Search
Awix (3310 KP) rated On the Basis of Sex (2018) in Movies
Mar 1, 2019
Legal bio-pic has a title that makes it sound like a recipe for a failed marriage; unfortunately it's not as interesting as that. Felicity Jones plays a young Ruth Bader Ginsberg, battling the patriarchy first at Harvard and then in the courts, aided by her husband Marty (it's Armie Hammer time!).
Well-mounted and with some decent performances, and there are some startling revelations (sex discrimination was not considered unconstitutional in the US until fairly recently), but the actual story of the main case covered by the film is not that gripping (a lot of discussion of legal procedure and tax law), and the earnestness of the film also threatens to make it a bit indigestible: of course RBG is an important figure fighting for a good cause, but that doesn't mean any film about her has to feel like The Lives of the Saints. The documentary about Ginsberg is also flawed, but more peppy than this.
Well-mounted and with some decent performances, and there are some startling revelations (sex discrimination was not considered unconstitutional in the US until fairly recently), but the actual story of the main case covered by the film is not that gripping (a lot of discussion of legal procedure and tax law), and the earnestness of the film also threatens to make it a bit indigestible: of course RBG is an important figure fighting for a good cause, but that doesn't mean any film about her has to feel like The Lives of the Saints. The documentary about Ginsberg is also flawed, but more peppy than this.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Free Fire (2017) in Movies
Jan 12, 2019
Stretched a bit too much
Ever since watching Sightseers I’ve always been excited to see the next Ben Wheatley film, however recently they’ve been very hit and miss. And sadly Free Fire for me was no different.
It has a truly fantastic cast, you can’t really get much better than the likes of Brie Larson, Cillian Murphy, Armie Hammer and Michael Smiley. The cast themselves are faultless, and so is the direction. It’s brilliantly shot and does very well with such a limited set. The soundtrack is great too. My main issue is that it’s a simple plot that feels like it’s been stretched too thin. Whilst the run time of 90 minutes is very short, it still dragged and got a little boring and definitely feels too stretched. Don’t get me wrong, there are parts of this film that are hilarious and this did help, but for me it wasn’t enough. I could’ve done with a little more variety. Also the ending was a little predictable.
It has a truly fantastic cast, you can’t really get much better than the likes of Brie Larson, Cillian Murphy, Armie Hammer and Michael Smiley. The cast themselves are faultless, and so is the direction. It’s brilliantly shot and does very well with such a limited set. The soundtrack is great too. My main issue is that it’s a simple plot that feels like it’s been stretched too thin. Whilst the run time of 90 minutes is very short, it still dragged and got a little boring and definitely feels too stretched. Don’t get me wrong, there are parts of this film that are hilarious and this did help, but for me it wasn’t enough. I could’ve done with a little more variety. Also the ending was a little predictable.
Erika (17788 KP) rated On the Basis of Sex (2018) in Movies
Jan 14, 2019 (Updated Jan 14, 2019)
I am not a member of the RBG cult, and I honestly have no idea as to why it even exists. But, I was kind of bored yesterday and needed to get out of the house, so I decided to go see this.
I was equally bored. It started out with RBG at Harvard in law school, and, guess what? The Dean of the school and a lot of dudes were misogynist , color me shocked (heavy sarcasm). This film covers about 20 years, and dragged like it covered that amount of time. I think Felicity Jones did a good job with what she was given and her period clothing was one of my favorite things. How the court cases went weren't really a secret, so I wasn't sure why people were gasping during it. It was bizarre.
Honestly, the best part of the film was how smoking hot Armie Hammer looked.
In short, an over-hyped film, about an over-hyped figure.
I was equally bored. It started out with RBG at Harvard in law school, and, guess what? The Dean of the school and a lot of dudes were misogynist , color me shocked (heavy sarcasm). This film covers about 20 years, and dragged like it covered that amount of time. I think Felicity Jones did a good job with what she was given and her period clothing was one of my favorite things. How the court cases went weren't really a secret, so I wasn't sure why people were gasping during it. It was bizarre.
Honestly, the best part of the film was how smoking hot Armie Hammer looked.
In short, an over-hyped film, about an over-hyped figure.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Social Network (2010) in Movies
Apr 24, 2020
I really liked the format of this film. I think in some movies it's really hard to do a jump plot and do it well, but this film does it exquisitely. I loved the cast - Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, Brenda Song, Armie Hammer, Rashida Jones, and obviously Jesse Eisenberg - they all did a phenomenal job.
It's really interesting to watch this movie now, 10 years after its initial release and see how Facebook and even the world, has changed. Especially with all of the drama and the rumors about Facebook and what it's involved in. I suppose it's fitting given the way that it was created.
I enjoyed this film. I'm not sure if I'll ever watch it again, but I know that I can't say I won't so I suppose that's a good thing. My favorite thing about this film is the way the plot roles, going back and forth between the depositions and what happened, it's really seamless and enjoyable.
It's really interesting to watch this movie now, 10 years after its initial release and see how Facebook and even the world, has changed. Especially with all of the drama and the rumors about Facebook and what it's involved in. I suppose it's fitting given the way that it was created.
I enjoyed this film. I'm not sure if I'll ever watch it again, but I know that I can't say I won't so I suppose that's a good thing. My favorite thing about this film is the way the plot roles, going back and forth between the depositions and what happened, it's really seamless and enjoyable.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Wounds (2019) in Movies
Feb 22, 2020
Unsettling but confused
This is the kind of horror film I usually enjoy. Something atmospheric, creepy and a little unusual, without the need to go over the top on horrific CGI or predictable jump scares. Wounds succeeds with this and the horror scenes are enjoyably creepy and unsettling. The problem is pretty much the rest of the film.
Armie Hammer and Zazie Beetz are very good, and when they're on screen together they're great, but the rest of the cast are left with little to work with and Dakota Johnson's character is a complete waste of space. The main issue is that the plot is rather weird, which would be fine if there was a decent explanation at the end but the ending is severely lacking and makes for a lot of confusion. The tone of the film also feels more like a drama with a bit of horror thrown in rather than a full on horror - with a little less of the drama and a little more exposition this might have been a decent film.
Armie Hammer and Zazie Beetz are very good, and when they're on screen together they're great, but the rest of the cast are left with little to work with and Dakota Johnson's character is a complete waste of space. The main issue is that the plot is rather weird, which would be fine if there was a decent explanation at the end but the ending is severely lacking and makes for a lot of confusion. The tone of the film also feels more like a drama with a bit of horror thrown in rather than a full on horror - with a little less of the drama and a little more exposition this might have been a decent film.
David McK (3172 KP) rated The Lone Ranger (2013) in Movies
Sep 15, 2019 (Updated Feb 14, 2021)
"Hi Ho Silver away!"
Gore Verbinski (Pirates of the Carribean) take on the classic Western for Disney, with Johnny Depp's Tonto pretty much playing the same character as his Captain Jack Sparrow, and with Armie Hammer taking on the role of The Lone Ranger.
Set as an elderly Tonto telling the story to a child visitor in a fairground in 1930s San Fransisco, this takes a while to get going (2hour 20 running time!), with a large part of the story settign the scene and the background to how the Lone Ranger came to be who he is/was.
Indeed, apart from a slight refrain at the beginning the stirring William Tell overture doesn't even get used until near the end of the movie (probably for the best, as an overuse would dilute its impact).
I also have to say that this is probably one for the big screen: the sweeping majestic shots of the Wild West do kind of lose their impact on a smaller TV screen!
Gore Verbinski (Pirates of the Carribean) take on the classic Western for Disney, with Johnny Depp's Tonto pretty much playing the same character as his Captain Jack Sparrow, and with Armie Hammer taking on the role of The Lone Ranger.
Set as an elderly Tonto telling the story to a child visitor in a fairground in 1930s San Fransisco, this takes a while to get going (2hour 20 running time!), with a large part of the story settign the scene and the background to how the Lone Ranger came to be who he is/was.
Indeed, apart from a slight refrain at the beginning the stirring William Tell overture doesn't even get used until near the end of the movie (probably for the best, as an overuse would dilute its impact).
I also have to say that this is probably one for the big screen: the sweeping majestic shots of the Wild West do kind of lose their impact on a smaller TV screen!
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated J. Edgar (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When I first heard about this movie, it intrigued me. When I heard that it starred Leonardo Dicaprio and was directed by Clint Eastwood, I was hooked. And I must say, that with a few small exceptions, the film definitely lived up to expectations for me.
J. Edgar is the story of Hoover’s rise to “power”, as told by J. Edgar Hoover. The movie takes place during three different time periods: when Hoover was just a budding employee of the Department of Justice and his involvement in the creation of the Bureau of Investigation; flash forward to Kennedy’s time in the office of the President of the United States of America, and finally during Nixon’s short-lived administration.
Throughout the film we see the influence that Hoover had in the government at the time. Of course, at the beginning of his career, he had very little. But through lies, deceit and manipulation he quickly became very influential. He began building his “personal files” very early on, which he used to blackmail and coerce government officials into many things, but most of all to keep his position as head of the FBI.
Throughout the film we see J. Edgar Hoover’s struggle with his controlling mother, his sexuality and his political opponents. His mother, Annie Hoover, played by Dame Judi Dench, saw Hoover as the savior of their family name. It had been disgraced in her eyes by his mentally ill father. She was his guiding voice in all areas of his life, including appearance, stature and his sexuality.
We see Hoover make advances towards Helen Gandy, played by Naomi Watts, who is a typist who becomes his personal assistant his entire life. Hoover’s demeanor around her is awkward at best, and she makes it very clear that she is focusing on her career. Shortly after the creation of the Bureau of Investigations he meets Clyde Tolson, played by Armie Hammer of The Social Network fame. It quickly becomes obvious that there is chemistry between these two.
The film takes us all the way to Hoover’s death and the many things he has accomplished, or perhaps did not accomplish, in between. Remember that I said that this a story of J. Edgar Hoover as told by the man himself. This plays into the film in a very great way. Overall, this is definitely a must-see film as it is a great drama sprinkled with spots of humor. I can see a trio of Oscar nominations with this film for Clint Eastwood in directing, and for Leonardo Dicaprio and Armie Hammer in acting.
J. Edgar is the story of Hoover’s rise to “power”, as told by J. Edgar Hoover. The movie takes place during three different time periods: when Hoover was just a budding employee of the Department of Justice and his involvement in the creation of the Bureau of Investigation; flash forward to Kennedy’s time in the office of the President of the United States of America, and finally during Nixon’s short-lived administration.
Throughout the film we see the influence that Hoover had in the government at the time. Of course, at the beginning of his career, he had very little. But through lies, deceit and manipulation he quickly became very influential. He began building his “personal files” very early on, which he used to blackmail and coerce government officials into many things, but most of all to keep his position as head of the FBI.
Throughout the film we see J. Edgar Hoover’s struggle with his controlling mother, his sexuality and his political opponents. His mother, Annie Hoover, played by Dame Judi Dench, saw Hoover as the savior of their family name. It had been disgraced in her eyes by his mentally ill father. She was his guiding voice in all areas of his life, including appearance, stature and his sexuality.
We see Hoover make advances towards Helen Gandy, played by Naomi Watts, who is a typist who becomes his personal assistant his entire life. Hoover’s demeanor around her is awkward at best, and she makes it very clear that she is focusing on her career. Shortly after the creation of the Bureau of Investigations he meets Clyde Tolson, played by Armie Hammer of The Social Network fame. It quickly becomes obvious that there is chemistry between these two.
The film takes us all the way to Hoover’s death and the many things he has accomplished, or perhaps did not accomplish, in between. Remember that I said that this a story of J. Edgar Hoover as told by the man himself. This plays into the film in a very great way. Overall, this is definitely a must-see film as it is a great drama sprinkled with spots of humor. I can see a trio of Oscar nominations with this film for Clint Eastwood in directing, and for Leonardo Dicaprio and Armie Hammer in acting.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Wounds (2019) in Movies
Oct 17, 2019
Will's life isn't that complicated, he does his shifts at the bar, comes home to his girlfriend Carrie and in between he flirts with one of the regulars, Alicia.
Life in the bar is pretty predictable, everyone drinks too much and there's the occasional fight. On this particular evening things get even stranger. When Eric and his friends arrive already drunk Will leaves them be, he's more intrigued by the group of college kids who arrive looking quite out of place. Everything is turned upside down when Eric and his friends start fighting and bring the night to a quick end.
Clearing up the debris Will finds a phone belonging to one of the kids, he takes it home intending to put it in lost property the next day but before that happens he discovers some shocking images that lead him and Carrie down a terrifying rabbit hole.
Wounds has a nice idea behind it but once I came out of the film and started thinking about it I began realising that somehow it's all just a little vague. One of the things I like about films with sci-fi and supernatural leanings is finding out about where the "things" have come from, in Wounds they give you a hint about it but nothing solid to go on. Will and Carrie are only given the vaguest of clues about what is happening and it's surprisingly frustrating. It felt very much like we'd been handed film two in a series and somewhere along the line we'd be handed the first film as a prequel and watch it end as they drop the phone in the bar.
We're also probably subjected to a little too much drama. The beginning takes a while to get to the horror aspect of things. By the time it came out I was genuinely surprised. I'd assumed the horror tag was added at a stretch as it was coming across as a thriller more than everything else. Certainly the drama portion seemed to be unnecessary to most of what was going on by the end of the film.
Armie Hammer plays Will in the main role of the movie. Will's journey goes through a lot of stages, potentially too many. It does at least work in a sensible progression rather than jumping around. Hammer is convincing in all stages even if they do seem a little far fetched but I would personally have axed some of it.
Here's what I would have done... Zazie Beetz was great and I love her in everything I've seen, in my opinion she was underused in this film. I'd have given her the role of Carrie and expanded it slightly while cutting Alicia and her boyfriend out completely. Beetz's performance was great but there wasn't really anything to get her teeth into when it came to the horror side of everything. She had great chemistry with Hammer onscreen which I didn't get from his performances with Johnson. Johnson's performance in general felt underwhelming, Carrie wasn't going to be a likeable character but she could have been so much more.
Sound plays a very big part in the film. As I mentioned at the beginning creepy crawlies play a big part in Wounds, and even when they're not there you know they're there. It's incredibly well done because more than once I found myself getting twitchy that I could hear them in the background of scenes. The other noticeable sound related issue was around the phone, at one point Will answers the mobile and we're subjected to a loud piercing tone that cuts right through you. Again, fantastic use of sound, but in this instance while it makes you feel the unease of Will as it happens it is also painfully loud for anyone who is even slightly sensitive to things like that.
The film uses effects to create the swarms of bugs... although saying that, if they didn't then it's a very impressive bunch of cockroach wranglers they have on staff. The effects themselves aren't fantastic but when they happen it's so fast that it kind of works in the moment.
It might not be the best horror film but it certainly wasn't a bad watch. It comes out on Netflix tomorrow, I won't be seeing it again right away but it's definitely going onto the Watchlist for the future.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/wounds-movie-review.html
Life in the bar is pretty predictable, everyone drinks too much and there's the occasional fight. On this particular evening things get even stranger. When Eric and his friends arrive already drunk Will leaves them be, he's more intrigued by the group of college kids who arrive looking quite out of place. Everything is turned upside down when Eric and his friends start fighting and bring the night to a quick end.
Clearing up the debris Will finds a phone belonging to one of the kids, he takes it home intending to put it in lost property the next day but before that happens he discovers some shocking images that lead him and Carrie down a terrifying rabbit hole.
Wounds has a nice idea behind it but once I came out of the film and started thinking about it I began realising that somehow it's all just a little vague. One of the things I like about films with sci-fi and supernatural leanings is finding out about where the "things" have come from, in Wounds they give you a hint about it but nothing solid to go on. Will and Carrie are only given the vaguest of clues about what is happening and it's surprisingly frustrating. It felt very much like we'd been handed film two in a series and somewhere along the line we'd be handed the first film as a prequel and watch it end as they drop the phone in the bar.
We're also probably subjected to a little too much drama. The beginning takes a while to get to the horror aspect of things. By the time it came out I was genuinely surprised. I'd assumed the horror tag was added at a stretch as it was coming across as a thriller more than everything else. Certainly the drama portion seemed to be unnecessary to most of what was going on by the end of the film.
Armie Hammer plays Will in the main role of the movie. Will's journey goes through a lot of stages, potentially too many. It does at least work in a sensible progression rather than jumping around. Hammer is convincing in all stages even if they do seem a little far fetched but I would personally have axed some of it.
Here's what I would have done... Zazie Beetz was great and I love her in everything I've seen, in my opinion she was underused in this film. I'd have given her the role of Carrie and expanded it slightly while cutting Alicia and her boyfriend out completely. Beetz's performance was great but there wasn't really anything to get her teeth into when it came to the horror side of everything. She had great chemistry with Hammer onscreen which I didn't get from his performances with Johnson. Johnson's performance in general felt underwhelming, Carrie wasn't going to be a likeable character but she could have been so much more.
Sound plays a very big part in the film. As I mentioned at the beginning creepy crawlies play a big part in Wounds, and even when they're not there you know they're there. It's incredibly well done because more than once I found myself getting twitchy that I could hear them in the background of scenes. The other noticeable sound related issue was around the phone, at one point Will answers the mobile and we're subjected to a loud piercing tone that cuts right through you. Again, fantastic use of sound, but in this instance while it makes you feel the unease of Will as it happens it is also painfully loud for anyone who is even slightly sensitive to things like that.
The film uses effects to create the swarms of bugs... although saying that, if they didn't then it's a very impressive bunch of cockroach wranglers they have on staff. The effects themselves aren't fantastic but when they happen it's so fast that it kind of works in the moment.
It might not be the best horror film but it certainly wasn't a bad watch. It comes out on Netflix tomorrow, I won't be seeing it again right away but it's definitely going onto the Watchlist for the future.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/wounds-movie-review.html
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 15, 2022
To start with, there's only so much you can hate on an Agatha Christie adaption. The film could be torrid tripe, but there's still a particular brand of intrigue which always comes with one of her whodunits. This latest re-telling of Death on the Nile just about scrapes by, mainly thanks to its second half, and that aforementioned Christie narrative, but sadly, not much else.
There's glimpses of something good there. Kenneth Branagh can be hit or miss as far as I'm concerned. For every Belfast (soaringly wonderful) there's an Artemis Fowl (what I imagine a lobotomy feels like). This is somewhere in the middle. There are moments of promise sprinkled here and there, but they struggle to break through all the bloated hot air that is draped over everything.
All of the characters are ridiculous. I get that's part of it, but it just falls flat here. It's hard to enjoy comic relief when everyone is comic relief. Gal Gadot seems like she is half-arsing every line. Russell Brand feels jarringly out of place. I traditionally enjoy French & Saunders but they also feel alien in every scene they're in. I know this shouldn't really impact my view, but Armie Hammer look like he just wants to eat everyone he talks to. Even the usually reliable Annette Benning comes across completely disinterested. There's no chemistry anywhere, and it all just feels a bit odd. Branagh is pretty great as Poirot to his credit. He just about holds proceedings together along with Sophie Okonedo, and they both manage to inject some charisma when things become arduous, which is farily regularly.
A bit of a misfire then, but not a complete disaster. I can firmly file Death on the Nile under "films I don't really like, but would probably watch again if it was on TV, or maybe on Christmas day at my Mums house".
There's glimpses of something good there. Kenneth Branagh can be hit or miss as far as I'm concerned. For every Belfast (soaringly wonderful) there's an Artemis Fowl (what I imagine a lobotomy feels like). This is somewhere in the middle. There are moments of promise sprinkled here and there, but they struggle to break through all the bloated hot air that is draped over everything.
All of the characters are ridiculous. I get that's part of it, but it just falls flat here. It's hard to enjoy comic relief when everyone is comic relief. Gal Gadot seems like she is half-arsing every line. Russell Brand feels jarringly out of place. I traditionally enjoy French & Saunders but they also feel alien in every scene they're in. I know this shouldn't really impact my view, but Armie Hammer look like he just wants to eat everyone he talks to. Even the usually reliable Annette Benning comes across completely disinterested. There's no chemistry anywhere, and it all just feels a bit odd. Branagh is pretty great as Poirot to his credit. He just about holds proceedings together along with Sophie Okonedo, and they both manage to inject some charisma when things become arduous, which is farily regularly.
A bit of a misfire then, but not a complete disaster. I can firmly file Death on the Nile under "films I don't really like, but would probably watch again if it was on TV, or maybe on Christmas day at my Mums house".
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Lone Ranger (2013) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: The Lone Ranger starts with Tonto (Depp) telling the story of how he met the Lone Ranger John Reid (Hammer) the district attorney of Texas, we see how Butch Cavendish (Fichtner) killed John only for Tonto to bring him back from the dead to get their vengeance on the outlaws.
The journey takes the two men across the wild west to expose the truth behind everything that has been going on between the outlaws and the native Americans.
Thoughts on The Lone Ranger
Characters – John Reid is a district attorney in Texas, living in the shadow of his brother, but this time he gets to go on an adventure with his brother only to be murdered and bought back to life by Tonto. He must work with Tonto to get the people behind his brother’s death. Tonto is the native American that shows John the way as his own past makes him the colourful character that does things in his own direction. Butch Cavendish is the villainous outlaw not afraid to kill anyone who gets in the way of what he desires.
Performances – Armie Hammer in this leading role is good through the film, he must play the straight-laced character and pulls this off. Johnny Depp is going on one of his stranger character missions again here and at times is fine, but at others gets annoying. William Fichtner as a villain is something we always want to see.
Story – The story follows the origin of The Lone Ranger and Tonto as they faced their first enemy together in the wild west. The story plays out nicely just how you would imagine any Disney related material to, as an unlikely hero is born, even if it does follow elements of the Pirates beginning. This does have an adventure across the west feel which is nice to see and the twists and turns do seem to be easy to see unfolding, with a villain that knows the danger the two heroes pose to him.
Action/Adventure/Western – The action sequences do come off feeling like the highlight of the movie, with an amazing opening train sequence. The adventure side of the film is written all over the idea of going across the wild west to stop the villainous characters. The western feel comes through strong too, while not the most serious we do see both sides of the law.
Settings – The settings take us all over the wild west fitting into nearly ever typical location we know about.
Special Effects – The effects are good too in the film while only being used to cover up certain moments of the film.
Scene of the Movie – Ladder trick.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too long.
Final Thoughts – This is a lot of fun even if it is too long in places, the cast do a good job and this one will be a film that you can switch off and enjoy.
Overall: Enjoyable action adventure.
The journey takes the two men across the wild west to expose the truth behind everything that has been going on between the outlaws and the native Americans.
Thoughts on The Lone Ranger
Characters – John Reid is a district attorney in Texas, living in the shadow of his brother, but this time he gets to go on an adventure with his brother only to be murdered and bought back to life by Tonto. He must work with Tonto to get the people behind his brother’s death. Tonto is the native American that shows John the way as his own past makes him the colourful character that does things in his own direction. Butch Cavendish is the villainous outlaw not afraid to kill anyone who gets in the way of what he desires.
Performances – Armie Hammer in this leading role is good through the film, he must play the straight-laced character and pulls this off. Johnny Depp is going on one of his stranger character missions again here and at times is fine, but at others gets annoying. William Fichtner as a villain is something we always want to see.
Story – The story follows the origin of The Lone Ranger and Tonto as they faced their first enemy together in the wild west. The story plays out nicely just how you would imagine any Disney related material to, as an unlikely hero is born, even if it does follow elements of the Pirates beginning. This does have an adventure across the west feel which is nice to see and the twists and turns do seem to be easy to see unfolding, with a villain that knows the danger the two heroes pose to him.
Action/Adventure/Western – The action sequences do come off feeling like the highlight of the movie, with an amazing opening train sequence. The adventure side of the film is written all over the idea of going across the wild west to stop the villainous characters. The western feel comes through strong too, while not the most serious we do see both sides of the law.
Settings – The settings take us all over the wild west fitting into nearly ever typical location we know about.
Special Effects – The effects are good too in the film while only being used to cover up certain moments of the film.
Scene of the Movie – Ladder trick.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too long.
Final Thoughts – This is a lot of fun even if it is too long in places, the cast do a good job and this one will be a film that you can switch off and enjoy.
Overall: Enjoyable action adventure.