Movies Home (WIP) Actor/Director Home Webpage Home Neocities Profile

keep up to date with what I watch in 2024 with my carrd.







browse gallery views


list movies here

Breakfast on Pluto


release: Sept 3 2005


Length: 2h 9m


Drama Comedy LGBTQ+

rating: R

(Language, Drug use, Sexuality, Violence)


Golden Globes

Best Actor - Motion Picture Musical or Comedy

Cillian Murphy Nominated

Irish Film Awards

Best Actor in a Lead Role in a Feature Film

Cillian Murphy Won

Best Director

Neil Jordan Won

Best Script for Film

Neil Jordan Patrick McCabe Won


It's 1970 Ireland and as a baby, Patrick "Kitten" Braden (Played by Cillian Murphy) Is abandoned by his mother and left on the steps of a church where Father Liam (Played by Liam Neeson) finds her and places Kitten in an abusive foster home. Kitten has been surrounded by small minded people in her small Irish town who can't accept her gender identity as a Transgender woman (born male, self-identifies as female), so she leaves for London to look for her mother and to discover herself.

Cast & Crew

Director:Neil Jordan

Writers:Neil Jordan (Writer) Pat McCabe (Writer) Pat McCabe (Book Author)

Cast (as ranked most important by me): Cillian Murphy as Patrick "Kitten" Braden,

Liam Neeson as Father Liam, Ruth Negga as Charlie, Brendan Gleeson as John-Joe Kenny, Gavin Friday as Billy Hatchet

Personal Review

Relevant Quotes

Breakfast on Pluto is like a little gem you find in the bottom of a 3 for $5 DVD bin in goodwill. It probably does belong in that bin but you have that gut feeling that it could've been so much more. Just unfortunate. -Me, the only person with a correct opinion.

We're handed 36 separate chapters in the life of an androgynous sunbeam, but the whimsy is like a piece of caramel lodged between two of your back teeth: a sweet irritant. -Micheal Phillips.


I have to admit. I saw this film because I was binge watching movies with Cillian Murphy. I was on vacation in my Grandmas spare bedroom on a bed that would creak and a headrest that would bang against the wall with every shift in weight, listening to this film on a pair of broken headphones held together by a wire and scotch tape that would pull at my hair everytime I took them off to check if someone was going to walk in.

The movie was dificult for me to understand due to a multitude of reasons such as the broken headphones, low volume heavy irish accents and lack of subtitles because apparently some free movie websites don't take time to sync up english subtitles for an english film that hasn't been watched since 2006?

That part was mostly my own fault. Although I do think the heavy Irish accents and Cillian Murphy mumbling (In character) could make it difficult for other viewers.

I may be biased towards Cillian Murphy but I think he did an amazing job playing Kitten and you can tell he really put in work to make Kitten seem like a real woman. she didn't seem at all like a Cisgender man playing what he assumed a Transgender person would act like, he just flowed in this role and added this tenderness to Kitten that could not be replicated by many. He was by far the best thing about this movie.

I did not enjoy some aspects like the talking birds but the overall story and plot is quite interesting. This movie is mainly brought down by

Although not a favorite it is still a charming movie that could've been great. I understand why people adore it when it comes to the stunning performance by Cillian Murphy but I can also understand why people dislike this movie. I think this quote from Micheal Phillips sums up the movie well:

We're handed 36 separate chapters in the life of an androgynous sunbeam, but the whimsy is like a piece of caramel lodged between two of your back teeth: a sweet irritant. -Micheal Phillips

The Crush


release: Apr 2 1993


Length: 1h 29m


Thriller Drama Romance

rating: R

(Sexuality, Nudity, Violence, Language)


28yr old Nick Elliot (Played by Cary Elwes) is a newspaper reporter who moves into the Forresters guesthouse in hopes of quiet time while working on a new story. This all gets thrown out the window when he meets 14yr old Adrienne Forrester (Played by Alica Silverstone). The Forresters only child, a spunky (maybe even a bit psychotic) obsessive young prodigy. When she develops a deadly crush on Nick, he must battle with his heart and mind. (Although the movie may try to convince you he isn't fighting with his heart it's pretty clear.)

Cast & Crew

Director:Alan Shapiro

Writers:Alan Shapiro (Writer)

Cast: Cary Elwes as Nick Elliot, Alica Silverstone as Adrian Forrester,

Jennfer Rubin as Amy Maddik, Amber Benson as Cheyenne, Kurtwood Smith as Cliff Forrester

Personal Review

Relevant Quotes

Feels like I accidentally ran directly into some Pedophiles dream. -Me, the only person with a correct opinion.

"The Crush" is the movie that child abusers have been waiting for. -Rob Gonsalves.

There's something scuzzy about the whole exercise. -Hal Hinson.

Alan Shapiro's The Crush suffers from a distinct lack of believability, turning what should have been a tense and horrific tale into a laughable mess. -Jeff Beck.

An exploitative thriller that also harbors dangerous notions about and readily trivializes child neglect, sexual abuse and rape. -Chris Hicks.


I watched this film because I wanted to see Cary Elwes in some of his older roles.

It's so unfortunate that the brilliant Alica Silverstone and Cary Elwes had to work together on this mess. I really do love them both but it pains me that this absolute garbage is their only movie together.

This film was Alica Silverstones first film and you can tell she was going to be something special. She's so talented and just had that knack for acting but for her first movie to be this borderline Pedo bait? It really is just unfortunate.

Alica Silverstone may have been 16 but her character is 14 ("nearly 15") and there are way too many "sexy" shots of her with provocative music in some cases like in her swimsuit, underwear, under her skirt and at one point, nude. (Although it was a body double and you only see her butt it's still a bit...) Even being a teen while watching this I felt very uncomfortable. It's like these scenes were purposefully trying to make her sexually appealing so we feel better about Nick Elliots ( Cary Elwes) forbidden attraction to her.

I think the movie had plenty of oppourtunity to be great. It had a unique story I was really looking forward to but it was twisted into this garbage by director Alan Shapiro.

The crush feels like some sick guys fantasy and I'm sorry (once again) that Alica Silverstone and Cary Elwes were apart of it. I mean Nick Elliot is no hero like the movie depicts him to be. Adrian gets put in a mental asylum and Nick is... free to go? Like, he drove Adrian to a well known makeout spot, kissed Adrian (leaned into her kiss after she initiated), played his "if you were 10yrs older" card, stared at her getting undressed in her closet (I know the situation wasn't his fault really but he could've closed his eyes), stared at her in her swimsuit and there's probably a multitude of examples I missed.

A movie where the young. 14yr old girl is the one in the wrong for having a crush on a grown man who for some reason can't just push her away? She just keeps coming back to conviniently undress exactly where this poor grown man is hiding! What ever will he do!? Feels like I accidentally ran directly into some Pedophiles dream

This movie did not age well at ALL and I think many of the high ratings on IMDB fail to realize how damaging this sort of portrayal is. Especially when the adult in the movie is also, if not more, in the wrong.

And the fact that this is supposedly based on Alan Shapiros real life experience with a young girl? Let's hope the majority of this film was built upon creative liberties.

Lover Stalker Killer

N/A (see notes.)

release: Feb 9 2024


Length: 1h 30m


Documentary Crime

rating: 15+

(Violence, Disturbing Images, Language)


I will not rate a documentary that only recounts real life events in the same way I will a fictional film. I find it unfair to rank a real life crime against fictional scripts because that is entirely dependent on the crime itself and very little to do with actual writing or creative aspects. I will say, I found this documentary to be very interesting and I do reccommend watching it.


This American True Crime Documentary examines how Dave Kroupa was recently got out of a long-term relationship and eager to restart his romantic life. He tried online dating, meeting Liz and Cari who were two of his most promising connections. It should have been an opportunity for Dave to rekindle with the world but it turned into a twisted love triangle, putting Dave and everyone he cares about at risk, resulting in the brutal murder of the people closest to him.

Cast & Crew

Director: Sam Hobkinson

Writer: Sam Hobkinson

Cast: Dave Kroupa as self, Nancy Raney as self, Law enforcement as self

Personal Review

Firstly, if you haven't seen the documentary yet, go watch it! Full of twists, super interesting watch. This review WILL HAVE SPOILERS!

The Documentary used interviews with those involved, including the law enforcement officers who worked on the case, alongside vivid reenactments that bring viewers into the story. The film does an amazing job of keeping the viewer hooked.

This Documentary highlights the problem with Law Enforcement. Near the end, it is stated that Cari Farvers body is lost in a landfill and my mom had commented "Why don't they search the landfills? There's a dead body in there!" I live in Canada and as I type this Indigenous peoples are rallying for the government to search landfills for the bodies of multiple Indigenous women. This is our reality. People die and are never found because the government doesn't want to find them. Mass genocide towards Indigenous children occured, the government found graves full of hundreds of children and the government does not classify this as a crime scene.

The Documentary states it took 4 years for them to arrest Liz Goylar, not because she was in hiding but because the police had believed a dead woman, Cari Farver, was alive and in hiding commiting these crimes. Liz Goylar framed Cari Farver yes but had the police searched Cari Farver's car to begin with they would've found the blood stains on the passenger seat that were only found 4 years after Cari Farvers death/disapperance.

The Documentary is frustrating as someone who is very interested in how the world is fucking us all over. The police did so little to help with finding Cari Farver in the beginning. They didn't even try to find the IP address from the person sending the threatening emails, this was after a believed innocent womans hosue was burned down along with threating letters towards multiple children. This is just the reality and it's terrible.

I find the film does a lot to make Dave seem like the victim, they wanted to keep the twist a secret but near the end I feel they could've done more to address how terrible this is, that Cari Farver died and the police failed her family. Her mother and son. Cari Farver got this horrible reputation as a psycho because people had believed she was commiting these crimes when she was the real victim and although netflix adds a little slideshow at the end on Cari Farver it doesn't undo the fact that they made us think this victim was in the wrong for almost the entire documentary.

I reccommend watching it for sure but I don't feel comfortable commenting on much of it as a film.

RIP Cari Farver



release: July 25 2014


Length: 1h 29m


Action Sci-Fi Thriller

rating: R

(Violence, Disturbing Images, Sexuality)


Lucy (played by Scarlett Johansson) is forced by her boyfriend of one week to deliver a briefcase to Mr. Jang (played by Choi Min-Sik). Lucy is captured by Mr. Jang's people and becomes a drug mule for a powerful synthetic drug, CPH4. This scene is juxtaposed by a lecture from Professor Norman (played by Morgan Freeman), the leading authority on the human mind, providing hypotheses on what could happen if a human unlocked more of their brain's potential, using only 10% as of the 21st century. While Lucy is delivering the drug, she is beaten, and the package in her stomach begins to leak. The drug starts to change her, unlocking more space in her cerebral cortex, allowing her to gain the ability to use up to 100% of her mind's potential.

Cast & Crew

Director:Luc Besson

Writer:Luc Besson (Writer)

Cast (as ranked most important by me): Scarlett Johansson as Lucy,

Morgan Freeman as Professor Norman, Choi Min-Sik as Mr. Jang, Amr Waked as Pierre Del Rio,

Personal Review

I watched this movie because my father expressed how much he liked this film and it was only an hour 30min so why not.

Lucy tries to be a lot of things. The director states that he intended the film to feel like Léon: The Professional, Inception and 2001: A Space Odyssey. The problem is it is nowhere near any of these flims, as of writing this I have never even seen Léon: The Professional or 2001: A Space Odyssey but if those films are supposed to be on par with Lucy, there is 0 way they would be as popular or highly regarded.

I enjoyed the beginning of the movie with the juxtaposition of Lucy (played by Scarlett Johansson) being kidnapped and forced to be a drug mule with Professor Norman's (played by Morgan Freeman) lecture on the human mind with clips of animals and destruction. The visuals in the first 20-30 min are absolutely stunning and got me really excited only for the ending of the movie to be lackluster.

The movie, near the end, tries to tackle a lot of material in a very short time and leaves very little time for comprehension. It goes from this very unique idea and presentation to this almost basic action-hero movie. There is almost no tension because you know Lucy is basically all-powerful once the climax fight hits so there's no real stakes. I was sure that there would be another person with 100% control over their mind for her to fight but no it's really a boring ending to a great concept and does not justify the 9 years it took Luc Besson to finish this screenplay.

Lucy has a lot of inaccuracies that take it away from the viewer, making it a more difficult watch.

1. The premise this movie is based upon is that humans only use a small percent of their brain- this is a myth.

2. Lucy also uses the visual analogy of a car traveling faster and faster until it disappears from sight to explain that "Time" is the most important thing, this analogy is flawed. If an object were to travel so fast that it appears invisible, as depicted in the movie, it wouldn't actually disappear. Iit would essentially create a wall along its path. This effect is the same as the concept of subatomic particles in an atom where subatomic particles revolve around the nucleus of the atom so quickly that it keeps the atom together which results in the formation of matter according to particle physics. Therefore, the car would not disappear as suggested in the video segment, but rather transform into an impenetrable wall of energy encircling the Earth along its path, as it approached an infinite velocity.

3. Life on earth is at least 3.5 billion years old, the movie repeatedly states its 1 billion.

4. When Lucy mentally regresses she ends up in front of a band of Native Americans on horses. Native Americans would not have used horses for they were not known to the Native Americans. This depictions of Native Americans in a historical past is also damaging and harmful to present day Indigenous communities.

I think Lucy certainly had a lot of potential. There were some things I really liked about this movie, mainly the beginning and the visuals there but also a scene towards the end where, when Lucy travels back in time through her mind, prehistoric Lucy reaches her hand out to touch Lucy's hand, their hand/finger positions mirror the hand positions of Adam reaching out to touch the Hand of God in, "The Creation", by Michelangelo as painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, in Rome. Metaphorically, Lucy at one hundred percent brain capacity, could be seen as God, while prehistoric Lucy could be seen as an Adam figure.

I WISH the movie took more of a route like this, playing into what could happen to someone with 100% brain capacity and becoming a god in the sense that they are all-powerful and all-knowing, but due to still being somewhat-human, not an all-loving god. More references to mortal-depicitions of god and a longer run-time could've saved this movie, where instead, Lucy gets into a fight she could win with her hand tied behind her back and blindfolded and downloads all her knowledge on a USB and disappears.

It seems the only good parts of the movie come from personal speculation rather than the actual content. For the stunning visuals it gets some points, I don't even want to talk about the last half of the movie.