Search
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Misbehaviour (2020) in Movies
Jan 11, 2021
Watchable but a little misdirected
Misbehaviour is a 2020 drama directed by Philippa Lowthorpe based on a true story, that follows a group of women from the Women’s Liberation Movement as they attempt to disrupt the 1970 Miss World pageant being held in London.
Misbehaviour has made a decision to follow four separate stories as they eventually intersect at the Miss World pageant, and I think this is to it’s detriment as it seemed to dilute the main issue about women’s inequality. It follows Sally (Keira Knightley), a history student wanting her place at the table, as she joins forces with Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley), a radical feminist from the Women’s Liberation Movement who believes in taking physical action as the plot to disrupt the pageant. It also follows 3 other storylines centred around the pageant itself: Eric (Rhys Ifans) and Julia Morley (Keeley Hawes), the creators of the Miss World Pageant as they attempt to respond to controversies surrounding it; Miss Grenada Jennifer Hosten (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) as she takes part in the contest and; Bob Hope (Greg Kinnear) who is hosting the pageant. All of these stories together, whilst interesting, mean that not enough time and detail is given to each individual storyline, especially with an under two hour run time.
The film begins with some fairly shocking male behaviour from Sally’s university interviewers and Bob Hope, but sadly it doesn’t carry on in this vein throughout. Had the entire film focused on the behaviour and attitudes women had really experienced during the 70s, it would’ve been a lot more hard hitting and engaging. Instead it comes across as a little too light hearted. The most disturbing scenes were those involving Bob Hope and his clearly inappropriate behaviour, and Greg Kinnear plays him very well although the prosthetic nose is a tad distracting. However the problem with Hope is that his scenes, whilst good, are entirely unnecessary when linked to the main plot and are a big contributor to the dilution of the story.
Misbehaviour looks good, the costume and sets are very in keeping with the time period and so is the music. It also has a rather stellar cast, all of whom put in performances that are very good and not to be criticised – Rhys Ifans provides some much needed comic relief as pageant creator Eric Morley. The standout of all of these is Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Jennifer, who brings poise and intrigue to a character with barely any lines and leaves us wanting more. And sadly due to the intersecting storylines, we don’t see enough of her until right at the end, which was far too late. It was also nice to see the real women that inspired this film featured before the credits and find out how they moved forward with their lives.
Overall Misbehaviour is a decent film with good performances with an important message and story to promote. I just wish that instead of trying to tell this story from the point of every key player involved, they had focused on the central subject of the inequality women experienced at the time as this would’ve made Misbehaviour a lot more memorable.
Misbehaviour has made a decision to follow four separate stories as they eventually intersect at the Miss World pageant, and I think this is to it’s detriment as it seemed to dilute the main issue about women’s inequality. It follows Sally (Keira Knightley), a history student wanting her place at the table, as she joins forces with Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley), a radical feminist from the Women’s Liberation Movement who believes in taking physical action as the plot to disrupt the pageant. It also follows 3 other storylines centred around the pageant itself: Eric (Rhys Ifans) and Julia Morley (Keeley Hawes), the creators of the Miss World Pageant as they attempt to respond to controversies surrounding it; Miss Grenada Jennifer Hosten (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) as she takes part in the contest and; Bob Hope (Greg Kinnear) who is hosting the pageant. All of these stories together, whilst interesting, mean that not enough time and detail is given to each individual storyline, especially with an under two hour run time.
The film begins with some fairly shocking male behaviour from Sally’s university interviewers and Bob Hope, but sadly it doesn’t carry on in this vein throughout. Had the entire film focused on the behaviour and attitudes women had really experienced during the 70s, it would’ve been a lot more hard hitting and engaging. Instead it comes across as a little too light hearted. The most disturbing scenes were those involving Bob Hope and his clearly inappropriate behaviour, and Greg Kinnear plays him very well although the prosthetic nose is a tad distracting. However the problem with Hope is that his scenes, whilst good, are entirely unnecessary when linked to the main plot and are a big contributor to the dilution of the story.
Misbehaviour looks good, the costume and sets are very in keeping with the time period and so is the music. It also has a rather stellar cast, all of whom put in performances that are very good and not to be criticised – Rhys Ifans provides some much needed comic relief as pageant creator Eric Morley. The standout of all of these is Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Jennifer, who brings poise and intrigue to a character with barely any lines and leaves us wanting more. And sadly due to the intersecting storylines, we don’t see enough of her until right at the end, which was far too late. It was also nice to see the real women that inspired this film featured before the credits and find out how they moved forward with their lives.
Overall Misbehaviour is a decent film with good performances with an important message and story to promote. I just wish that instead of trying to tell this story from the point of every key player involved, they had focused on the central subject of the inequality women experienced at the time as this would’ve made Misbehaviour a lot more memorable.
JT (287 KP) rated American Hustle (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
There’s a lot of love for American Hustle and with a cast such as this it is easy to see why. It’s a film that oozes glitz and glamour and has a slick sense of stability with shades Scorsese as an attempt at a crime caper.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Dangerous Method (2011) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Dangerous Method starts as Sabine Spielrein (Knightley) is to an asylum where she is treated by Carl Jung (Fassbender) for her irrational reaction to any stimulation. In the search for answers Carl turns to Sigmund Freud (Mortensen) who has been an expert in the sexual disorders people are meant to have.
Once Carl gets to the bottom of Sabine’s case he finds himself learn from one of his patients Otto Gross (Cassel) who teaches him to he should be more sexually adventurous and his former patient Sabine is also now ready to embrace her issues. With all this going on Carl learns more from Freud about expressing his sexual side.
A Dangerous Method tries to tell the story of three famous scientific minds, sadly this only seems to show the difference they had through a difficult time in history. I found myself wondering what we were learning about as a lot of the dialogue feels very cloggy throughout. This really disappoints as a film which should be a lot more interesting.
Actor Review
Keira Knightley: Sabina is considered an ill young woman who is struggling with a fantasist that Carl Jung is treating, when he discovers the problem she becomes his mistress and moving towards living a normal life. She uses her newly discovered knowledge to get her way. Keira is solid in this role but never convinces.sabina
Viggo Mortensen: Sigmund Freud is the famous doctor that Carl Jung turns to for advice with dealing with his latest patient Sabina. He gives father like advice to Carl which becomes the opposite to what Carl thinks. Viggo makes for a good Freud but I do feel something was missing in his performance.frued
Michael Fassbender: Carl Jung is the doctor who is treating Sabina, he ends up going through Sigmund Freud to learn about what the problems are where to two become friends but also against each other’s opinions. He also gets involved with Sabina as he has his eyes opened sexually. Michael is good in the leading role but like the rest I feel is missing something.car
Vincent Cassel: Otto Gross is a patient that opens the eyes of Carl, he is seductive with how he speaks, after talking to Carl we see a different side of him. Vincent gives us a solid supporting performance I wish we could have seen more from.
Support Cast: A Dangerous Method doesn’t really have the biggest supporting cast and the ones we do meet sometimes feel almost pointless.
Director Review: David Cronenberg – David is a director we all have high expectations of but this really was a let-down.
Biographical: A Dangerous Method only teaches us the very basic about three very famous scientific minds.
Settings: A Dangerous Method re-creates the settings for this time period all looking very good.
Suggestion: A Dangerous Method is one to miss really, it doesn’t come off with the highest interest levels. (Miss It)
Best Part: Settings look great.
Worst Part: We don’t learn enough about the characters.
Believability: Based on the real people.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Based on the true story of Jung, Freud and the patient who came between them.
Overall: Dull biopic really.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/04/03/michael-fassbender-weekend-a-dangerous-method-2011/
Once Carl gets to the bottom of Sabine’s case he finds himself learn from one of his patients Otto Gross (Cassel) who teaches him to he should be more sexually adventurous and his former patient Sabine is also now ready to embrace her issues. With all this going on Carl learns more from Freud about expressing his sexual side.
A Dangerous Method tries to tell the story of three famous scientific minds, sadly this only seems to show the difference they had through a difficult time in history. I found myself wondering what we were learning about as a lot of the dialogue feels very cloggy throughout. This really disappoints as a film which should be a lot more interesting.
Actor Review
Keira Knightley: Sabina is considered an ill young woman who is struggling with a fantasist that Carl Jung is treating, when he discovers the problem she becomes his mistress and moving towards living a normal life. She uses her newly discovered knowledge to get her way. Keira is solid in this role but never convinces.sabina
Viggo Mortensen: Sigmund Freud is the famous doctor that Carl Jung turns to for advice with dealing with his latest patient Sabina. He gives father like advice to Carl which becomes the opposite to what Carl thinks. Viggo makes for a good Freud but I do feel something was missing in his performance.frued
Michael Fassbender: Carl Jung is the doctor who is treating Sabina, he ends up going through Sigmund Freud to learn about what the problems are where to two become friends but also against each other’s opinions. He also gets involved with Sabina as he has his eyes opened sexually. Michael is good in the leading role but like the rest I feel is missing something.car
Vincent Cassel: Otto Gross is a patient that opens the eyes of Carl, he is seductive with how he speaks, after talking to Carl we see a different side of him. Vincent gives us a solid supporting performance I wish we could have seen more from.
Support Cast: A Dangerous Method doesn’t really have the biggest supporting cast and the ones we do meet sometimes feel almost pointless.
Director Review: David Cronenberg – David is a director we all have high expectations of but this really was a let-down.
Biographical: A Dangerous Method only teaches us the very basic about three very famous scientific minds.
Settings: A Dangerous Method re-creates the settings for this time period all looking very good.
Suggestion: A Dangerous Method is one to miss really, it doesn’t come off with the highest interest levels. (Miss It)
Best Part: Settings look great.
Worst Part: We don’t learn enough about the characters.
Believability: Based on the real people.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Based on the true story of Jung, Freud and the patient who came between them.
Overall: Dull biopic really.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/04/03/michael-fassbender-weekend-a-dangerous-method-2011/
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Amityville Horror in Books
May 20, 2019
Jay Anson’s The Amityville Horror sparked a lot of attention when it was first published in 1977 and soon after became the basis for the famed horror movie of the same title–but the question often remains: is it a true story? Originally published as such, The Amityville Horror now resides among fiction titles, largely due to the fact that besides the Lutzes, very little activity has been reported in the DeFeo house. (There were also several lawsuits.) For the purpose of this review, I will be treating The Amityville Horror as a fiction novel.
Normally, this paragraph is used to describe the characters and how I felt about them. Because The Amityville Horror was meant to be regarded as non-fiction, the characters, based on real people, are rather flat. There are too many questions about how they behave and react to different events in their lives. Part of this may be attributed to the style of Anson’s writing, which comes across to me as rather basic. In some places, there’s no flow and things appear forced.
Plotwise, I found the story to be engaging enough that I did, admittedly, devour it. Anson lays out events one after another, with little to no space in between. He also writes from several perspectives, and switches frequently–which can be rather distracting.
Overall, The Amityville Horror garners a lot of fame. The DeFeo murders were monstrous, but the addition of the Lutzes’ stories adds fuel to a fire that, for many skeptics, has long since stopped burning. If you’re a franchise fan, the book will likely interest you, but other than that, is neither spectacular or horrible.
http://theghastlygrimoire.com/2019/05/02/book-review-the-amityville-horror-by-jay-anson/
Normally, this paragraph is used to describe the characters and how I felt about them. Because The Amityville Horror was meant to be regarded as non-fiction, the characters, based on real people, are rather flat. There are too many questions about how they behave and react to different events in their lives. Part of this may be attributed to the style of Anson’s writing, which comes across to me as rather basic. In some places, there’s no flow and things appear forced.
Plotwise, I found the story to be engaging enough that I did, admittedly, devour it. Anson lays out events one after another, with little to no space in between. He also writes from several perspectives, and switches frequently–which can be rather distracting.
Overall, The Amityville Horror garners a lot of fame. The DeFeo murders were monstrous, but the addition of the Lutzes’ stories adds fuel to a fire that, for many skeptics, has long since stopped burning. If you’re a franchise fan, the book will likely interest you, but other than that, is neither spectacular or horrible.
http://theghastlygrimoire.com/2019/05/02/book-review-the-amityville-horror-by-jay-anson/
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Nightingale Point in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Book-Review-Banner.png"/>;
<b><i>One ordinary day. One extraordinary event. Their lives changed forever. </i></b>
Nightingale Point is a book that shows the aftermath of a terrible disaster. A story about many people's lives, how this event changed them and their recovery and grief.
<b><i>BEFORE</i></b>
The book starts with giving us a brief description of people living in two neighboring buildings. We get to know their daily routines, their worries and hopes. We get a glimpse of their everyday lives and start to care for them.
We meet Mary, who has moved from the Philippines into the UK to persue her career as a nurse. Her husband is always away and her children are distant.
We meet the brothers Tristan and Malachi - they have a tragedy of their own, and Mary is like their mum. Tristan is the naughty 16-year-old and Malachi is the older, more responsible brother.
Then we meet Pamela, a 16-year-old who loves running and falls in love with Malachi. However, her racist dad forbids her to see Malachi and locks her inside the building,
We see Elvis as well, who has learning disabilities and lives with his carer. He gets bullied by Tristan one day when Tristan spits in his face.
<b><i>AFTER</i></b>
On 4th May 1996, a plane crashes into these two buildings at Nightingale Point and everything changes.
Every resident that lives on Nightingale Point has a before and after story. The ones that survived, but also the ones that didn't.
This is a story about how much one event can turn your life upside down, how it can change you and also how much little things mean in life, but we forget them so often.
I found it amusing that we had different chapters from different people's perspectives, and each character had its own different writing style and life to it. This was amazingly done by the author. I found the chapters with Elvis especially refreshing, as they were so heartwarming.
Based on real tragic events - the crash in Bijlmer, Amsterdam and also the fire in Grenfell Tower, the author did a wonderful job in showing the readers the true pain, trauma and the battle of moving forward when a tragedy happens.
Guys, if you haven't read this book, please pick it up. It will be a hit and it will change your life. Every time I look at this book, I will remember how much little things matter in life and will always call my dad and ask him how he's doing. Because it matters.
Thank you to the team at HQ for sending me a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Book-Review-Banner.png"/>;
<b><i>One ordinary day. One extraordinary event. Their lives changed forever. </i></b>
Nightingale Point is a book that shows the aftermath of a terrible disaster. A story about many people's lives, how this event changed them and their recovery and grief.
<b><i>BEFORE</i></b>
The book starts with giving us a brief description of people living in two neighboring buildings. We get to know their daily routines, their worries and hopes. We get a glimpse of their everyday lives and start to care for them.
We meet Mary, who has moved from the Philippines into the UK to persue her career as a nurse. Her husband is always away and her children are distant.
We meet the brothers Tristan and Malachi - they have a tragedy of their own, and Mary is like their mum. Tristan is the naughty 16-year-old and Malachi is the older, more responsible brother.
Then we meet Pamela, a 16-year-old who loves running and falls in love with Malachi. However, her racist dad forbids her to see Malachi and locks her inside the building,
We see Elvis as well, who has learning disabilities and lives with his carer. He gets bullied by Tristan one day when Tristan spits in his face.
<b><i>AFTER</i></b>
On 4th May 1996, a plane crashes into these two buildings at Nightingale Point and everything changes.
Every resident that lives on Nightingale Point has a before and after story. The ones that survived, but also the ones that didn't.
This is a story about how much one event can turn your life upside down, how it can change you and also how much little things mean in life, but we forget them so often.
I found it amusing that we had different chapters from different people's perspectives, and each character had its own different writing style and life to it. This was amazingly done by the author. I found the chapters with Elvis especially refreshing, as they were so heartwarming.
Based on real tragic events - the crash in Bijlmer, Amsterdam and also the fire in Grenfell Tower, the author did a wonderful job in showing the readers the true pain, trauma and the battle of moving forward when a tragedy happens.
Guys, if you haven't read this book, please pick it up. It will be a hit and it will change your life. Every time I look at this book, I will remember how much little things matter in life and will always call my dad and ask him how he's doing. Because it matters.
Thank you to the team at HQ for sending me a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mule (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Eastwood is back, but is he hero or anti-hero?
It’s delightful to see Clint Eastwood back in front of the camera on the big screen. His last starring film was “Trouble with the Curve” in 2012 – a baseball-themed film that I don’t remember coming out in the UK, let alone remember seeing. Before that was 2008’s excellent “Gran Torino”.
Based on a true story.
“The Mule” is based on a true New York Times story about Leo Sharp, a veteren recruited by a cartel to ship drugs from the southern border to Chicago.
Eastwood couldn’t cast Sharp in the movie as himself because he died back in 2016, so had to personally take the role. (This is #satire…. Eastwood’s last film was the terrible “The 15:17 to Paris” where his ‘actors’ were the real-life participants themselves: you won’t find a review on this site as I only review films I’ve managed to sit through…. and with this one I failed!).
The plot.
Eastwood plays Earl Stone, a self-centred horticulturist of award-winning daylily’s (whatever they are) who is estranged from wife Mary (Dianne Wiest) and especially from his daughter Iris (Alison Eastwood, Clint’s own daughter), who now refuses to speak to him. This is because Earl has let his family down at every turn. The only person willing to give him a chance is his grand-daughter Ginny (Taissa Farmiga, younger sister of Vera). With his affairs in financial freefall, a chance meeting at a wedding leads Earl into a money-making driving job for the cartel operated by Laton (Andy Garcia). (Laton doesn’t seem to have a first name….. Fernando perhaps?).
With has beat-up truck and aged manner, he is invisible to the cops and so highly effective in the role. Even when – as the money keeps rolling in – he upgrades his truck to a souped-up monster!
Loose Morals.
It’s difficult to know whether Eastwood is playing a hero or an anti-hero. You feel tense when Earl is at risk of being caught, but then again the law officers would be preventing hundreds of kilos of cocaine from reaching the streets of Chicago and through their actions saving the lives of probably hundreds of people. I felt utterly conflicted: the blood of those people, and the destruction of the families that addiction causes, was on Earl’s hands as much as his employer’s. But you can’t quite equate that to the affable old-man that Eastwood portrays, who uses much of the money for charitable good-works in his community.
Family values.
In parallel with the drug-running main plot is a tale of Earl’s attempted redemption: “family should always come first”. When the two storylines come together around a critical event then it feels like a sufficient trigger for Earl to turn his back on his life of selfishness. This also gives room for some splendid acting scenes between Eastwood and Wiest. It’s also interesting that Earl tries to teach the younger DEA enforcement agent not to follow in the sins of his past. Bradley Cooper, back in pretty-boy mode, plays the agent, but seemed to me to be coasting; to me he wasn’t convincing in the role. Michael Peña is better as his unnamed DEA-buddy.
Final thoughts.
The showing at my cinema was surprisingly well-attended for a Wednesday night, showing that Eastwood is still a star-draw for box-office even in his old age. And it’s the reason to see the film for sure. His gristled driving turn to camera (most fully seen in the trailer rather than the final cut) is extraordinary.
He even manages to turn in an “eyes in rearview-mirror” shot that is surely a tribute to his Dirty Harry days!
If you can park your moral compass for a few hours then its an enjoyable film of drug-running and redemption. I’d like to suggest it also illustrates that crime really doesn’t pay, but from the end titles scene I’m not even sure at that age if that even applies!
Based on a true story.
“The Mule” is based on a true New York Times story about Leo Sharp, a veteren recruited by a cartel to ship drugs from the southern border to Chicago.
Eastwood couldn’t cast Sharp in the movie as himself because he died back in 2016, so had to personally take the role. (This is #satire…. Eastwood’s last film was the terrible “The 15:17 to Paris” where his ‘actors’ were the real-life participants themselves: you won’t find a review on this site as I only review films I’ve managed to sit through…. and with this one I failed!).
The plot.
Eastwood plays Earl Stone, a self-centred horticulturist of award-winning daylily’s (whatever they are) who is estranged from wife Mary (Dianne Wiest) and especially from his daughter Iris (Alison Eastwood, Clint’s own daughter), who now refuses to speak to him. This is because Earl has let his family down at every turn. The only person willing to give him a chance is his grand-daughter Ginny (Taissa Farmiga, younger sister of Vera). With his affairs in financial freefall, a chance meeting at a wedding leads Earl into a money-making driving job for the cartel operated by Laton (Andy Garcia). (Laton doesn’t seem to have a first name….. Fernando perhaps?).
With has beat-up truck and aged manner, he is invisible to the cops and so highly effective in the role. Even when – as the money keeps rolling in – he upgrades his truck to a souped-up monster!
Loose Morals.
It’s difficult to know whether Eastwood is playing a hero or an anti-hero. You feel tense when Earl is at risk of being caught, but then again the law officers would be preventing hundreds of kilos of cocaine from reaching the streets of Chicago and through their actions saving the lives of probably hundreds of people. I felt utterly conflicted: the blood of those people, and the destruction of the families that addiction causes, was on Earl’s hands as much as his employer’s. But you can’t quite equate that to the affable old-man that Eastwood portrays, who uses much of the money for charitable good-works in his community.
Family values.
In parallel with the drug-running main plot is a tale of Earl’s attempted redemption: “family should always come first”. When the two storylines come together around a critical event then it feels like a sufficient trigger for Earl to turn his back on his life of selfishness. This also gives room for some splendid acting scenes between Eastwood and Wiest. It’s also interesting that Earl tries to teach the younger DEA enforcement agent not to follow in the sins of his past. Bradley Cooper, back in pretty-boy mode, plays the agent, but seemed to me to be coasting; to me he wasn’t convincing in the role. Michael Peña is better as his unnamed DEA-buddy.
Final thoughts.
The showing at my cinema was surprisingly well-attended for a Wednesday night, showing that Eastwood is still a star-draw for box-office even in his old age. And it’s the reason to see the film for sure. His gristled driving turn to camera (most fully seen in the trailer rather than the final cut) is extraordinary.
He even manages to turn in an “eyes in rearview-mirror” shot that is surely a tribute to his Dirty Harry days!
If you can park your moral compass for a few hours then its an enjoyable film of drug-running and redemption. I’d like to suggest it also illustrates that crime really doesn’t pay, but from the end titles scene I’m not even sure at that age if that even applies!
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Deepwater Horizon (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
On April 20th 2010, approximately 40 miles off of the Louisiana coast, the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded and sank spilling over 3 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill, also known as the Gulf oil spill and BP oil spill, is the worst oil spill in U.S. history, and cost 11 crew members their lives. It’s also one of the largest environmental disasters in history, who’s total cost to the marine life, fishing community, and entire Gulf coast is still unknown. The film Deepwater Horizon is based on the true story of the men and women who were working on the rig the day of the disaster.
As a new team arrives for a 21-day shift they can already tell something is not exactly right, when the contracted testing crew is leaving without conducting critical tests. The man in charge of the vessel, Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell), sets out to find out why the contractors have been dismissed and who let them go. Chief electronics technician Mike Williams (Mark Wahlberg) also goes to question the crew as to what has happened while he was off ship and how long the list is of things he needs to fix. Through a quick investigation by Mike and Jimmy find that BP officials, headed by Vidrine (John Malkovich), are the ones who made the decision. The BP officials chose to assume that everything was fine, and since the Deepwater Horizon was 43 days past their deadline and the rising costs were mounting. Their decision was that it was time to cap the well and move to the next site. That didn’t sit well with Mr. Jimmy, as most of the crew call him, so he demands that one more test is to be run before anything else happens.
The BP officials remind him of the cost and loss of money but eventually agree to the test. The initial test fails but before additional test can be run Jimmy is called away to another part of the vessel. With the addition test being inconclusive, and Mike and Jimmy not around, Vidrine pressures the crew to push forward and move on. Reluctantly the crew and Jimmy agree to move forward. A frustrated Jimmy retires to his crew quarters to get ready for a long night. Mike heads to his shop to video chat with his wife and start the monumental task of fixing all that is wrong aboard the Deepwater Horizon. At about 10 PM the entire vessel was rocked by an explosion. With that the crew rushes frantically to try and stop an even greater disaster and make their way safely off the Deepwater Horizon.
Director Peter Berg (Lone Survivor, Hancock, The Kingdom) does a great job of holding a steady pace throughout this film. The story moves well and once the action begins the intensity and suspense left me on the edge of my seat. The casting is great with Dylan O’Brien, Kate Hudson, Gina Rodriguez and others joining the previously mentioned Wahlberg, Russell and Malkovich. In focusing on the men and women who were on the Deepwater Horizon and their families it makes it a very creative an emotional tribute to the 11 men who perished that night. It does paint the large oil company (BP) as a villain, driven by profit to a point of recklessness, in a way that may be a little too political for some. I found it an informative story, showing a different side to a very well-known disaster.
As a new team arrives for a 21-day shift they can already tell something is not exactly right, when the contracted testing crew is leaving without conducting critical tests. The man in charge of the vessel, Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell), sets out to find out why the contractors have been dismissed and who let them go. Chief electronics technician Mike Williams (Mark Wahlberg) also goes to question the crew as to what has happened while he was off ship and how long the list is of things he needs to fix. Through a quick investigation by Mike and Jimmy find that BP officials, headed by Vidrine (John Malkovich), are the ones who made the decision. The BP officials chose to assume that everything was fine, and since the Deepwater Horizon was 43 days past their deadline and the rising costs were mounting. Their decision was that it was time to cap the well and move to the next site. That didn’t sit well with Mr. Jimmy, as most of the crew call him, so he demands that one more test is to be run before anything else happens.
The BP officials remind him of the cost and loss of money but eventually agree to the test. The initial test fails but before additional test can be run Jimmy is called away to another part of the vessel. With the addition test being inconclusive, and Mike and Jimmy not around, Vidrine pressures the crew to push forward and move on. Reluctantly the crew and Jimmy agree to move forward. A frustrated Jimmy retires to his crew quarters to get ready for a long night. Mike heads to his shop to video chat with his wife and start the monumental task of fixing all that is wrong aboard the Deepwater Horizon. At about 10 PM the entire vessel was rocked by an explosion. With that the crew rushes frantically to try and stop an even greater disaster and make their way safely off the Deepwater Horizon.
Director Peter Berg (Lone Survivor, Hancock, The Kingdom) does a great job of holding a steady pace throughout this film. The story moves well and once the action begins the intensity and suspense left me on the edge of my seat. The casting is great with Dylan O’Brien, Kate Hudson, Gina Rodriguez and others joining the previously mentioned Wahlberg, Russell and Malkovich. In focusing on the men and women who were on the Deepwater Horizon and their families it makes it a very creative an emotional tribute to the 11 men who perished that night. It does paint the large oil company (BP) as a villain, driven by profit to a point of recklessness, in a way that may be a little too political for some. I found it an informative story, showing a different side to a very well-known disaster.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Blood Moon in Books
Nov 8, 2019
When businessman Recidio Suarez is kidnapped it is the start of a brutal ordeal of beatings and torture as the gang try to steal as many of his assets as they can, and once they have done so it is clear they will kill him.
The police fail to investigate and it is up to Suarez' lawyer Nolan Stevens to track down the gang and try to stop them before they strike again. He races against time to put the evidence together that he needs, but will his efforts be enough?
Based on a true story, there are two distinct phases of this story. Firstly the kidnapping, torture and theft carried out by the gang. The second that of the attempt to capture them. The first part manage to convey the plight Suarez finds himself in well, the panic, the desperation, the pain and the realisation that he is unlikely to get out of this alive.
But it is with the investigation that this novel really steps up a gear. Stevens is a great foil, using the law to his advantage but also carefully breaking it when he needs to. As he tracks the gang down, piecing together their identities, actions and motivations bit by bit the reader is drawn along too, wanting him to succeed.
Everything is described well, from the sticky heat Suarez has to endure in captivity to the indifference of the police and the planning of the gang and the violence of their crimes. I also couldn't help but chuckle as Stevens find time to settle an old score at the same time.
As crime thrillers go this is a good one. Not a 'whodunnit' as that is revealed very early on, but more showing not only how far some people will go for money but also how guile, wit and tenacity will often produce results in the end.
The police fail to investigate and it is up to Suarez' lawyer Nolan Stevens to track down the gang and try to stop them before they strike again. He races against time to put the evidence together that he needs, but will his efforts be enough?
Based on a true story, there are two distinct phases of this story. Firstly the kidnapping, torture and theft carried out by the gang. The second that of the attempt to capture them. The first part manage to convey the plight Suarez finds himself in well, the panic, the desperation, the pain and the realisation that he is unlikely to get out of this alive.
But it is with the investigation that this novel really steps up a gear. Stevens is a great foil, using the law to his advantage but also carefully breaking it when he needs to. As he tracks the gang down, piecing together their identities, actions and motivations bit by bit the reader is drawn along too, wanting him to succeed.
Everything is described well, from the sticky heat Suarez has to endure in captivity to the indifference of the police and the planning of the gang and the violence of their crimes. I also couldn't help but chuckle as Stevens find time to settle an old score at the same time.
As crime thrillers go this is a good one. Not a 'whodunnit' as that is revealed very early on, but more showing not only how far some people will go for money but also how guile, wit and tenacity will often produce results in the end.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Laundromat (2019) in Movies
May 18, 2021
Is this the dullest movie title in film history?
In "The Laundromat", Ellen Martin (Meryl Streep) loses her husband Joe (James Cromwell) in a boating accident. She expects a multi-million dollar insurance payout, but is frustrated that the insurance companies evaporate in a miasma of shell-companies and double-dealing. Her compulsive investigations lead her to two Panamanian-based double dealers: Jürgen Mossack (Gary Oldman) and Ramón Fonseca (Antonio Banderas).
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
Fearless (Scarlet Suffragette #1)
8.0
Rate It
Book
Nicola Claire's captivating new Gothic romance series introduces a dark and sinister early settler...