Search
Search results
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Nocturnal Animals (2016) in Movies
Jul 28, 2017
Great story (1 more)
Tension & suspense
The best film of 2016
I don't readily give out full 10 reviews (you'll know that if you've seen any of my others) but this was by far my favourite film of 2016 and the only one from last year that I'd give full marks to.
There's some brilliant acting on all parts, it's ridiculously tense and suspenseful, very dark and completely enthralling. Tom Ford does a fine job (I still can't believe the director and the fashion designer are the same person) and Amy Adams is probably my favourite actress right now. The ending was great, I love an unhappy ending and this doesn't disappoint.
I went on to read the book after this, and it was completely different and nowhere near as good as the film. One of the rare times when the film is better than the book.
There's some brilliant acting on all parts, it's ridiculously tense and suspenseful, very dark and completely enthralling. Tom Ford does a fine job (I still can't believe the director and the fashion designer are the same person) and Amy Adams is probably my favourite actress right now. The ending was great, I love an unhappy ending and this doesn't disappoint.
I went on to read the book after this, and it was completely different and nowhere near as good as the film. One of the rare times when the film is better than the book.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Julie & Julia (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Julie & Julia’ is an intertwined tale based on the two true stories of cooking legend Julia Child (Meryl Streep) and that of author Julie Powell (Amy Adams). It is a story of non-traditional mentoring and the value of hard work and dedication, covering the process Child went through creating the 1961 classic Mastering the Art of French Cooking alongside the tale of Powell who was made famous when she blogged her way through Child’s book.
The films leads do nothing but deliver. Amy Adams, sporting a spunky new haircut, creates a character that is both soul searching and fun to watch. Meryl Streep amazingly transforms into Child, having perfected the subtleties of her personality so well that I found myself remising back to my single digit years.
The costumes are delightful and manage to seamlessly separate the two women’s tales while uniting them into a bigger story. The use of color and pacing make this a film that displays not only a change in time and lifestyle, but also the uniting human values that are entirely timeless.
A story of relationships and personal growth, combined with moments of laughter and hardship, I found myself in the mood I enjoyed through ‘Chocolat’ and ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’.
The film could have used more food imagery and I felt like the character of Eric Powell (Chris Messina) could have been better developed. But the delightful relationship between Julia and her husband Paul Child, played by the ever-enchanting Stanley Tucci, made this film a wildly entertaining journey.
On top of being a well-told tale, ‘Julie & Julia’ has that je ne sais quoi which make it a truly exceptional piece of film, and I know this because even my action loving husband enjoyed it. Well worth the price of admission ‘Julie & Julia’ is a time traveling felicity that is sure to win your heart, as it has mine.
The films leads do nothing but deliver. Amy Adams, sporting a spunky new haircut, creates a character that is both soul searching and fun to watch. Meryl Streep amazingly transforms into Child, having perfected the subtleties of her personality so well that I found myself remising back to my single digit years.
The costumes are delightful and manage to seamlessly separate the two women’s tales while uniting them into a bigger story. The use of color and pacing make this a film that displays not only a change in time and lifestyle, but also the uniting human values that are entirely timeless.
A story of relationships and personal growth, combined with moments of laughter and hardship, I found myself in the mood I enjoyed through ‘Chocolat’ and ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’.
The film could have used more food imagery and I felt like the character of Eric Powell (Chris Messina) could have been better developed. But the delightful relationship between Julia and her husband Paul Child, played by the ever-enchanting Stanley Tucci, made this film a wildly entertaining journey.
On top of being a well-told tale, ‘Julie & Julia’ has that je ne sais quoi which make it a truly exceptional piece of film, and I know this because even my action loving husband enjoyed it. Well worth the price of admission ‘Julie & Julia’ is a time traveling felicity that is sure to win your heart, as it has mine.
JT (287 KP) rated American Hustle (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
There’s a lot of love for American Hustle and with a cast such as this it is easy to see why. It’s a film that oozes glitz and glamour and has a slick sense of stability with shades Scorsese as an attempt at a crime caper.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
kitty ♡ (68 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Dec 5, 2017 (Updated Dec 5, 2017)
ezra miller as the flash (4 more)
jeremy irons
amy adams
aquaman's "my man!"
ray fisher
gal gadot (2 more)
ben affleck
the fact that lois and martha were seemingly a-ok with bruce's plan
don't let the critics get you down
Contains spoilers, click to show
let me just start this off with: when barry allen said "i need... friends" I FELT THAT
anyway, with that being said, this movie got way too much shit for existing. the mistake people keep making is comparing it to the avengers, which i get because it's basically the same plot, but please give the writers and the cast and crew more credit.
the one thing that still annoys me though is the fact that martha and lois didn't have a scene with bruce in which they talk about resurrecting clark. correct me if i'm wrong, but if memory serves me correctly, martha seemed surprised and doubtful? like she JUST got word of her son being jump-started back to life? umm? ethics department, hello?? why were lois and martha just okay with letting this happen umm???
anyway, with that being said, this movie got way too much shit for existing. the mistake people keep making is comparing it to the avengers, which i get because it's basically the same plot, but please give the writers and the cast and crew more credit.
the one thing that still annoys me though is the fact that martha and lois didn't have a scene with bruce in which they talk about resurrecting clark. correct me if i'm wrong, but if memory serves me correctly, martha seemed surprised and doubtful? like she JUST got word of her son being jump-started back to life? umm? ethics department, hello?? why were lois and martha just okay with letting this happen umm???
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Sharp Objects in TV
Aug 29, 2018
Brilliantly dark and intriguing
It’s rare to find a tv show like this nowadays. I’ve watched the entire series across two evenings, and for me this is definitely not a common occurrence!
I love Amy Adams (and not just because I’m jealous of her hair), she’s a fantastic actress and is brilliant as the haunted and troubled Camille. She’s supported by a great cast and there is a lot of well done character development. Even if Adora is one of the most infuriating characters I’ve seen on screen for some time. The series itself is very dark, covering everything from Camille's past to the current murder and disappearance of the young girls. Everything from the music to the directing and cinematography is perfect for this story, and every episode left me wanting to watch more.
My only criticisms are that the ending was a tiny bit predictable (I’ve probably read too many books, and I haven’t even read this one!), and whilst I enjoyed delving into Camille’s past and family, I found that the story about the two girls wasn’t quite in the forefront after the first couple of episodes. I know the reasons for this, but for me the investigation could’ve been a little more prominent.
I love Amy Adams (and not just because I’m jealous of her hair), she’s a fantastic actress and is brilliant as the haunted and troubled Camille. She’s supported by a great cast and there is a lot of well done character development. Even if Adora is one of the most infuriating characters I’ve seen on screen for some time. The series itself is very dark, covering everything from Camille's past to the current murder and disappearance of the young girls. Everything from the music to the directing and cinematography is perfect for this story, and every episode left me wanting to watch more.
My only criticisms are that the ending was a tiny bit predictable (I’ve probably read too many books, and I haven’t even read this one!), and whilst I enjoyed delving into Camille’s past and family, I found that the story about the two girls wasn’t quite in the forefront after the first couple of episodes. I know the reasons for this, but for me the investigation could’ve been a little more prominent.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Nocturnal Animals (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Putting the crisis into mid-life crisis.
“Do you think your life has turned into something you never intended?” So asks Susan Morrow (Amy Adams) to her young assistant, who obviously looks baffled. “Of course, not – you’re still young”. Susan is in a mid-life crisis. While successful within the opulent Los Angeles art scene her personal life is crashing to the ground around her: her marriage (to Hutton (Armie Hammer, “The Man From Uncle”) ) appears to be cooling fast amid financial worries.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated LOW in Books
Jan 31, 2019
I received a copy of LOW by Mike Duke in the mail a few months back and I’ve finally finished reading it–my health has gotten in the way not just once, but twice. For the most part, I enjoyed reading the book, but I do have a single bone to pick with it. You’ll see that towards the end of my review.
The two main characters are Mark Adams and Chad Bigleby. While Adams is a bit flat, Chad Bigleby is dynamic. Officer Adams is a good guy, through and through and does what’s right. Chad, on the other hand, is a man with no moral conscience. He’s a cheater, an abuser, and all around, a piece of shit. Mr. Phailees and Phobos are real pieces of work, showing that Duke’s definitely got the ability to create some pretty crazy characters.
Plotwise, the book is steady. There’s always something going on, even in the lulls between major events. That said, you might wonder why it took me so long to read the book if I found it interesting, and in that regard, I admit that I’ve been in a bit of a slump when it comes to reading. On top of that, I’ve had some severe concentration issues as of late.
I loved the way Duke writes his monsters. Some of them have a Lovecraftian feel to them, which I really like. Others are horrifying in other ways, such as Charon and Mortis which are demon-like and massive in their appearance.
Earlier I said I have a bone to pick, and here it is: the women in this book are unbelievably unrealistic. It’s because of this that I cannot give LOW a five-star rating. None of them are strong or independent, and for the most part, they seem like puppets controlled by their men. I would have liked to see Samantha stand up to Chad, or Amy grow a backbone despite her mistakes. It’s actually quite appalling how meek and sexualized the female characters are in this book. Granted, one of the points of view is from a misogynistic asshole of a man.
LOW is a good book and definitely falls into the horror category. In its pages, Mike Duke’s command of language is strong and his words come together beautifully to create a horrifying scene. It makes the reader question their own morality and wonder whether or not their sins would be so grievous as to be judged by Mr. Phailees. I know one thing for sure: I wouldn’t want to be at the wrong end of his bite.
I’d like to thank the author for providing me with a copy of this book for free in exchange for an honest review.
The two main characters are Mark Adams and Chad Bigleby. While Adams is a bit flat, Chad Bigleby is dynamic. Officer Adams is a good guy, through and through and does what’s right. Chad, on the other hand, is a man with no moral conscience. He’s a cheater, an abuser, and all around, a piece of shit. Mr. Phailees and Phobos are real pieces of work, showing that Duke’s definitely got the ability to create some pretty crazy characters.
Plotwise, the book is steady. There’s always something going on, even in the lulls between major events. That said, you might wonder why it took me so long to read the book if I found it interesting, and in that regard, I admit that I’ve been in a bit of a slump when it comes to reading. On top of that, I’ve had some severe concentration issues as of late.
I loved the way Duke writes his monsters. Some of them have a Lovecraftian feel to them, which I really like. Others are horrifying in other ways, such as Charon and Mortis which are demon-like and massive in their appearance.
Earlier I said I have a bone to pick, and here it is: the women in this book are unbelievably unrealistic. It’s because of this that I cannot give LOW a five-star rating. None of them are strong or independent, and for the most part, they seem like puppets controlled by their men. I would have liked to see Samantha stand up to Chad, or Amy grow a backbone despite her mistakes. It’s actually quite appalling how meek and sexualized the female characters are in this book. Granted, one of the points of view is from a misogynistic asshole of a man.
LOW is a good book and definitely falls into the horror category. In its pages, Mike Duke’s command of language is strong and his words come together beautifully to create a horrifying scene. It makes the reader question their own morality and wonder whether or not their sins would be so grievous as to be judged by Mr. Phailees. I know one thing for sure: I wouldn’t want to be at the wrong end of his bite.
I’d like to thank the author for providing me with a copy of this book for free in exchange for an honest review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hillbilly Elegy (2020) in Movies
Apr 14, 2021
Decent - with 3 strong female performances
Glenn Close is one of the most lauded Actresses of our time and her current streak of 7 Academy Award nominations without a win is a record. It would be ironic, indeed, if she would win her first Oscar with this, her 8th Oscar nomination, this time as Best Supporting Actress in HILLBILLY ELEGY.
Written by Vanessa Taylor and based on the book (and true story) by J.D. Vance, HILLBILLY ELEGY tells the tale of J.D. (naturally enough), who overcomes his impoverished roots and dysfunctional family background to become a star Law Student at Yale.
Gabriel Basso plays J.D. as the Law Student and he is just not charismatic enough to shine in this role especially as he goes up against 3 talented actresses that have PLENTY to sink their considerable acting chops into.
Close plays “Mamaw”, the grandmother of the clan. She is a no-nonsense, pragmatic matriarch that lives and breathes (through cigarette clogged lungs) “Family First”. It’s an interesting and strong performance by Close, but she does teeter into “Granny Clampett” territory at times for me. It’s a good performance…but the one that will finally get Close her Oscar? I don’t think so.
Amy Adams steals the movie as J.D.’s mother (and Mamaw’s daughter), Bev. She is (as we say in these parts) “a whole thing”. Her Bev is self-centered, clawing, desperate and constantly wondering why the world doesn’t give her the things that she is deserved. Nothing is EVER her fault and if you don’t believe me, just ask her. Adams’ performance is the strongest in this film and she never crosses the line into caricature.
One last moment of credit needs to be given to Haley Bennett as J.D.’s sister Lindsay, who is often the one stuck taking care of their Mother. When I first saw Bennett a few years back in 2016 in back to back strong performances in THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN and THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, I thought we were watching the emergence of a star. It’s good to see her on the screen again.
Credit for these performances must go the unlikely person helming this film, good ol’, reliable Ron Howard who’s workmanlike Directorial instincts and style lends itself very well to this, often told, type of story. It’s nothing flashy, but gets the job done.
And that pretty much sums up my feelings towards this film “nothing flashy, but gets the job done”, not the greatest film to come out in 2020 - but it is layered with 3 strong female performances by Adams, Bennett and Close so that makes this film one good enough to check out.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Written by Vanessa Taylor and based on the book (and true story) by J.D. Vance, HILLBILLY ELEGY tells the tale of J.D. (naturally enough), who overcomes his impoverished roots and dysfunctional family background to become a star Law Student at Yale.
Gabriel Basso plays J.D. as the Law Student and he is just not charismatic enough to shine in this role especially as he goes up against 3 talented actresses that have PLENTY to sink their considerable acting chops into.
Close plays “Mamaw”, the grandmother of the clan. She is a no-nonsense, pragmatic matriarch that lives and breathes (through cigarette clogged lungs) “Family First”. It’s an interesting and strong performance by Close, but she does teeter into “Granny Clampett” territory at times for me. It’s a good performance…but the one that will finally get Close her Oscar? I don’t think so.
Amy Adams steals the movie as J.D.’s mother (and Mamaw’s daughter), Bev. She is (as we say in these parts) “a whole thing”. Her Bev is self-centered, clawing, desperate and constantly wondering why the world doesn’t give her the things that she is deserved. Nothing is EVER her fault and if you don’t believe me, just ask her. Adams’ performance is the strongest in this film and she never crosses the line into caricature.
One last moment of credit needs to be given to Haley Bennett as J.D.’s sister Lindsay, who is often the one stuck taking care of their Mother. When I first saw Bennett a few years back in 2016 in back to back strong performances in THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN and THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, I thought we were watching the emergence of a star. It’s good to see her on the screen again.
Credit for these performances must go the unlikely person helming this film, good ol’, reliable Ron Howard who’s workmanlike Directorial instincts and style lends itself very well to this, often told, type of story. It’s nothing flashy, but gets the job done.
And that pretty much sums up my feelings towards this film “nothing flashy, but gets the job done”, not the greatest film to come out in 2020 - but it is layered with 3 strong female performances by Adams, Bennett and Close so that makes this film one good enough to check out.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Woman in the Window (2021) in Movies
May 24, 2021
It is NOT Rear Window
A piece of advice for you when you start to watch the “Alfred Hitchcock-esque” thriller, THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW. If you are at all a Hitchcock fan, you will be spending the first part of this film comparing it to the 1954 classic REAR WINDOW and this would be a disservice to this film.
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Nov 27, 2017
Decent cast performances (1 more)
Good fun
Varying quality of SFX (1 more)
Painfully safe
Justice At Last For DC Fans?
Last weekend, a movie dropped that most comic book fans have been hotly anticipating for the last few decades. The follow up to the disappointment that was Dawn of Justice, Justice League had a lot to live up to. I’m not going to try and convince you that it is a perfect movie, but I enjoyed it. If I was judging the movie on it’s own I would probably be much harsher with my rating etc, but in the context of other DCEU movies, it’s a breath of fresh air.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.