Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Prestige (2006) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Underrated and underseen gem
Along with INSOMNIA, the 2006 film that Nolan directed, THE PRESTIGE is probably one of his least known and least viewed films and that is too bad for it is a wonderful motion picture that proves he is a strong director with a strong vision.
Dubbed "The Warring Magicians" film, THE PRESTIGE stars Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman as two 19th Century Magicians who are...well...at war with each other. Of course, they started out as partners, but soon became enemies, each trying to out do each other and to discover the other magician's secrets.
Cleverly written by Nolan and his frequent collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan - and based on the novel by Christopher Priest, THE PRESTIGE will keep you guessing throughout, trying to figure out "how they did it" and are constantly being surprised by double turns, back stabbing and second guessing.
Bale, by this time in his career, has established himself as a powerful actor - and he shines here. Joining Bale is Nolan regular Michael Caine as the mentor of the two magicians, a young-ish Scarlett Johannsen as a a woman who falls in love with both of them (of course) and Rebecca Hall and Piper Perabo as Bale's and Jackman's wives, respectively. But...the surprise to me in this film when I first saw it - and again when I recently re-viewed it - is the performance of Hugh Jackman. This film shows that Jackman is more than just Wolverine - that dude can act. As a magician, he is showing glimpses of being "THE GREATEST SHOWMAN" (but that is another movie for another day) and more than holds his own against a fierce Bale. Finally...special notice needs to be made to the actor who portrays inventor Nikola Tesla - perfectly cast in this role is Ziggy Stardust himself, David Bowie. It's a shame that Bowie did not act in more films for he captures the screen in the brief appearances he makes in this film.
As for Nolan - he is now coming into his own as a Director. The action is fast paced, the twists and turns are "honestly" played, the composition of the pictures on the screen are interesting and beautiful to look at and I walked away satisfied.
If you haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (or if you haven't seen it in awhile) - check this one out. You'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A (and...that's a surprise to me, I figured it would be a B+/A- film)
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Dubbed "The Warring Magicians" film, THE PRESTIGE stars Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman as two 19th Century Magicians who are...well...at war with each other. Of course, they started out as partners, but soon became enemies, each trying to out do each other and to discover the other magician's secrets.
Cleverly written by Nolan and his frequent collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan - and based on the novel by Christopher Priest, THE PRESTIGE will keep you guessing throughout, trying to figure out "how they did it" and are constantly being surprised by double turns, back stabbing and second guessing.
Bale, by this time in his career, has established himself as a powerful actor - and he shines here. Joining Bale is Nolan regular Michael Caine as the mentor of the two magicians, a young-ish Scarlett Johannsen as a a woman who falls in love with both of them (of course) and Rebecca Hall and Piper Perabo as Bale's and Jackman's wives, respectively. But...the surprise to me in this film when I first saw it - and again when I recently re-viewed it - is the performance of Hugh Jackman. This film shows that Jackman is more than just Wolverine - that dude can act. As a magician, he is showing glimpses of being "THE GREATEST SHOWMAN" (but that is another movie for another day) and more than holds his own against a fierce Bale. Finally...special notice needs to be made to the actor who portrays inventor Nikola Tesla - perfectly cast in this role is Ziggy Stardust himself, David Bowie. It's a shame that Bowie did not act in more films for he captures the screen in the brief appearances he makes in this film.
As for Nolan - he is now coming into his own as a Director. The action is fast paced, the twists and turns are "honestly" played, the composition of the pictures on the screen are interesting and beautiful to look at and I walked away satisfied.
If you haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (or if you haven't seen it in awhile) - check this one out. You'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A (and...that's a surprise to me, I figured it would be a B+/A- film)
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Death Wish (2018) in Movies
Mar 13, 2018
Bruce Willis killing bad guys
5 minutes before DEATH WISH started there was just 2 of us in the movie theater (by the time the film started, there was probably around 20). I turned to the only gentleman sitting there (about 2 seats down) and asked him if he'd like break into a "discussion group" after the film. "I'm just here to see Bruce Willis kill bad guys.", he said.
He did not walk away disappointed.
Directed by Eli Roth, DEATH WISH is a remake of the early 1970's film starring Charles Bronson about a "normal, family man" who snaps after his wife and daughter are assaulted. The Police' hands are tied, so he decides to take matters in his own hands and starts committing "vigilante justice".
Bruce Willis stars in this remake - and he is perfectly fine as the Doctor turned vigilante. Joining him is Vincent D'Onofrio as his brother, Elisabth Shue as his wife and BREAKING BAD'S Dean Norris as the cop who is chasing him. All of these actors do a perfectly fine job with what they are given to work with, but (let's be honest), fine acting - or intricate plot developments - are not what you are looking for in this film.
As my new friend put it - "I'm just here to see Bruce Willis kill bad guys".
And "kill bad guys" he does. But...not as often as I though he would. And...not nearly as graphically as I was expecting. Director Roth is known as a Director of Horror "splatter" films, "torture porn" fare like the HOSTEL films and CABIN FEVER. I was pleasantly surprised by the restraint that Roth has shown in the graphic violence in this film - I was expecting it to be a lot worse, almost stomach churning - but it just wasn't (except for 1 torture seen involving a car). It was "basic" violent fare - and well done.
To be honest, I thought they spent too much time of the film setting up Willis' character turn to "the dark side", at one point wondering "get to killing the bad guys already". But, when the film gets there, it is entertaining, indeed.
As I walked past my "new friend" after the film was over, I asked him what he thought:
"I saw Bruce Willis killing bad guys, I'm good."
And that about sums it up.
Letter Grade B- (just know what you're getting into)
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
He did not walk away disappointed.
Directed by Eli Roth, DEATH WISH is a remake of the early 1970's film starring Charles Bronson about a "normal, family man" who snaps after his wife and daughter are assaulted. The Police' hands are tied, so he decides to take matters in his own hands and starts committing "vigilante justice".
Bruce Willis stars in this remake - and he is perfectly fine as the Doctor turned vigilante. Joining him is Vincent D'Onofrio as his brother, Elisabth Shue as his wife and BREAKING BAD'S Dean Norris as the cop who is chasing him. All of these actors do a perfectly fine job with what they are given to work with, but (let's be honest), fine acting - or intricate plot developments - are not what you are looking for in this film.
As my new friend put it - "I'm just here to see Bruce Willis kill bad guys".
And "kill bad guys" he does. But...not as often as I though he would. And...not nearly as graphically as I was expecting. Director Roth is known as a Director of Horror "splatter" films, "torture porn" fare like the HOSTEL films and CABIN FEVER. I was pleasantly surprised by the restraint that Roth has shown in the graphic violence in this film - I was expecting it to be a lot worse, almost stomach churning - but it just wasn't (except for 1 torture seen involving a car). It was "basic" violent fare - and well done.
To be honest, I thought they spent too much time of the film setting up Willis' character turn to "the dark side", at one point wondering "get to killing the bad guys already". But, when the film gets there, it is entertaining, indeed.
As I walked past my "new friend" after the film was over, I asked him what he thought:
"I saw Bruce Willis killing bad guys, I'm good."
And that about sums it up.
Letter Grade B- (just know what you're getting into)
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Office Christmas Party (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Josh Parker (Jason Bateman) is a man with many things on his mind. He has just finalized a divorce which has cost him his house, tons of money, and his confidence. Known for bunting instead of swinging away, Josh heads to his office to move on with his life as Christmas approaches.
His lead programmer Tracey (Olivia Munn) constantly reminds him of his playing it safe mentality to the point where she fed up with him and his ways.
Thankfully for Josh his boss Clay (T.J. Miller), values him and even though he is a goof who happened to be given the office by his late father who started the company, things are looking up.
That is until Interim CEO Carol (Jennifer Aniston) arrives and makes no effort to hide her disdain for her brother Clay, nor the company not meeting her expectations.
Carol quickly tells Josh and Clay that they will have to downsize if they want to stay open and in a very unpopular move, eliminates bonuses and the office Christmas Party.
Since the movie is called “Office Christmas Party”, you know that Carol’s request will fall on deaf ears as Clay convinces his sister that they are about to close a major client (Courtney B. Vance), and as such will have the deal set before she lands in London later that evening.
With nothing to go on aside from desperation, Clay puts the lovable but highly eccentric office into overdrive to create a party unlike any other so they can land the contract needed to stay in business.
When the party arrives one series of epic misadventures and mishaps after another arises which threatens to sink the company and everyone involved once and for all.
The film follows a fairly linear and somewhat predictable path but the strong cast does a great job and Kate McKinnon as the ultra-weird H.R. lead steals several of the scenes in which she is in. Bateman plays pretty much the same character that he has played in most of his recent work as the everyman that tries to make the best of the bad situation and Miller is pretty much recycling the same character he plays on Silicon Valley. That being said, there are plenty of laughs if you do not mind the very bawdy humor and Directors Josh Gordon and Will Speck keep things moving at a steady pace with laughs throughout the film.
While it is likely not going to be a holiday classic, “Office Christmas Party”, is a very fun and enjoyable diversion.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/09/office-christmas-party/
His lead programmer Tracey (Olivia Munn) constantly reminds him of his playing it safe mentality to the point where she fed up with him and his ways.
Thankfully for Josh his boss Clay (T.J. Miller), values him and even though he is a goof who happened to be given the office by his late father who started the company, things are looking up.
That is until Interim CEO Carol (Jennifer Aniston) arrives and makes no effort to hide her disdain for her brother Clay, nor the company not meeting her expectations.
Carol quickly tells Josh and Clay that they will have to downsize if they want to stay open and in a very unpopular move, eliminates bonuses and the office Christmas Party.
Since the movie is called “Office Christmas Party”, you know that Carol’s request will fall on deaf ears as Clay convinces his sister that they are about to close a major client (Courtney B. Vance), and as such will have the deal set before she lands in London later that evening.
With nothing to go on aside from desperation, Clay puts the lovable but highly eccentric office into overdrive to create a party unlike any other so they can land the contract needed to stay in business.
When the party arrives one series of epic misadventures and mishaps after another arises which threatens to sink the company and everyone involved once and for all.
The film follows a fairly linear and somewhat predictable path but the strong cast does a great job and Kate McKinnon as the ultra-weird H.R. lead steals several of the scenes in which she is in. Bateman plays pretty much the same character that he has played in most of his recent work as the everyman that tries to make the best of the bad situation and Miller is pretty much recycling the same character he plays on Silicon Valley. That being said, there are plenty of laughs if you do not mind the very bawdy humor and Directors Josh Gordon and Will Speck keep things moving at a steady pace with laughs throughout the film.
While it is likely not going to be a holiday classic, “Office Christmas Party”, is a very fun and enjoyable diversion.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/09/office-christmas-party/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Just Mercy (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2020
Having seen Clemency in October I felt like I was prepared for what Just Mercy might throw at me. I was not. The two films handle the death row scenario in very different ways and the storyline that runs alongside it gives you two very different experiences.
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bad Boys for Life (2020) in Movies
Jan 18, 2020
Entertaining "shoot-em-up" with 2 charismatic leads
Okay - I gotta admit, I never saw the first two BAD BOYS films starring Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, but I pretty much got the gist of it through the advertisements, so when these 2 re-united for a 3rd film (set 17 years after BAD BOYS II), I figured I would skip this one as well. But...as life would have it...I ended up attending this film - with a giant attitude of "this is gonna stink" to accompany me.
And...I was wrong. I was really, really entertained by this film.
BAD BOYS FOR LIFE presents Martin Lawrence's Det. Marcus Burnett and Will Smith's Det. Mike Lowry still "in the game". One wants to keep working and the other is looking to retire (if you take a look at the picture, you can figure out which one is which). The two battle like an old married couple while taking on some crooks in "shoot 'em up" action scenes.
And...what's not to like about that? Smith and Lawrence still have strong chemistry on the screen and the action scenes - staged by new (to me) Directors Adil and Bilall - keep things moving at a quick enough pace, not too fast that you get a headache, but not too slow that you start punching a hole in the plot.
And...as is typical of these types of films...the plot is paper thin and just is a reason to have these 2 banter and to have shoot-em-up scenes.
But that doesn't matter.
Ably helping the boys out is their put-upon Captain (the always watchable Joe Pantaliano reprising his role from the previous 2 films) and the members of the "AMMO SQUAD". These are young cops who are set up to replace our 2 heroes. Normally, this band of youngsters would be arrogant a-holes who end up being too cocky and are outwitted by our heroes, but this film puts that convention on it's ear and the "Ammo Squad" are actually a pretty good addition to this film series.
The filmmakers left the door wide open for BAD BOYS 4 and...I can't believe I'm saying this...I'm actually looking forward to it! Certainly not an Oscar contender, but an entertaining "blow-em-up" with 2 charismatic leads that play off each other well. Everyone involved knew exactly what type of film they were making - so they made that movie, with no apologies.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...I was wrong. I was really, really entertained by this film.
BAD BOYS FOR LIFE presents Martin Lawrence's Det. Marcus Burnett and Will Smith's Det. Mike Lowry still "in the game". One wants to keep working and the other is looking to retire (if you take a look at the picture, you can figure out which one is which). The two battle like an old married couple while taking on some crooks in "shoot 'em up" action scenes.
And...what's not to like about that? Smith and Lawrence still have strong chemistry on the screen and the action scenes - staged by new (to me) Directors Adil and Bilall - keep things moving at a quick enough pace, not too fast that you get a headache, but not too slow that you start punching a hole in the plot.
And...as is typical of these types of films...the plot is paper thin and just is a reason to have these 2 banter and to have shoot-em-up scenes.
But that doesn't matter.
Ably helping the boys out is their put-upon Captain (the always watchable Joe Pantaliano reprising his role from the previous 2 films) and the members of the "AMMO SQUAD". These are young cops who are set up to replace our 2 heroes. Normally, this band of youngsters would be arrogant a-holes who end up being too cocky and are outwitted by our heroes, but this film puts that convention on it's ear and the "Ammo Squad" are actually a pretty good addition to this film series.
The filmmakers left the door wide open for BAD BOYS 4 and...I can't believe I'm saying this...I'm actually looking forward to it! Certainly not an Oscar contender, but an entertaining "blow-em-up" with 2 charismatic leads that play off each other well. Everyone involved knew exactly what type of film they were making - so they made that movie, with no apologies.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Banyan Tales - Adventure Series & Morals for Kids
Education and Book
App
Get BanyanTales, the best socio-emotional learning app for children up to 8 years old, and watch...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Soul (2020) in Movies
Feb 5, 2021
Good...but wished it touched my Soul more
The creators at PIXAR have done it again. They have crafted a beautifully drawn, incredibly imaginative, wonderfully performed, heartwarming story for young and old alike to enjoy.
I just wished it touched my Soul more.
Written and Directed by Pete Docter (UP!, INSIDE OUT) - who I would argue is the…ahem…soul of Pixar - SOUL tells the story of Joe, a middle school band teacher who aspires to be a jazz musician. On the cusp of realzing his dream, Joe (or, rather, Joe’s soul) finds himself in the afterlife desperately trying to return to his life to fulfill his dream.
Strongly voiced by Jamie Foxx, Joe is singularly focused on his goal and he won’t let anything get in his way, not even a “lost soul” (voiced by Tina Fey).
Now, I am a big fan of Tina Fey’s and she does just as good a job in her voice acting as Foxx, but for me, I just didn’t sense a gel of characters between these two. Part of that issue just might be in the storytelling - as Joe’s character is constantly pushing Fey’s character away and, so, was pushing me away as well.
And that is too bad as this relationship is at the…well…soul of this film and I really wanted this to work better because the rest of the film is WONDERFUL.
Docter’s depiction of the afterlife is sublimely abstract and I really felt that this worked well and was a smart way to deal with that portion of the film. The script moves along and the assorted situations and characters that Joe and “22” (Fey’s character) encounter are fun.
And that’s because Pixar, once again, populates the film with a strong array of voice talent that brings “something more” to their characters - Graham Norton, Phylicia Rashad, Wes Studi and Daveed Diggs all shine in what are, essentially, extended cameo roles.
Which brings me back to my central issue - Foxx and Fey are on screen together for most of this film and I just wanted to connect with them more. Perhaps I was just not in the mood for this film at the time I viewed it. I will definitely give this movie another look (because there are so many good things going on).
Perhaps, I just need to open my soul more.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I just wished it touched my Soul more.
Written and Directed by Pete Docter (UP!, INSIDE OUT) - who I would argue is the…ahem…soul of Pixar - SOUL tells the story of Joe, a middle school band teacher who aspires to be a jazz musician. On the cusp of realzing his dream, Joe (or, rather, Joe’s soul) finds himself in the afterlife desperately trying to return to his life to fulfill his dream.
Strongly voiced by Jamie Foxx, Joe is singularly focused on his goal and he won’t let anything get in his way, not even a “lost soul” (voiced by Tina Fey).
Now, I am a big fan of Tina Fey’s and she does just as good a job in her voice acting as Foxx, but for me, I just didn’t sense a gel of characters between these two. Part of that issue just might be in the storytelling - as Joe’s character is constantly pushing Fey’s character away and, so, was pushing me away as well.
And that is too bad as this relationship is at the…well…soul of this film and I really wanted this to work better because the rest of the film is WONDERFUL.
Docter’s depiction of the afterlife is sublimely abstract and I really felt that this worked well and was a smart way to deal with that portion of the film. The script moves along and the assorted situations and characters that Joe and “22” (Fey’s character) encounter are fun.
And that’s because Pixar, once again, populates the film with a strong array of voice talent that brings “something more” to their characters - Graham Norton, Phylicia Rashad, Wes Studi and Daveed Diggs all shine in what are, essentially, extended cameo roles.
Which brings me back to my central issue - Foxx and Fey are on screen together for most of this film and I just wanted to connect with them more. Perhaps I was just not in the mood for this film at the time I viewed it. I will definitely give this movie another look (because there are so many good things going on).
Perhaps, I just need to open my soul more.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Ad Astra (2019) in Movies
Sep 27, 2019
A missed opportunity
Like crossing the vast expanse of oceans in a sailing ship, rocketing across the vast expanse of our Galaxy would, naturally, lead one to self-contemplation. In the film AD ASTRA Brad Pitt spends a lot of time contemplating.
Unfortunately, that is pretty much all PItt - and this film - does.
AD ASTRA follows the adventure of Astronaut Roy McBride (Pitt) who's father Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) is a fabled Astronaut who disappeared while on a deep space mission to Neptune. When a Galaxy-wide energy pulse emanating from Neptune threatens life on Earth, suspicion is that Clifford is still alive in orbit around Neptune and the hope is that Roy can contact him and stop this life threatening force.
Sounds like an interesting premise, doesn't it? And it could have been. And the world that was built for this movie - a world set in the "near future", one where we did not stop going to the moon and space and there are now space stations - and colonies and pirates(!) - on the Moon and Mars, is an interesting concept and I really wanted to explore that world.
Unfortunately, Director and Writer James Gray (THE LOST CITY OF Z) was not interested in exploring this (so why build it?!?) - he was more interested in contemplating the meaning of life's purpose and fate and legacies and do the sins of the father really come back to seek payment by the son? And I do mean contemplate, for that is what Pitt's character does through most of this film - sit and think (which we hear through voice over), while contemplative music plays wistfully.
It's a good recipe to cure insomnia.
While Pitt does a nice enough job in the lead - an actor can only do so much with looking, thoughtfully, out the window. Ruth Negga and Donald Sutherland both try to inject some life in this film, but their parts are, in essence, extended cameos and the likes of "that guy" actors like Donnie Kashawarz, John Finn and John Ortiz pop up for a scene or two along the way as we travel across our Galaxy with Pitt but don't really register Only Tommy Lee Jones manages to liven things up...but his presence is too little too late.
Like a parent, I am not upset at this film, just disappointed at the choices that were made. I thought Pitt and Gray knew better.
Letter Grade: B- (it is well made and pretty to look at)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Unfortunately, that is pretty much all PItt - and this film - does.
AD ASTRA follows the adventure of Astronaut Roy McBride (Pitt) who's father Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) is a fabled Astronaut who disappeared while on a deep space mission to Neptune. When a Galaxy-wide energy pulse emanating from Neptune threatens life on Earth, suspicion is that Clifford is still alive in orbit around Neptune and the hope is that Roy can contact him and stop this life threatening force.
Sounds like an interesting premise, doesn't it? And it could have been. And the world that was built for this movie - a world set in the "near future", one where we did not stop going to the moon and space and there are now space stations - and colonies and pirates(!) - on the Moon and Mars, is an interesting concept and I really wanted to explore that world.
Unfortunately, Director and Writer James Gray (THE LOST CITY OF Z) was not interested in exploring this (so why build it?!?) - he was more interested in contemplating the meaning of life's purpose and fate and legacies and do the sins of the father really come back to seek payment by the son? And I do mean contemplate, for that is what Pitt's character does through most of this film - sit and think (which we hear through voice over), while contemplative music plays wistfully.
It's a good recipe to cure insomnia.
While Pitt does a nice enough job in the lead - an actor can only do so much with looking, thoughtfully, out the window. Ruth Negga and Donald Sutherland both try to inject some life in this film, but their parts are, in essence, extended cameos and the likes of "that guy" actors like Donnie Kashawarz, John Finn and John Ortiz pop up for a scene or two along the way as we travel across our Galaxy with Pitt but don't really register Only Tommy Lee Jones manages to liven things up...but his presence is too little too late.
Like a parent, I am not upset at this film, just disappointed at the choices that were made. I thought Pitt and Gray knew better.
Letter Grade: B- (it is well made and pretty to look at)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954) in Movies
Sep 22, 2019
The creature lurks!
In the Amazon jungle, a prehistoric amphibian claw fossil is found prodding local scientists to investigate its origins. They decide on an expedition to gain more information and possibly locate its origins.
The journey is a dangerous one figuring out where to find the mysterious lagoon which is locked in a desolate location within the tropical jungle. Their undersea adventures are met with initial disappoint only locating some interesting plant and animal life.
Within the depths on the lagoon, a strange creature has taken notice of his new guests and is not too happy about it. He lurks submerged within the deep watching and waiting for his opportunity to strike. He ventures close by to gather information and figure out his opponents' vulnerabilities. He also notices the pretty girl among the crew of men.
After a few encounters with the creature, the scientists grow increasingly concerned after the creature has had his way with a few of them, so they attempt to make their escape. Somehow, a large fallen tree is now blocking their path which was clear when they arrived at the lagoon.
There will be an ultimate standoff to secure their release or the demise of the creature.
The look of this film is plain remarkable. This has to be one of the earliest movies to utilize extensive underwater footage and it is very believable. The cinematography for the time period is both beautiful and menacing when needed in glorious black and white.
Obviously, we are talking 1950s special effects here; however, the creature itself stands the test of time. I am not sure how the man in the rubber sit was able to not only see what he was doing, swim quickly in and under water as well as jump into the water while on fire at one point. The mask also was able to move the creature's mouth up and down as well as look like he was breathing while out of the water using his gills. The effect worked really well.
This film was made at a time when the previous Universal Studios monster films had run their course in the 1930s and 1940s, but were not yet into the ultra B movie era in the 1950s and beyond.
If Universal ever gets back to its current "Monster" universe after the mediocre Tom Cruise "Mummy" film, I'm sure the creature will rise again. Until then, enjoy this classic creature gem.
The journey is a dangerous one figuring out where to find the mysterious lagoon which is locked in a desolate location within the tropical jungle. Their undersea adventures are met with initial disappoint only locating some interesting plant and animal life.
Within the depths on the lagoon, a strange creature has taken notice of his new guests and is not too happy about it. He lurks submerged within the deep watching and waiting for his opportunity to strike. He ventures close by to gather information and figure out his opponents' vulnerabilities. He also notices the pretty girl among the crew of men.
After a few encounters with the creature, the scientists grow increasingly concerned after the creature has had his way with a few of them, so they attempt to make their escape. Somehow, a large fallen tree is now blocking their path which was clear when they arrived at the lagoon.
There will be an ultimate standoff to secure their release or the demise of the creature.
The look of this film is plain remarkable. This has to be one of the earliest movies to utilize extensive underwater footage and it is very believable. The cinematography for the time period is both beautiful and menacing when needed in glorious black and white.
Obviously, we are talking 1950s special effects here; however, the creature itself stands the test of time. I am not sure how the man in the rubber sit was able to not only see what he was doing, swim quickly in and under water as well as jump into the water while on fire at one point. The mask also was able to move the creature's mouth up and down as well as look like he was breathing while out of the water using his gills. The effect worked really well.
This film was made at a time when the previous Universal Studios monster films had run their course in the 1930s and 1940s, but were not yet into the ultra B movie era in the 1950s and beyond.
If Universal ever gets back to its current "Monster" universe after the mediocre Tom Cruise "Mummy" film, I'm sure the creature will rise again. Until then, enjoy this classic creature gem.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) in Movies
Feb 22, 2018
A fun "who-will-survive" flick
During the Super Bowl, a "surprise" trailer dropped for a new entry in the Cloverfield family of films. The good news is that the film was dropping on Netflix the next day, so fanboys immediately jumped on-line and then started hating on it (again, on-line) because it wasn't exactly what they thought it would be.
Which is too bad, for THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is a very fun, very well made, very well acted "10 Little Indians" style Sci-Fi film (you know, the type of film where a finite group of folks are marooned someplace - like and island or an isolated, creepy mansion and are picked off one by one). This time, they are on a space station, and when an experiment goes awry, bad things start to happen.
I stated that this film is another entry in the "Cloverfield family of films", so let me explain that. The overseer of these films is none other than JJ Abrams and he has stated that there will be a series of films - very different in style, type and substance - that will (somehow) be related in the Cloverfield Universe. And, so far, he has fulfilled his promise (at least to me) - for those that just want "more of the same", he has alienated.
The first film, CLOVERFIELD, is a "found footage" film about a giant monster (think Godzilla) rampaging through modern day New York City. Of the 3 films,thus far, in the Cloverfield family, this one (for me) was the least effective (especially because I am not a big fan of "found footage" films). The 2nd film was 2016's 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE and was a very effective psychological horror/drama starring John Goodman as a fellow who has rescued/captured (kidnapped?) Mary Elizabeth Winstead and has locked her in his survival bunker in order to - he says - save her from the monster above. The film effectively goes back and forth with wondering what is scarier - the monster above or the monster (Goodman) below. If you haven't seen 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE, I highly recommend it.
The third installment, then, is THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX, a prequel of sorts about a group of scientists aboard a space station conducting a desperate, highly dangerous power experiments to solve the world's energy crisis. When something goes wrong, bad things happen. And since this is in the Cloverfield family, you gotta know it has some connection with how the Cloverfield monster got on Earth.
But this film doesn't really concern itself with the Cloverfield monster - which is what I think is angering the "fanboys" - this film is about the survival of the charismatic, international scientists that are stranded on this space station after the accident. Almost every one of the actors in this film are "oh...that guy" type actors - all very good. From German actor Daniel Bruhl (RUSH) to Chinese actress Ziyi Zhang (CROUCHING TIGER...) to Englishman David Oyelowo (SELMA) to good ol' John Ortiz (a million different things) - the cast is strong, fun to watch and easy to root for. They all are in service to the plot devices (and predicaments they are in) and they serve the plot (and the film) well.
Special notice should be made for Chris O'Dowd (BRIDESMAIDS) who brings some much needed levity via his deadpan humor approach to everything as the ship's handyman and, especially, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (BELLE) as the heroine of the adventure from through who's eyes we encounter the events of the film.
I have stated before that I am a sucker for these types of "10 Little Indians who-will-survive" films and this one is no exception. Go in with no preconceived notions, roll with what the film throws at you and you'll have a good time time, too.
THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is now streaming on Netflix.
Letter Grade: B (it is the very definition of a "B" movie).
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Which is too bad, for THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is a very fun, very well made, very well acted "10 Little Indians" style Sci-Fi film (you know, the type of film where a finite group of folks are marooned someplace - like and island or an isolated, creepy mansion and are picked off one by one). This time, they are on a space station, and when an experiment goes awry, bad things start to happen.
I stated that this film is another entry in the "Cloverfield family of films", so let me explain that. The overseer of these films is none other than JJ Abrams and he has stated that there will be a series of films - very different in style, type and substance - that will (somehow) be related in the Cloverfield Universe. And, so far, he has fulfilled his promise (at least to me) - for those that just want "more of the same", he has alienated.
The first film, CLOVERFIELD, is a "found footage" film about a giant monster (think Godzilla) rampaging through modern day New York City. Of the 3 films,thus far, in the Cloverfield family, this one (for me) was the least effective (especially because I am not a big fan of "found footage" films). The 2nd film was 2016's 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE and was a very effective psychological horror/drama starring John Goodman as a fellow who has rescued/captured (kidnapped?) Mary Elizabeth Winstead and has locked her in his survival bunker in order to - he says - save her from the monster above. The film effectively goes back and forth with wondering what is scarier - the monster above or the monster (Goodman) below. If you haven't seen 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE, I highly recommend it.
The third installment, then, is THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX, a prequel of sorts about a group of scientists aboard a space station conducting a desperate, highly dangerous power experiments to solve the world's energy crisis. When something goes wrong, bad things happen. And since this is in the Cloverfield family, you gotta know it has some connection with how the Cloverfield monster got on Earth.
But this film doesn't really concern itself with the Cloverfield monster - which is what I think is angering the "fanboys" - this film is about the survival of the charismatic, international scientists that are stranded on this space station after the accident. Almost every one of the actors in this film are "oh...that guy" type actors - all very good. From German actor Daniel Bruhl (RUSH) to Chinese actress Ziyi Zhang (CROUCHING TIGER...) to Englishman David Oyelowo (SELMA) to good ol' John Ortiz (a million different things) - the cast is strong, fun to watch and easy to root for. They all are in service to the plot devices (and predicaments they are in) and they serve the plot (and the film) well.
Special notice should be made for Chris O'Dowd (BRIDESMAIDS) who brings some much needed levity via his deadpan humor approach to everything as the ship's handyman and, especially, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (BELLE) as the heroine of the adventure from through who's eyes we encounter the events of the film.
I have stated before that I am a sucker for these types of "10 Little Indians who-will-survive" films and this one is no exception. Go in with no preconceived notions, roll with what the film throws at you and you'll have a good time time, too.
THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is now streaming on Netflix.
Letter Grade: B (it is the very definition of a "B" movie).
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)