Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Following the Lord of the Rings Trilogy was going to be no easy feat. The series not only made incredible amounts of cash at the box office worldwide, but also garnered an Academy award for best picture for the final film in the series. In the years since the trilogy, writer-director-producer Peter Jackson has not overwhelmed at the box office. His big-budget remake of “King Kong” performed below expectations and the high-profile collapse of the “Halo” movie to which he was attached, as well as the underwhelming box office of “The Lovely Bones” made many people question if Jackson had peaked and was better suited for the lower budgeted independent films that first gave him his start.
When it was announced that a film version of “The Hobbit” was in the works and that director Guillermo del Toro would direct the film as well as help write the screenplay and that Jackson would produce, the fans’ interest level was definitely piqued. But after a long state of pre-production, del Torro decided not to direct the film as he was unwilling to commit the next six years to living and working in New Zealand. Jackson then took over the film and soon after it was announced that it would be stretched into three movies to form a new trilogy.
For those unfamiliar with the story it was actually the first book written by J.R.R. Tolkien, which sets the stage for what was to follow in the Lord of the Rings even though it was originally conceived as a standalone story. The film opens with an older Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), writing a memoir while preparations for a party are underway. Bilbo discusses how there was one story that he had not disclosed and sets pen to paper in order to chronicle his legendary journey 60 years prior.
Gandolf Wizard (Sir Ian McKellen) visits the younger Bilbo and suggests he go on an adventure. Bilbo immediately declines, as being a Hobbit, he has no desire to leave the creature comforts and serenity of The Shire, much less face the dangers that exist in the world beyond. A group of dwarves arrive’ that evening and despite their gluttonous appetites and loud behavior, Bilbo has a change of heart the following morning and accompanies them on their quest.
The group’s goal is to travel to the dwarves’ kingdom of Erebor to reclaim their stronghold which was lost many years earlier to a vicious Dragon named Smaug. In the decades since, the dwarves existed as people without a home, forced to live as nomads taking work wherever they can find it. Along the way the group deals with all manner of threats and dangers ranging from trolls, goblins, orcs, and other supernatural elements. Of course there were some internal tensions and conflicts within the group as it marched towards a finale that sets the stage for the next film.
The movie has a runtime of nearly 3 hours and there were times that I caught a couple members in press row dozing briefly. While I enjoyed the film more than I did any of the Lord of the Rings movies, it was clearly obvious that things were being stretched out in order to justify a third film in the series. There were countless scenes of the band walking over hills and across the countryside so much so that at times I felt that I was watching the longest commercial for New Zealand tourism ever created. We get it. It’s a long journey. They travel near and far. I got it. I don’t need to see it every 10 minutes.
There were also several scenes that were done almost as if in aside that truthfully did not add much to the story but seem to exist as nothing more than time fillers. In the subsequent films it is learned that characters and scenes that did not appear in the book will be inserted into the film. Once again I have to question this as I do believe they could have easily cut an hour out of this movie and not lose much of the necessary narrative.
There’s been a lot of talk about the higher frame rate 3-D that was used to create the film. There have been claims that it was distracting, jerky, and detracted from the movie. I on the other hand found it absolutely captivating because it did not have that movie look to it, and it felt like I was watching an HD television. Even during the CGI heavy sequences, it did appear as if the performers were literally right there in front of me and I got the impression more of watching a play than of watching a movie.
The visual effects in the film were quite stunning. The live-action and computer-generated elements were absolutely amazing, especially during the latter part of the film when we meet Gollum (Andy Serkis), and during the battle and the goblin stronghold. Although the book is considered a children’s novel, I would really have to think twice about bringing young children to see this film as there is a lot of action and violence in the film as well as potential scares in the form of the monsters that abound.
The film could have definitely used some star power to it. While the cast does a solid job, they are fairly generic and almost interchangeable during certain segments of the film. That being said, the film works because despite its issues, it’s a visually spectacular masterpiece that, if you can endure the long periods of inaction, pays off especially well during the film’s battle sequences.
When it was announced that a film version of “The Hobbit” was in the works and that director Guillermo del Toro would direct the film as well as help write the screenplay and that Jackson would produce, the fans’ interest level was definitely piqued. But after a long state of pre-production, del Torro decided not to direct the film as he was unwilling to commit the next six years to living and working in New Zealand. Jackson then took over the film and soon after it was announced that it would be stretched into three movies to form a new trilogy.
For those unfamiliar with the story it was actually the first book written by J.R.R. Tolkien, which sets the stage for what was to follow in the Lord of the Rings even though it was originally conceived as a standalone story. The film opens with an older Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), writing a memoir while preparations for a party are underway. Bilbo discusses how there was one story that he had not disclosed and sets pen to paper in order to chronicle his legendary journey 60 years prior.
Gandolf Wizard (Sir Ian McKellen) visits the younger Bilbo and suggests he go on an adventure. Bilbo immediately declines, as being a Hobbit, he has no desire to leave the creature comforts and serenity of The Shire, much less face the dangers that exist in the world beyond. A group of dwarves arrive’ that evening and despite their gluttonous appetites and loud behavior, Bilbo has a change of heart the following morning and accompanies them on their quest.
The group’s goal is to travel to the dwarves’ kingdom of Erebor to reclaim their stronghold which was lost many years earlier to a vicious Dragon named Smaug. In the decades since, the dwarves existed as people without a home, forced to live as nomads taking work wherever they can find it. Along the way the group deals with all manner of threats and dangers ranging from trolls, goblins, orcs, and other supernatural elements. Of course there were some internal tensions and conflicts within the group as it marched towards a finale that sets the stage for the next film.
The movie has a runtime of nearly 3 hours and there were times that I caught a couple members in press row dozing briefly. While I enjoyed the film more than I did any of the Lord of the Rings movies, it was clearly obvious that things were being stretched out in order to justify a third film in the series. There were countless scenes of the band walking over hills and across the countryside so much so that at times I felt that I was watching the longest commercial for New Zealand tourism ever created. We get it. It’s a long journey. They travel near and far. I got it. I don’t need to see it every 10 minutes.
There were also several scenes that were done almost as if in aside that truthfully did not add much to the story but seem to exist as nothing more than time fillers. In the subsequent films it is learned that characters and scenes that did not appear in the book will be inserted into the film. Once again I have to question this as I do believe they could have easily cut an hour out of this movie and not lose much of the necessary narrative.
There’s been a lot of talk about the higher frame rate 3-D that was used to create the film. There have been claims that it was distracting, jerky, and detracted from the movie. I on the other hand found it absolutely captivating because it did not have that movie look to it, and it felt like I was watching an HD television. Even during the CGI heavy sequences, it did appear as if the performers were literally right there in front of me and I got the impression more of watching a play than of watching a movie.
The visual effects in the film were quite stunning. The live-action and computer-generated elements were absolutely amazing, especially during the latter part of the film when we meet Gollum (Andy Serkis), and during the battle and the goblin stronghold. Although the book is considered a children’s novel, I would really have to think twice about bringing young children to see this film as there is a lot of action and violence in the film as well as potential scares in the form of the monsters that abound.
The film could have definitely used some star power to it. While the cast does a solid job, they are fairly generic and almost interchangeable during certain segments of the film. That being said, the film works because despite its issues, it’s a visually spectacular masterpiece that, if you can endure the long periods of inaction, pays off especially well during the film’s battle sequences.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The best movie of the summer has arrived, and it’s Star Trek Into Darkness!
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Old (2021) in Movies
Jul 28, 2021
Cinematography and Sound Design - very Hitchcockian (1 more)
Concept and initial set-up of the movie
Dafter than the Dharma initiative.
"Old" is the latest from the gloriously inconsistent writer/director M. Night Shyamalan. Will this be great Shyamalan (à la "The Sixth Sense") or dire Shyamalan (à la "The Last Airbender")? The answer, in my view, is somewhere in the middle. It's a curate's egg of a movie.
Positives:
- The premise feels very familiar (desert island beach; time slips; weird things happening.... "Lost" anyone?). But as a shell for a big screen adventure it kept me well-engaged.
- Shyamalan and his "Glass" cinematographer Mike Gioulakis use some novel techniques to portray the ageing effects. The angles they utilize feel quite Hitchcockian at times. Shyamalan supports this with the sound design, which makes this a REALLY good movie to watch in a cinema with good surround sound. Often the camera will be spinning showing nothing but ocean or rocks, with the character's conversation rotating behind you in the cinema. It's really quite effective.
- Shyamalan knows that no visual effects can improve on the horrors your mind can come up with. Although a '15' certificate, the "sustained threat, strong violence and injury detail" referenced by the BBFC pales into insignificance (in terms of what you actually see) compared to the equally rated "Freaky".
- I've seen other reviews comment that the "twist" (no spoilers here) was obvious. But, although not a ground-breaking idea, I was sufficiently satisfied with the denouement. It made sense, albeit twisted sense.
Negatives:
- I enjoyed the movie's leisurely set-up, introducing the characters and the movie's concept. (In many ways, it felt like the start of one of Irwin Allen's disaster movies of the 70's and 80's). But then Shyamalan turns the dial up to 11 and the action becomes increasingly farcical. Add into that the fact that you can see some of the 'jolts' coming a mile off, and the movie becomes progressively more disappointing, with a high ERQ (eye-rolling quotient) by the end.
- In particular, there are inconsistencies to the story that get you asking uncomfortable questions. For example, wounds can heal in the blink of an eye.... but not stab wounds apparently.
- The cast is truly global in nature: Vicky ("Phantom Thread") Krieps hails from Luxembourg; Bernal is Mexican; Sewell is a Brit; Amuka-Bird ("David Copperfield") is Nigerian; Leung is American; Eliza Scanlan is an Aussie; and Thomasin McKenzie (so good in "Jojo Rabbit", and good here too) is a Kiwi. But although it's clearly quite natural that an exotic beach resort would attract guests from all over the world, the combination of accents here makes the whole thing, unfortunately, sound like a dodgy spaghetti western!
Summary Thoughts: 'Time' and 'ageing' have of course been a popular movie topic for many years. I remember being both gripped and horrified by George Pal's wonderful 1960's version of "The Time Machine" when Rod Taylor threw his machine into fast forward and the dead Morlock decomposed in front of his eyes! Ursula Andress did the same as the rapidly ageing Ayesha in 1965's "She". And, more recently and with better effects, Julian Glover did the same in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".
Unfortunately, "Old" isn't likely to join any of these classic movies in my consciousness. It's a diverting enough movie, with fabulous views of the Dominican Republic (which the local tourist board will no doubt be delighted with). A "less is more" approach might have made this a classic. But unfortunately, that's not what Shyamalan delivered here. Since what we get is a 'Lost-lite' with farcical elements.
And, by the way.... The movie that Charles (Rufus Sewell) refers to starring Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando is "The Missouri Breaks". It has a very unusual John Williams soundtrack, which I have on vinyl somewhere and is probably worth a few bob!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- The premise feels very familiar (desert island beach; time slips; weird things happening.... "Lost" anyone?). But as a shell for a big screen adventure it kept me well-engaged.
- Shyamalan and his "Glass" cinematographer Mike Gioulakis use some novel techniques to portray the ageing effects. The angles they utilize feel quite Hitchcockian at times. Shyamalan supports this with the sound design, which makes this a REALLY good movie to watch in a cinema with good surround sound. Often the camera will be spinning showing nothing but ocean or rocks, with the character's conversation rotating behind you in the cinema. It's really quite effective.
- Shyamalan knows that no visual effects can improve on the horrors your mind can come up with. Although a '15' certificate, the "sustained threat, strong violence and injury detail" referenced by the BBFC pales into insignificance (in terms of what you actually see) compared to the equally rated "Freaky".
- I've seen other reviews comment that the "twist" (no spoilers here) was obvious. But, although not a ground-breaking idea, I was sufficiently satisfied with the denouement. It made sense, albeit twisted sense.
Negatives:
- I enjoyed the movie's leisurely set-up, introducing the characters and the movie's concept. (In many ways, it felt like the start of one of Irwin Allen's disaster movies of the 70's and 80's). But then Shyamalan turns the dial up to 11 and the action becomes increasingly farcical. Add into that the fact that you can see some of the 'jolts' coming a mile off, and the movie becomes progressively more disappointing, with a high ERQ (eye-rolling quotient) by the end.
- In particular, there are inconsistencies to the story that get you asking uncomfortable questions. For example, wounds can heal in the blink of an eye.... but not stab wounds apparently.
- The cast is truly global in nature: Vicky ("Phantom Thread") Krieps hails from Luxembourg; Bernal is Mexican; Sewell is a Brit; Amuka-Bird ("David Copperfield") is Nigerian; Leung is American; Eliza Scanlan is an Aussie; and Thomasin McKenzie (so good in "Jojo Rabbit", and good here too) is a Kiwi. But although it's clearly quite natural that an exotic beach resort would attract guests from all over the world, the combination of accents here makes the whole thing, unfortunately, sound like a dodgy spaghetti western!
Summary Thoughts: 'Time' and 'ageing' have of course been a popular movie topic for many years. I remember being both gripped and horrified by George Pal's wonderful 1960's version of "The Time Machine" when Rod Taylor threw his machine into fast forward and the dead Morlock decomposed in front of his eyes! Ursula Andress did the same as the rapidly ageing Ayesha in 1965's "She". And, more recently and with better effects, Julian Glover did the same in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".
Unfortunately, "Old" isn't likely to join any of these classic movies in my consciousness. It's a diverting enough movie, with fabulous views of the Dominican Republic (which the local tourist board will no doubt be delighted with). A "less is more" approach might have made this a classic. But unfortunately, that's not what Shyamalan delivered here. Since what we get is a 'Lost-lite' with farcical elements.
And, by the way.... The movie that Charles (Rufus Sewell) refers to starring Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando is "The Missouri Breaks". It has a very unusual John Williams soundtrack, which I have on vinyl somewhere and is probably worth a few bob!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
Kris Karcher (10 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jan 5, 2018
Better then it looks.
Contains spoilers, click to show
It’s been years since I’ve seen the original 1995 Jumanji, but from what I can remember as a 5-10 year old (not sure when I got around to owning the VHS) I enjoyed it. Robin Williams was on fire in the 90’s and turned in another comparable performance in this fun action adventure film. This new incarnation of the Jumanji tale changes direction a bit. For one it swaps the outdated board game that contains an entire jungle world inside it, for a more cultural relevant video game console that contains an entire jungle world inside it. I’m actually surprised they didn't use an iPad. 2017’s Jumanji also adds in a body swapping element. The teens that enter the game suddenly become adult video game characters. Complete with skills and weakness of varying degrees of usefulness.
Semantics aside, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is also a serviceable blockbuster flick. It’s a fun film that moves at a decent pace and avoids a lot of the typical dull spots most popcorn flicks fall victim to. The adult cast is a fun mixture of comedic talent and have some great chemistry together. The teenage cast less so but they have a more limited role in the film. I enjoyed watching the adult cast attempt to convey the teenagers “inside” them. Dwayne Johnson does this particularly well, playing a timid nerdy teenager trapped in the body of a jacked, smoldering, elite fighting machine. The film purposefully miscast each role. Kevin Hart play’s the avatar of a 6ft football star, Jack black stands in for a Mean Chick-esc selfie obsessed teenage girl, and the bad ass Karen Gillan plays the avatar of an insecure self-conscious teenage girl. The dichotomy of the characters real-life personalities always being at odds with their avatars new physical and mental attributes provides much of the comedy. Not all of it lands, but enough does and they don’t overdo it.
Once we enter the world of Jumanji the characters attempt to figure out how the “game” works. This leads to some humorous video game style exposition. I found this method of exposition to be unique and interesting. Incorporating NPC’s (Non-playable characters) whose sole purpose is to help players figure out what is going on and how to play the game was a fun and meta way to advance the story. It sort of reminds me of some of the things I enjoyed about 2012’s Wreck-It Ralph.
Then the gang runs into the other player in the game and another star of the film, Nick Jonas. Jonas plays Jefferson "Seaplane" McDonough who is the avatar of Zack a teenage boy sucked into the game in 1997 (Jonas uses 1997 lingo frequently. Radical.) and has lived in the jungle for what he claims to be “a few months”. This leads to the biggest missed opportunity of the film. Time apparently moves differently in Jumanji. A few months in Jumanji translates to 20 years in real life. When Zack is told he has been missing 20 years this should have been a major B plot. They do try and add some weight to the situation by showing how deeply affected Zack is by this news, but I feel they could have explored this dynamic a bit further. Especially when it comes to the ending. Which is a bit anticlimactic. Once they all end up working together to escape Jumanji they all are all transported back to their respective timelines and it would appear as though no time has passed. So it sort of ditches the whole being stuck in the game for 20 years angle and instead chooses to allow Zack to live a full and complete life starting from 1997. Also, the main cast seems to be unaffected timeline wise. All of this film took place while they were down in the basement serving their detentions. It would have made for a much more interesting ending if they return to their bodies and find out that in the real world they were gone for a longer period of time. Even just a week or so would have added an interesting dynamic to the pretty flat and standard ending. They do end up meeting up with grown-up Zack (Played by Colin Hanks) and there is a nice little payoff to the quasi-romance Nick Jonas and Jack Black had throughout the film. (Yes you read that correctly.) Alex named his daughter after Bethany who saved his life in the jungle.
The four teenagers all learn valuable life lessons inside the jungle. Fridge leans to appreciate his friend Spencer. Spencer learns to man up and take risks. Bethany learns to care about something other than herself and her popularity, and Martha learns to come out of her shell a bit and open up. While I often find these types of stories to be heavy-handed and snooze-worthy Jumanji manages to keep the gushy feel good stuff to a minimum. It’s there, and it’s obvious but it’s not in your face enough to bring down the movie.
Ultimately I will go ahead and recommend Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle if your into Action comedy that doesn't ever take itself too seriously. I repeat this is not a serious movie. But it is a mildly funny, family-friendly romp that I fully expect anyone who paid for a ticket to at least get their monies worth. Provided they came in with the right expectations.
Semantics aside, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is also a serviceable blockbuster flick. It’s a fun film that moves at a decent pace and avoids a lot of the typical dull spots most popcorn flicks fall victim to. The adult cast is a fun mixture of comedic talent and have some great chemistry together. The teenage cast less so but they have a more limited role in the film. I enjoyed watching the adult cast attempt to convey the teenagers “inside” them. Dwayne Johnson does this particularly well, playing a timid nerdy teenager trapped in the body of a jacked, smoldering, elite fighting machine. The film purposefully miscast each role. Kevin Hart play’s the avatar of a 6ft football star, Jack black stands in for a Mean Chick-esc selfie obsessed teenage girl, and the bad ass Karen Gillan plays the avatar of an insecure self-conscious teenage girl. The dichotomy of the characters real-life personalities always being at odds with their avatars new physical and mental attributes provides much of the comedy. Not all of it lands, but enough does and they don’t overdo it.
Once we enter the world of Jumanji the characters attempt to figure out how the “game” works. This leads to some humorous video game style exposition. I found this method of exposition to be unique and interesting. Incorporating NPC’s (Non-playable characters) whose sole purpose is to help players figure out what is going on and how to play the game was a fun and meta way to advance the story. It sort of reminds me of some of the things I enjoyed about 2012’s Wreck-It Ralph.
Then the gang runs into the other player in the game and another star of the film, Nick Jonas. Jonas plays Jefferson "Seaplane" McDonough who is the avatar of Zack a teenage boy sucked into the game in 1997 (Jonas uses 1997 lingo frequently. Radical.) and has lived in the jungle for what he claims to be “a few months”. This leads to the biggest missed opportunity of the film. Time apparently moves differently in Jumanji. A few months in Jumanji translates to 20 years in real life. When Zack is told he has been missing 20 years this should have been a major B plot. They do try and add some weight to the situation by showing how deeply affected Zack is by this news, but I feel they could have explored this dynamic a bit further. Especially when it comes to the ending. Which is a bit anticlimactic. Once they all end up working together to escape Jumanji they all are all transported back to their respective timelines and it would appear as though no time has passed. So it sort of ditches the whole being stuck in the game for 20 years angle and instead chooses to allow Zack to live a full and complete life starting from 1997. Also, the main cast seems to be unaffected timeline wise. All of this film took place while they were down in the basement serving their detentions. It would have made for a much more interesting ending if they return to their bodies and find out that in the real world they were gone for a longer period of time. Even just a week or so would have added an interesting dynamic to the pretty flat and standard ending. They do end up meeting up with grown-up Zack (Played by Colin Hanks) and there is a nice little payoff to the quasi-romance Nick Jonas and Jack Black had throughout the film. (Yes you read that correctly.) Alex named his daughter after Bethany who saved his life in the jungle.
The four teenagers all learn valuable life lessons inside the jungle. Fridge leans to appreciate his friend Spencer. Spencer learns to man up and take risks. Bethany learns to care about something other than herself and her popularity, and Martha learns to come out of her shell a bit and open up. While I often find these types of stories to be heavy-handed and snooze-worthy Jumanji manages to keep the gushy feel good stuff to a minimum. It’s there, and it’s obvious but it’s not in your face enough to bring down the movie.
Ultimately I will go ahead and recommend Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle if your into Action comedy that doesn't ever take itself too seriously. I repeat this is not a serious movie. But it is a mildly funny, family-friendly romp that I fully expect anyone who paid for a ticket to at least get their monies worth. Provided they came in with the right expectations.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bendy and the Ink Machine in Video Games
Aug 14, 2019
Set in the long abandoned Joey Drew Studios, Bendy and the Ink Machine (“BatIM”) is a survival horror game with an aesthetic of classic cartoons of yesteryear. As Henry, you set about to revisit your old workshop after receiving a mysterious letter from your past employer. When Henry arrives at the shop, he finds duhn duhn duhn the Ink Machine. The Ink Machine is a rather large device that gushes out black ink and has mystical qualities. Henry then becomes trapped in the maze-like studio, though he soon finds that he is not alone. Like a creep in the shadows, Bendy, the Mickey Mouse of the Joey Drew Studios universe, is lurking. BatIM blends puzzle solving with first-person gameplay as you adventure through a studio brimming with horrors. The art style is reminiscent of Steamboat Willie, with a macabre twist. Instead of happy go-lucky little animals, we are bombarded with the sinister grin of Bendy as he emerges from the shadows.
Similar to other games with an episodic structure (e.g.: Alan Wake and Life is Strange), BatIM uses short levels to advance the story line in some intriguing ways. Love of Exploration will be your saving grace in this game, as each area requires some in order to advance to the next. The game is not fast-paced. On the contrary, it’s meant to be a slow experience for the player with sparse combat scenarios present only to add a brief moment of action. Your actions as Henry are very limited, as is his speed. With 5 chapters, the gameplay time is at just about hours, and the game uses every minute to pull you deeper into the dark world it has created.
I reviewed BatIM for the Nintendo Switch and found that the game was somewhat held back by the platform’s technical limitations. The biggest drawback I found was that textures would often blur and have jagged edges, with the shaky 30FPS frame rate just feeding fuel to this fire. This is a detriment to gaming’s purpose in keeping the players immersed in the environment. BatIM is meant to be tense, but I often found myself dispelled of the illusion due to blurry visuals and dropped frames. With a game designed so well, how unfortunate that this be its biggest flaw. Maybe this can be patched out, but we can only hope at this point.
BatIM developer, theMeatly Games, may have taken inspiration from Five Nights at Freddy’s as the gameplay and overall genre of the games are quite similar. The world is conceptualized using objects such as books and tapes found within the game instead of long cut scenes that can tend to take you out of the moment rather than add to it in games like these. As you delve deeper into the oubliette of a workshop, you’ll find that the gameplay is perfectly paired with the game’s sick and twisted visuals, proving that BatIM delivers on every level.
Bendy and the Ink Machine is available now on all major platforms.
Similar to other games with an episodic structure (e.g.: Alan Wake and Life is Strange), BatIM uses short levels to advance the story line in some intriguing ways. Love of Exploration will be your saving grace in this game, as each area requires some in order to advance to the next. The game is not fast-paced. On the contrary, it’s meant to be a slow experience for the player with sparse combat scenarios present only to add a brief moment of action. Your actions as Henry are very limited, as is his speed. With 5 chapters, the gameplay time is at just about hours, and the game uses every minute to pull you deeper into the dark world it has created.
I reviewed BatIM for the Nintendo Switch and found that the game was somewhat held back by the platform’s technical limitations. The biggest drawback I found was that textures would often blur and have jagged edges, with the shaky 30FPS frame rate just feeding fuel to this fire. This is a detriment to gaming’s purpose in keeping the players immersed in the environment. BatIM is meant to be tense, but I often found myself dispelled of the illusion due to blurry visuals and dropped frames. With a game designed so well, how unfortunate that this be its biggest flaw. Maybe this can be patched out, but we can only hope at this point.
BatIM developer, theMeatly Games, may have taken inspiration from Five Nights at Freddy’s as the gameplay and overall genre of the games are quite similar. The world is conceptualized using objects such as books and tapes found within the game instead of long cut scenes that can tend to take you out of the moment rather than add to it in games like these. As you delve deeper into the oubliette of a workshop, you’ll find that the gameplay is perfectly paired with the game’s sick and twisted visuals, proving that BatIM delivers on every level.
Bendy and the Ink Machine is available now on all major platforms.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (2011) in Movies
Dec 14, 2020
Great Performances, Even Better Film
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is one of the most gratifying ways to end a series. After such a long series, you’re hoping that the end does the rest of the series justice and thIS movie doesn’t disappoint in the slightest. It’s the harrowing conclusion to Harry Potter’s journey as he tries to put a stop to the evil Voldemort once and for all.
Acting: 10
It’s not surprise that the acting is so stellar as these wonderful actors/actresses have had years to grow comfortable in the skin of their characters. Daniel Radcliffe continues to be sensational in his role as Harry Potter as he embraces Potter’s ascension into manhood. Rupert Grint (Ron) and Emma Watson (Hermione) shine yet again playing his dedicated friends and sidekicks. You can tell that the three of them have formed such a strong bond over the eight movies as their synergy is extremely on point.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
This final film pulls out all the stops as it’s an all-out good vs. evil war. Teeming with amazing characters, I was hardpressed trying to uncover who exactly my favorite was. Potter is wonderful, yes, but so are dozens of others literally. I was really impressed with the maturation of Ron’s character. It can be hard at times developing a sidekick but in some ways, Ron’s journey to completion is just as satisfying as Harry’s.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This one is for all the marbles so they hold nothing back when it comes to amazing action sequences. The battles sprawl all across Hogwarts filled with dope magic and wonder. Sparks fly in abundance of blacks, greens and reds across a dark backdrop, a spectacular display. Sometimes you have no idea who’s even winning, but it looks damn cool.
Entertainment Value: 10
Potter vs. Voldemort alone is worth the price of admission. The battle definitely lives up to the hype. Even moreso to see closure happen on every level is a welcome treat. Outside of a slow(ish) start, the movie is enjoyable from beginning to end.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The beauty of the final book being done in two parts for the movie is they definitely saved the best for last. All the best battles and memorable scenes are jam-packed into Part 2, causing things to fly by at a breakneck pace. Just over two hours, the final installment just flies by.
Plot: 10
JK Rowling wraps up this beautiful adventure quite nicely. The thing I keep going back to and have an immense amount of respect for: No loose ends. The stakes are higher than ever in this story that succeeds with a few cool twists along the way.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 94
The magical battles alone are enough to make Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 worth a watch. With the combination of rich characters who each get a proper sendoff, a speedy pace, and a chunk of memorable moments, this is a movie to remember.
Acting: 10
It’s not surprise that the acting is so stellar as these wonderful actors/actresses have had years to grow comfortable in the skin of their characters. Daniel Radcliffe continues to be sensational in his role as Harry Potter as he embraces Potter’s ascension into manhood. Rupert Grint (Ron) and Emma Watson (Hermione) shine yet again playing his dedicated friends and sidekicks. You can tell that the three of them have formed such a strong bond over the eight movies as their synergy is extremely on point.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
This final film pulls out all the stops as it’s an all-out good vs. evil war. Teeming with amazing characters, I was hardpressed trying to uncover who exactly my favorite was. Potter is wonderful, yes, but so are dozens of others literally. I was really impressed with the maturation of Ron’s character. It can be hard at times developing a sidekick but in some ways, Ron’s journey to completion is just as satisfying as Harry’s.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This one is for all the marbles so they hold nothing back when it comes to amazing action sequences. The battles sprawl all across Hogwarts filled with dope magic and wonder. Sparks fly in abundance of blacks, greens and reds across a dark backdrop, a spectacular display. Sometimes you have no idea who’s even winning, but it looks damn cool.
Entertainment Value: 10
Potter vs. Voldemort alone is worth the price of admission. The battle definitely lives up to the hype. Even moreso to see closure happen on every level is a welcome treat. Outside of a slow(ish) start, the movie is enjoyable from beginning to end.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The beauty of the final book being done in two parts for the movie is they definitely saved the best for last. All the best battles and memorable scenes are jam-packed into Part 2, causing things to fly by at a breakneck pace. Just over two hours, the final installment just flies by.
Plot: 10
JK Rowling wraps up this beautiful adventure quite nicely. The thing I keep going back to and have an immense amount of respect for: No loose ends. The stakes are higher than ever in this story that succeeds with a few cool twists along the way.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 94
The magical battles alone are enough to make Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 worth a watch. With the combination of rich characters who each get a proper sendoff, a speedy pace, and a chunk of memorable moments, this is a movie to remember.
The Escape Manifesto: Quit Your Corporate Job - Do Something Different!
Book
Rob, Dom and Mikey were fed up with the corporate treadmill. When they decided to change careers,...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Ben-Hur (1959) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Solid Conflict but Falls Just Short of a Classic For Me
Jewish hero Judah Ben-Hur rises up to challenge the Romans after they make him a slave.
Acting: 10
I understand that Charlton Heston’s performance as Ben-Hur is a point of contention with this movie, but I thought he delivered a strong performance. Was it perfect? Nope, but he gave me enough of a fiery presence to keep me entertained and to give me someone to root for. One thing I will not contend is that Stephen Boyd’s performance as Messala was the best in the movie. He’s an easy person to hate, but Boyd also helps you sympathize with the role as well. There’s a quiet fierceness about him that you loathe and respect at the same time.
Beginning: 5
Oh, that this was just about the Overture. It’s not. I understand full-well that a lot of classics had an Overture before the start of the movie. That wasn’t my problem. There were at least sixty minutes that could have been cut from this movie and twenty of them come from the beginning. By the time Judah and Messala converse for the first time, I was almost fully checked out. It took me a minute to get involved in the story again.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
You expect an epic like this to deliver on the visuals and Ben-Hur doesn’t disappoint. The movie takes you throughout a number of different setpieces, each of them just as beautiful as the last. From the Coliseum to the Valley of the Lepers, director William Wyler puts you right where you need to be. I was captivated by the magic of the visuals and, as a result, never bored.
Conflict: 9
It is hard to stretch conflict out over the course of almost four hours, but Ben-Hur really succeeds here. You know the Romans are bad news so you feel the trouble brewing when they start marching in Judah’s city. From there, through Judah’s captivity, to his return home, there is a consistent amount of action that drives and pushes the story forward. There are some slow parts but the chariot scene alone makes up for those parts. It is historically viewed as a classic scene and it doesn’t take long to see why. By the end of it, I was cheering harder than when I watched Rocky beat up the Russian.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 9
Pace: 6
Plot: 8
Ben-Hur’s story is beautiful for the most part. Again, it definitely could have been cut quite a few times, but I still rather enjoyed the adventure. It makes you really feel like you are a part of something special. If only it hadn’t overstayed it’s welcome…
Resolution: 4
Overall: 78
I refuse to call a movie a classic because everyone else does. A classic is something you want to watch over and over. When it comes to Ben-Hur, once was absolutely enough.
Acting: 10
I understand that Charlton Heston’s performance as Ben-Hur is a point of contention with this movie, but I thought he delivered a strong performance. Was it perfect? Nope, but he gave me enough of a fiery presence to keep me entertained and to give me someone to root for. One thing I will not contend is that Stephen Boyd’s performance as Messala was the best in the movie. He’s an easy person to hate, but Boyd also helps you sympathize with the role as well. There’s a quiet fierceness about him that you loathe and respect at the same time.
Beginning: 5
Oh, that this was just about the Overture. It’s not. I understand full-well that a lot of classics had an Overture before the start of the movie. That wasn’t my problem. There were at least sixty minutes that could have been cut from this movie and twenty of them come from the beginning. By the time Judah and Messala converse for the first time, I was almost fully checked out. It took me a minute to get involved in the story again.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
You expect an epic like this to deliver on the visuals and Ben-Hur doesn’t disappoint. The movie takes you throughout a number of different setpieces, each of them just as beautiful as the last. From the Coliseum to the Valley of the Lepers, director William Wyler puts you right where you need to be. I was captivated by the magic of the visuals and, as a result, never bored.
Conflict: 9
It is hard to stretch conflict out over the course of almost four hours, but Ben-Hur really succeeds here. You know the Romans are bad news so you feel the trouble brewing when they start marching in Judah’s city. From there, through Judah’s captivity, to his return home, there is a consistent amount of action that drives and pushes the story forward. There are some slow parts but the chariot scene alone makes up for those parts. It is historically viewed as a classic scene and it doesn’t take long to see why. By the end of it, I was cheering harder than when I watched Rocky beat up the Russian.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 9
Pace: 6
Plot: 8
Ben-Hur’s story is beautiful for the most part. Again, it definitely could have been cut quite a few times, but I still rather enjoyed the adventure. It makes you really feel like you are a part of something special. If only it hadn’t overstayed it’s welcome…
Resolution: 4
Overall: 78
I refuse to call a movie a classic because everyone else does. A classic is something you want to watch over and over. When it comes to Ben-Hur, once was absolutely enough.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Verdict: Charming
Story: Dumbo starts when Holt Farrier (Farrell) returns from war, to re-join the circus run by Max Medici (DeVito) where his kids Milly (Parker) and Joe (Hobbins) have been living and working for years, Holt has come back injured, with the only job offered to him, being cleaning up after the elephants, one of which is pregnant giving birth to an elephant with giant ears, which only causes chaos on his debut in the circus.
After Dumbo’s mother is taken away, he is left alone, while the children learn about his flying skills, which turns Max’s circus into the talk of the country, attracting V. A. Vandevere (Keaton) who wants to offer Max the world for Dumbo.
Thoughts on Dumbo
Characters – Holt Farrier is a war veteran widow that has returned to his children in a circus. He has been suffering with his time away, this has seen him not show as much affection as his wife would have, he takes the only job he can get which sees him training and cleaning up the elephants, his time back in the circus does bring him back to his kids, where he learns how important life still can be. V. A. Vandevere is the operator of Dreamland, he sales the idea of a better life for the whole troop, even if he has his own ideas to just make himself rich. Max Medici runs the small circus that discovers Dumbo’s talent, he has always been in the game for the money and can’t resist the idea of money when Vandevere arrives but must learn there is more to his life than money. Colette Marchant is the star performer in Vandevere show, she has been for years though she is just the hottest thing he has going for a while, she doe solve to perform. Dumbo is the baby elephant with giant eyes, who loses his mother, but has the incredible ability to fly, drawing crowds from miles.
Performances – Colin Farrell gives us a wonderful performance as the caring veteran who has been struggling with his own problems once returning from war. Michael Keaton enjoy the villainous role, while Danny DeVito is shows the desperation while still bringing the heart needing for the role, Eva Green shines to as the beautiful performer too.
Story – The story here shows how a small circus that finds themselves with a star attraction in Dumbo, which sees them become a success that the whole country wants to see. The story might focus on Dumbo being forced into performing after having his mother taken away, while deeper down we get to see a family that has been broken from death and war, needing to come back together. We see themes of greed with the circus masters at times, but all together the ideas behind everything all shine through to show that people who do good will get what they deserve in life.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure shows the how Dumbo comes into the world and put through traumas at a young age before finding his feet and learn that some people are good in life, with the fantasy of an elephant that can fly being the highlight of what makes Dumbo so special.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the different sizes of circus that we see Dumbo being part of.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are brilliant bringing Dumbo to life like nothing we could have imagined.
Scene of the Movie – The Dumbo flight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does spend too much time telling Milly she can’t follow her scientist dreams.
Final Thoughts – This is the best live action Disney film of 2019, it brings the scale of the idea to life, which looks wonderful and has great performances too.
Overall: Beautiful Fantasy Film.
Story: Dumbo starts when Holt Farrier (Farrell) returns from war, to re-join the circus run by Max Medici (DeVito) where his kids Milly (Parker) and Joe (Hobbins) have been living and working for years, Holt has come back injured, with the only job offered to him, being cleaning up after the elephants, one of which is pregnant giving birth to an elephant with giant ears, which only causes chaos on his debut in the circus.
After Dumbo’s mother is taken away, he is left alone, while the children learn about his flying skills, which turns Max’s circus into the talk of the country, attracting V. A. Vandevere (Keaton) who wants to offer Max the world for Dumbo.
Thoughts on Dumbo
Characters – Holt Farrier is a war veteran widow that has returned to his children in a circus. He has been suffering with his time away, this has seen him not show as much affection as his wife would have, he takes the only job he can get which sees him training and cleaning up the elephants, his time back in the circus does bring him back to his kids, where he learns how important life still can be. V. A. Vandevere is the operator of Dreamland, he sales the idea of a better life for the whole troop, even if he has his own ideas to just make himself rich. Max Medici runs the small circus that discovers Dumbo’s talent, he has always been in the game for the money and can’t resist the idea of money when Vandevere arrives but must learn there is more to his life than money. Colette Marchant is the star performer in Vandevere show, she has been for years though she is just the hottest thing he has going for a while, she doe solve to perform. Dumbo is the baby elephant with giant eyes, who loses his mother, but has the incredible ability to fly, drawing crowds from miles.
Performances – Colin Farrell gives us a wonderful performance as the caring veteran who has been struggling with his own problems once returning from war. Michael Keaton enjoy the villainous role, while Danny DeVito is shows the desperation while still bringing the heart needing for the role, Eva Green shines to as the beautiful performer too.
Story – The story here shows how a small circus that finds themselves with a star attraction in Dumbo, which sees them become a success that the whole country wants to see. The story might focus on Dumbo being forced into performing after having his mother taken away, while deeper down we get to see a family that has been broken from death and war, needing to come back together. We see themes of greed with the circus masters at times, but all together the ideas behind everything all shine through to show that people who do good will get what they deserve in life.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure shows the how Dumbo comes into the world and put through traumas at a young age before finding his feet and learn that some people are good in life, with the fantasy of an elephant that can fly being the highlight of what makes Dumbo so special.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the different sizes of circus that we see Dumbo being part of.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are brilliant bringing Dumbo to life like nothing we could have imagined.
Scene of the Movie – The Dumbo flight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does spend too much time telling Milly she can’t follow her scientist dreams.
Final Thoughts – This is the best live action Disney film of 2019, it brings the scale of the idea to life, which looks wonderful and has great performances too.
Overall: Beautiful Fantasy Film.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Black Widow (2021) in Movies
Jul 8, 2021
An entertaining pose-struck by Johansson and Pugh
A long time in the waiting (again) but "Black Widow" is an excellent addition to the Marvel canon: almost a "Rogue One" in the series, taking us back to fill in some gaps after "Captain America: Civil War". It's just great to have ANY Marvel back in the cinema.... that Michael Giacchino Marvel tune set the hairs going on the back of my neck!
Positives:
- Loving the heart in this Marvel! There's more sense of "family" than in F9! Johansson and Pugh, in particular, have a great on-screen relationship, and nice sisterly bickering goes on. There's a fabulous scene in a petrol (gas) station between the pair that really shows what class acting is available in this outing.
- David Harbour adds some fine comedy as the "Red Guardian", complete with action figure! Seeing him squeezing into his old uniform reminded me strongly of Mr Incredible! And the relationship with Rachel Weisz's Melina is also great fun.
- Completing the strong acting complement is Ray Winstone as villain Dreykov. It's a role he's played so many times before that he could probably do it in his sleep: but still great to watch. A shout-out too to the lovely Olga Kurylenko, looking decidedly unlovely here! (She isn't given very much to do as Taskmaster though.)
- There were some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments for me: both through witty dialogue and visual gags. A helicopter 'landing' was particularly snort-worthy!
- Lorne Balfe delivers another stonking soundtrack, full of Russian undertones. Also great is a twisted version of Nirvana's "Teen Spirit" over the opening titles.
Negatives:
- Now I KNOW you need to suspend belief during Marvel films, but the "Red Room" location (no spoilers, and no - not the "50 Shades" type) stretches that too far. It leads to an over-blown, free-falling finale that somewhat lessened the impact for me of the rather more realistic flow of the movie to that point.
- Tonally the movie is rather inconsistent. As an example, the start of the movie is played 'straight', as is the role of Alexei. But when he reappears later in the film - and it took me a long time to appreciate the jailbird character was in fact him - then he suddenly becomes the comic heart of the movie.
- I loved the way the film built the relationships between the characters. So this is NOT a negative from me. But I *suspect* some Marvel action fans may find the narrative portions of the movie too slow for their liking.
Summary Thoughts on "Black Widow": Black Widow has always struck me as an odd and slightly second-rate member of The Avengers. After all, she has no specific "superpowers", so how has she survived all of the physical abuse to date? So, given what we know happened to her in "Endgame", I questioned whether this was an origin story that would hold much interest with me. But the knack here is that it really isn't an "origin story" at all. It covers her early life, pre-titles, but then skips all the intermediate biopic stuff to drill into this specific adventure in her life. And the quality of the acting and the relationships that are built up delivered something that I greatly enjoyed.
Cate Shortland seems an odd choice to front a huge movie like this (she has a very short movie CV) but I think she's done a great job here. I'd put it in the top quartile of Marvel movies for me.
And BTW, as it's Marvel so as you might expect there is an end credits scene. You have to wait until the very end of the credits for it (so you can appreciate Lorne Balfe's score some more). But it is worth waiting for, re-introducing a character from one of the Phase 4 TV series.
(For the full graphical version, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/07/black-widow-a-posers-guide-to-the-incredibles-3/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies).)
Positives:
- Loving the heart in this Marvel! There's more sense of "family" than in F9! Johansson and Pugh, in particular, have a great on-screen relationship, and nice sisterly bickering goes on. There's a fabulous scene in a petrol (gas) station between the pair that really shows what class acting is available in this outing.
- David Harbour adds some fine comedy as the "Red Guardian", complete with action figure! Seeing him squeezing into his old uniform reminded me strongly of Mr Incredible! And the relationship with Rachel Weisz's Melina is also great fun.
- Completing the strong acting complement is Ray Winstone as villain Dreykov. It's a role he's played so many times before that he could probably do it in his sleep: but still great to watch. A shout-out too to the lovely Olga Kurylenko, looking decidedly unlovely here! (She isn't given very much to do as Taskmaster though.)
- There were some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments for me: both through witty dialogue and visual gags. A helicopter 'landing' was particularly snort-worthy!
- Lorne Balfe delivers another stonking soundtrack, full of Russian undertones. Also great is a twisted version of Nirvana's "Teen Spirit" over the opening titles.
Negatives:
- Now I KNOW you need to suspend belief during Marvel films, but the "Red Room" location (no spoilers, and no - not the "50 Shades" type) stretches that too far. It leads to an over-blown, free-falling finale that somewhat lessened the impact for me of the rather more realistic flow of the movie to that point.
- Tonally the movie is rather inconsistent. As an example, the start of the movie is played 'straight', as is the role of Alexei. But when he reappears later in the film - and it took me a long time to appreciate the jailbird character was in fact him - then he suddenly becomes the comic heart of the movie.
- I loved the way the film built the relationships between the characters. So this is NOT a negative from me. But I *suspect* some Marvel action fans may find the narrative portions of the movie too slow for their liking.
Summary Thoughts on "Black Widow": Black Widow has always struck me as an odd and slightly second-rate member of The Avengers. After all, she has no specific "superpowers", so how has she survived all of the physical abuse to date? So, given what we know happened to her in "Endgame", I questioned whether this was an origin story that would hold much interest with me. But the knack here is that it really isn't an "origin story" at all. It covers her early life, pre-titles, but then skips all the intermediate biopic stuff to drill into this specific adventure in her life. And the quality of the acting and the relationships that are built up delivered something that I greatly enjoyed.
Cate Shortland seems an odd choice to front a huge movie like this (she has a very short movie CV) but I think she's done a great job here. I'd put it in the top quartile of Marvel movies for me.
And BTW, as it's Marvel so as you might expect there is an end credits scene. You have to wait until the very end of the credits for it (so you can appreciate Lorne Balfe's score some more). But it is worth waiting for, re-introducing a character from one of the Phase 4 TV series.
(For the full graphical version, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/07/black-widow-a-posers-guide-to-the-incredibles-3/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies).)
