Search
Search results
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The War of the Worlds in TV
Dec 6, 2019
Wasted talent & story
I really can't understand what the BBC were thinking with this one. A great story and a really good cast, completely squandered.
The first episode started off slowly but well with quite a decent build up. Even when the martians appeared it was rather tense and exciting, with a great sense of foreboding. The problem with this is the main George & Amy storyline. Despite it being set in the Edwardian period, slightly earlier than the book (but still a lot closer than that Tom Cruise abomination) they seem to have decided to ignore the majority of the book's storyline and instead include a rather convoluted and modern storyline about George and his mistress. It's entirely unnecessary and is the main focus of the series, despite it being a complete bore. This is the main issue with the 2nd and third parts of the series, they're so dull and there's no interest or excitement because it concentrates solely on George and Amy. The martians are almost an after thought. It doesnt help either that they try and explain the subtleties and intricacies of the book with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.
Even the cast can't save this, as they seem to have given up on trying to put in believable performances. And what was with the flitting between different time periods? Trying to include a bit of intrigue with a storytelling mechanism that has worked so well with other films but fails miserable in this, as it spoils the entire ending and resolution of the story.
A classic case of looks good, starts off well but falls completely flat. Such a disappointment.
The first episode started off slowly but well with quite a decent build up. Even when the martians appeared it was rather tense and exciting, with a great sense of foreboding. The problem with this is the main George & Amy storyline. Despite it being set in the Edwardian period, slightly earlier than the book (but still a lot closer than that Tom Cruise abomination) they seem to have decided to ignore the majority of the book's storyline and instead include a rather convoluted and modern storyline about George and his mistress. It's entirely unnecessary and is the main focus of the series, despite it being a complete bore. This is the main issue with the 2nd and third parts of the series, they're so dull and there's no interest or excitement because it concentrates solely on George and Amy. The martians are almost an after thought. It doesnt help either that they try and explain the subtleties and intricacies of the book with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.
Even the cast can't save this, as they seem to have given up on trying to put in believable performances. And what was with the flitting between different time periods? Trying to include a bit of intrigue with a storytelling mechanism that has worked so well with other films but fails miserable in this, as it spoils the entire ending and resolution of the story.
A classic case of looks good, starts off well but falls completely flat. Such a disappointment.
Matthew Scott (7 KP) rated Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (2001) in Movies
Mar 25, 2019
Greatest movie ever? MoviePoopChute.com thinks not!
There is not a more positive culture relevant movie in existence. If you like any movie or TV show from the 70s-90s, chances are somebody from that show is in this movie. Mark Hamil, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Carrie Fisher, George Carlin, Pie fucker, that dude that screwed Joey on Dawson's, Stiffler, not to mention hetero life mates Jay and Silent Bob! The jokes on this movie are a mile a minute, so you need to pay attention if you want to catch them all. If you're new to Kevin Smith and his impulsive friend Jason Mewes, then check out their Smodcast podcasts, or any of the other movies they've done together. Mallrats, Clerks, Dogma, Chasing Amy, etc. This is a must see for any fan of pop culture. This movie is like every Funko Pop figure wrapped into one.
Maddi Zoe (6 KP) rated Pitch Perfect 3 (2017) in Movies
Feb 8, 2018
Comedy classic with mediocre music
Pitch Perfect is back! Expect nothing but jaw-dropping harmonies, startling costumes and classic comedy. The third and final instalment of the Barden Bellas story finishes in aca-style!
The comedy follows the reunification of the Bellas as they embark on a USO tour, entertaining the troops in Europe. In classic Bella-style, the tour is also a competition between the acts to open the show for DJ Khaled during the final show in France.
From the get-go, we are bombarded with endless classic comedy moments. Take for instance, the awe-inspiring yacht opening and the explosive escape.
Despite a confusing start to the film, questions are later answered. Why are they on a boat? Why did it explode? It eventually makes sense. The story then makes a swift flashback to a few weeks before the story began.
Beca (Anna Kendrick) follows her dreams as a music producer. The rest of the Bellas, bar Emily (Hailee Steinfield) continue to pursue their careers
The cast is flawless. Its predecessors clearly proved this. Each and every film is underpinned by the cast's chemistry. Thankfully, Fat Amy (Rebel Wilson) is still as funny as ever. Amy also meets her match as Lily (Hana Mae Lee) proves to be quite the comedic character.
We also see new appearances. The likes of Ruby Rose (Calamity) stars as the front lady of the band 'Evermoist' (arguably the best and worst band name ever).
We couldn't miss the soundtrack (it is a musical). It is fantastic. However, it has to be the weakest of the three.
The Bellas are almost the only artists on the tour who are acapella. The majority of the other groups play instruments, except in another classic riff-off. The music couldn't have ended a more 'perfect' way. A beautiful rendition of George Michael's Freedom bought a tear to the eye.
The cinematography was equally as good as other films. We even get to see numerous surprises from Fat Amy (explosive scenes).
We even see a montage of sorts during a performance on tour. The camera shots also seemed to fit together, making the film flow and avoiding a yawn.
There are also some great side plots. From comical to the dramatic likes of explosions, the action does at points seem unnecessary.
We were also treated moments of pure comedy gold! A classic but predictable scene occurred in DJ Khaled's hotel suite.
Pitch Perfect 3 is a great finale to the end of the series. It roads the trilogy off in the 'perfect' way. Have you seen the first two? If so, we urge you to watch the third instalment. Have you not seen either? We advise you to binge watch them all!
The comedy follows the reunification of the Bellas as they embark on a USO tour, entertaining the troops in Europe. In classic Bella-style, the tour is also a competition between the acts to open the show for DJ Khaled during the final show in France.
From the get-go, we are bombarded with endless classic comedy moments. Take for instance, the awe-inspiring yacht opening and the explosive escape.
Despite a confusing start to the film, questions are later answered. Why are they on a boat? Why did it explode? It eventually makes sense. The story then makes a swift flashback to a few weeks before the story began.
Beca (Anna Kendrick) follows her dreams as a music producer. The rest of the Bellas, bar Emily (Hailee Steinfield) continue to pursue their careers
The cast is flawless. Its predecessors clearly proved this. Each and every film is underpinned by the cast's chemistry. Thankfully, Fat Amy (Rebel Wilson) is still as funny as ever. Amy also meets her match as Lily (Hana Mae Lee) proves to be quite the comedic character.
We also see new appearances. The likes of Ruby Rose (Calamity) stars as the front lady of the band 'Evermoist' (arguably the best and worst band name ever).
We couldn't miss the soundtrack (it is a musical). It is fantastic. However, it has to be the weakest of the three.
The Bellas are almost the only artists on the tour who are acapella. The majority of the other groups play instruments, except in another classic riff-off. The music couldn't have ended a more 'perfect' way. A beautiful rendition of George Michael's Freedom bought a tear to the eye.
The cinematography was equally as good as other films. We even get to see numerous surprises from Fat Amy (explosive scenes).
We even see a montage of sorts during a performance on tour. The camera shots also seemed to fit together, making the film flow and avoiding a yawn.
There are also some great side plots. From comical to the dramatic likes of explosions, the action does at points seem unnecessary.
We were also treated moments of pure comedy gold! A classic but predictable scene occurred in DJ Khaled's hotel suite.
Pitch Perfect 3 is a great finale to the end of the series. It roads the trilogy off in the 'perfect' way. Have you seen the first two? If so, we urge you to watch the third instalment. Have you not seen either? We advise you to binge watch them all!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Free Birds (2013) in Movies
Nov 26, 2020
A Fun Thanksgiving Flick
When asked to list films worth watching that have a Thanksgiving theme, the BankofMarquis likes to pull out a little animated gem that came and went pretty quickly in 2013 - FREE BIRDS - starring the voices of Owen Wilson and Woody Harrelson as 2 turkeys that go back in time in an egg-shaped time machine named STEVE (voiced by George Takei - more on that later) to stop the first Thanksgiving. This film succeeds more than it doesn't.
The first full length animated feature film from REEL FX (one of only 2 they have put out thus far) FREE BIRDS suffers from that kiss of death - multiple writers revising the script over time. Directed by JImmy Hayward (HORTON HEARS A WHO), who is also credited with writing this film alongside long time Kevin Smith collaborator Scott Mosier,FREE BIRDS is actually a pretty fun film, despite the disjointedness of the plot.
Credit should go to the stellar voice cast, led by Owen Wilson and Woody Harrelson. They have tremendous chemistry together and are a fun pair to watch. Joining them is the always dependable Amy Poehler (who would shine as the voice of Joy years later in Pixar's INSIDE OUT). It was fun spending an hour and a half with these 3 - and the others in this cast: Colm Meaney, David Keith and Dan Fogler.
But, for me, the star of this film is Star Trek's George Takei as the voice of S.T.E.V.E (the egg-shaped time machine device). He understands what type of film he is in and delivers just the right blend of comedy and seriousness that helps elevate the proceedings. And that is good for, as I stated above, the plot is a bit disjointed, so I would recommend you just sit back, relax and enjoy the ride.
The critics panned this film, but it made over $110 million at the box office (more than doubling it's production cost), so many, many moviegoers had the same, fun experience that I did.
And...you will, too...if you give FREE BIRDS a try.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The first full length animated feature film from REEL FX (one of only 2 they have put out thus far) FREE BIRDS suffers from that kiss of death - multiple writers revising the script over time. Directed by JImmy Hayward (HORTON HEARS A WHO), who is also credited with writing this film alongside long time Kevin Smith collaborator Scott Mosier,FREE BIRDS is actually a pretty fun film, despite the disjointedness of the plot.
Credit should go to the stellar voice cast, led by Owen Wilson and Woody Harrelson. They have tremendous chemistry together and are a fun pair to watch. Joining them is the always dependable Amy Poehler (who would shine as the voice of Joy years later in Pixar's INSIDE OUT). It was fun spending an hour and a half with these 3 - and the others in this cast: Colm Meaney, David Keith and Dan Fogler.
But, for me, the star of this film is Star Trek's George Takei as the voice of S.T.E.V.E (the egg-shaped time machine device). He understands what type of film he is in and delivers just the right blend of comedy and seriousness that helps elevate the proceedings. And that is good for, as I stated above, the plot is a bit disjointed, so I would recommend you just sit back, relax and enjoy the ride.
The critics panned this film, but it made over $110 million at the box office (more than doubling it's production cost), so many, many moviegoers had the same, fun experience that I did.
And...you will, too...if you give FREE BIRDS a try.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jan 21, 2019
Good movie with 2 GREAT performances
Writer/Director Adam McKay was known for years as the writing partner/director of Will Ferrell, having written and directed such comedy gems as ANCHORMAN, TALLADEGA NIGHTS and STEP BROTHERS and then, in 2015, he stepped out of Ferrell's shadow - and the comedy world - and delivered the multi-Oscar nominated film THE BIG SHORT, a fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at the financial crisis of the mid-2000's.
His follow-up to this film is another fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at a serious subject - the life and career of former Vice President Dick Cheney, an unassuming bureaucrat that wields much power in the George W. Bush White House. I thought THE BIG SHORT worked on every level so was looking forward to this follow-up and this one works on MOST levels.
So..what does work? Let's start with the acting of the top-notch cast. Steve Carrell, Sam Rockwell, Lily Rabe, Justin Kirk and Tyler Perry all are terrific in smaller, supporting roles that depict real people (like Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, Liz Cheney, Scooter LIbbey and Colin Powell, respectively). They all bring the necessary level of gravitas and ironic humor to their parts.
But...make no mistake...this film stars and IS ABOUT Lynne and Dick Cheney (Amy Adams and Christian Bale) and both of these two stars SHINE BRIGHTLY in their portrayal of a a Washington DC power couple who are always calculating the political angle of any issue and how they can benefit from it. I expect both of these two actors to get Oscar nominations.
What also works is the pseduo-documentary style that McKay brings to the screen (similar to THE BIG SHORT), the characters, at times, speak directly to the camera to explain something or (at one time) breaks into a Shakespearean scene to emphasize what's going on.
So...what doesn't work? I'm going to start with the Narrator of this piece, Jesse Plemons. He is a solid actor who can bring a wry sense of humor - or gravitas - to the proceedings. But, to be plain about it, Plemons narrator character (who we come to find out has a VERY big role in Cheney's life) is just not interesting enough to follow or listen to. In THE BIG SHORT, this role was filled by the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and, I'm afraid, Plemons just doesn't have that same level of charm and charisma.
Secondly, what didn't work for me was the people/events that were unfolding in front of me. There was NOT ONE character to root for on the screen. Every politician seen upon the screen was just out for themselves and were willing to screw (or stab in the back) anyone that is no longer any use for them. These are not very likable characters and I longed for someone to root for, which made this film fall short of "GREAT" status for me. It is a very good film - strongly acted - but not a GREAT film.
If you haven't seen it, I would recommend VICE to all if, for nothing else, the performances of Adams and Bale, they are mesmerizing, just don't expect to root for anyone.
Letter Grade B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
His follow-up to this film is another fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at a serious subject - the life and career of former Vice President Dick Cheney, an unassuming bureaucrat that wields much power in the George W. Bush White House. I thought THE BIG SHORT worked on every level so was looking forward to this follow-up and this one works on MOST levels.
So..what does work? Let's start with the acting of the top-notch cast. Steve Carrell, Sam Rockwell, Lily Rabe, Justin Kirk and Tyler Perry all are terrific in smaller, supporting roles that depict real people (like Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, Liz Cheney, Scooter LIbbey and Colin Powell, respectively). They all bring the necessary level of gravitas and ironic humor to their parts.
But...make no mistake...this film stars and IS ABOUT Lynne and Dick Cheney (Amy Adams and Christian Bale) and both of these two stars SHINE BRIGHTLY in their portrayal of a a Washington DC power couple who are always calculating the political angle of any issue and how they can benefit from it. I expect both of these two actors to get Oscar nominations.
What also works is the pseduo-documentary style that McKay brings to the screen (similar to THE BIG SHORT), the characters, at times, speak directly to the camera to explain something or (at one time) breaks into a Shakespearean scene to emphasize what's going on.
So...what doesn't work? I'm going to start with the Narrator of this piece, Jesse Plemons. He is a solid actor who can bring a wry sense of humor - or gravitas - to the proceedings. But, to be plain about it, Plemons narrator character (who we come to find out has a VERY big role in Cheney's life) is just not interesting enough to follow or listen to. In THE BIG SHORT, this role was filled by the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and, I'm afraid, Plemons just doesn't have that same level of charm and charisma.
Secondly, what didn't work for me was the people/events that were unfolding in front of me. There was NOT ONE character to root for on the screen. Every politician seen upon the screen was just out for themselves and were willing to screw (or stab in the back) anyone that is no longer any use for them. These are not very likable characters and I longed for someone to root for, which made this film fall short of "GREAT" status for me. It is a very good film - strongly acted - but not a GREAT film.
If you haven't seen it, I would recommend VICE to all if, for nothing else, the performances of Adams and Bale, they are mesmerizing, just don't expect to root for anyone.
Letter Grade B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Amsterdam (2022) in Movies
Nov 21, 2022
Weak First Half Gives Way To Strong Second Half
There are certain Directors working today that gain such a reputation that most Major Movie Stars clamor to be in their films - no matter how big (or small) their part is. Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson and Christopher Nolan all come to mind. And, for some reason, David O. Russell is in that camp as well.
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A patronising mess of a film
If you want to learn how to completely and utterly fail at satire, look no further than Adam McKay’s Vice. It honestly does pain me to say this was one of the worst experiences I’ve ever had in the cinema. As a matter of fact, I was seconds away from walking out at one point. But, like any good critic, I stayed in my seat. I hoped and prayed it would get better… but it didn’t. If anything, it snowballed.
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Erika (17788 KP) Dec 6, 2019