Review Of Babygirl

 

Take example of Miller’s Girl; the same age Gap, yet, there was a story, the maturity of Cairo, impeccable in terms of literature, philosophy, to life itself; thus, that made the difference where Age after all didn’t matter.

Alas, in Babygirl, let us first Swap the roles of Banderas & Kidman, and now, Banderas is in the quest for his ultimate cognitive orgasm, let’s say with a nineteen year old intern, doing the same things what Kidman was doing to achieve her ultimate cognitive orgasm, exuding pathological sexual desires having no iota of maturity, including in the working hours at office; and then, you would see what media would be publishing -> from mansplaining to vulgar to excessive masculinity!

The problem is not with the theme as such, as I explained above, there are lot of flicks with the same themes present. Yet, there’s something called the story, which is missing, and that’s why Babygirl is A24’s ultimate low-life flick.

And it is because of such vagabond illiterate Interns like Samuel, and, CEOs like Romy, who’ve made Corporate to Social conversions, less worthy; in the offices eating ties (just imagine, what if Jacob doing the same thing & eating, let’s any Intern’s scarf, hair, etc. in the office, sending her Milk to drink, and saying, ‘good girl’; then how you would’ve portrayed that in the media?), to, 24x7 discussing the orgasm gap, the conversations then would have been so so irritating! Means, if I’m imagining myself sitting with Romy, what I’m discussing with her 24/7 then?  

Look! This is about pathological sexual desires. No issues with that! But, there should be some story at least! Like the difference between Companion & Wifelike. Whilst former exuded the humanoid not merely a sex slave; whilst in the latter, explicitly did (at least it appeared to me)!

No idea why Kidman or Banderas did this flick. Again, the issue is not with the theme, BUT, with the story itself, which is absent and nowhere to be found.    

If you’re taking your sexual dissatisfaction or desires at the Workplace, as what Romy did; what Samuel did; then don’t expect a conducive ethical working environment; and please then don’t publish how men at the workplace sexually abused many innocent women, again, AT THE WORK PLACE, running #MeToo movement! Beyond that, you’re free to do whatever you want to do!

All said and done; Sorry, didn’t like the flick for the following reasons!☹

© Pranav Chaturvedi

Who Can Replace James Bond!

 

There’s a saying that certain things should remain untouched! You agree with me or not, but, how Pierce Brosnan defined James Bond’s character in the Golden Eye, I think, no one defined or carried that character so well, or, better than him; and no previous or subsequent movie was able to define what Golden Eye defined, as what James Bond movies are all about!  

For instance, you can’t replace Keanu Reeves in John Wick (John Wick itself as J.W.->2). Just alike you can’t change Ethan Hunt in Mission Impossible (Mission Impossible itself as M.I.->2). Just alike how Christian Bale carried the character of Batman, no one else can carry like in The Dark Knight!

You know what? I always watch the beginning of anything, be it any character itself too, when it tries to replace someone or something else similar. For example: A dancer or singer since beginning, can’t become James Bond. Honestly! It won’t suit him or her either! The same thing goes for John Wick, because, we’ve seen Keanu Reeves since Speed or Matrix. Now if you would try to replace such characters with something or someone else, that won’t mix or match, rather, would look more FUNNIER!

If you understand what defines a character, what defines a movie itself; I think, you would stop asking for the replacement, then and now!

Have you seen recent advertisements on television? It feels like someone is coercing you to buy their products’ or services!

But who can play the character of James Bond? You should ask who can remake Golden Eye? You should ask who can replace Golden Eye’s Pierce Brosnan as James Bond! If you have the answer, then, you’ve the replacement as well!😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi

Review Of The Day Of The JACKAL

 

When and where the line of morality can be drawn for any revenge, that is still unclear, even if the revenge is taken legally. The dilemma between what is ethical and unethical. To choose between the Four Spheres of Ethical dilemmas.  

The protagonist, Jackal’s revenge in Afghanistan, let’s presume was morally justified, of course, the legality of it which was indeed contentious. But again, Jackal’s revenge didn’t end there, and portraying himself as the pure sniper ethical assassin, he repeats the same mistake, once he stood against for, in Afghanistan. For example, he too destroyed the loose ends, in the similar fashion! Be it senior citizens, be it his one-night stand Rasmus which he used and then executed to remove loose ends, and many more etc. Means, let’s say, Jackal thinks, there’s no difference between what Bianca was doing, as MI6 & Foreign Secretary too, were directly indirectly representing Wall Street tycoons to eliminate UDC, with the fear that the World economy would collapse if River is released; but again, then how he would justify the above executions as well? indeed, both poor & rich cross all limits, as there’s no difference between them; except the living lifestyle.  

Again, this is the difference between Jackal & John Wick. John Wick, being selfless, and part of Syndicate, Rules, Procedures, and Trust; understood, where to draw such line. But the problem with Jackal is not that he got affected with what happened in Afghanistan or what the British Army did, BUT, he was like everyone else, to cross any line to save money for 7 Generations of descendants to come  i.e. -> FAMILY!

No doubt that the series is captivating, thriller, clever, rich, suspenseful; yet, when I drew the line of morality and trust; that time I lost a bit of interest in the series, again, despite it being one of the most intriguing clever series I’ve watched in the long time.

What if Jackal would’ve sided with UDC? What if Jackal wouldn’t’ve killed Rasmus? What if Jackal wouldn’t’ve been so passionate about his own Family just like everyone else, who too would do almost anything for bloodlines?

I was wondering how the story would’ve changed, had the Jackal’s story been written taken above viewpoints into consideration, as then, even the audience would’ve been subjected to the Four Spheres Of Dilemmas, as what is right and what is wrong!

And again, was Bianca correct in using leftist daughter of her Asset as collateral?

Look, I’m writing from the point of view of entertainment only. No more, No less! But again, what’s wrong, if the life dilemmas too are being put into the same medium!

One thing is sure that Jackal, even from the perspective of an Elite Assassin, wasn’t ethical enough in his missions!

All said & done, no doubt, a clever thriller good watch!😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi