Category Archives: movie reviews

Notes on “Ford v Ferrari”

Great review. I enjoyed Ford v Ferrari, and it was another great review, that of Steve Sailer, which induced me to see it (well, that and the fact that my fiancee was interested to see it, which surprised and delighted me). Nice to see a great old-fashioned men’s movie, about men, white men in fact, doing masculine things, i.e. adventure, meeting challenges. And it was very well done, despite some imperfections.

Uncouth Reflections

Fabrizio del Wrongo writes:

“Ford v Ferrari” is nearly 200 minutes long, ludicrous for a car-racing flick, and its narrative incorporates a fair amount of padding. The scenes centering on the family of driver Ken Miles are particularly unnecessary. Watching them we can feel director James Mangold straining for a context beyond the dudes-tinkering-with-cars frame of the material. Despite some nice work on the part of Caitriona Balfe, deliciously MILF-y as Miles’ wife, these scenes never don’t feel schematic, and they detract from the real heart of the film, the relationship between the temperamental gearheads played by Christian Bale (Miles) and Matt Damon. Damon, as automotive designer Carroll Shelby, delivers a solid and generous performance worthy of the workmanlike character he’s playing. He knows he’s there to support Bale, and we never catch him trying to steal the limelight. As for Bale, he provides further evidence that he’s one of…

View original post 268 more words

1 Comment

Posted by on March 20, 2020 in movie reviews


Fifteen female-less feature films

They ostensibly bitch about it, but this is a list of (IMO, having seen the majority of them) great movies for men.


A lesson about men for marriage-minded women (and also about women for marriage-minded men) from the movie “High Noon”

Excellent post.

A few years back, I did a short review for a Reformed magazine of High Noon:

A Western classic, High Noon portrays a town sheriff who has to face an unrepentant criminal just released from jail; the sheriff finds himself increasingly isolated, as the townspeople turn away in fear. Not a Christian movie per se, High Noon nevertheless should strike a chord with Reformed viewers, with its portrayal of the universal wickedness of humanity (shown as afflicting even the most upright and decent citizens, in terms of their moral cowardice in the face of evil), but also, in terms of the sheriff’s heroic unwillingness to compromise with evil, standing on principle, regardless of the cost. An entertaining, thought-provoking movie.

But I don’t think I gave much thought to the wife’s character, just seeing it as part and parcel of the general cowardice of the townspeople, though still remembering that ‘a man’s foes shall be they of his own household’, as well. Whereas I think if I saw the movie for the first time now, that might be the first thing I’d notice, the wife’s refusal to stand by her man, to be a proper help-meet.

There are indeed many lessons to be learned from ‘High Noon’, as well as it being an entertaining Western.


A man leading a woman upward Another in a series of posts where I attempt to undo the damage of feminism

One of my favorite movies for explaining the differences between men and women is “High Noon” (1952).

Here’s the summary from IMDB:

Former marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper) is preparing to leave the small town of Hadleyville, New Mexico, with his new bride, Amy (Grace Kelly), when he learns that local criminal Frank Miller has been set free and is coming to seek revenge on the marshal who turned him in. When he starts recruiting deputies to fight Miller, Kane is discouraged to find that the people of Hadleyville turn cowardly when the time comes for a showdown, and he must face Miller and his cronies alone.

The main theme of the film concerns Amy’s decision to break her wedding vows the very day that she makes them. She tells her new husband that…

View original post 1,260 more words


October Baby

I recently got the opportunity to finally see ‘October Baby’, a Christian movie from a few years back dealing with abortion (as longtime followers of this site may recall). At the time, Wintery Knight linked to a review of it.

I am disappointed.

Spoilers follow.

Near the start of the movie, just a little bit into it, it is revealed that the girl’s adoptive mother (the girl didn’t yet know she’d been adopted) stumbled upon the daughter’s open diary in her bedroom, noticed some apparently suicidal thoughts, told the father, who then emailed part of the entry to the family doctor. When this comes to light, the parents are holding hands, sitting next to their daughter in the doctor’s office, and the mother gets upset and unlinks her hand from her husband. That annoyed me, as it does in real life when women use that technique to try to emotionally blackmail their boyfriends / fiancés / husbands. The mother should have taken her husband’s side, even if she disagreed with his actions, and not the daughter’s – and the movie shouldn’t have apparently endorsed the mother’s behaviour, as it unfortunately did.

On learning suddenly that she had been adopted, the daughter is only upset at her father for not telling her, not her mother; the movie frames it as the father alone being responsible, as if (a) he had actually done something wrong (on what basis must an adopted child be told he or she is adopted? I see no Scriptural basis for that.) and (b) as if it was all his ‘fault’, and none of it the mother’s, also. This anger at her father, but neutral feeling towards her mother’s equal silence, continues throughout the movie.

And when the father doesn’t want to reveal anything further to the daughter, the mother goes against her husband and gives the girl her birth certificate.

So the mother denigrates male authority within marriage, and this isn’t shown to be a bad thing, just the way of things…

Apart from the male character who is the daughter’s best friend, all the young men in the movie are doofuses, with various character flaws of one kind or another.

And the film did in fact blame the man for the unwanted pregnancy and subsequent botched abortion then premature birth; it was subtle, but those with a Red Pill POV, with ‘They Live’ glasses, should be able to pick up on it.

The abortionist’s nurse aide to the daughter:

“She told me she didn’t even know the fella, didn’t know his name. Met him at a bar, and had a night together, and then he was gone.”

See that?

“He was gone.”

Not “they went their separate ways” after fornicating, but “he was gone” (presumably meaning she had brought him back to her place, then he left – but it’s his fault, doncha know, even though it takes two to tango).

I could go on and on, I have more complaints (e.g. the usual evanjellyfish hypersensitivity towards fears of accusations of racism makes them have a black girl and a Hispanic guy among the group of friends who go on the road trip together, though giving them very few lines, which demonstrates they’re just for show; the nauseatingly endless scenes of moody girl contemplating beside a lake or the ocean (felt like a Beverly Hills 90210 episode, with Brandon jumping in his car to go brood by the ocean), but I’ll leave it at that.

Typical, man-bashing, women-are-all-victims, P.C., churchian evanjellyfish Blue Pill worldview bullshit, with tradcons being just as male-bashing as feminists

Save your time / money; skip this one.


The Christian Post pans new ‘Left Behind’ remake

So it must be really bad (and not just in its eschatology)!


Not even Nicolas Cage’s wounded puppy-dog look can save the ‘Left Behind’ remake…

The highly anticipated film “Left Behind” hits theaters this Friday, but not even Nicolas Cage’s star power can save the doomed rapture-inspired reboot.

Vic Armstrong’s latest directorial project arrives with Cage in the role of a prodigal airline captain Rayford Steele who is among a small group of survivors in the midst of the Second Coming. Best known for his roles during the ’90’s that include “Face/Off” and “City of Angels,” Cage seems like a non sequitur in “Left Behind.” Also, the actor’s notoriously monotone and soft-spoken voice leaves viewers distracted from what should be his character’s completely unrealistic plight to safely land a damaged plane full of people while halfway between New York and London.

Rounding out the cast of “Left Behind” is Lea Thompson, Jordin Sparks, and Chad Michael Murray, but each actor offers only a weak portrayal of what life would be like in a world of darkness and chaos. In the role of a single mother, Sparks attempts to convey the desperation and agony of losing a child. However, the “American Idol” star struggles through the scene, unconvincingly pointing a gun at others as well as to her own head in a proposed fit of paranoia.


Looking back at its predecessors, “Left Behind” failed to replicate the appeal of the Kirk Cameron-starred film series of the same name. Moreover, “Left Behind” is a far cry from Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’ massively popular books on which the film is based. In an obvious attempt to set up for a sequel, “Left Behind” focuses on just three characters, resulting in a tediously slow first 30 minutes and making way for an abrupt and nonsensical ending.

In conclusion, where “Left Behind” could have instructed believers and non-believers alike on the story of the rapture, the film disappointingly trips over cheap special effects and a painful script. The viewing experience was also greatly dampened by the quality of the film, including simple lighting and style techniques. The film opens in theaters Friday, Oct. 3.

Well, the ‘rapture’, as popularly understood in evangelicalism today, is not Scriptural, so that’s just as well.

*Update: Left Behind gets the Anthony Sacramone treatment, here.

TL;DR: it sucked, really bad.


The First Rule of Fight Church: You Do Not Talk About Fight Church

Fight Church: Can You Love Your Neighbor While Pummeling Him?

Among the thorny theological questions that divide men, one that hasn’t been much considered is “Can you love your neighbor as yourself, and at the same time, knee him in the face as hard as you can?” In fact, that very question is posed by one of the subjects of Fight Church, the new Lionsgate documentary by Daniel Junge and Bryan Storkel, that follows the fights and faith journeys of a more than a half dozen mixed martial arts (MMA) fighters in and out of the ring. In Fight Church, we meet several charismatic, articulate and, might I add, attractive men of the Word, strong in their ties and devotion to their Christian faith. The film’s characters span the spectrum: from a retired gun-toting, strong willed brawler to a retired kick-boxer who is now anti-CWF (Christian While Fighting). Ultimately, all of the faithful men in the documentary are, well, wrestling with what message their brutal vocation sends to believers and non-believers alike.

Sounds like an intriguing movie. I hope it eventually comes out on Canadian Netflix.


Posted by on September 19, 2014 in America, Masculinity, movie reviews, religion


Our Man Is A Man


Posted by on September 18, 2014 in movie reviews


Late August Cinematic Mini-Linkfest

Picton, Ontario.

Picton, Ontario.

Adventures In Keeping House: Sex Mission; How To Destroy Your Marriage; High Treason, A Review

Wintery Knight: Friday night movie: Saboteur (1942); Friday night movie: Sink the Bismarck! (1960); Friday night movie: Five Fingers (1952)

Rebecca Cusey: Eight Lessons For Filmmakers From ‘Calvary’; Why We Need ‘The Giver’

Emily Schultheis: ‘The Giver’: A New Kind Of Dystopian Young Adult Film

Anthony Sacramone: “The Giver” and the Gift That Keeps on Taking

Fabrizio del Wrongo: Movie Poster Du Jour: “Illumination”; Notes on “Every-Night Dreams”; Movie Poster Du Jour: “1941”; Crusades; “Particle Fever”; Movie Poster Du Jour: “Diary of a Country Priest”

Paleo Retiree: “Reel Injuns”; “Crazy Wisdom”

Blowhard, Esq.: The Camera Loves…; “Finding Vivian Maier” (2014)

Eve Tushnet: The Man Who Ate Liberty Valance

Ray Olson: Why you should see the silents, part II


Posted by on August 23, 2014 in Linklove, movie reviews, Red Pill Reviews


Still Mine

Saw a great little indie Canadian flick recently, ‘Still Mine’.

‘Still Mine’ is based on a true story of an elderly couple in rural New Brunswick, facing the situation of her declining due to Alzheimer’s, and his having to cope; he decides to build a smaller house on their farm property for them to live in, rather than the big farmhouse they always have lived in, after circumstances illustrate such might be a good idea; he runs into resistance from pigheaded bureaucrats, as her health and mental state continue to decline. His deep love for his equally loving wife makes him just as pigheaded, determined to do what he believes is best for her.

A great portrait of a Marriage 1.0, the way it should be, and still is for some; it was amazing to watch a man drag his uncooperative wife into their house, when she foolishly wanted to stay out in the cold overnight; completely un-progressive. And a surprisingly honest look at the nature of metastasizing tyrannical big government; not something I’d have expected to see in a Canadian movie, frankly; I was pleasantly surprised, and delighted.

James Cromwell has always shone in the many various supporting roles he’s had through the years; it’s about time he had a lead role, and he shines yet again. As does Geneviève Bujold, who is always great.

A touching but not sappy or overly sentimental drama; I enjoyed it thoroughly, and certainly recommend it for fans of human interest, character-driven stories.


‘Molière à bicyclette’ et ‘Paulette’

Récemment, j’ai regardé deux films français, en français, sans sous-titres: ‘Molière à bicyclette’, et ‘Paulette’. J’ai fait ça même pour m’amuser et aussi pour pratiquer ma français.

‘Molière à bicyclette’ est l’histoire de deux acteurs qui decident à faire un production de ‘La Misanthrope’ de Molière, au théâtre. Je n’avais pas lu ‘La Misanthrope’, même que je n’ai pas vu un production de celà, mais je comprends que l’histoire de ‘Molière à bicyclette’ est un miroir de celle de ‘La Misanthrope’. Bien que ma compréhension en français n’est pas parfait, j’ai compris presque tout, et c’était drole et amusant.

‘Paulette’ est l’histoire d’une vielle veuve française, une ancienne boulangère qui est devenu pauvre, qui decide à devenir une trafiquant de drogue. C’était très drôle, bien que j’ai compris un peu moins de ‘Paulette’ que ‘Molière à bicyclette’, mais tout meme, c’était pas un grand problème.

‘Paulette’ est tellement ‘politiquement incorrect’; le ‘racisme’ est un source des blagues, plutôt qu’une opportunité pour une progressive sermon; j’aimais ça, beaucoup.

Si vous parlez français, et vous aimez le cinéma français, vous aimerez ces deux films.