Last review of 2014, and this marks my 100th post on The Lively Mind Reviews. Thank you once again for all of the feedback, recommendations, and for just generally being awesome. Have a happy new year, and here’s to kicking ass in 2015.
When I first saw this, I thought it was mildly entertaining. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a person’s infidelity revealed by a talking parrot. Then I started to think…why did this guy think it was a good idea to buy a parrot that mimics everything it hears BEFORE cheating on his girlfriend? In order for the parrot to repeat everything that was said between this guy and “Joy”, it had to basically be in the same room as them. No one deserves to be murdered, but this guy kind of had it coming for cheating and just being stupid. I give it 2/5. While nowhere near as bad as some of the earlier shorts, it is pretty forgettable and on the bland side.
This might not be for everyone. If you’re looking for a literal “death by orgasm”, you will not find it here. Forzani and Cattet go for an abstract and almost experimental explanation of the French term for an orgasm: la petit mort, or the little death. I don’t think it’s horrible, but I’m not going to say it’s that great. What does a melted Barbie have to do with getting your rocks off? I don’t know about you, but I haven’t had bubbles floating around during sex acts. I appreciate the fact the directors opted not go for the literal. I just wish they still could’ve done something that made a lick of sense. I give it 2/5. It’s interesting, but still difficult to grasp if you’re unfamiliar with the French term.
Mother of God…
What is the point of this? People in poverty will do anything to survive? Rich people always have sick fetishes? This short has several implications that I don’t think Rumley ever thought of. If you’re unfamiliar with crush videos, I envy you. I don’t even think I can explain what they are without ending up on some watch list. All I want to know is what was Rumley trying to do here. Is it social commentary? Nope, it’s just a decade old script for a full length movie he wasn’t able to make, so he decided to condense it here just so he could use it. This gets a 0. It starts off as something that could very easily raise awareness about pretty much anything, but it ends up being…well, nothing respectable. If you decide to see for yourself for any reason, keep in mind I was able to find that no animals were harmed during this short. At least there’s that.
Oh Adam Wingard…I want to say you’re talented, believe me I do. But I think your middle name is Inconsistent, because anything you’re involved in clearly reflects that. This short isn’t really bad. It’s just extremely lazy. I think Wingard was going for some sort of meta joke, but it doesn’t work. We know each director had the same budget and time constraints, but they didn’t use their respective segments to vent their frustrations. It doesn’t help that the death isn’t even tied to the letter. It gets 1/5. If someone was able to show a death based on Hydro-electric Diffusion, Wingard should’ve been creative enough to find something else that started with Q.