Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Finding Steve McQueen (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
This heist comedy (we'll come to that later) sounds pretty good from the synopsis, I can't really elaborate much on it like I normally would because, for once, it's spot on!
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Nightcrawler (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The concept of the American dream is generally thought of as ascending to great heights of success. For some, that means creating something out of nothing. They can do this either through lots of hard work, or by having a stroke of good luck.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
To be honest, crime fiction is not my usual genre of choice.
I also tend to find 'book club picks' to be rather off-putting; generally finding those I have previously read to be rather tedious and just not generally all that interesting (while able to admire the literary sophistication of the works).
This is both a crime fiction novel, and a 'Richard and Judy book club pick', so that would - normally - have been 2 marks against picking it up, in my books.
However, I have read - and generally quite enjoyed - most, if not all, of Simon Scarrow's other works - in particular his Cato and Macro series - so, when I saw this on a Kindle deal for something like 99p, I thought to myself 'why not?'.
And, I have to admit, I did actually quite enjoy this.
Set in 1939 Berlin just at the start of WW2, I found this to be unusual in that it told the story from the Point of View of a German criminal inspector - most WW2 novels (that I am aware of) usually feature either American or Brits as their main protagonists - who is not a member of the Nazi party: a fact that, here, is usually held against him but is also the reason he got handed the assignment as he has no links to any factions within the party.
It's both a very different time and 'headspace' than modern sensibilities; interesting to see how the man-on-the-street could have viewed the headline events of the time. As someone from Northern Ireland, there's also aspects of the novel that hit frighteningly close to home for me ...
I also tend to find 'book club picks' to be rather off-putting; generally finding those I have previously read to be rather tedious and just not generally all that interesting (while able to admire the literary sophistication of the works).
This is both a crime fiction novel, and a 'Richard and Judy book club pick', so that would - normally - have been 2 marks against picking it up, in my books.
However, I have read - and generally quite enjoyed - most, if not all, of Simon Scarrow's other works - in particular his Cato and Macro series - so, when I saw this on a Kindle deal for something like 99p, I thought to myself 'why not?'.
And, I have to admit, I did actually quite enjoy this.
Set in 1939 Berlin just at the start of WW2, I found this to be unusual in that it told the story from the Point of View of a German criminal inspector - most WW2 novels (that I am aware of) usually feature either American or Brits as their main protagonists - who is not a member of the Nazi party: a fact that, here, is usually held against him but is also the reason he got handed the assignment as he has no links to any factions within the party.
It's both a very different time and 'headspace' than modern sensibilities; interesting to see how the man-on-the-street could have viewed the headline events of the time. As someone from Northern Ireland, there's also aspects of the novel that hit frighteningly close to home for me ...
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Animals (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: American Animals starts as we see the heist about to take place, rewinding us 18 months where we meet Spencer Reinhardt (Keoghan) an art student in Transylvania University, struggling with his identity, turning to his streetwise friend Warren Lipka (Peters) the two discuss the potential of stealing rare expensive books from the library.
As the idea turns into a plan they bring in Chas Allen (Jenner) and Eric Borsuk (Abrahamson), can they make this plan come off, well the answer is no because as we see the planning we meet the real thieves now in their 30s discussing what they remember about the idea.
Thoughts on American Animals
Characters – Warren is the streetwise student on a scholarship, not living up to his potential, he will always get things down however illegal they might be. He is the one that brings the team together to make this happen even if he is also the one that gets them in the most problems. Spencer is the art student that comes up with the idea because he is sick of not standing out in the art world, looking for the pain be believes artist require. He is all in with the planning but when it comes to following through he thinks they will need to go too far. Chas is the getaway driver, he has the most money which helps with the planning of the heist. Eric becomes the brains learning where things could and would go wrong if they do it in certain directions. We do also meet the adult versions of these characters in the real version that are looking back on the crime they committed.
Performances – Evan Peters is the clear highlight in this film, he always comes off unpredictable which seeing the older versions of the characters you completely understand too. Barry Keoghan does play the stranger member of the crew well, he is the one that is happy to plan not commit a crime, he needs to be straighter faced than Peters character. When it comes to the rest of the cast they are fine without needing to do that much.
Story – The story here is based on the real story of four university students that robbed the rare book collection in the library of their university. The way the story is told is interesting because it does both help and hinder the film, having a mix of the actors playing the younger versions and the real men talking about the events does give the story a documentary feel. Where this does hinder the story is by telling us that they failed early on and are now just remembering what happen which takes away any excitement or edge of your set moments towards anything going on. There are moments in the story which are good to watch, for example the scene where they are watching heist movies to learn how to pull it off and seeing the pitch perfect plan in Warren’s head. If we are being honest, the story is about 20 minutes too long because the opening hour just drags you along, once the heist gets underway things get more exciting but by then you might see the audience lose interest.
Crime – The crime follows a real heist that happened at the same university, we get to see how it was planned, how things went down and seeing the consequences the boys felt.
Settings – The film is mostly set in and around the university, this helps for any heist film, we do get moments where we step away, but that is for the plan which does work when you see how the boys are out of their depth at times.
Scene of the Movie – Selecting the names.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The first hour.
Final Thoughts – This is an overly long heist movie that drags along at a horribly slow pace, once things kick off we do get some interest, but the fact we have the real criminals involved in telling the story we know the outcome.
Overall: Just watch for Evan Peters being slightly crazy.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/08/28/american-animals-2018/
As the idea turns into a plan they bring in Chas Allen (Jenner) and Eric Borsuk (Abrahamson), can they make this plan come off, well the answer is no because as we see the planning we meet the real thieves now in their 30s discussing what they remember about the idea.
Thoughts on American Animals
Characters – Warren is the streetwise student on a scholarship, not living up to his potential, he will always get things down however illegal they might be. He is the one that brings the team together to make this happen even if he is also the one that gets them in the most problems. Spencer is the art student that comes up with the idea because he is sick of not standing out in the art world, looking for the pain be believes artist require. He is all in with the planning but when it comes to following through he thinks they will need to go too far. Chas is the getaway driver, he has the most money which helps with the planning of the heist. Eric becomes the brains learning where things could and would go wrong if they do it in certain directions. We do also meet the adult versions of these characters in the real version that are looking back on the crime they committed.
Performances – Evan Peters is the clear highlight in this film, he always comes off unpredictable which seeing the older versions of the characters you completely understand too. Barry Keoghan does play the stranger member of the crew well, he is the one that is happy to plan not commit a crime, he needs to be straighter faced than Peters character. When it comes to the rest of the cast they are fine without needing to do that much.
Story – The story here is based on the real story of four university students that robbed the rare book collection in the library of their university. The way the story is told is interesting because it does both help and hinder the film, having a mix of the actors playing the younger versions and the real men talking about the events does give the story a documentary feel. Where this does hinder the story is by telling us that they failed early on and are now just remembering what happen which takes away any excitement or edge of your set moments towards anything going on. There are moments in the story which are good to watch, for example the scene where they are watching heist movies to learn how to pull it off and seeing the pitch perfect plan in Warren’s head. If we are being honest, the story is about 20 minutes too long because the opening hour just drags you along, once the heist gets underway things get more exciting but by then you might see the audience lose interest.
Crime – The crime follows a real heist that happened at the same university, we get to see how it was planned, how things went down and seeing the consequences the boys felt.
Settings – The film is mostly set in and around the university, this helps for any heist film, we do get moments where we step away, but that is for the plan which does work when you see how the boys are out of their depth at times.
Scene of the Movie – Selecting the names.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The first hour.
Final Thoughts – This is an overly long heist movie that drags along at a horribly slow pace, once things kick off we do get some interest, but the fact we have the real criminals involved in telling the story we know the outcome.
Overall: Just watch for Evan Peters being slightly crazy.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/08/28/american-animals-2018/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Anti-Social (2015) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Anti-Social starts as we meet street artist Dee (Sulkin), his model girlfriend Kirsten (Markle) and his armed robber brother Marcus (Myers) who has been making the headlines for all the wrong reasons now. Dee is about to be given motivation from Philip (Berkel) who sees his potential as an artist, while Marcus is getting deeper into the world of crime.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1999) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Aug 6, 2020)
Look, there had to be something British on the list! Brighton Rock, Get Carter, The Long Good Friday and Sexy Beast were all considered, as was Ritchie’s own follow up to this stylised romp, Snatch. But, in the end, I chose this because it is the most fun to watch, and really re-invented the non American crime film. For my money a tighter film than Snatch, and less silly, Lock Stock has a naivety that puts you on an equal footing with its protagonists and keeps you engaged from start to hilarious finish. Its sense of humour is key to its success, as we watch one botched effort to get ahead after another. The pay off moments are glorious, and the whole package is wrapped up in every cinematic trick in the book, making it a dizzying rollercoaster experience you never forget first watching. There is a nastiness of spirit and “laddishness” underlying it that is perhaps a little too indulged without a sense of irony, but you can always forgive it. Will it continue to age as well as some on this list, I’m not sure.
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Most Wanted Man (2014) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on A Most Wanted Man
Characters – Gunther Bachmann is the German agent that is tracking known terrorists, his team has connections and keeps eyes on most of the suspects with their latest one being one wanted worldwide, he must figure out if this man is a danger or not. Martha Sullivan is part of the American team searching for the terrorist, she is trusting Gunther to do the right thing only she isn’t sure what he is going to do. Annabel Richter is an attorney that is trying to help the suspect get into Germany, she is just doing his job using her connection to help make his move go smoother. Tommy Brue is the bank manager that has been dealing with multiple nationalities through the years, he gets involved in trying to get the transfer of money done.
Performances – Philip Seymour Hoffman in the leading role steps into the German character with ease, showing the composure to take his character to be the standout of the film. Robin Wright, Rachel McAdams and Willem Dafoe fill the supporting roles well through the film.
Story – The story here follows the German and American intelligence agencies as they are trying to figure out if an immigrate is a potential terrorist suspect, both sides have difference of opinion on what is true and they must try to stay ahead of each other the best they can. This story does try to come off like an intense spy thriller that seems to get bogged down too easily, by making everything seem like it is just an everyday incident, this does move at a slow pace which only brings down everything because they do just seem to pick a random person, that could have reason to suspect from the early point in the film.
Crime – The crime side of the film shows how the authorities operate to try and tackle potential criminal actions, it does show that they could be above the law at times too.
Settings – We have the German backdrop for this movie, showing how they are planning to operate to keep tracks on terrorists.
Scene of the Movie – Pick up.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It just seems dull.
Final Thoughts – This is a spy thriller that never seems to get going, it tries to play along with the idea that we are building, but we soon lose the attention because it is more of a political spy thriller over anything going on thriller.
Overall: Slow burning thriller that just doesn’t get going.
Characters – Gunther Bachmann is the German agent that is tracking known terrorists, his team has connections and keeps eyes on most of the suspects with their latest one being one wanted worldwide, he must figure out if this man is a danger or not. Martha Sullivan is part of the American team searching for the terrorist, she is trusting Gunther to do the right thing only she isn’t sure what he is going to do. Annabel Richter is an attorney that is trying to help the suspect get into Germany, she is just doing his job using her connection to help make his move go smoother. Tommy Brue is the bank manager that has been dealing with multiple nationalities through the years, he gets involved in trying to get the transfer of money done.
Performances – Philip Seymour Hoffman in the leading role steps into the German character with ease, showing the composure to take his character to be the standout of the film. Robin Wright, Rachel McAdams and Willem Dafoe fill the supporting roles well through the film.
Story – The story here follows the German and American intelligence agencies as they are trying to figure out if an immigrate is a potential terrorist suspect, both sides have difference of opinion on what is true and they must try to stay ahead of each other the best they can. This story does try to come off like an intense spy thriller that seems to get bogged down too easily, by making everything seem like it is just an everyday incident, this does move at a slow pace which only brings down everything because they do just seem to pick a random person, that could have reason to suspect from the early point in the film.
Crime – The crime side of the film shows how the authorities operate to try and tackle potential criminal actions, it does show that they could be above the law at times too.
Settings – We have the German backdrop for this movie, showing how they are planning to operate to keep tracks on terrorists.
Scene of the Movie – Pick up.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It just seems dull.
Final Thoughts – This is a spy thriller that never seems to get going, it tries to play along with the idea that we are building, but we soon lose the attention because it is more of a political spy thriller over anything going on thriller.
Overall: Slow burning thriller that just doesn’t get going.
Debbie Duncan (0 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express in Books
Feb 5, 2018
What a journey!
Contains spoilers, click to show
How do you a summarise a book that is a classical as this one ? We come face to face with Hercule Poirot as he joins the Orient Express at Aleppo in a rush to get to London. After getting in the train Poirot is approached by Samuel Ratchett, a malevolent, elderly American who wants to hire the detective as He believes his life is being threatened.
On the second night of the journey the train is stopped by a snowdrift near Vinkovci and Poirot's is woken by a cry emanating from Ratchett's compartment. The next morning we discover that Ratchett has been murdered and Poirot investigates the crime.
As we get to meet the other passengers we soon discover that everyone on the train has a motive to murder. Poirot discovers that everyone in the coach had a connection to the a famous Family called the Armstrong family who lost their daug in tragic circumstances. and a to kill . He proposes two possible solutions.
What does our detective friend do when he finds the truth?
Even if you know the ending the journey mpoint is weaved so wonderfully in and out like a train sneaking up the route of the Orient Express
On the second night of the journey the train is stopped by a snowdrift near Vinkovci and Poirot's is woken by a cry emanating from Ratchett's compartment. The next morning we discover that Ratchett has been murdered and Poirot investigates the crime.
As we get to meet the other passengers we soon discover that everyone on the train has a motive to murder. Poirot discovers that everyone in the coach had a connection to the a famous Family called the Armstrong family who lost their daug in tragic circumstances. and a to kill . He proposes two possible solutions.
What does our detective friend do when he finds the truth?
Even if you know the ending the journey mpoint is weaved so wonderfully in and out like a train sneaking up the route of the Orient Express
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2086 KP) rated Mouse Trapped (Mirage Mysteries #2) in Books
Mar 9, 2018
Phoenix Robbery detective Marsha “Mouse” is shot in a meeting with an informant gone wrong. All the police have to go on is part of a name and the original tip that the thieves were targeting a collection of Native American silver jewelry. Homicide detectives Joe and Tom are pursuing some of the tangential leads, which brings them into the Robbery side of the case. Can the two figure out what happened without inciting a turf war within the police department?
It’s nice to have a mystery that involves another crime as well, and I enjoyed tracking down the thieves as a way to find the killer. Since the only clue is part of a name, we get too many suspects with similar sounding names, meaning we have to work hard to remember them all until we really get to know the characters. New Christian Joe is trying to grow in his faith, something I enjoyed seeing. I first read this book over 25 years ago, and it’s nice to see it stacks up to my memories of the series.
Read my full review at <a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2017/03/book-review-mouse-trapped-by-sandy.html">Carstairs Considers</a>.
It’s nice to have a mystery that involves another crime as well, and I enjoyed tracking down the thieves as a way to find the killer. Since the only clue is part of a name, we get too many suspects with similar sounding names, meaning we have to work hard to remember them all until we really get to know the characters. New Christian Joe is trying to grow in his faith, something I enjoyed seeing. I first read this book over 25 years ago, and it’s nice to see it stacks up to my memories of the series.
Read my full review at <a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2017/03/book-review-mouse-trapped-by-sandy.html">Carstairs Considers</a>.
Vegas (725 KP) rated Locked Up (2017) in Movies
Jul 16, 2019 (Updated Jul 16, 2019)
Why was she even sent to this place for a minor "crime" (1 more)
Plot holes
Not one to watch with your granny
An American teen in Asia gets bullied and retaliates, causing her to be sent to a correctional facility which was more like a Hellhole prison.
She is forced into situations that are awkward and uncomfortable to watch at times and doesn't make for easy viewing, so isn't a lets relax with a family friendly Sunday afternoon type film
That being said, it wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good either, it is a, watch to pass the time film, but then forget about afterwards.
There are a lot of plot holes especially as to why on earth she ended up in this place, randomly after barely a mention of a "trial" (a 30 second to a minute scene) and how this place, looking like a high tech facility can be a front for the goings on behind the facade with nobody checking on the running of the place, even if corruption is rife i cant see how it got like this... I know we are supposed not to think of things like that but sometimes questions need to be asked of films.
She is forced into situations that are awkward and uncomfortable to watch at times and doesn't make for easy viewing, so isn't a lets relax with a family friendly Sunday afternoon type film
That being said, it wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good either, it is a, watch to pass the time film, but then forget about afterwards.
There are a lot of plot holes especially as to why on earth she ended up in this place, randomly after barely a mention of a "trial" (a 30 second to a minute scene) and how this place, looking like a high tech facility can be a front for the goings on behind the facade with nobody checking on the running of the place, even if corruption is rife i cant see how it got like this... I know we are supposed not to think of things like that but sometimes questions need to be asked of films.