Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated White House Down (2013) in Movies
Mar 17, 2020
The White House gets the action treatment once again
For the second time in 2013 the White House was the target of terrorists, as no sooner had Gerard Butler shut the door (or what was left of it) Channing Tatum stepped through to show what he could do. It’s oddly surreal for two films with the same plot to be out the very same year, (and if anyone knows of any others films then please let me know) and with identical scenarios, and outcomes for that matter.
Directed by Roland Emmerich who must have blown up and destroyed more landmarks than we care to remember, has another crack at dismantling the White House. Whereas Olympus was more of an attempt at a serious film, White House Down seemed to opt for a more light-hearted approach, and it was clear that it wasn’t taking itself to seriously.
Tatum plays capitol policeman Cale who, desperate to connect with his daughter, brings her along to the White House for a tour while he interviews for a job on the President’s secret service detail. Failing to make the grade due to a poor disciplinary record and disregard for authority he’s turned away, but as luck would have it is on hand to save the day in McClane-esque fashion.
The problem is its big-budget, overblown on a plot that has been done to death (not just twice in a year) the whole father trying to connect with his son/daughter, while at the same time dealing with his demons and back story is just Hollywood on repeat. Emmerich is a master for the visual, and CGI for that matter as he brings us as close to the chaos as is humanly possible, but in the end, the charge is going to run out and you’re left thinking “yea, give us something we haven’t seen already!”.
The on-screen relationship between Fox’s President Sawyer and Tatum’s head strung cop is pretty good, must be all the time they spent making that god awful Channing All Over Your Tatum music video. So the love between the pair is already there, and it was certainly a hell of a lot better than Gerard Butler and Aaron Eckhart.
The action is big and ballsey and there are one or two neat moments like the car chase over the White House lawn and the Black Hawk descent, but we’ve seen it all before especially from Emmerich, and you can see he prefers to favour action set pieces as opposed to neatly setting up the plot and constructing dialogue. James Woods is on hand for villain duties as the disgruntled head of the President’s secret service and is wanting vengeance for the death of his soldier son. It’s all pretty bog-standard stuff, and the list of mercenaries are forgettable, no real standouts there either.
It certainly not the worst but doesn’t quite pip Olympus for me, it’s Emmerich on autopilot doing what he does best but while it’s entertaining it’s not unique enough to set it apart from other blockbusters.
Directed by Roland Emmerich who must have blown up and destroyed more landmarks than we care to remember, has another crack at dismantling the White House. Whereas Olympus was more of an attempt at a serious film, White House Down seemed to opt for a more light-hearted approach, and it was clear that it wasn’t taking itself to seriously.
Tatum plays capitol policeman Cale who, desperate to connect with his daughter, brings her along to the White House for a tour while he interviews for a job on the President’s secret service detail. Failing to make the grade due to a poor disciplinary record and disregard for authority he’s turned away, but as luck would have it is on hand to save the day in McClane-esque fashion.
The problem is its big-budget, overblown on a plot that has been done to death (not just twice in a year) the whole father trying to connect with his son/daughter, while at the same time dealing with his demons and back story is just Hollywood on repeat. Emmerich is a master for the visual, and CGI for that matter as he brings us as close to the chaos as is humanly possible, but in the end, the charge is going to run out and you’re left thinking “yea, give us something we haven’t seen already!”.
The on-screen relationship between Fox’s President Sawyer and Tatum’s head strung cop is pretty good, must be all the time they spent making that god awful Channing All Over Your Tatum music video. So the love between the pair is already there, and it was certainly a hell of a lot better than Gerard Butler and Aaron Eckhart.
The action is big and ballsey and there are one or two neat moments like the car chase over the White House lawn and the Black Hawk descent, but we’ve seen it all before especially from Emmerich, and you can see he prefers to favour action set pieces as opposed to neatly setting up the plot and constructing dialogue. James Woods is on hand for villain duties as the disgruntled head of the President’s secret service and is wanting vengeance for the death of his soldier son. It’s all pretty bog-standard stuff, and the list of mercenaries are forgettable, no real standouts there either.
It certainly not the worst but doesn’t quite pip Olympus for me, it’s Emmerich on autopilot doing what he does best but while it’s entertaining it’s not unique enough to set it apart from other blockbusters.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Napoleon Dynamite (2004) in Movies
Mar 18, 2020
A Movie That Succeeds With Truly Memorable Characters
The story follows the highs and lows of high schooler Napoleon Dynamite. This is one of those movies you can’t help but like as it’s truly unlike anything you’ve ever seen before. I have yet to run into someone that didn’t like the movie, but I’m sure they’re out there.
Acting: 10
BeginnIng: 10
”What are you gonna do today, Napoleon?” a kid on the bus asks.
”Whatever I feel like doing, gosh!”
Napoleon responds.It’s hilarious because it totally comes out of left field and never fails to make me bust out laughing no matter how many times I watch this scene. It sets you up and the laughs keep coming!
Characters: 10
Napoleon (Josh Heder) is truly a man all his own. He moves about with a breathy nerdiness that’s both hilarious and a little endearing too. Again you can’t help but love him. Without him, there is no movie. That’s not to say that you won’t love all the other characters as well. His brother Kip (Aaron Ruell) can’t stop talking about his internet girlfriend LaFawnduh and is totally all in his on his rap career. Napoleon’s friend Pedro (Efren Ramirez) talks in a low voice barely above a whisper and you wonder just how the hell he is going to have a shot at winning class president. And I haven’t even gotten to Uncle Rico (Jon Gries) yet! Yes, there is much to love about these memorable characters that truly stand out.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Director Jared Hess shoots this in a way that’s wonderfully confusing. You don’t really know what year it is or just where the hell the setting is located. It’s a beautiful hodgepodge of nowhere and I love it.
Conflict: 2
One of the weaker points of the movie. The movie seems to wander about aimlessly from scene to scene with no strong storyline to boot. I’m ok with it because it’s so damn funny, but this movie would have hit the classic level for me had they given Napoleon some adversity to overcome.
Entertainment Value: 10
Despite the lack of conflict, the movie is entertaining from start to finish. I was cracking up the whole way through. I would be very surprised if someone watched this and couldn’t find at least a handful of parts they enjoyed.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
Plot: 1
Again, had there been more of a story, this movie easily makes my Top 100. Napoleon Dynamite is not so much a story as it is a journey. It’s like watching a number of funny sketches wedged between a beginning and an end.
Resolution: 10
There is no strong showdown where Napoleon conquers his demons or a moment where Napoleon finally finds that thing that he’s looking for. But there is an unforgettable dance sequence followed by the most hilarious tetherball game ever. And, you know what? That’s good enough for me.
Overall: 82
If you want to laugh your face off and originality like no other, look no further. Napoleon Dynamite is sure to make you at least crack a smile. Or, if you’re anything like me, it will make you split a rib.
Acting: 10
BeginnIng: 10
”What are you gonna do today, Napoleon?” a kid on the bus asks.
”Whatever I feel like doing, gosh!”
Napoleon responds.It’s hilarious because it totally comes out of left field and never fails to make me bust out laughing no matter how many times I watch this scene. It sets you up and the laughs keep coming!
Characters: 10
Napoleon (Josh Heder) is truly a man all his own. He moves about with a breathy nerdiness that’s both hilarious and a little endearing too. Again you can’t help but love him. Without him, there is no movie. That’s not to say that you won’t love all the other characters as well. His brother Kip (Aaron Ruell) can’t stop talking about his internet girlfriend LaFawnduh and is totally all in his on his rap career. Napoleon’s friend Pedro (Efren Ramirez) talks in a low voice barely above a whisper and you wonder just how the hell he is going to have a shot at winning class president. And I haven’t even gotten to Uncle Rico (Jon Gries) yet! Yes, there is much to love about these memorable characters that truly stand out.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Director Jared Hess shoots this in a way that’s wonderfully confusing. You don’t really know what year it is or just where the hell the setting is located. It’s a beautiful hodgepodge of nowhere and I love it.
Conflict: 2
One of the weaker points of the movie. The movie seems to wander about aimlessly from scene to scene with no strong storyline to boot. I’m ok with it because it’s so damn funny, but this movie would have hit the classic level for me had they given Napoleon some adversity to overcome.
Entertainment Value: 10
Despite the lack of conflict, the movie is entertaining from start to finish. I was cracking up the whole way through. I would be very surprised if someone watched this and couldn’t find at least a handful of parts they enjoyed.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
Plot: 1
Again, had there been more of a story, this movie easily makes my Top 100. Napoleon Dynamite is not so much a story as it is a journey. It’s like watching a number of funny sketches wedged between a beginning and an end.
Resolution: 10
There is no strong showdown where Napoleon conquers his demons or a moment where Napoleon finally finds that thing that he’s looking for. But there is an unforgettable dance sequence followed by the most hilarious tetherball game ever. And, you know what? That’s good enough for me.
Overall: 82
If you want to laugh your face off and originality like no other, look no further. Napoleon Dynamite is sure to make you at least crack a smile. Or, if you’re anything like me, it will make you split a rib.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Line of Duty (2019) in Movies
Jul 12, 2020
I know a throwaway action film when I see it and they're usually either brilliant films to relax to or a great opportunity to catch up on your social media feeds.
Frank Penny is bumbling through his life as a cop, a loner, disgraced, but he still knows what's right. When an operation to rescue a kidnap victim goes awry he leaps into the pursuit against orders, cornering the suspect it looks like it's a job well done, until he has to draw his gun. With the suspect down there might not be any way to get the girl back safely.
You'd be forgiven for thinking this was a different film from the outset. It starts with heavy inspirational music over Frank working out, is it a sports movie about redemption? A stylised title comes up, is it a romcom? None of the above, it is of course a crime thriller. After the opening that does thankfully become evident.
When we meet characters that would normally be a time for a slightly slower pace, but Line Of Duty seems to keep everything quick from the very beginning and it doesn't slow as we get further in. The constant action sweeps you along with everything and you really don't notice how long you've been watching for.
Aaron Eckhart in the lead role... makes me pause. It works in a John McClane-esque race against time kind of way but the dynamic with Courtney Eaton is strange. The recklessness that he takes by bringing her along with him (if you ignore the madness of doing it in the first place) makes you think it's going to be a flirty kind of relationship, but he's over twice her age and with his backstory you'd expect a protective father figure... but remember there's all that action and peril so that really doesn't work either.
Eaton gives a fairly solid performance as the intrepid reporter, there's not anything mindblowing mixed in the role but it's nice to have the action broken up with the ongoing commentary and slight touch of humour.
As you'd expect with a fast pace those cameras go running a lot, ugh to jiggly camerawork, but thankfully because it's incorporated with the action you don't notice so much. Along with that you get to see some of Ava's phone camera footage, I think the film could have stood to have more of it, it would have been a relevant change in style and added a little more to spice up the expected elements. I was a little surprised to see some random video game shots creep in, those clips work just fine in things like Guns Akimbo, but in the context of Line Of Duty it didn't make a lot of sense when there was a sensible alternative available.
Line Of Duty is the Ronseal of films, you know what to expect and in that regard it doesn't disappoint. It's got lots of your typical action cliches and if you like the race against time type of storyline then I really don't think you'll have any issue watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/07/line-of-duty-movie-review.html
Frank Penny is bumbling through his life as a cop, a loner, disgraced, but he still knows what's right. When an operation to rescue a kidnap victim goes awry he leaps into the pursuit against orders, cornering the suspect it looks like it's a job well done, until he has to draw his gun. With the suspect down there might not be any way to get the girl back safely.
You'd be forgiven for thinking this was a different film from the outset. It starts with heavy inspirational music over Frank working out, is it a sports movie about redemption? A stylised title comes up, is it a romcom? None of the above, it is of course a crime thriller. After the opening that does thankfully become evident.
When we meet characters that would normally be a time for a slightly slower pace, but Line Of Duty seems to keep everything quick from the very beginning and it doesn't slow as we get further in. The constant action sweeps you along with everything and you really don't notice how long you've been watching for.
Aaron Eckhart in the lead role... makes me pause. It works in a John McClane-esque race against time kind of way but the dynamic with Courtney Eaton is strange. The recklessness that he takes by bringing her along with him (if you ignore the madness of doing it in the first place) makes you think it's going to be a flirty kind of relationship, but he's over twice her age and with his backstory you'd expect a protective father figure... but remember there's all that action and peril so that really doesn't work either.
Eaton gives a fairly solid performance as the intrepid reporter, there's not anything mindblowing mixed in the role but it's nice to have the action broken up with the ongoing commentary and slight touch of humour.
As you'd expect with a fast pace those cameras go running a lot, ugh to jiggly camerawork, but thankfully because it's incorporated with the action you don't notice so much. Along with that you get to see some of Ava's phone camera footage, I think the film could have stood to have more of it, it would have been a relevant change in style and added a little more to spice up the expected elements. I was a little surprised to see some random video game shots creep in, those clips work just fine in things like Guns Akimbo, but in the context of Line Of Duty it didn't make a lot of sense when there was a sensible alternative available.
Line Of Duty is the Ronseal of films, you know what to expect and in that regard it doesn't disappoint. It's got lots of your typical action cliches and if you like the race against time type of storyline then I really don't think you'll have any issue watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/07/line-of-duty-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Greyhound (2020) in Movies
Mar 11, 2021
Hanks Does It Again
Tom Hanks interest in the men who fought in WWII is well known. From his starring role as Capt. Miller is what is (arguably) the definitive film about D-Day, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, to his Executive Producing role in, arguably, the best mini-series ever produced about WWII, BAND OF BROTHERS, Hanks has brought a face to the nameless heroes who fought in the middle of the last century.
Add his latest film GREYHOUND, to the list of films that brings a face to a heretofore unknown (at least to me) group of heroes.
Based on the book THE GOOD SHEPHERD by C.S. Forester and adapted for the screen by Hanks himself, GREYHOUND tells the story of a Commander of a U.S. Navy escort ship, helping cargo ships cross the Atlantic Ocean - an Ocean filled with enemy submarines.
Hanks, of course, plays Commander Ernest Krause, Captain of the USS Keeling, code named “Greyhound”, who is on his first mission. As one might imagine, Hanks imbues Krause with a common decency and you inherently trust Krause’s instincts as he makes split second decision after split second decision. What surprised me about Hanks in this role is his “steely resolve” in dealing with the problems. You can see his brain working as he makes pragmatic decision after pragmatic decision - sometimes not the most “human” decisions - but the right decisions after all.
This is both the strength and the problem with this film - Hanks’ character is NEVER wrong, so after awhile, the tension on the Bridge with Capt. Krause being questioned on his decisions, is never really there.
But, that is a “nit” in this film for Director Aaron Schneider has constructed a taunt and tight thriller that is non-stop action from start to finish. He wisely decided to keep the film at a tight 90 minutes and keep the action flying (versus putting in a couple of “character building scenes” that could have stretched the runtime). He does shoehorn in a flashback scene between Krause and his lady love (played by Elisabeth Shue), a scene that is not really needed, but besides this he focuses his attention on the Greyhound and it’s mission and this is a smart move that the film benefits from.
Director Schneider relies, heavily, on the Special F/X recreating the Atlantic sea battles and, for the most part, it succeeds. BUT…from time-to-time I felt like I was watching a video game - and not a film. The F/X (at times) was just not feature film quality that drew me away from the emotion and the action on the screen.
With the Global Pandemic, this film’s theatrical release was cancelled and it was put on Apple TV+(where you can find it today), so I can forgive the lower F/X results…but just a little.
All-in-all a fun thrill ride, with a terrific central performance, in a film that shows an aspect of WWII I had not previously scene portrayed on film before.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Add his latest film GREYHOUND, to the list of films that brings a face to a heretofore unknown (at least to me) group of heroes.
Based on the book THE GOOD SHEPHERD by C.S. Forester and adapted for the screen by Hanks himself, GREYHOUND tells the story of a Commander of a U.S. Navy escort ship, helping cargo ships cross the Atlantic Ocean - an Ocean filled with enemy submarines.
Hanks, of course, plays Commander Ernest Krause, Captain of the USS Keeling, code named “Greyhound”, who is on his first mission. As one might imagine, Hanks imbues Krause with a common decency and you inherently trust Krause’s instincts as he makes split second decision after split second decision. What surprised me about Hanks in this role is his “steely resolve” in dealing with the problems. You can see his brain working as he makes pragmatic decision after pragmatic decision - sometimes not the most “human” decisions - but the right decisions after all.
This is both the strength and the problem with this film - Hanks’ character is NEVER wrong, so after awhile, the tension on the Bridge with Capt. Krause being questioned on his decisions, is never really there.
But, that is a “nit” in this film for Director Aaron Schneider has constructed a taunt and tight thriller that is non-stop action from start to finish. He wisely decided to keep the film at a tight 90 minutes and keep the action flying (versus putting in a couple of “character building scenes” that could have stretched the runtime). He does shoehorn in a flashback scene between Krause and his lady love (played by Elisabeth Shue), a scene that is not really needed, but besides this he focuses his attention on the Greyhound and it’s mission and this is a smart move that the film benefits from.
Director Schneider relies, heavily, on the Special F/X recreating the Atlantic sea battles and, for the most part, it succeeds. BUT…from time-to-time I felt like I was watching a video game - and not a film. The F/X (at times) was just not feature film quality that drew me away from the emotion and the action on the screen.
With the Global Pandemic, this film’s theatrical release was cancelled and it was put on Apple TV+(where you can find it today), so I can forgive the lower F/X results…but just a little.
All-in-all a fun thrill ride, with a terrific central performance, in a film that shows an aspect of WWII I had not previously scene portrayed on film before.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Ghost Capture
Photo & Video and Entertainment
App
Ghosts Don't Exist Presents "Ghost Capture" ***NOW WITH 40 TOTAL GHOSTS!! DON'T FORGET TO SUBMIT...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Midway (2019) in Movies
Aug 10, 2020
So bad...it's bad
There are times when you watch a film and you can just hear the conference room discussion that happened back at the studio before getting it green-lit...
Studio Flunky: "Remember the 1970's WWII flick MIDWAY starring Henry Fonda, Charlton Heston, Charles Coborn, Richard Mitchum and an All Star cast"?
Studio Head: "Yeah...I loved that flick..."
Studio Flunky: "We have a fairly weak script here that pretty much rips that off, but we have the Director of Independence Day ready to Direct, so we'd just need some strong actors and top notch special effects to pull it off".
Studio Head: " I love it. Just one thing..."
Studio Flunky: "What's that?"
Studio Head: "Cut the budget to about 1/10th of what you're asking for."
And that's the issue with the Roland Emrich 2019 version of MIDWAY...what the film lacks in script quality, it makes up with by casting weak actors and crossing them with cheap special effects.
Yeah...it doesn't work very well. No wonder it came and went pretty quickly in the theaters.
Patrick Wilson is the most successful in this film in his role as Intelligence Officer Edwin Layton who figures out what the Japanese are up to in the early days of World War II. He has some fun scenes with Brennan Brown as one of this "codebreakers" and his interactions with Woody Harrelson as Admiral Nimitz are fun.
And...that's about it for the acting and interesting things in this film. Harrelson is wasted in his role (he clearly owed someone a favor to appear in what should be considered and extended cameo). Dennis Quaid overacts (as he is want to do) as "Bull" Halsey. Mandy Moore, Aaron Eckhart, Nick Jonas and Luke Evans bring no charisma to roles that were written with the hopes that an actor would bring charisma to them. They all bring "one dimension" and play the heck out of that singular character trait...but interesting characters that does not build.
And then there is the case of Ed Skrein (in the Charlton Heston role) as the "rogue fighter pilot, bucking the system, but learning through the course of this film that he would be more effective bringing his unique insights into the system than buck it". Skrein is my poster child for "warning...bad movie ahead." He has, in my opinion, "anti-charisma". He sucks a movie into his void and we, the audience, are stuck there with him. Of course, we spend most of the film with him...much to my chagrin.
At least, you say, today's special effects would rescue this film.
Nope...it looked like someone's kid slapped something together on his MAC. The depth of the EFX are slim, the color schemes don't seem to match and the actors didn't look at all like they were in the scene with the effects.
Nothing really works in this film. Avoid it at all costs. I can't even give you the "it's so bad it's good" line on this one.
It's so bad, it's bad.
Letter Grade "D"
2 Stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Studio Flunky: "Remember the 1970's WWII flick MIDWAY starring Henry Fonda, Charlton Heston, Charles Coborn, Richard Mitchum and an All Star cast"?
Studio Head: "Yeah...I loved that flick..."
Studio Flunky: "We have a fairly weak script here that pretty much rips that off, but we have the Director of Independence Day ready to Direct, so we'd just need some strong actors and top notch special effects to pull it off".
Studio Head: " I love it. Just one thing..."
Studio Flunky: "What's that?"
Studio Head: "Cut the budget to about 1/10th of what you're asking for."
And that's the issue with the Roland Emrich 2019 version of MIDWAY...what the film lacks in script quality, it makes up with by casting weak actors and crossing them with cheap special effects.
Yeah...it doesn't work very well. No wonder it came and went pretty quickly in the theaters.
Patrick Wilson is the most successful in this film in his role as Intelligence Officer Edwin Layton who figures out what the Japanese are up to in the early days of World War II. He has some fun scenes with Brennan Brown as one of this "codebreakers" and his interactions with Woody Harrelson as Admiral Nimitz are fun.
And...that's about it for the acting and interesting things in this film. Harrelson is wasted in his role (he clearly owed someone a favor to appear in what should be considered and extended cameo). Dennis Quaid overacts (as he is want to do) as "Bull" Halsey. Mandy Moore, Aaron Eckhart, Nick Jonas and Luke Evans bring no charisma to roles that were written with the hopes that an actor would bring charisma to them. They all bring "one dimension" and play the heck out of that singular character trait...but interesting characters that does not build.
And then there is the case of Ed Skrein (in the Charlton Heston role) as the "rogue fighter pilot, bucking the system, but learning through the course of this film that he would be more effective bringing his unique insights into the system than buck it". Skrein is my poster child for "warning...bad movie ahead." He has, in my opinion, "anti-charisma". He sucks a movie into his void and we, the audience, are stuck there with him. Of course, we spend most of the film with him...much to my chagrin.
At least, you say, today's special effects would rescue this film.
Nope...it looked like someone's kid slapped something together on his MAC. The depth of the EFX are slim, the color schemes don't seem to match and the actors didn't look at all like they were in the scene with the effects.
Nothing really works in this film. Avoid it at all costs. I can't even give you the "it's so bad it's good" line on this one.
It's so bad, it's bad.
Letter Grade "D"
2 Stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bullet Train (2022) in Movies
Aug 10, 2022
Ultra-Violent...and a TON of Fun!
Early conversations surrounding the new Brad Pitt action flick BULLET TRAIN label this film as “Ultra-Violent”.
They say this as if it is a bad thing.
Directed by David Leitch (DEADPOOL 2) with a screenplay by Zak Olkewicz (FEAR STREET: PART TWO) and based on the book Kotaro Isaka, BULLET TRAIN is (no arguing here) an Ultra-Violent action flick in every sense of the term, set on the famed titular Japanese Bullet Train and follows an operative by the codename Ladybug (played by Pitt who you know from such gentle fair as FIGHT CLUB and INGLORIOUS BASTERDS) who’s easy “snatch and grab” job is nothing easy thanks to the appearance of various other nefarious individuals who also are looking for that case.
Following in the footsteps of such similarily-violent flicks as NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, TRAINING DAY, FARGO and just about anything Directed by Quentin Tarantino, Director Leitch uses the violence, mayhem and bloodshed to ADD to the story (which all of the aforementioned films also did with great affect) and not “just” to be violent. And that’s an important distinction here. If the ultra-violence is fun and important to moving the story and plot along (and not just there to be gratuitous), then the movie can succeed quite well - and this one does.
What also makes these types of movies succeed is the plotting - which is sharp by writer Okewicz - and the twists and turns that you do not see coming - but make sense along the way (and will reward the viewer upon repeated viewing) and Bullet Train does this as well. It is a smartly made film that is crisply directed with some terrific action sequences (though, if I’m being fair, at times the CGI is not as good as it could/should be), but it is entertaining as all get out.
Leading us through this mayhem is the always charming and charismatic Pitt who parlays the “goofball” personae of a person in just a little over his head but comes out on top due to luck (or skill) - you be the judge. Pitt is the perfect performer for the audience to become invested in as he is the one that you need to be rooting for throughout - and you do from just about the beginning.
Leitch, wisely then, surrounded Pitt with some terrific character actors in this venture. From Aaron Taylor-Johnson (KICK-ASS) to Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) to Joey King (THE CONJURING) to the always terrific Hiroyuki Sanada (MORTAL COMBAT) and a host of others who do extended cameos - and to name them would be to spoil the fun of them. They all understand what type of film they are in and all seem to be having a good time going along with it all.
And why not? Bullet Train is a delight in the cinema - for those of you who like action and violence that is pretty spectacular and over the top. It is a heckuva lotta fun.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (Out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
They say this as if it is a bad thing.
Directed by David Leitch (DEADPOOL 2) with a screenplay by Zak Olkewicz (FEAR STREET: PART TWO) and based on the book Kotaro Isaka, BULLET TRAIN is (no arguing here) an Ultra-Violent action flick in every sense of the term, set on the famed titular Japanese Bullet Train and follows an operative by the codename Ladybug (played by Pitt who you know from such gentle fair as FIGHT CLUB and INGLORIOUS BASTERDS) who’s easy “snatch and grab” job is nothing easy thanks to the appearance of various other nefarious individuals who also are looking for that case.
Following in the footsteps of such similarily-violent flicks as NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, TRAINING DAY, FARGO and just about anything Directed by Quentin Tarantino, Director Leitch uses the violence, mayhem and bloodshed to ADD to the story (which all of the aforementioned films also did with great affect) and not “just” to be violent. And that’s an important distinction here. If the ultra-violence is fun and important to moving the story and plot along (and not just there to be gratuitous), then the movie can succeed quite well - and this one does.
What also makes these types of movies succeed is the plotting - which is sharp by writer Okewicz - and the twists and turns that you do not see coming - but make sense along the way (and will reward the viewer upon repeated viewing) and Bullet Train does this as well. It is a smartly made film that is crisply directed with some terrific action sequences (though, if I’m being fair, at times the CGI is not as good as it could/should be), but it is entertaining as all get out.
Leading us through this mayhem is the always charming and charismatic Pitt who parlays the “goofball” personae of a person in just a little over his head but comes out on top due to luck (or skill) - you be the judge. Pitt is the perfect performer for the audience to become invested in as he is the one that you need to be rooting for throughout - and you do from just about the beginning.
Leitch, wisely then, surrounded Pitt with some terrific character actors in this venture. From Aaron Taylor-Johnson (KICK-ASS) to Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) to Joey King (THE CONJURING) to the always terrific Hiroyuki Sanada (MORTAL COMBAT) and a host of others who do extended cameos - and to name them would be to spoil the fun of them. They all understand what type of film they are in and all seem to be having a good time going along with it all.
And why not? Bullet Train is a delight in the cinema - for those of you who like action and violence that is pretty spectacular and over the top. It is a heckuva lotta fun.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (Out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Molly's Game (2017) in Movies
Nov 30, 2017
My local cinema held a secret screening last night, and Molly's Game was the surprise movie they showed. Beforehand, I'd probably only seen the name of the movie along with the accompanying poster and I had literally no idea what it was about. If I'd seen the trailer, and knew a bit more about the plot movie, I don't think I'd have gone to watch it, but it actually turned out to be a pretty enjoyable movie. Despite the fact that there were about 10 other movies I was secretly hoping they'd screen instead, I wasn't disappointed by this. That's the gamble you take with a secret screening I guess.
Molly's Game is based on a true story, and the accompanying book written by Molly Bloom. It's written and directed by Aaron Sorkin, writer of, among other things, The West Wing and The Newsroom, so you get a pretty good idea of the quick-witted snappy dialogue that you're in for. Jessica Chastain plays Molly, and she is just absolutely incredible in this movie. Not knowing the basic story it was based on, the opening scenes changed direction so many times that I was left wondering what the movie was actually going to be about and which direction it was headed. Narrated by Molly, we're initially introduced to her life as an Olympic class skier. She describes her younger life training with her stern father (Kevin Costner), the spinal surgery which put her out of action for a while, her fight back to the top and the tragic accident which then put her out of action once more. Then we jump forward 12 years, where Molly is suddenly woken one morning by a phone call. It's the FBI, and they want her to come out of her room within the next few minutes or they're going to break down the door. When she does come out, she is cuffed and arrested for running high-stakes poker games. We then see her in the office of Charlie Jaffey (Idris Elba), a top (and expensive) lawyer who Molly would like to represent her. The remainder of the movie then switches between Molly narrating and filling us in on the events of the last decade or so leading up to now, and Molly and Charlie as they bicker and work together in piecing together her defence.
The first half of the movie is enjoyable as we follow Molly, working her way up from bored secretary to running hugely expensive poker games for the rich, famous and weird in Los Angeles and then New York. As mentioned earlier, Jessica Chastain is simply amazing, given a superb performance as we follow Molly from troubled child to shrewd, intelligent business woman and 'poker princess'. At the height of her game she was legally raking in thousands of dollars each night, and even getting on the wrong side of the Russian mob. However, after a while it all starts to drag a little and I feel the movie could have benefited from a much tighter run time (it's 160 minutes long). Things pick up again towards the end though, and Costner and Elba get their chance to shine. Well worth watching.
Molly's Game is based on a true story, and the accompanying book written by Molly Bloom. It's written and directed by Aaron Sorkin, writer of, among other things, The West Wing and The Newsroom, so you get a pretty good idea of the quick-witted snappy dialogue that you're in for. Jessica Chastain plays Molly, and she is just absolutely incredible in this movie. Not knowing the basic story it was based on, the opening scenes changed direction so many times that I was left wondering what the movie was actually going to be about and which direction it was headed. Narrated by Molly, we're initially introduced to her life as an Olympic class skier. She describes her younger life training with her stern father (Kevin Costner), the spinal surgery which put her out of action for a while, her fight back to the top and the tragic accident which then put her out of action once more. Then we jump forward 12 years, where Molly is suddenly woken one morning by a phone call. It's the FBI, and they want her to come out of her room within the next few minutes or they're going to break down the door. When she does come out, she is cuffed and arrested for running high-stakes poker games. We then see her in the office of Charlie Jaffey (Idris Elba), a top (and expensive) lawyer who Molly would like to represent her. The remainder of the movie then switches between Molly narrating and filling us in on the events of the last decade or so leading up to now, and Molly and Charlie as they bicker and work together in piecing together her defence.
The first half of the movie is enjoyable as we follow Molly, working her way up from bored secretary to running hugely expensive poker games for the rich, famous and weird in Los Angeles and then New York. As mentioned earlier, Jessica Chastain is simply amazing, given a superb performance as we follow Molly from troubled child to shrewd, intelligent business woman and 'poker princess'. At the height of her game she was legally raking in thousands of dollars each night, and even getting on the wrong side of the Russian mob. However, after a while it all starts to drag a little and I feel the movie could have benefited from a much tighter run time (it's 160 minutes long). Things pick up again towards the end though, and Costner and Elba get their chance to shine. Well worth watching.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
This one belongs to James Spader
I doubt that Joss Whedon and the team down at Marvel knew just how successful 2012’s Avengers Assemble would go on to be. After just a few months of release it became the third highest-grossing film of all time, by no means an easy feat to achieve.
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/