Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tail as old as Kline.
With the Disney marketing machine in full swing, its hard to separate the hype from the movie reality in this latest live-action remake of one of their classic animated features from 1991. If you are lucky enough to have children you will know that each child tends to have “their” Disney feature: for my second daughter (then 4) that film would be “Beauty and the Beast”. With a VHS video tape worn down to the substrate, this is a film I know every line of dialogue to (“I’m especially good at expectorating”). So seeing this movie was always going to be a wander down Nostalgia Avenue and a left turn into Emotion Crescent, regardless of how good a film it was. And so it proved.
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Take It Easy
Games and Entertainment
App
It’s a puzzle, it’s a brain teaser and it’s a game! It’s all three and much more! It is...
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Tower Heist (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In the movie Tower Heist, the employees of The Tower, a ritzy high-rise condominium in New York City, fall victim to a Ponzi scheme and lose their 401(k). Now normally there wouldn’t be anything they could do about it but Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda), the one behind the Ponzi scheme, is one of the residents at The Tower.
Josh Kovacs (Ben Stiller), former general anager of The Tower, has an idea to steal the defrauded employees’ money back, but he needs help with his grand scheme. Josh brings in his brother-in-law Cole Howard (Casey Affleck) and Rick Malloy (Michael Pena). Both are former employees and as such have a score to settle. Josh also enlists the help of Odessa Montero (Gabourey Sidibe) who is currently a maid at the Tower and Chase Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick), a former resident.
While eager to do what they believe is right, the group does not have a background in crime, so Josh brings in Slide (Eddie Murphy), a thief from his neighborhood that he has known since childhood. Will this band of merry men and woman be successful and save the day Robin Hood-style or will they run afoul of FBI Agent Claire Denham (Tea Leoni)?
The film has a very entertaining story that unfolds beautifully and a better cast would be impossible to find. Now with that said, there were some parts in the movie that were distracting to me because I could not suspend my disbelief that far, however, I can’t say what they are due to the fact that I do not want to spoil any scenes for you.
Eddie Murphy did an amazing job of keeping his character realistic and at the same time unbelievably funny. Without a doubt every scene Murphy is in is golden. Not only did Alan Alda’s character get arrested for stealing people’s money but he almost stole the show. And even though every fiber of my being wanted to dislike his character, who is an arrogant, self-righteous, demeaning jerk; Alda portrayed him in such a way that I was actually sort of hoping that the character would get away with it. Now I know all you Benheads out there are asking “What about Ben Stiller?” You all will be happy to know that he was great, he was definitely the humorous glue that held the movie together. Matthew Broderick, Michael Pena and Casey Affleck were all very entertaining though at times Casey gets drowned out by the others. Last but certainly not least Gabourey Sidibe and Tea Leoni were both great and incredibly funny however they did not get anywhere near as much screen time as I would have liked.
Josh Kovacs (Ben Stiller), former general anager of The Tower, has an idea to steal the defrauded employees’ money back, but he needs help with his grand scheme. Josh brings in his brother-in-law Cole Howard (Casey Affleck) and Rick Malloy (Michael Pena). Both are former employees and as such have a score to settle. Josh also enlists the help of Odessa Montero (Gabourey Sidibe) who is currently a maid at the Tower and Chase Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick), a former resident.
While eager to do what they believe is right, the group does not have a background in crime, so Josh brings in Slide (Eddie Murphy), a thief from his neighborhood that he has known since childhood. Will this band of merry men and woman be successful and save the day Robin Hood-style or will they run afoul of FBI Agent Claire Denham (Tea Leoni)?
The film has a very entertaining story that unfolds beautifully and a better cast would be impossible to find. Now with that said, there were some parts in the movie that were distracting to me because I could not suspend my disbelief that far, however, I can’t say what they are due to the fact that I do not want to spoil any scenes for you.
Eddie Murphy did an amazing job of keeping his character realistic and at the same time unbelievably funny. Without a doubt every scene Murphy is in is golden. Not only did Alan Alda’s character get arrested for stealing people’s money but he almost stole the show. And even though every fiber of my being wanted to dislike his character, who is an arrogant, self-righteous, demeaning jerk; Alda portrayed him in such a way that I was actually sort of hoping that the character would get away with it. Now I know all you Benheads out there are asking “What about Ben Stiller?” You all will be happy to know that he was great, he was definitely the humorous glue that held the movie together. Matthew Broderick, Michael Pena and Casey Affleck were all very entertaining though at times Casey gets drowned out by the others. Last but certainly not least Gabourey Sidibe and Tea Leoni were both great and incredibly funny however they did not get anywhere near as much screen time as I would have liked.
Miss Hollywood: Lights, Camera, Fashion! - Pet Fun
Entertainment and Games
App
Play mini games with Miss Hollywood and her pet friends and become a superstar! Budge Studios™...
Peter Russell (61 KP) rated Legacy of Dragonholt in Tabletop Games
May 3, 2019
Its an rpg without a dm (1 more)
The biggest book based choose your adventure youve probably ever played
As with any choose your adventure choices can seem limiting (2 more)
The game is the only one of its kind and feels like it should be a series, but unfortunately discontinued
Its a one time playthrough
Largest choose your adventure ever
This game takes on roleplaying games for a single player rpg experience using "choose your adventure" style mechanics. At the beginning of the game a player makes a character, chooses a class and chooses skills. These character design choices do very much affect gameplay, providing different adventure paths/ options for characters of different races or having given skills in a situation. The box includes multiple adventures, each with a rough playtime of 30-60 minutes, though it can become longer with more players. Each booklet is designed to be played as a single gaming session, providing a convenient place to stop for the night or for a breather. The game also has a story tracking mechanic where bubbles are filled in based on choices made. These can affect interaction with npcs or track overarching campaign events that have shaped the world.
I played through this game once and it took me about 6 hours and feel tgere are not enough alternate choices to merit another playthrough. Even though the game says it can be played with 1 to 6 players I recommend one player because only a single choice can be made with each entry and multiple players may not agree on a single course of action. For this game you fo need some tablespace as there are lots of tracking sheets and books and possibly a map you will have out.
*Minor Spoiler Ahead
My overall view of this game is that I wish it was different in one of two ways.
1. It would be nice if there were expansions to this where a character could carry over to another campaign or an expansion that weaves in more npc drama. At the end there are only 4 possible endings and then the game just ends, I wanted more, but knew it would never be.
2. This game with all of its tracking was more akin to muds and I feel it would have been better suited (at least for single player) as an interactive book for a computer where the tracking is done behind the scenes. This would of provided more mystery and made the game feel more in the moment rather than breaking out of the story to reference tracking sheets to see if a choice was allowed.
I played through this game once and it took me about 6 hours and feel tgere are not enough alternate choices to merit another playthrough. Even though the game says it can be played with 1 to 6 players I recommend one player because only a single choice can be made with each entry and multiple players may not agree on a single course of action. For this game you fo need some tablespace as there are lots of tracking sheets and books and possibly a map you will have out.
*Minor Spoiler Ahead
My overall view of this game is that I wish it was different in one of two ways.
1. It would be nice if there were expansions to this where a character could carry over to another campaign or an expansion that weaves in more npc drama. At the end there are only 4 possible endings and then the game just ends, I wanted more, but knew it would never be.
2. This game with all of its tracking was more akin to muds and I feel it would have been better suited (at least for single player) as an interactive book for a computer where the tracking is done behind the scenes. This would of provided more mystery and made the game feel more in the moment rather than breaking out of the story to reference tracking sheets to see if a choice was allowed.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Accountant (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Rain Man with a Kalashnikov.
(Another Bob the Movie Man Showcase Theatre).
The scene: studio execs in a board room in Warner Brothers. Greg Silverman, head of Creative Development walks into the room full of his most creative guys and slams a script by Bill Dubuque onto the table.
Silverman: “Affleck needs a real zinger of a film to follow his Batman work and this is it… but we we need a really riveting title… something to grab everyone’s attention and get them begging to pay their ticket money to see. Hit me!”
Creative 1: “The Autist?”
Silverman: “Like your thinking…. good Oscar associations… but perhaps a tad non-PC.”
Creative 2: “Under the Skin?”
Silverman: “Been done. Besides, don’t want everyone thinking they’re going to see THAT much of Johansson again”
A grey looking financial director, sitting in the corner: “Er… sir… I’ve got an idea….”
=====
So… it’s not the most PR-friendly title in the world, but it is a whole lot more interesting than it sounds. Ben Affleck plays the titular accountant (who may or may not be called Christian Wolff) – a sort of evil Jack Reacher of the financial world: off-the-grid behind multiple aliases and with financial fingers in more murky pies around the world than seems tasteful.
Not only is he a mathematical genius with the numbers, but is also extremely handy with his fists and an arsenal of high powered weaponry he keeps in his executive trailer home… ready to up-roots and disappear at any time.
Supported over the phone by a mysterious ‘Pepper-Potts-style’ personal assistant, who appears more machine than person, Affleck is guided from job to job, dropping in the occasional “normal” job to keep the authorities off his tail. One of these is for a bio-technology company headed up by Lamar Black (John Lithgow) who brings him in – against the wishes of his FD and long term friend Ed Chilton (Andy Umberger) – since all appears not quite right in the books. Junior accountant Dana Cummings (Anna “Pitch Perfect” Kendrick) is the young lady who has seen the discrepancy but can’t track it down in the labyrinthine accounts.
This so called ‘safe’ job lands both him and Dana in extreme danger as person or persons unknown, fronted by a hired ‘heavy’ played by Jon Bernthal, try to prevent some dodgy activities coming to the surface.
As a parallel thread, the head of the Treasury Department’s Crime Enforcement Division, Ray King (J.K. Simmons, “Whiplash”) strong-arms (for no readily apparent reason) analyst Marybeth Medina (an impressive Cynthia Addai-Robinson) into pursuing Wolff. With a keen intellect and a strong incentive she begins to close in.
Directed by Gavin O’ Connor, this – for me – is a frustratingly inconsistent film. When it flies, it really flies well, both at an action level and at a dramatic level. The flashback scenes to Wolff’s childhood are well done, showing how the autistic and needy youngster who needed compassion, quiet and understanding got the exact opposite from his militaristic father (Robert C Treveiler) to ‘jolt him out of’ his condition. It is easy to understand how he turned out the way he did.
On the flip side, the plot progression almost deliberately shines a spotlight on some questions (no spoilers) that if you ask them you immediately see the answers, resulting in most of the rest of the plot falling into place without shock or surprise. There was only one genuine twist for me, right at the end of the film, that I didn’t see coming.
The script by Bill Dubuque (“The Judge”) delivers some really nice scenes between Affleck and Kendrick, some smart (and genuinely funny) one-liners and one of the best abruptly ended speeches since Samuel L. Jackson’s in “Deep Blue Sea”. However, the whole Treasury Investigation story-line (however good it is to see J.K. Simmons act) is somewhat superfluous to the whole thing and just doesn’t work.
Kendrick and Affleck have good chemistry, with Affleck trying desperately to breathe some likeability into what is a pretty cold and calculating character. It’s hard though to empathise with someone who – albeit indirectly – is the source of such misery around the world through drugs, terrorism, dictatorships and God-knows what else. Kendrick plays kooky and naive really well, but she really ought to get some protocols sorted out around letting people into her apartment: she really doesn’t seem to learn!
It’s a nice idea and entertaining to watch, but the delivery is flawed.
The scene: studio execs in a board room in Warner Brothers. Greg Silverman, head of Creative Development walks into the room full of his most creative guys and slams a script by Bill Dubuque onto the table.
Silverman: “Affleck needs a real zinger of a film to follow his Batman work and this is it… but we we need a really riveting title… something to grab everyone’s attention and get them begging to pay their ticket money to see. Hit me!”
Creative 1: “The Autist?”
Silverman: “Like your thinking…. good Oscar associations… but perhaps a tad non-PC.”
Creative 2: “Under the Skin?”
Silverman: “Been done. Besides, don’t want everyone thinking they’re going to see THAT much of Johansson again”
A grey looking financial director, sitting in the corner: “Er… sir… I’ve got an idea….”
=====
So… it’s not the most PR-friendly title in the world, but it is a whole lot more interesting than it sounds. Ben Affleck plays the titular accountant (who may or may not be called Christian Wolff) – a sort of evil Jack Reacher of the financial world: off-the-grid behind multiple aliases and with financial fingers in more murky pies around the world than seems tasteful.
Not only is he a mathematical genius with the numbers, but is also extremely handy with his fists and an arsenal of high powered weaponry he keeps in his executive trailer home… ready to up-roots and disappear at any time.
Supported over the phone by a mysterious ‘Pepper-Potts-style’ personal assistant, who appears more machine than person, Affleck is guided from job to job, dropping in the occasional “normal” job to keep the authorities off his tail. One of these is for a bio-technology company headed up by Lamar Black (John Lithgow) who brings him in – against the wishes of his FD and long term friend Ed Chilton (Andy Umberger) – since all appears not quite right in the books. Junior accountant Dana Cummings (Anna “Pitch Perfect” Kendrick) is the young lady who has seen the discrepancy but can’t track it down in the labyrinthine accounts.
This so called ‘safe’ job lands both him and Dana in extreme danger as person or persons unknown, fronted by a hired ‘heavy’ played by Jon Bernthal, try to prevent some dodgy activities coming to the surface.
As a parallel thread, the head of the Treasury Department’s Crime Enforcement Division, Ray King (J.K. Simmons, “Whiplash”) strong-arms (for no readily apparent reason) analyst Marybeth Medina (an impressive Cynthia Addai-Robinson) into pursuing Wolff. With a keen intellect and a strong incentive she begins to close in.
Directed by Gavin O’ Connor, this – for me – is a frustratingly inconsistent film. When it flies, it really flies well, both at an action level and at a dramatic level. The flashback scenes to Wolff’s childhood are well done, showing how the autistic and needy youngster who needed compassion, quiet and understanding got the exact opposite from his militaristic father (Robert C Treveiler) to ‘jolt him out of’ his condition. It is easy to understand how he turned out the way he did.
On the flip side, the plot progression almost deliberately shines a spotlight on some questions (no spoilers) that if you ask them you immediately see the answers, resulting in most of the rest of the plot falling into place without shock or surprise. There was only one genuine twist for me, right at the end of the film, that I didn’t see coming.
The script by Bill Dubuque (“The Judge”) delivers some really nice scenes between Affleck and Kendrick, some smart (and genuinely funny) one-liners and one of the best abruptly ended speeches since Samuel L. Jackson’s in “Deep Blue Sea”. However, the whole Treasury Investigation story-line (however good it is to see J.K. Simmons act) is somewhat superfluous to the whole thing and just doesn’t work.
Kendrick and Affleck have good chemistry, with Affleck trying desperately to breathe some likeability into what is a pretty cold and calculating character. It’s hard though to empathise with someone who – albeit indirectly – is the source of such misery around the world through drugs, terrorism, dictatorships and God-knows what else. Kendrick plays kooky and naive really well, but she really ought to get some protocols sorted out around letting people into her apartment: she really doesn’t seem to learn!
It’s a nice idea and entertaining to watch, but the delivery is flawed.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Everest (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Ever since Sir Edmund Hillary reached the peak of Mount Everest in 1953, the mountain has been the Holy Grail for climbers of all experience levels despite the fact that the mountain has claimed more than a few victims over the years from those who have attempted to reach the summit which is also known as “The Killing Zone”.
In the new film “Everest”, audiences get an up close look at the beauty and danger of the mountain as told by real men and women who risked it all for a shot at greatness.
Based on the books Into Thin Air and The Climb: Tragic Ambitions on Everest by two of the survivors, the film looks at an expedition in 1996 that until recently was the most tragic climb on the mountain and caused real concern about the commercialization of the mountain.
Jason Clarke stars as Rob Hall, an experienced guide and climber who has operated a very successful company which charges $65,000 a head for the chance at greatness.
As the film opens, Rob is leaving his pregnant wife behind in New Zealand to lead a group up the mountain. The weather looks good during the brief window where they have a chance to climb to the top, and despite a record number of groups waiting to climb, Rob is confident he can get his crew to the top.
Rob has a seasoned and professional crew and with a journalist in tow, he is ready to procedure but always operates from a position of safety and care. It is attention to safety that causes Rob to be labeled a “hand holder” from rival guide Scott Fisher (Jake Gyllenhaal).
Despite their rival nature and different styles, Rob and Scott decide to combine forces and work with one another to get their clients up the mountain and work to secure the all-important climbing ropes.
As the climb goes well, we learn about the various characters and get some great supporting work from Sam Worthington, Josh Brolin, and the diverse and very engaging cast of the film.
Naturally things do not go as planned as a series of weather induced tragedies set in and forces the climbers to battle overwhelming odds to survive in a deadly race against time.
Aside from the amazing visual where you can really see the challenge and danger of climbing at an altitude usually reserved for 747s, the film which will be shown only in IMAX 3D screens shows the passion and endurance of those willing to pay a small fortune and risk death for one of the greatest challenges out there.
Director Baltasar Kormakur is to be praised for a visually compelling film that lets the setting and characters propel the story and does not resort to Hollywood gimmicks like over embellished storms, cave ins, and scenes common in most Disaster films and focused on the events as depicted by the survivors.
It was difficult at times to identify key characters as when they are all bundled up in a storm, telling who was who became a real challenge at times, but imagine how hard it was for those who were actually there.
If you are looking for a character driven action film with amazing scenery, you will want to make sure to see this film as it is as unforgettable a tale with amazing visuals.
http://sknr.net/2015/09/18/everest/
In the new film “Everest”, audiences get an up close look at the beauty and danger of the mountain as told by real men and women who risked it all for a shot at greatness.
Based on the books Into Thin Air and The Climb: Tragic Ambitions on Everest by two of the survivors, the film looks at an expedition in 1996 that until recently was the most tragic climb on the mountain and caused real concern about the commercialization of the mountain.
Jason Clarke stars as Rob Hall, an experienced guide and climber who has operated a very successful company which charges $65,000 a head for the chance at greatness.
As the film opens, Rob is leaving his pregnant wife behind in New Zealand to lead a group up the mountain. The weather looks good during the brief window where they have a chance to climb to the top, and despite a record number of groups waiting to climb, Rob is confident he can get his crew to the top.
Rob has a seasoned and professional crew and with a journalist in tow, he is ready to procedure but always operates from a position of safety and care. It is attention to safety that causes Rob to be labeled a “hand holder” from rival guide Scott Fisher (Jake Gyllenhaal).
Despite their rival nature and different styles, Rob and Scott decide to combine forces and work with one another to get their clients up the mountain and work to secure the all-important climbing ropes.
As the climb goes well, we learn about the various characters and get some great supporting work from Sam Worthington, Josh Brolin, and the diverse and very engaging cast of the film.
Naturally things do not go as planned as a series of weather induced tragedies set in and forces the climbers to battle overwhelming odds to survive in a deadly race against time.
Aside from the amazing visual where you can really see the challenge and danger of climbing at an altitude usually reserved for 747s, the film which will be shown only in IMAX 3D screens shows the passion and endurance of those willing to pay a small fortune and risk death for one of the greatest challenges out there.
Director Baltasar Kormakur is to be praised for a visually compelling film that lets the setting and characters propel the story and does not resort to Hollywood gimmicks like over embellished storms, cave ins, and scenes common in most Disaster films and focused on the events as depicted by the survivors.
It was difficult at times to identify key characters as when they are all bundled up in a storm, telling who was who became a real challenge at times, but imagine how hard it was for those who were actually there.
If you are looking for a character driven action film with amazing scenery, you will want to make sure to see this film as it is as unforgettable a tale with amazing visuals.
http://sknr.net/2015/09/18/everest/
Andy K (10821 KP) rated What We Left Behind: Looking Back at Deep Space Nine (2018) in Movies
Jul 23, 2019
Where would we be without DS9?
Maybe the best Trek of all time?
Sisko, Odo, Kira, O'Brien, Dax, Quark, Bashir and the rest of the massive cast brought Star Trek to life as never before in this vastly different "station"ary style of Trek.
At the time, syndication was where it was at for reruns and additional revenue for a TV program. DS9 bucked the trend of wrapping up everything within one episode and began a TV serial which pretty much ran almost the entire run, much to the dismay of studio executives. Nowadays, shows like The Walking Dead, Lost, or Game of Thrones do this every week, but in the mid 90s this was not common.
Sandwiched in between The Next Generation and Voyager, DS9 did not get a lot of respect during its initial run at all. Also at that time, Trek TNG movies were in full swing so the show had to compete with that as well. Television stations would often preempt the show, skip a week or run the show in the early morning hours which made it even harder for its audience to keep track of the action.
DS9 certainly got a 2nd life with the current popularity of "binge watching" on your favorite streaming service. Having the ability to watch multi-part episodes or entire seasons within a few weeks brought back to life the en genius writing, acting and production quality of the series.
For this documentary, former showrunner Ira Steven Behr took several years worth of cast, crew and fan interviews, clips, behind the scenes footage and compiled a wonderful interesting film for any Trek fan. Many cast members major and minor as well as producers, writers and tech workers told tales of working on the show and how they very much enjoyed their time.
Throughout the many iterations of Trek, original creator Gene Roddenberry felt the show should entertain as well as provide social commentary on the issues of the time and DS9 was no exception. Throughout the show's 7 year run they dealt with issues such as racism, homelessness, same sex relationships and even genetic engineering.
One of the most fun subplots of the film was gathering the show's original writers in a room to formulate the first episode for the fictitious "Season 8" which will never actually happen (although I wish it would). The ideas, plot points and arcs they went through and came up with were extremely interesting, keep with the high level of writing the show originally produced, but also through us a few curveballs with some fun surprises.
Through the cast interviews we got to hear how the crew got along, some of their favorite and least favorite episodes and even the friendships they have maintained with one another.
The DVD set I received also had included a vast assortment of additional footage featuring even more nuggets and stories of what made the show great.
Overall, this film was one of the best documentaries I have ever seen about one of my favorite television programs in my lifetime. I might have to start binge watching the show again very soon.
Did I mention my name appears in the end credits?!? 😊
Sisko, Odo, Kira, O'Brien, Dax, Quark, Bashir and the rest of the massive cast brought Star Trek to life as never before in this vastly different "station"ary style of Trek.
At the time, syndication was where it was at for reruns and additional revenue for a TV program. DS9 bucked the trend of wrapping up everything within one episode and began a TV serial which pretty much ran almost the entire run, much to the dismay of studio executives. Nowadays, shows like The Walking Dead, Lost, or Game of Thrones do this every week, but in the mid 90s this was not common.
Sandwiched in between The Next Generation and Voyager, DS9 did not get a lot of respect during its initial run at all. Also at that time, Trek TNG movies were in full swing so the show had to compete with that as well. Television stations would often preempt the show, skip a week or run the show in the early morning hours which made it even harder for its audience to keep track of the action.
DS9 certainly got a 2nd life with the current popularity of "binge watching" on your favorite streaming service. Having the ability to watch multi-part episodes or entire seasons within a few weeks brought back to life the en genius writing, acting and production quality of the series.
For this documentary, former showrunner Ira Steven Behr took several years worth of cast, crew and fan interviews, clips, behind the scenes footage and compiled a wonderful interesting film for any Trek fan. Many cast members major and minor as well as producers, writers and tech workers told tales of working on the show and how they very much enjoyed their time.
Throughout the many iterations of Trek, original creator Gene Roddenberry felt the show should entertain as well as provide social commentary on the issues of the time and DS9 was no exception. Throughout the show's 7 year run they dealt with issues such as racism, homelessness, same sex relationships and even genetic engineering.
One of the most fun subplots of the film was gathering the show's original writers in a room to formulate the first episode for the fictitious "Season 8" which will never actually happen (although I wish it would). The ideas, plot points and arcs they went through and came up with were extremely interesting, keep with the high level of writing the show originally produced, but also through us a few curveballs with some fun surprises.
Through the cast interviews we got to hear how the crew got along, some of their favorite and least favorite episodes and even the friendships they have maintained with one another.
The DVD set I received also had included a vast assortment of additional footage featuring even more nuggets and stories of what made the show great.
Overall, this film was one of the best documentaries I have ever seen about one of my favorite television programs in my lifetime. I might have to start binge watching the show again very soon.
Did I mention my name appears in the end credits?!? 😊
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Let Him Go (2020) in Movies
Dec 23, 2020
Feud for Thought
After a family tragedy for the Blackledge family, grandparents George (Kevin Costner) and Margaret (Diane Lane) are left to bring up baby Jimmy (Bram and Otto Hornung) with mother/daughter-in-law Lorna (Kayli Carter). But a few years later, Lorna marries bad-un Donnie Weboy (Will Brittain) and disappears back to Donnie's hillbilly extended family in the wilds of North Dakota, led by the fearsome Blanche Weboy (Lesley Manville). Fearing for the child's wellbeing, Margaret drags retired Sheriff George on a dangerous journey to rescue the child.
There are strong similarities in this story with a sub-plot of the excellent "Ozark", where the psychopathic Darlene Snell (Lisa Emery) is intent on having a child to grow up with on her remote ranch. The sense of tension there is recreated here, exacerbated by the movie's extremely slow (read "glacial") pace in its early stages. It's the same sort of rising dread that I felt with "Nocturnal Animals". This reaches its peak at a tense standoff over lamb chops at the Weboy ranch, but we are probably half-way into the film by then.
The slow pace however is broken by a couple of extremely violent scenes that earn the movie its UK-15 certificate. One (no spoilers here!) harks back to another Kevin Costner blockbuster where he was a bit luckier! And the finale turns a slightly sleepy tale of "two old folks" into an 'all guns blazing' action western that's highly unexpected. Although you could argue that this is tonally extremely uneven, it works and makes the movie a lot more memorable than it otherwise would be.
The standout leading performance here is the one from Diane Lane as the mentally tortured Granny pursuing her convictions across the country. Here writer/director Thomas Bezucha gives the character full rein. It's a memorable 'strong female' part, that would have been dominated by the male lead in the writing of films a few years back. Lane delivers a dramatic and rock-solid performance that has Oscar nomination written all over it.
I'm also a big fan of Kevin Costner, not just because he's a solid and reliable actor over many years. I always remember him gamely appearing as "The Postman"/'propeller-guy' in Billy Crystal's hilarious montage opening for the 70th Academy Awards. Anyhow, here he has his meatiest dramatic role in many years, and delivers fully on it. Top job, although I suspect this may not be his year for his elusive Best Actor award.
Finally, rounding out the Oscar hopefuls is the brilliant Lesley Manville as Blanche Weboy. It's a dream of a role for the Brighton-born star, nominated of course for the Best Supporting Actress two years ago for "Phantom Thread". And she is genuinely chilling here, firing on all cylinders like some sort of deranged Bette Davis on speed. She's used sparingly in the movie, but that makes her scenes all the more memorable. Another nomination perhaps? I'd predict so, yes.
I found this to be an uncomfortable watch, since I found myself in a moral quandary with the storyline. It's clear that Margaret is genuinely concerned for the safety of Jimmy (and less so, Lorna). Yet, what she is ultimately prepared to do is consider child abduction, when the law if probably on the side of the other party. Sure, the lifestyle and attitudes of the Weboys are alien to this more traditional "Granny". But although Blanche rules with a Victorian-level of grit, isn't she - at least before any of her more vicious tendencies emerge - entitled to do that? The film firmly roots itself behind the Blackledge's as "the good guys", but the script cleverly has you questioning that at various points,
Two technical categories in "Let Him Go" are also worthy of note. The cinematography is by Guy Godfree, and the sweeping vistas of Montana and North Dakota (actually Alberta in Canada!) are gloriously delivered. And the music by Michael Giacchino - one of my favourite composers - is cello-heavy and fitting for the sombre storyline. I always assess the quality of a score by whether I annoy the cinema cleaners by sitting until the last of the end credits have rolled, and this is one I did that to.
As the last movie I see before Christmas, "Let Him Go" is not exactly a feelgood festive offering. It's a well-crafted and thoughtful story, but not one to make you feel good inside, for the reasons outlined above. If you are a movie-lover though, then it's an interesting watch, if only for the fine acting performances on offer.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the "Bob the Movie Man" review on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/23/let-him-go-is-not-a-joyous-affair-but-delivers-oscar-worthy-performances/. Thanks.)
There are strong similarities in this story with a sub-plot of the excellent "Ozark", where the psychopathic Darlene Snell (Lisa Emery) is intent on having a child to grow up with on her remote ranch. The sense of tension there is recreated here, exacerbated by the movie's extremely slow (read "glacial") pace in its early stages. It's the same sort of rising dread that I felt with "Nocturnal Animals". This reaches its peak at a tense standoff over lamb chops at the Weboy ranch, but we are probably half-way into the film by then.
The slow pace however is broken by a couple of extremely violent scenes that earn the movie its UK-15 certificate. One (no spoilers here!) harks back to another Kevin Costner blockbuster where he was a bit luckier! And the finale turns a slightly sleepy tale of "two old folks" into an 'all guns blazing' action western that's highly unexpected. Although you could argue that this is tonally extremely uneven, it works and makes the movie a lot more memorable than it otherwise would be.
The standout leading performance here is the one from Diane Lane as the mentally tortured Granny pursuing her convictions across the country. Here writer/director Thomas Bezucha gives the character full rein. It's a memorable 'strong female' part, that would have been dominated by the male lead in the writing of films a few years back. Lane delivers a dramatic and rock-solid performance that has Oscar nomination written all over it.
I'm also a big fan of Kevin Costner, not just because he's a solid and reliable actor over many years. I always remember him gamely appearing as "The Postman"/'propeller-guy' in Billy Crystal's hilarious montage opening for the 70th Academy Awards. Anyhow, here he has his meatiest dramatic role in many years, and delivers fully on it. Top job, although I suspect this may not be his year for his elusive Best Actor award.
Finally, rounding out the Oscar hopefuls is the brilliant Lesley Manville as Blanche Weboy. It's a dream of a role for the Brighton-born star, nominated of course for the Best Supporting Actress two years ago for "Phantom Thread". And she is genuinely chilling here, firing on all cylinders like some sort of deranged Bette Davis on speed. She's used sparingly in the movie, but that makes her scenes all the more memorable. Another nomination perhaps? I'd predict so, yes.
I found this to be an uncomfortable watch, since I found myself in a moral quandary with the storyline. It's clear that Margaret is genuinely concerned for the safety of Jimmy (and less so, Lorna). Yet, what she is ultimately prepared to do is consider child abduction, when the law if probably on the side of the other party. Sure, the lifestyle and attitudes of the Weboys are alien to this more traditional "Granny". But although Blanche rules with a Victorian-level of grit, isn't she - at least before any of her more vicious tendencies emerge - entitled to do that? The film firmly roots itself behind the Blackledge's as "the good guys", but the script cleverly has you questioning that at various points,
Two technical categories in "Let Him Go" are also worthy of note. The cinematography is by Guy Godfree, and the sweeping vistas of Montana and North Dakota (actually Alberta in Canada!) are gloriously delivered. And the music by Michael Giacchino - one of my favourite composers - is cello-heavy and fitting for the sombre storyline. I always assess the quality of a score by whether I annoy the cinema cleaners by sitting until the last of the end credits have rolled, and this is one I did that to.
As the last movie I see before Christmas, "Let Him Go" is not exactly a feelgood festive offering. It's a well-crafted and thoughtful story, but not one to make you feel good inside, for the reasons outlined above. If you are a movie-lover though, then it's an interesting watch, if only for the fine acting performances on offer.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the "Bob the Movie Man" review on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/23/let-him-go-is-not-a-joyous-affair-but-delivers-oscar-worthy-performances/. Thanks.)
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated Witch's Bell in Books
May 23, 2019
This was a free book on Amazon and the reviews make you wonder if you should even pick it up, but I still did and I have never been happier. I did find some of the complaints to be true to word, but I did enjoy the book way too much to just say it wasn't worth the read. However, we will be discussing Ebony Bell and her adventures and what Bell may have been done to make it better. Let's dive in.
So first of all, I fell in love with the idea behind this book and apparently the series. With characters like Nathan Wall and Ebony Bell, I couldn't help but be intrigued on whatever relationships was forming between them. I think this book was pretty well thought out considering it cold have left the scenes bare making it hard to visualize where the characters were and what was exactly going on. However, I did think there could have been a little less rambling about different things, though I feel it may be foreshadowing for other books. I feel that even though Ebony was pretty fleshed out, that there could have been a little more on the other characters we find ourselves following a bit. For example, Avery's mother is described by her looks and a bit of how she acted when Ebony was a child, but as a member of the Coven, I wanted a little more. Like how did she become apart of the Coven who were supposedly the strongest witches around as well as the oldest? It left a few questions popping to mind and hope they will be answered in the future. Nathan was another character I felt could have been fleshed out a bit more and not really semi revealed at the end. It left a lot to be desired, but again could just be information that makes you want to read on.
I loved, and I mean LOVED, how when Ebony had her magic blocked from her, the way she saw things changed a bit. Do not get me wrong, her outfits made me giggle, but seeing her actually notice the small things even though she didn't have to and hadn't noticed before, was kind of nice. You were able to see her actually begin to appreciate things she hadn't before. I always love seeing characters grow as a person. Ebony had learned to really appreciate what she was seeing as well as what she had. To see her struggle had brought some delight and I found myself a little mad at how she would forget the most important thing she had thought about until it was almost too late. I did find that the use of other characters did help make what was going on around her seem a little more dire.
I found the love interest between Ebony and Nathan to be a bit subtle, which was kind of nice since it left a lot of room for something to blossom a wonderful romance. I do like how Nate gets under Ebony's skin and no matter how hard she tries rattle him he is unfazed. This made them polar opposites, which made me smile a bit, Though I would have loved to see more between them in the form of witty banter and teasing. but what I was given, I didn't think it was all that bad, just could have been more.
Overall, I would rate this book 4 stars out of 5 stars. There could have been more given and even explained something better while not rambling on things that made you begin to question a character's mental state. I loved the story line and hope that as the books move forward we can figure it all out about our mysterious Detective Nathan Wall, the Coven and whoever is behind trying to rewrite Ebony Bell's story.
So first of all, I fell in love with the idea behind this book and apparently the series. With characters like Nathan Wall and Ebony Bell, I couldn't help but be intrigued on whatever relationships was forming between them. I think this book was pretty well thought out considering it cold have left the scenes bare making it hard to visualize where the characters were and what was exactly going on. However, I did think there could have been a little less rambling about different things, though I feel it may be foreshadowing for other books. I feel that even though Ebony was pretty fleshed out, that there could have been a little more on the other characters we find ourselves following a bit. For example, Avery's mother is described by her looks and a bit of how she acted when Ebony was a child, but as a member of the Coven, I wanted a little more. Like how did she become apart of the Coven who were supposedly the strongest witches around as well as the oldest? It left a few questions popping to mind and hope they will be answered in the future. Nathan was another character I felt could have been fleshed out a bit more and not really semi revealed at the end. It left a lot to be desired, but again could just be information that makes you want to read on.
I loved, and I mean LOVED, how when Ebony had her magic blocked from her, the way she saw things changed a bit. Do not get me wrong, her outfits made me giggle, but seeing her actually notice the small things even though she didn't have to and hadn't noticed before, was kind of nice. You were able to see her actually begin to appreciate things she hadn't before. I always love seeing characters grow as a person. Ebony had learned to really appreciate what she was seeing as well as what she had. To see her struggle had brought some delight and I found myself a little mad at how she would forget the most important thing she had thought about until it was almost too late. I did find that the use of other characters did help make what was going on around her seem a little more dire.
I found the love interest between Ebony and Nathan to be a bit subtle, which was kind of nice since it left a lot of room for something to blossom a wonderful romance. I do like how Nate gets under Ebony's skin and no matter how hard she tries rattle him he is unfazed. This made them polar opposites, which made me smile a bit, Though I would have loved to see more between them in the form of witty banter and teasing. but what I was given, I didn't think it was all that bad, just could have been more.
Overall, I would rate this book 4 stars out of 5 stars. There could have been more given and even explained something better while not rambling on things that made you begin to question a character's mental state. I loved the story line and hope that as the books move forward we can figure it all out about our mysterious Detective Nathan Wall, the Coven and whoever is behind trying to rewrite Ebony Bell's story.