticed with Season 3 is how slanted the politics were, compared to the previous seasons. ABC (according to them) tries to be politically unbiased, and so the first two seasons attempted to reflect that. The villains were based on groups in the real world, but it was far removed enough that there was no direct link. The politics espoused by the President's speech were distinctly centrist. But in Season 3, there is a left wing slant no matter how hard the series tries to tell me that it is centrist. This is mostly a result of the season having a distinct tone of identity politics that just feels off.
That being said, the left wing politcs is nowhere near "West Wing" levels, so the politically right leaning shouldn't be turned off by it (I'm also certain West Wing never bothered with identity politics either. It was a show from a different time). The series still does take potshots at both ends of the political spectrum, just not as strongly as the first two, and also notes that not all groups are monolithic, which is nice. However, there is a definite Left-wing slant in Season 3. Right wing extremist groups are mentioned a lot, but not a peep about left wing extremists.
Season 3 also takes a lot cues from what's happening in the world right now. I can't quite articulate it, but there's something jarring about watching the series and instantly being reminded about a certain rally that happened in the real world not too long ago. I'm don't find it off-putting per se, but I do find it jarring and that it would make the season feel dated in later years to come. Not to mention, these references are just that, references. They don't really add anything to the story, or the over arching plot.
This is an issue that I'm noticing more in Season 3, than the first two seasons. There are character arcs that serve no other purpose than just padding out the run time and attempting to make them more than just cardboard cutouts.
Which brings me to my next point, there are a few characters missing. There is a convinient narrative explanation for this, but when you think about the characters that are affected by it, it doesn't make sense as to why they're absent. I am aware that the actors and actresses may not be available for whatever reason and had to have been replaced, but there are a lot of turnovers, and some of the replacements don't feel as valuable or as likeable as their predecessors.
Lastly, the music. I usually don't coment on music, but some of the selections used at the end of certain episodes felt off, considering the subject matter they finished with. The tunes were a bit too spirited for a moment that should be tragic and horrifying.
I know my review has largely been negative so far, but I'll list the good.
-Kirkman's character development and interaction with family
-Emily's development
-New Chief of Staff Mars. He's a new addition but I really enjoyed his arc. Arguably the best part of Season 3.
-The Campaign Manager. This character is a barrel of excitement.
-A different portrayal of the CIA. In most media, the CIA is always portrayed as this overly powerful organisation that skirts the rules whenever it chooses. Here they're shown as an Agency with not enough domestic resources. I don't know how representative that is of real life, but it's a refreshing change.
-Dr Eli, he's a geneticist. Great character. The scientific matieral in season 3 is surprisingly accurate, albeit broad. I guess they don't want to be caught out by the details, but it's nice to see things that are more authentic at first glance.
Line of Duty (2012)
Bamboozles all round, very original and worth the watch
Standard crime procedurals follow a formula.
1. Find bad guy
2. Build up bad guy
3. Quickly wrap up the ending and catch bad guy because the episode is closing on the end time.
We're all used to seeing that, that we don't have the time to appreciate the characters and villains.
Line of Duty, this one I stumbled on Netflix. The premise didn't sound that exciting to me at first, I mean it was about internal affiars, "how exciting could that be?" I asked. And boy was I happy to be wrong. I hadn't binged watched a TV show since I was introduced to "Person of Interest".
Instead of one episode being about one "villain", rather it's a whole season for one "villain". And no season is the same, which is another good thing.
So we are treated to an entire season where the target of the Internal Affairs Officers are fleshed out. First you're wary of the target, then you become sympathetic, then your wary again! But something else happens and now you're even more sympathetic. And on and on it goes until the final climax that has your eyebrows rising bast your hairline, and your jaw on the floor.
Okay, I'm hyping it up excessively here so be careful. But the point is that this show takes the time and effort to flesh out everyone. The targets aren't just "mwahahaha, I'm an evil psycopath" or "I did it for revenge!" cliches that are littered in crime procedurals. They are very human characters that you might even become attached to.
Definitely worth a watch.
Dang kou feng yun (2017)
A decent flick with strengths and weaknesses
I watched this on Netflix, and their discription of the film was something along the lines of "a maverick leader and a clever young general take on the Japanese pirates amid bureaucratic intrigue in Ming Dynasty China".
In reality, the film is more "a clever young general takes on Japanese pirates" with bureaucratic intrigue in Ming Dynasty China as a mere backdrop. The film does alllude to bureaucratic politics in the first half of the film, but it is left to the wayside into the second half with no mention of it at the conclusion of the story. We're sort of left hanging about the characters who appeared in the first half that were involved in the politics of the Ming Dynasty.
The second half of the film focuses on two battles - and that's fine. However with a fairly crowded cast, some of the characters' death are left me feeling unempathetic. Had the film focused on developing these certain characters more in the first half of the film, it would've been more impactful. We simply didn't get time to grow attached to the characters that die.
Personally, I think the movie would've been better if it just focused on the general chasing the pirates and with very light sprinkles of his maverick leader trying to get him the funds for his army. Then the first half of the film could focus on the general training his troops, and the second half can be the battles.
The movie also gets bogged down with comedic scenes between the General and his wife. I found it touching and funny, but it did make me stop and wonder when the battles were going to happen, this film is around the 2hr mark.
However, these scenes were all to humanise the General and his wife, who plays an integral part in one of the battles later on in the film. She ticks the standard "badass waifu" that we all wish had our backs, and the actress does a pretty good job of convincing me that she's exhaustedly and desperately hacking away at Japanese soldiers.
Now it would be jarring to see a 5ft6 petite woman carving her way through katanna wielding troops, but the film does it in a way that she manages to get the jump on them in the heat of battle, rather than going toe to toe with countless men. And of course, a few people have to bail her out in battle - she's not a Mary Sue (which is to be expected because Asian cinema knows how to write strong yet not overpowered female characters) So point in favour to the creative minds behind that.
Next up, I appreciate how the film takes the time to develop the Japanese characters, from the wise leader, to the young and honourable samurai, and the dishonourable ronins.
The film makes a clear distinction that the ronin are the ones doing the messy work, and are barbaric in their behaviour much to the disgust of their samurai leaders. The samurai aren't the cliche evil Japanese characters we see so much in Chinese film, which is a nice change of pace for once. "Ip Man" was a bit too heavy handed on the anti-Japanese sentiment.
Finally we have the action. It's good, no shaky cam and well choreographed scenes make it worth the wait. It's no "Red Cliff", but it is more than adequate and not as fantastical as other similar epics such as "The Curse of the Golden Flower" - which is a good thing.
Overall, I enjoyed the film and the battle scenes definitely made up for the wait.
The Punisher (2017)
Kinda like Person of Interest, but minus the AI and abstaining from killing... and crime investigation
For those of us who watched and liked POI and then wondered what POI would have looked like if they didn't have a "no-killing" policy, the Punisher would be a close fit.
That being said, there's more than enough originality in this series so don't worry. The opening premise is similar, but that's where the similarities end.
The series does a good job of bringing "humanity" to a character that is usually portrayed to be cold and ruthless. The action scenes are visceral and gory enough to keep most of us entertained, and the twists do keep you on your toes. All in all, a good watch.
Dunkirk (2017)
Suspenseful and riveting
Nolan doesn't approach Dunkirk like other war movies. There are no scenes of dialogue where the characters are humanised, nor any visceral scenes of battle to hammer in how hellish war is.
Instead, the implication of horror and sparse dialogue, coupled with Hans Zimmer's excellent soundtrack, creates a tense atmosphere where time feels like it's running out. Though the characters don't say much, we relate to them in fear, and action.
As expected, there are neat little details in every character's action that makes them unique. This movie is definitely worth a watch.
Wonder Woman (2017)
Attempts to explore the human condition but falls short
Wonder Woman attempts to explore the human condition, particularly mankind's relation with warfare and peace. This simple premise with a World War I setting, and Wonder Woman's perspective is an excellent opportunity to create a gripping narrative about the dichotomy of the human condition that is war and peace.
However, poor representation of WWI leaves the premise feeling hollow and empty, as well as missing out on excellent opportunities to flesh out the narrative more deeply.
WWI is a war that was caused by a mess of interlocking treaties and a series of seminal events, thus there were no good or bad sides in the war, but Wonder Woman attempts to portray the Germans as being the "bad guys" as they were the only ones in the film to use chemical weapons. The film's attempt to portray the cruelties of war missed out on vital opportunities such as gas attacks, wave attacks against machine gun positions, and shell-shock caused by enduring artillery bombardments from days on end. Another opportunity missed are the Christmas day truce which would've shown the good side of humanity in war.
Greek mythology was also warped for this film - which was disappointing.
The movie is also hampered by a predictable plot, plot holes, and cliche's that are more fitting for a Saturday cartoon. The film also doesn't go into depth about the Amazons - which would've been another opportunity to show contrast between the paradise island Wonder Woman grew up in, and the trying times of the early 20th Century.
The CGI is decent, though there are parts where it becomes obvious that the scene is a green screen. Action is decent enough, but is lackluster in the final battle.
I will give this movie props for not making it one huge gender vs gender fest, but rather a cooperative story that acknowledges the sexism that was existent during the early 20th century.
A lot could've been done to make Wonder Woman a better movie, but alas it is not.
Arrow (2012)
Mediocre Batman at best
Following the theme of Nolan's gritty Dark Knight, we are given the TV show about Arrow, a billionaire playboy turned vigilante. You'd think that that's where the similarities would end, but it doesn't. Watching this TV show, I felt like I was watching a lazy rip off of the Dark Knight trilogy, except this time there is far too much soap operas, not enough moral dilemmas, and a lot or racy scenes to rope in newcomers.
This show's iteration of Oliver Queen is broody, a master martial artist, and tactical genius - sound familiar? That's right, Queen here is not a gruff guy with a sense of humour, he's just broody. In fact, a major plot point in season 2 practically screams Batman.
But Oliver Queen's live screen portrayal is not that bad. At one point or another, I had just wished they had killed off one of the main characters because it was just that unbearable. A lot of them felt very one dimensional, only gaining depth in the later half of season 2 - which is very late to flesh out characters. This is probably due to the cringe-worthy dialogue that even the best actors would have trouble making the audience believe the emotional weight behind it.
Special effects and scale of the actions scenes are very lacking in size and scope as well as authenticity. The fighting looks extremely choreographed with long panning shots generally seen in Asian martial arts films, but the thing is, the actors in Arrow don't have a martial arts background which makes the long panning shots feel caricatured.
All in all, the acting could be better if the directing was better. Dialogue needs a huge overhaul, and there is a lot of potential wasted when it comes to the story. So many times, the narrative could've been more powerful if the writers were willing to take a more daring risk instead of the clichéd deus ex wrap up.
Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation (2015)
Best in the series
Usually, when a franchise reaches its fifth installment without being a part of some grander over arching plot, said franchise has overstayed its welcome. But not in the case of Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation. As the fifth movie of the franchise, Rogue Nation still manages to bring a fresh take with a more sinister villain, and surprising questions about ethics in field where ethics is a foreign concept. There are also neat little plot twist moments which keeps you on your toes and keeps the narrative from rehashing earlier movies. The action scenes in this movie are a wonderful mix of hilarity, audacity and brutality. When watching it, you know it's highly improbable, but who cares? It's great fun.
Interstellar (2014)
A memorable experience
To be honest, Interstellar was not on my "to watch" list when it first came out. But at my friend's request, we decided to go watch it without knowing what to expect.
I was absolutely blown away by the world building and the emotional depth of characters. There are plenty of movies about saving mankind or the planet, that generally gloss over the world they're in or just focus too much on it. Nolan and his writing staff managed to balance it perfectly by constructing a world that is so eerily relatable that just completely immersed me in it all. Some other friends who have seen this movie claim the first act is too long and too boring, but for me personally, I loved every second of its intricacies.
When the second act finally takes place, when the astronauts set out on their journey, that's when we're treated to scientific concepts that have been misinterpreted by the masses. Under Kip Thorne's direction, the writing team created a world that was scientifically accurate for the most part, and riveting. Hans Zimmer's unique use of pipe organs gave the soundtrack a very human and metaphysical element which resonated with one of the core ideas of this film, and this is humanity striving to reach beyond what is normal.
The acting in this movie is brilliant, hats off to the actress who played young Murphy Cooper. Her acting chops is definitely on the mark, and you can definitely buy into father-daughter dynamic she shares with Matthew McConaughey - which is the emotional core of the film.
This movie is definitely a memorable experience, one that has stuck with me for a very long time, and definitely more years to come. Its a must see for those who love the metaphysical and the science.
The Blacklist (2013)
It's good, but I got spoiled by Person of Interest
As mentioned earlier, I got spoiled by "Person of Interest".
"Blacklist" has its good sides and the bad. The good side is this constant mystery about the Reddington and his perchance for Agent Keen, which leads to some very neat "Silence of the Lamb" dynamic, except without the whole psychopathic cannibal, and instead you just have a brilliant and remorseless killer. Which in a way, is a bit cliché for a villain, but Spader pulls it off and gives you a very convincing and human character.
Megan Boone also does her character justice. Agent Keen despite being a rookie, neither comes off as brutally efficient and brilliant, nor naive and incompetent. She gives her character a certain kind of innocence which evolves into caution, but the character still has compassion and drive. Most female characters these days are; adorkable, overly flawed, or Mary Stu. Thankfully, Agent Keen is none of the above, she's a regular human being who is thrown into extraordinary circumstances.
Now the downsides, like I mentioned earlier, POI spoiled me, and this is why: the premise of the show is an FBI task force hunting down names on a blacklist, which really does take out the fun of guessing who the perp is. Furthermore, a lot of the episode is spent establishing the blacklister, and then the final ten minutes is their inevitable deus-ex downfall. You see, POI on the other hand, teases out the downfall of a villain that has been established. Another thing is that there seems to be a lot of poor judgement moments and villains that seem to be insanely powerful, and I mean "plot armour" insanely powerful. It's almost like certain facilities don't follow correct protocol in the world of Blacklist, but hey, artistic license overdrive.
American Sniper (2014)
See it as a biography and not as a war film
At this film's emotional core is a family man who goes to war. That's as much as I can simplify this movie without misconstruing anything. Like most modern war films, "American Sniper" has come under fire for being a propaganda movie. As an Australian, I can honestly say, I don't see it.
This movie has been labelled as anti-Muslim and so on, but I honestly don't see it. People who claim this movie is anti-Muslim generally refer to the scene where Chris Kyle is about to shoot a boy carrying explosives towards an American convoy (as seen in the trailer). I can see where people might say this move is anti-Muslim, but I don't agree with it. I see it as a really nasty situation of "do you shoot the boy?" or "do you hold your fire, thus letting the boy blow himself up along with twelve other American soldiers."
There's also another scene where a boy is tortured and killed with a drill because insurgents believed that his father was giving information to American soldiers. I can sort of see how that could be interpreted as propaganda, but that would be stretching it.
Now, on the war front side of the story, a very unique warrior's psyche is shown. I don't know if it was just me, or whether it was intentional or not, but, at first Bradley Cooper really sells it as Kyle just wants to become a SEAL. And then during the Kyle's multiple tours and his wife asks him why he still wants to go back, Kyle states that he does it to protect his family to which his wife responds that, that is not a real reason. Bradley's execution of this scene leaves you thinking whether or not Kyle does truly want to protect his family, or that war is where Kyle feels most at home. Again, this does not strike me as propaganda, but it is quite amazing how people would instantly label this kind of behaviour as psychopathic.
The home front side of the story shows how Kyle is revered by fellow soldiers and at the same time, shows the toll it is taking on him, his marriage, and the psyche of his brother (though short that scene, it is powerful regardless).
In short, I still have a hard time wrapping my head around how this movie is a propaganda. Eastwood's previous films such as "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "Flags of Our Fathers" bring a very human element to battlefields that have been romanticised by propaganda, as well as criticising those who do not understand war. To say that "American Sniper" is anti-Muslim is a bit mind boggling since "Letters from Iwo Jima" portrayed the Japanese soldiers as men fighting for their country - not as a one-dimensional barbaric bucktooth cartoon. My guess to why this movie is labelled as propaganda is because of the title and the promotional poster. After all, seeing the name "American Sniper" with a soldier holding the American flag does certainly invoke that image of patriotism.
It's best to watch this movie as a biography and don't think too much about trying to find whatever propaganda message is in it, because honestly, I couldn't find it. Enjoy the story.
Person of Interest (2011)
Nerd Nivarna - I should seek professional help from the binging
As a tech geek, and someone who's really into spy thriller, this show hits all the marks. Acting is superb, writing is brilliant and gripping.
The TV show focuses on topics such as human morality, motivation, and ethics, all while spinning a tale which leaves you guessing who the perp or the victim is.
However, despite the seriousness of this series, there are some very humorous moments - probably more funny because of how dark the narrative is - but the show never loses focus, unlike some other shows. Characters have excellent banter, and their conversations feel real.
Action sequences though small in scale, feel like real fights instead of like TV show budget fights attempting to look like the silver screen bonanzas. There are no high wire tricks for the hand to hand combat, and no Michael Bay explosions during gunfights. Why? Because the series didn't need to. Plenty of other TV Shows attempt to pull off a spectacle, but end up feeling very jarring.
The first time I watched this show, I was hooked, unfortunately the flight I was on only had two episodes from season 3. But when I got my hands on the series collection, it was a week of binge watching to the point I pulled all nighters, and only stopped watching it when I went to have a shower or sleep.
10/10 recommend.
Rome (2005)
Lacks a certain charm, maybe because its too crowded
This story is much like a vaudeville, it has comedy, drama, romance, and adventure. Right off the bat, it would appeal to quite a very wide audience.
However, it does feel very crowded. Not only are there a lot of characters, but there are a lot of plot points and genres to contend with. Without a central character or a theme, I did lose interest in the series many times. One moment I'm watching two soldiers trying to survive on some desolate island, the next moment my eyes were assaulted by a flurry of orgies... this is a HBO production after all. Aside from a few characters, it was a bit difficult to care for everyone else since each episode switched sceneries so many times. However during a war arc, the narrative does focus and everything becomes all the more enticing.
Despite the drawbacks of this series, it has pays attention to detail and authenticity. Despite how rare battle scenes are, this movie stays true to form and doesn't make their characters have superhuman fighting abilities. Everything feels grounded, and the threats always feel real. However, right at the moment I'm caught up in the struggles of one character, the vibe is instantly killed when the narrative changes to another scene.
Overall, if you like a bit of history, a lot of sex without the courting part of romance, and gratuitous violence, this is the TV show for you. But for someone like me who enjoys the intricacies of ancient battles and politics, "Rome" feels lacking.
Forever (2014)
An endearing surprise that really grows on you
TV Shows are a hit and miss for me, and I'm quite happy to say that this one is a hit. I first heard about this show from a friend, though the concept wasn't very enticing at first, I shelved this show away for later. The premise of an immortal doctor helping an NYPD detective solve murder mysteries is only the tip of the iceberg of what this show explores. It delves into philosophies and the finer points of human interactions. Safe to say, this show has taught me a lot. Think of this show as a mix of "Bones" and "Sherlock Holmes", but without the social awkwardness.
The acting and the writing on this show is phenomenal, as everything is very believable and emotionally loaded without feeling like teen angst. Plenty of shows have tried to add more drama into their mix, and most come out feeling like a really bad soapie. The writers of "Forever" on the other hand, do not fall in this trap, and instead offer us a powerful narrative with characters who you grow to care for.
As for the narrative itself, the show is a bit slow at the beginning in establishing its main story arc, but it is understandable all things considering. Other procedurals tend to have no overarching continuity arc, probably for the express purpose of letting an viewer switch in and no what is happening without needing to watch the previous episode. This is what makes "Forever" stand out from its contemporaries as we are not only watching a narrative about solving crime, but one that explores the struggles of the characters.
I strongly recommend this show.
The Young Turks (2005)
Unbalanced, undisciplined, lacking in decorum, and very self-righteous
Like most online news shows, TYT attempts to break away from the big corporate media and establish itself as a truth-speaking show. Since TYT is has a small budget, it must rely on a charm of in-your-face news presentation, and a strong liberal/progressive agenda to attract attention. This may be very enticing and refreshing at first, but for someone like me who enjoys professional and impartial presentation, this isn't the show for me.
The hosts - Cenk - in particular, is not afraid to voice his views whether or not they are politically correct relative to the general liberal crowd. This is where credit should be given when it's due, a show that has the gall to go against the views of its audience. However, the hosts on this show virtually attack everyone who is not a democrat or who do not fall in line with their views. And when I say attack, I really do mean it. The hosts will use name calling with a level of smugness that is normally associated with Fox News.
Don't be fooled if TYT calls themselves unbiased. They are very biased. So far, I have yet to see anything presented in an impartial light. In fact, there have been multiple occasions where the hosts cherry pick scientific and statistical facts to support their views, while omitting anything that might point towards the contrary. The heated arguments between hosts, because most of the time the hosts and guests hosts seem to have a unanimous decision on everything that it all just becomes amicable heated rants. That being said, whenever Ben Mankiewicz is hosting, that is a breath of fresh air as he does challenge the views of Cenk or Anna, which does get some nice discussions going at the same time, tempering out the very "passionate" hosts.
Overall, as an Australian, this show does give new insights into the far away land of freedom known as America, but honestly if you want to find a source of impartial or scientifically accurate news without doing your own research, I recommend DNews, SeekerDaily and TestTube. Though those three shows don't really tackle political issues anywhere near on the scale of TYT, at least you won't feel like you're being beaten over the head with a paddle named "liberal/progressive agendas".
If you are looking for a news source that is "unbiased", better to go for the big news corporations that omit information as opposed to broadcasting their stances, and watch multiple sources and formulate your own opinions from there. After all, political correctness is only relative.