All posts by Tarek Fayoumi…The Paterson of his Craft!

I am someone who strives to become a professional critic. I watch and review many movies. I view the eyes of movies as something as an art form. I have followed many critics over the years, but once I was thirteen I knew writing film reviews was going to be my passion. I learned from watching multiple episodes of Ebert And Roeper in my teen years, and then in middle school I began writing film reviews for a newspaper club. I am also an avid fan of the arts of Chicago including Theatre, Comedy, and music. Films, however, are my primary focus.
Capsule Reviews, CUFF 31, Film reviews

Flying Lessons (CUFF 31) Review

Leave a comment

This is one of those rare and distinct documentaries that captures struggle and frustration.  This film displays the art of tolerance while dealing with a crisis and dives into the depths with a blissful meaning and purpose. Flying Lessons is an audacious and gorgeous work-of-art about finding bonding moments in life. Directed by Elizabeth Nichols, Flying Lessons had me questioning how the film found its positive voice. How does it remain optimistic given the issues  beneath the surface that are so difficult to cope with?

Flying Lessons focuses on Philly Abe, a punk artist. The director examines Philly’s life from what she tells her. Philly lives in an apartment on the Lower East Side of New York City and is dealing with an abusive landlord related to issues of fairness and rent. Philly has ways of coping with the stress through music, art, and culture. The film links to a lot of artists in the 80s as Philly talks about her struggles growing up. The story is an experiential ride that throbs with heartache and pain.

Philly is an inspiring force in this surreal story of exploration. She thrives on telling her story, and explaining what she does with her artistic value to stay afloat. The director is skillful atputting herself in Philly’s environment by spending time in her home and listening to the many stories she shares. Flying Lessons showcases the reality of class facing a real problem. It is charismatic in its poetic writing which portrays the evolving patterns of art.

The perspective of a home-life in turmoil based on inevitabledetrimental causes is compelling. The director of Flying Lessonsencourages the audience to use their voice to build resilience and fortitude.  Philly’s daily routine and the development of an amazing artistic path make Flying Lessons intriguing. The mental approaches used by Nichols come from poignant angles which result in light in each word she hears from Philly. Three-and-a-half out of four stars.

Flying Lessons is destined to be part of the 31st Chicago Underground Film Festival. The festival runs from Wednesday,September 11th to Sunday, September 15th. Flying Lessons will play at the Harper Theater on Thursday, September 12th at 9:30pm and Saturday, September 14th at 12:00pm. Go to https://cuff.org/ for listings, tickets and passes.

Film reviews

Blink Twice Review

Leave a comment

Blink Twice is cast with an all-star list of talent with Naomie Ackie as Frida, Channing Tatum as Slater, Alia Shawkat as Jess, Christian Slater as Vic, Simon Rex as Cody, Adria Arjona as Sarah, Haley Joel Osment as Tom, Geena Davis as Stacy and Kyle MacLachlan as Rich. Directed by Zoe Kravitz, I felt the party was heated with many lines that keep the twists of the Island party hopping. Blink Twice is unique in its style. There is the setting of paradise where people are encouraged to cut lose and be free. There is a penalty with that freedom though. It is one of those films where it is set to have a catastrophic episode on a nightly basis…its continuity keeps its momentum steady.

In the film, Frida and Jess are two close friends who livetogether. They find themselves working a catering job that keeps them in the dumps. Frida is praying for an escape to have a therapeutic break from all the mental aggravations in her life. She is obsessed with Slater. This is because he is an icon of wealth. As luck would have it, Frida and Jesse are invited on a getaway to his private island, a place with no technology and a lot of weird natural resources. The trip also includes a group of people displaying some bizarre behaviors. The dismissal of technology on the island creates a strong attention to the reality of the circumstances and situations presented. Is it truly what Frida and Jesse think the adventure is though?

The film finds its points of being questionable though when moments of drug use kick in. This is where the behaviors of many of the guests begin to have a form of confusion, especially with Tom and Vic. They are weird ones. Other questionable characters include Stacy and Rich who throw in some odd dynamics. There remains an aspect of wondering what the truthreally is in Blink Twice.  All around there is a threat of danger. Slater may be wealthy, but what is he hiding? The depths of the getaway going downhill is where my mind kept finding its thrills. “Thrills” to the extent that all actions have consequences, and that despite how funny or serious the setting—there will be an outcome one or way the other.

Tatum is the party host who has that laid-back attitude, and he is also very welcoming. Does he know how truly crazy he is though? Does he know the dangers of the Island? Is everyone so drugged up on so many substances that they are totally oblivious to danger? This is a trail ride of questions where Blink Twice brings on buckets of sweat as the anxiety heightens. The party does not stop. No matter how dangerous or out of hand it gets.

A throbbing whirlwind of exhilaration, the party does not stop until the authorities get involved. How can the authorities make it on the Island when it is so remote with no technology? The island creates its own outcome with irresistible and psychological suspense. It is a comical party which keeps moving in a detrimental direction. The range of the problemspresented here leave questions with multiple choice answers. Is the island the risk? Is the host the risk? Are the guests the risk? Find out in Blink Twice. Three out of four stars.

Film reviews

The Crow

Leave a comment

The original version of The Crow (released in 1994) is a guilty pleasure of mine. The director of the 1994 version was Alex Proyas. In this newest edition, its director is Rupert Sanders. Redemption and power do not meet mesmerizing expectations in this current version of The Crow. There are depths of it that try with revenge and love to create a form of meaning. The background and characterizations of The Crow are meaningless.

The two characters are Eric (played by Bill Skarsgard) and Shelly (played by FKA twigs). They escape from prison, fall in love, and build their universe of romance. The enemy onto them is Vincent Roeg (played by Danny Huston). Vincent targets them both. Shelly is deceased. Eric seeks the power to bring her back. A mental state of mind brings Eric to the universes of the present and dead. The one who guides him on how to use his powers is Kronos (played by Sami Bouajila). Can Eric save the love of his life?

The beginning is Eric and Shelly having a life in prison. From there, they make their own life after escaping. The Crow has issues with its pacing. It will focus a lot on Eric and Shelly’s unconventional relationship. It will then transition to the mayhem of criminality coming down around them. Both are at the height of it, but one gains the power to do more detrimental things. With Eric having a love for art and words, his visions mean more than just love. The writing, however, is sloppy.

There is a lot of dragging. The scary powers take their time to get to their climatic scenarios do not come so smoothly in The Crow. It is even more complex to take Skarsgard seriously as Eric. He has a quiet monotone, and he does not possess tough-guy vibes.

There is a lot of turmoil. The Crow is captivating in a moment where criminality is finding light. Once that “light” finds its way to turn on, the dreads of terror come in drastically bad. It just throws it all in the bucket of vengeance (in Eric). With that, audiences can expect tons of tattoos, weird attitudes, and a strange path of poor writing in The Crow.

It misses its opportunities for invigoration. It is presented in the formality of predictability. “Predictability” of mediocrity. The 1972 version knew how to be on par with its good and bad guys. This version cares too much about making it look like a generic version of a superhero flick. It is not that though, It is just a horror with a poor script and angles. I felt there would be more to this. I had a feeling of moving parts. There were barely any. The Crow displays “moving parts” of flatness.

I do suggest revisiting the 1994 version before seeing this one. I felt lost throughout the context of this remake. It is detrimental and messy. It is a failure within the realms of structure. I do give it credit for trying to encourage its characterizations though. Two out of four stars.