Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated 6 Underground (2019) in Movies
Dec 13, 2019
Verdict: Completely Bonkers Entertainment
Story: 6 Underground starts as we meet the agents, One (Reynolds) the billionaire, Two (Laurent) the Spook, Three (Garcia-Rulfo) a hitman, Four (Hardy) the skywalker, Five (Arjona) the doctor and Six (Franco) the driver, whose latest mission in Italy has gone sour, seeing them use their skills to escape the threat coming their way, only to lose a member of the team, needing to find a new member to become a seven.
Recruiting Seven (Hawkins) we learn about the plans they group have, they look to eliminate dictators that nobody else would touch, placing the rightful person in charge of the country, with the latest mission being to head to Turgistan.
Thoughts on 6 Underground
Characters – One is the leader of the squad, he is a billionaire that faked his own death to build the squad which will fight against the dictators of the world, he recruits the very best, he uses the code name, he wants to use his wealth to solve the problems in the world, in a way being known really works, often given commentary on what is going on. Two is the ex-CIA spook that is the most deadly with a weapon, she is willing to lead any assault the team goes on. Three is a hitman that has been given a new life, he is the most reckless of the crew, he will break the rules, but give him a gun and he will get the job done. Four is known as the skywalker, he parkour skills are unbelievable, he will run through building roof tops, searching for routes for the team, getting involved when required, he is easily the most entertaining character of the squad. Five is the doctor, while she might have the weakest character development of the whole squad. Six is the driver that enjoys the thrills that come from the high speed chases. Seven is the newest member of the team, a former soldier bought in for his own skills, he does question the true identity of One, unlike anybody else.
Performances – Ryan Reynolds, is like he always is, wise cracking, fun to watch and always confident, something he needs to be for this role, thinking Deadpool, without the costume. Melanie Laurent does an excellent job in the spook role, with Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Adria Arjona, Dave Franco and Corey Hawkins are strong too, though it is Ben Hardy that seems to steal the show.
Story – The story here follows an elite group of soldiers that have come from around the world to work together to stop dictators from maintaining their reigns of terror over their nations. While this story is hugely ambition and original, it shows how wealthy people could use their money for the right reasons, to help the world instead of just watching it get destroyed. Outside of just dealing with the problems in the world, the story is very simple, go from one mission to the next, with plenty of banter between the squad, usually revolving around film references, which if you understand add humour to scenes through the film.
Action – The action in this film is massive, it is almost relentless for large parts of the film, we see so much happening, from car chases, the gun battles, parkour on rooftops and that boat sequences, well wow.
Settings – The film does take us all over the world, with the main country being fictional, it is implied which country we are seeing wanting to have a change. The film does make the most of the locations, with the environment playing a big part in how each scene can be won.
Scene of the Movie – The Parkour rooftop.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Sometimes it does feel like it is just Deadpool commenting on an action film.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly bonkers action film that you can switch off and just let everything unfold to the crazy levels it is meant to reach.
Overall: Wildly Over the Top.
Story: 6 Underground starts as we meet the agents, One (Reynolds) the billionaire, Two (Laurent) the Spook, Three (Garcia-Rulfo) a hitman, Four (Hardy) the skywalker, Five (Arjona) the doctor and Six (Franco) the driver, whose latest mission in Italy has gone sour, seeing them use their skills to escape the threat coming their way, only to lose a member of the team, needing to find a new member to become a seven.
Recruiting Seven (Hawkins) we learn about the plans they group have, they look to eliminate dictators that nobody else would touch, placing the rightful person in charge of the country, with the latest mission being to head to Turgistan.
Thoughts on 6 Underground
Characters – One is the leader of the squad, he is a billionaire that faked his own death to build the squad which will fight against the dictators of the world, he recruits the very best, he uses the code name, he wants to use his wealth to solve the problems in the world, in a way being known really works, often given commentary on what is going on. Two is the ex-CIA spook that is the most deadly with a weapon, she is willing to lead any assault the team goes on. Three is a hitman that has been given a new life, he is the most reckless of the crew, he will break the rules, but give him a gun and he will get the job done. Four is known as the skywalker, he parkour skills are unbelievable, he will run through building roof tops, searching for routes for the team, getting involved when required, he is easily the most entertaining character of the squad. Five is the doctor, while she might have the weakest character development of the whole squad. Six is the driver that enjoys the thrills that come from the high speed chases. Seven is the newest member of the team, a former soldier bought in for his own skills, he does question the true identity of One, unlike anybody else.
Performances – Ryan Reynolds, is like he always is, wise cracking, fun to watch and always confident, something he needs to be for this role, thinking Deadpool, without the costume. Melanie Laurent does an excellent job in the spook role, with Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Adria Arjona, Dave Franco and Corey Hawkins are strong too, though it is Ben Hardy that seems to steal the show.
Story – The story here follows an elite group of soldiers that have come from around the world to work together to stop dictators from maintaining their reigns of terror over their nations. While this story is hugely ambition and original, it shows how wealthy people could use their money for the right reasons, to help the world instead of just watching it get destroyed. Outside of just dealing with the problems in the world, the story is very simple, go from one mission to the next, with plenty of banter between the squad, usually revolving around film references, which if you understand add humour to scenes through the film.
Action – The action in this film is massive, it is almost relentless for large parts of the film, we see so much happening, from car chases, the gun battles, parkour on rooftops and that boat sequences, well wow.
Settings – The film does take us all over the world, with the main country being fictional, it is implied which country we are seeing wanting to have a change. The film does make the most of the locations, with the environment playing a big part in how each scene can be won.
Scene of the Movie – The Parkour rooftop.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Sometimes it does feel like it is just Deadpool commenting on an action film.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly bonkers action film that you can switch off and just let everything unfold to the crazy levels it is meant to reach.
Overall: Wildly Over the Top.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) in Movies
Mar 28, 2021
Strong Ensemble Work
The good thing about my yearly exercise to check out all of the Oscar Nominated films in the "Major" Categories is that it forces me to watch films that are "one my list" but I just haven't gotten to them. THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is one of those types of films - an Aaron Sorkin Written and Directed project with a stellar cast about an important moment in United States History.
And...I'm glad I "forced myself" to watch this, for TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 just might end up being my favorite film of 2020. It tells the tale of the trial of 8 (not 7 - they explain that difference in the film) leaders of revolutionary groups in the turbulent times that were the late 1960's in the United States and this film grasps the stakes that both sides are faced with in this historic time.
It all starts, of course, with the Writing and Directing of Aaron Sorkin (TV's THE WEST WING, A FEW GOOD MEN, MOLLY'S GAME) and it is some of his best work. Sorkin's writing style lends itself to this type of multi-player, multi-storyline story that all culminates into one story at the end. The words coming out of his character's mouths are insightful and true (if a bit over-blown for these characters) and they make you understand these characters - and their motivations - very well (whether the character is considered a "good" guy or a "bad" guy in this film).
The pedigree of Sorkin draws some wonderful actors to his works and THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is no different. Eddie Redmayne (Oscar Winner for THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING), Mark Rylance (Oscar Winner for BRIDGE OF SPIES), Ben Shenkman (Angels in America) and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (INCEPTION) all are at the top of their (considerably strong) games and Director/Writer Sorkin lets them all shine.
These 4 are good - but the next 6 are even better (yes...there is that many good to great performances in this film). Let's start with Jeremy Strong's (THE BIG SHORT) Jerry Rubin and Sacha Baron Cohen (BORAT) in his Oscar Nominated role of Abbie Hoffman. The embody the hippie culture of the '60's and bring gravitas and humor to the proceedings. Cohen earns his Oscar nomination by his "showey" role, but I would have been happy with just about any of the main Actor's being nominated.
Yahya Adbul-Mateen II (AQUAMAN) is powerful as Bobby Seale - the Black Panther Leader who is railroaded into this trial. He is supported by his friend, Fred Hampton - who I was glad to have learned more about in another Oscar nominated film this year, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH.
Special notice needs to be made of a few veteran performers in this film - John Carrol Lynch (FARGO) has become a "mark of excellence" for me in films. Whenever he shows up in a project, I know that it will be worth my while for no other reason than his performance, and this film is no exception and Frank Langella EXCELS in the role of the Judge in the case, Julius Hoffman, and he is - beyond a doubt - the "bad guy" in this film, but he brings a humanity to his character and I "loved to hate" him. This performance stuck with me and I think that Langella deserved an Oscar nomination.
Finally...there is an extended cameo from a well known Hollywood performer (who I will not name, for I do not wish to spoil his appearance) as former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. This character was built up prior to his appearance as a powerhouse, and this actor did not disappoint.
This is a fantastic ensemble film that really transported me back to the '60's and the message at the heart of this film are as relevant today as back then. As I stated above, this is currently my favorite film of 2020, and it will only be replaced at the top by something very, very special
TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is currently streaming on Netflix and I highly recommend that you check it out.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...I'm glad I "forced myself" to watch this, for TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 just might end up being my favorite film of 2020. It tells the tale of the trial of 8 (not 7 - they explain that difference in the film) leaders of revolutionary groups in the turbulent times that were the late 1960's in the United States and this film grasps the stakes that both sides are faced with in this historic time.
It all starts, of course, with the Writing and Directing of Aaron Sorkin (TV's THE WEST WING, A FEW GOOD MEN, MOLLY'S GAME) and it is some of his best work. Sorkin's writing style lends itself to this type of multi-player, multi-storyline story that all culminates into one story at the end. The words coming out of his character's mouths are insightful and true (if a bit over-blown for these characters) and they make you understand these characters - and their motivations - very well (whether the character is considered a "good" guy or a "bad" guy in this film).
The pedigree of Sorkin draws some wonderful actors to his works and THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is no different. Eddie Redmayne (Oscar Winner for THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING), Mark Rylance (Oscar Winner for BRIDGE OF SPIES), Ben Shenkman (Angels in America) and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (INCEPTION) all are at the top of their (considerably strong) games and Director/Writer Sorkin lets them all shine.
These 4 are good - but the next 6 are even better (yes...there is that many good to great performances in this film). Let's start with Jeremy Strong's (THE BIG SHORT) Jerry Rubin and Sacha Baron Cohen (BORAT) in his Oscar Nominated role of Abbie Hoffman. The embody the hippie culture of the '60's and bring gravitas and humor to the proceedings. Cohen earns his Oscar nomination by his "showey" role, but I would have been happy with just about any of the main Actor's being nominated.
Yahya Adbul-Mateen II (AQUAMAN) is powerful as Bobby Seale - the Black Panther Leader who is railroaded into this trial. He is supported by his friend, Fred Hampton - who I was glad to have learned more about in another Oscar nominated film this year, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH.
Special notice needs to be made of a few veteran performers in this film - John Carrol Lynch (FARGO) has become a "mark of excellence" for me in films. Whenever he shows up in a project, I know that it will be worth my while for no other reason than his performance, and this film is no exception and Frank Langella EXCELS in the role of the Judge in the case, Julius Hoffman, and he is - beyond a doubt - the "bad guy" in this film, but he brings a humanity to his character and I "loved to hate" him. This performance stuck with me and I think that Langella deserved an Oscar nomination.
Finally...there is an extended cameo from a well known Hollywood performer (who I will not name, for I do not wish to spoil his appearance) as former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. This character was built up prior to his appearance as a powerhouse, and this actor did not disappoint.
This is a fantastic ensemble film that really transported me back to the '60's and the message at the heart of this film are as relevant today as back then. As I stated above, this is currently my favorite film of 2020, and it will only be replaced at the top by something very, very special
TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is currently streaming on Netflix and I highly recommend that you check it out.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated King Kong (2005) in Movies
Jun 25, 2019
Thoughts on King Kong
Characters – Ann Darrow is a stage actress who has ben performing in an unsuccessful show for years until her theatre gets closed down, she is getting desperate to work with famous play write, only to find herself meeting a film director working with him. Ann jumps at the chance to have a paid gig, only this becomes more than she ever bargained for, when she becomes the object of King Kong affections on Skull Island. Carl Denham is a film director whose latest film isn’t impressing his investors, he decides to run before having the whole projects plug pulled, taking his crew to an unknown island and even after the danger starts, he continues to film his evolving story. Jack Driscoll is the screenwriter that is trying to get back to his stage work, only to find that Carl has tricked him into remaining on the boat, forcing him to work on the screenplay, he starts to fall in love with Ann along the way too, willing to risk his own life to save hers. Kong is the feared ruler of Skull Island, he takes Ann as a sacrifice falling in love with the human on his island, he can fight any threat, including T-Rexes. He is the icon that we know from previous films bought to life once again.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the role made famous by Fay Wray, brings her own stamp to the role, handling the small comic moments very well through the film too. Jack Black might not have been many people’s first choice for the director role, but he proves a lot of people wrong with his performance, which still remains one of his best. Adrian Brody proves to be a great choice too because he gets to poke fun at the Hollywood stereotypes.
Story – The story here follows an ambitious director who takes his crew including a desperate young actress to Skull Island, a mysterious uncharted location only to find a land filled with unseen monsters including the king of the island Kong, who becomes friends with Ann the actress. This is the remake of the one of the classic films of the 1930s, it does tell the same story, only builds on everything to new levels, because back then, nobody knew how big movies were going to be, so this time we can look back at the movie building era, showing more of the conflicts between movies and theatre. The island is also much larger in scale with plenty of creatures which add to the story. we do even have small side stories which do work to fill the films lengthy 3 hour plus run time. We do get to see just how destructive the human can be to new worlds too.
Action/Adventure – The action in the film is massive, edge of the seat and most importantly brilliant to watch, be it the fights between creatures, monsters and humans, right down to the New York showdown with Kong. The adventure does take us to a new world, where we haven’t seen the creatures before, or at least not this size. It shows the most dangerous side of the explorer’s journeys in the world.
Settings – The film does use two main settings, first New York which is re-created for the time period perfectly, the second is the island which is filled with the beauty and terror you would have come to expect from an unknown location
Special Effects – The effects are one of the biggest talking points of this film, first of all Kong looks fantastic, large amounts of the film looks brilliant, but that one chase scene will drag this down because it is such a weak point for the film.
Scene of the Movie – Kong versus the T-Rex.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The canyon chase the CGI looks awful.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the remakes that works because of the improvement in technology, it is epic in scale and manages to capture the true feeling behind what made the original such a memorable movie.
Overall: Stunning remake that lives up to the scale of the movie.
Characters – Ann Darrow is a stage actress who has ben performing in an unsuccessful show for years until her theatre gets closed down, she is getting desperate to work with famous play write, only to find herself meeting a film director working with him. Ann jumps at the chance to have a paid gig, only this becomes more than she ever bargained for, when she becomes the object of King Kong affections on Skull Island. Carl Denham is a film director whose latest film isn’t impressing his investors, he decides to run before having the whole projects plug pulled, taking his crew to an unknown island and even after the danger starts, he continues to film his evolving story. Jack Driscoll is the screenwriter that is trying to get back to his stage work, only to find that Carl has tricked him into remaining on the boat, forcing him to work on the screenplay, he starts to fall in love with Ann along the way too, willing to risk his own life to save hers. Kong is the feared ruler of Skull Island, he takes Ann as a sacrifice falling in love with the human on his island, he can fight any threat, including T-Rexes. He is the icon that we know from previous films bought to life once again.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the role made famous by Fay Wray, brings her own stamp to the role, handling the small comic moments very well through the film too. Jack Black might not have been many people’s first choice for the director role, but he proves a lot of people wrong with his performance, which still remains one of his best. Adrian Brody proves to be a great choice too because he gets to poke fun at the Hollywood stereotypes.
Story – The story here follows an ambitious director who takes his crew including a desperate young actress to Skull Island, a mysterious uncharted location only to find a land filled with unseen monsters including the king of the island Kong, who becomes friends with Ann the actress. This is the remake of the one of the classic films of the 1930s, it does tell the same story, only builds on everything to new levels, because back then, nobody knew how big movies were going to be, so this time we can look back at the movie building era, showing more of the conflicts between movies and theatre. The island is also much larger in scale with plenty of creatures which add to the story. we do even have small side stories which do work to fill the films lengthy 3 hour plus run time. We do get to see just how destructive the human can be to new worlds too.
Action/Adventure – The action in the film is massive, edge of the seat and most importantly brilliant to watch, be it the fights between creatures, monsters and humans, right down to the New York showdown with Kong. The adventure does take us to a new world, where we haven’t seen the creatures before, or at least not this size. It shows the most dangerous side of the explorer’s journeys in the world.
Settings – The film does use two main settings, first New York which is re-created for the time period perfectly, the second is the island which is filled with the beauty and terror you would have come to expect from an unknown location
Special Effects – The effects are one of the biggest talking points of this film, first of all Kong looks fantastic, large amounts of the film looks brilliant, but that one chase scene will drag this down because it is such a weak point for the film.
Scene of the Movie – Kong versus the T-Rex.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The canyon chase the CGI looks awful.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the remakes that works because of the improvement in technology, it is epic in scale and manages to capture the true feeling behind what made the original such a memorable movie.
Overall: Stunning remake that lives up to the scale of the movie.
Debbiereadsbook (1097 KP) rated Homeward Bound (Pine Cove #3) in Books
Sep 29, 2019 (Updated Dec 6, 2019)
can't fault it!
I was gifted my copy of this book, that I write a review was not required.
Swift finds out he is a father, 5 years after Imogen’s birth. But Imogen’s mum is struggling and Swift takes custody of his daughter while mum sorts herself out. Micha is home, after some time in custody, and is struggling being at home. He loves his family, he really does, but they don’t know who he is, deep down, he can’t tell them, not after what he did before he left. Swift comes to Micha’s aid and vice versa. The things start to spiral out of control with Micha being in such close proximity to Imogen, when his past finds and threatens those he has come to love, and Micha makes a dreadful decision. Can Swift get to him in time?
Ms Welch has out done herself, AGAIN!
I mean, the whole previously undiscovered bisexuality genre is growing on me, big time, and it is almost entirely due to Ms Welch’s skill at writing these characters!
Swift is Robin’s (from book 1, Safe Harbor) older brother, and Swift is Micha’s older brother’s best friend. Micha makes no bones about his attraction to Swift, from when they all hung out together when he was a teenager. But Micha is a grown man now, and surely can’t still be crushing on Swift, right? Clearly, he is. And he struggles so much with that attraction with Swift’s little, entirely innocent, touches, because Micha doesn’t want them to be innocent. But Swift is straight, cos he has a child. And Micha just suffers in silence.
Swift, however, is questioning everything. His daughter just landed on his doorstep, and he has no idea what to do! Having Micha help is a godsend. Having Micha in his space is . .nice. Having Micha OUT his space, is not so nice and it’s not till Swift thinks he might lose Micha that he questions why he feels like that. And Swift is just like, Okay then! Micha is MINE and I want him back. And he goes all out!
When Micha tells Swift about why he can’t tell his family he is gay, I cried, I really did. It breaks your heart, the pain he has been carrying around all this time.
It’s a well told tale, of getting what and WHO you want, it really is!
But PULEEEEEZE, Ms Welch, write Ava and Peyton a full story!!
5 full and shiny stars!
Nick J Russo narrates this series.
And just as Ms Welch outdid herself WRITING this book, Russo outdid himself NARRATING it.
I mean, I rarely react out loud (verbally, shouitng, crying at what I'm reading) when I am READING. When I am LISTENING, however, its a totally different ball game and I don't think I was ever more verbal with this book than maybe one other, in years of being an audio book listener!
Right from the start, Russo broke my heart for Micha. Well Welch did of course, but HEARING how broken Micha feels he is? I think I was crying right at the first chapter!
But when Micha is telling Swift why they can't be together?? Oh dear Lord. I had to stop what I was doing and just listen to poor Micha pour his heart out to Swift and I sobbed my bloody socks off! So much so, my daughter came in to ask if I was okay!
But equally, Russo gets over Swift's emotions too. Not quite as dramatically and gut wrenching as Micha's but Swift goes through a lot here, and Russo gets all of that across.
The voices for the other characters are carried across the series perfectly, and most of them pop uo here are some point.
While I was listening, I made a connection to book 4 that I hadn't made when I was reading. Elias and Ben pop up here and it was great to figure out where they fit in into the Pine Cove bigger picture. I have their book to read next.
5 stars for the book
5 stars for the narration!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Swift finds out he is a father, 5 years after Imogen’s birth. But Imogen’s mum is struggling and Swift takes custody of his daughter while mum sorts herself out. Micha is home, after some time in custody, and is struggling being at home. He loves his family, he really does, but they don’t know who he is, deep down, he can’t tell them, not after what he did before he left. Swift comes to Micha’s aid and vice versa. The things start to spiral out of control with Micha being in such close proximity to Imogen, when his past finds and threatens those he has come to love, and Micha makes a dreadful decision. Can Swift get to him in time?
Ms Welch has out done herself, AGAIN!
I mean, the whole previously undiscovered bisexuality genre is growing on me, big time, and it is almost entirely due to Ms Welch’s skill at writing these characters!
Swift is Robin’s (from book 1, Safe Harbor) older brother, and Swift is Micha’s older brother’s best friend. Micha makes no bones about his attraction to Swift, from when they all hung out together when he was a teenager. But Micha is a grown man now, and surely can’t still be crushing on Swift, right? Clearly, he is. And he struggles so much with that attraction with Swift’s little, entirely innocent, touches, because Micha doesn’t want them to be innocent. But Swift is straight, cos he has a child. And Micha just suffers in silence.
Swift, however, is questioning everything. His daughter just landed on his doorstep, and he has no idea what to do! Having Micha help is a godsend. Having Micha in his space is . .nice. Having Micha OUT his space, is not so nice and it’s not till Swift thinks he might lose Micha that he questions why he feels like that. And Swift is just like, Okay then! Micha is MINE and I want him back. And he goes all out!
When Micha tells Swift about why he can’t tell his family he is gay, I cried, I really did. It breaks your heart, the pain he has been carrying around all this time.
It’s a well told tale, of getting what and WHO you want, it really is!
But PULEEEEEZE, Ms Welch, write Ava and Peyton a full story!!
5 full and shiny stars!
Nick J Russo narrates this series.
And just as Ms Welch outdid herself WRITING this book, Russo outdid himself NARRATING it.
I mean, I rarely react out loud (verbally, shouitng, crying at what I'm reading) when I am READING. When I am LISTENING, however, its a totally different ball game and I don't think I was ever more verbal with this book than maybe one other, in years of being an audio book listener!
Right from the start, Russo broke my heart for Micha. Well Welch did of course, but HEARING how broken Micha feels he is? I think I was crying right at the first chapter!
But when Micha is telling Swift why they can't be together?? Oh dear Lord. I had to stop what I was doing and just listen to poor Micha pour his heart out to Swift and I sobbed my bloody socks off! So much so, my daughter came in to ask if I was okay!
But equally, Russo gets over Swift's emotions too. Not quite as dramatically and gut wrenching as Micha's but Swift goes through a lot here, and Russo gets all of that across.
The voices for the other characters are carried across the series perfectly, and most of them pop uo here are some point.
While I was listening, I made a connection to book 4 that I hadn't made when I was reading. Elias and Ben pop up here and it was great to figure out where they fit in into the Pine Cove bigger picture. I have their book to read next.
5 stars for the book
5 stars for the narration!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Lee (2222 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Nov 18, 2017
Messy introduction (1 more)
Steppenwolf
A really pleasant surprise
PRE-MOVIE THOUGHTS: Up until very recently, I'd been cautiously optimistic regarding Justice League. I enjoyed Man of Steel, despite some faults, and I thought that Henry Cavill was perfectly suited to the role. I didn't mind Batman V Superman so much either, despite Jesse Eisenbergs Lex Luthor constantly trying to ruin it. The best thing about Batman V Superman though was Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, which is why her standalone origin movie deservedly did so well earlier this year. But the characters of Superman and Batman were beginning to get a bit of a raw deal in my opinion, and that was starting to piss me off. The original Superman movie with Christopher Reeve, along with Christopher Nolans Dark Knight trilogy, are among my favourite films and these latest movies just weren't doing them 'justice'. Suicide Squad showed that DC couldn't do an ensemble movie, which cast a lot of doubt over just how good Justice League was going to be. And when reports came in of re-shoots and a change of director, it wasn't really looking good. But some of the more recent trailers and teasers actually didn't look so bad, so maybe there wasn't too much to be worried about. Until a few days ago that is, when about 90% of the reviews I read didn't give it higher than two stars! And those that gave it higher were still highlighting some of the weaknesses I've already mentioned here. So, I headed into the cinema, expecting to be pissed off again. But seriously, genuinely hoping I wasn't.
POST-MOVIE REVIEW: Justice League doesn't start things off too well. The world is still mourning the death of Superman, and a few pointless scenes try to highlight that loss and despair. Batman and Wonder Woman appear in a couple of standalone battles to remind us what they're capable of, but those scenes also seem rushed and out of place. We have three new team members to be introduced to as well, along with the big bad of the movie. Whereas Marvel's Avengers took the time to introduce their team over a series of standalone movies, we've had no such luxury in the run up to Justice League, aside from some brief glimpses in previous movies. It all just seems like a rush to get things to the point where the team are together and can start having some fun. Everything up until that point just seems cobbled together. Lacking coherence, and just a little bit dull.
Talking of dull, once again the big bad of the movie is a bit of a let down. Steppenwolf appears on Earth in search of three powerful cubes which when combined together will give him the ability to forge the Earth into something more appealing to him, or something like that anyway. He's accompanied by thousands of flying zombie man-bug type creatures and the whole thing just reeks of supervillain plotlines we've seen many times before. Steppenwolf himself is entirely CGI, and at times the CGI just doesn't look that good.
Onto the league themselves. Well, Wonder Woman is still the most impressive of them all, proving to be a real natural leader. Batman, although greatly improved on his Batman V Superman appearance, just seems like he can't be bothered. Tired and uninterested at times. This might be partly down to Ben Affleck, who never really seemed suited to the role in my opinion. If the rumours of him being recast in the next standalone Batman movie are true, then it may well be for the best. Even if the thought of yet another actor taking on the role so soon already is extremely frustrating.
The two biggest surprise for me were the two characters I was initially least interested about when heading in to the cinema. Cyborg, from his introduction in BvS and glimpses in the trailers, just seemed pointless. But, despite that we gloss over his back story somewhat, actually proves himself to be a valuable and interesting member of the team. And as for The Flash, he manages to get many of the movies better lines and scenes while he tries to come to terms with what he can actually do with his power ("Up until now I usually just run really fast and push people").
Slightly disappointing though was Aquaman. Not the character himself, just the fact that we barely get a glimpse of his undersea world, before he finds himself thrust into the league, reduced to just being some extra muscle. His is a role which would have greatly benefited from a standalone origin movie before appearing in this one.
When the team eventually do come together is when the movie really steps up a gear. They work really well together and I really enjoyed the battle scenes. It soon becomes clear though, that they cannot defeat Steppenwolf on their own, and need somebody even more powerful to help them out.
It's no secret, despite his absence from the trailers, that Superman returns to become part of the league. I felt that this was handled really well and the team helping to overcome his initial disorientation was a really fun scene. When he is fully recovered and battling the bad guys, it's the kind of Superman we all know and love and everything involving him is just hugely enjoyable.
If it wasn't for the rushed, incoherent introduction to the movie, I would have rated this a lot higher. For me, the rest of the movie is right up there with this years Wonder Woman, and is a serious step in the right direction for DC. A really pleasant surprise...
POST-MOVIE REVIEW: Justice League doesn't start things off too well. The world is still mourning the death of Superman, and a few pointless scenes try to highlight that loss and despair. Batman and Wonder Woman appear in a couple of standalone battles to remind us what they're capable of, but those scenes also seem rushed and out of place. We have three new team members to be introduced to as well, along with the big bad of the movie. Whereas Marvel's Avengers took the time to introduce their team over a series of standalone movies, we've had no such luxury in the run up to Justice League, aside from some brief glimpses in previous movies. It all just seems like a rush to get things to the point where the team are together and can start having some fun. Everything up until that point just seems cobbled together. Lacking coherence, and just a little bit dull.
Talking of dull, once again the big bad of the movie is a bit of a let down. Steppenwolf appears on Earth in search of three powerful cubes which when combined together will give him the ability to forge the Earth into something more appealing to him, or something like that anyway. He's accompanied by thousands of flying zombie man-bug type creatures and the whole thing just reeks of supervillain plotlines we've seen many times before. Steppenwolf himself is entirely CGI, and at times the CGI just doesn't look that good.
Onto the league themselves. Well, Wonder Woman is still the most impressive of them all, proving to be a real natural leader. Batman, although greatly improved on his Batman V Superman appearance, just seems like he can't be bothered. Tired and uninterested at times. This might be partly down to Ben Affleck, who never really seemed suited to the role in my opinion. If the rumours of him being recast in the next standalone Batman movie are true, then it may well be for the best. Even if the thought of yet another actor taking on the role so soon already is extremely frustrating.
The two biggest surprise for me were the two characters I was initially least interested about when heading in to the cinema. Cyborg, from his introduction in BvS and glimpses in the trailers, just seemed pointless. But, despite that we gloss over his back story somewhat, actually proves himself to be a valuable and interesting member of the team. And as for The Flash, he manages to get many of the movies better lines and scenes while he tries to come to terms with what he can actually do with his power ("Up until now I usually just run really fast and push people").
Slightly disappointing though was Aquaman. Not the character himself, just the fact that we barely get a glimpse of his undersea world, before he finds himself thrust into the league, reduced to just being some extra muscle. His is a role which would have greatly benefited from a standalone origin movie before appearing in this one.
When the team eventually do come together is when the movie really steps up a gear. They work really well together and I really enjoyed the battle scenes. It soon becomes clear though, that they cannot defeat Steppenwolf on their own, and need somebody even more powerful to help them out.
It's no secret, despite his absence from the trailers, that Superman returns to become part of the league. I felt that this was handled really well and the team helping to overcome his initial disorientation was a really fun scene. When he is fully recovered and battling the bad guys, it's the kind of Superman we all know and love and everything involving him is just hugely enjoyable.
If it wasn't for the rushed, incoherent introduction to the movie, I would have rated this a lot higher. For me, the rest of the movie is right up there with this years Wonder Woman, and is a serious step in the right direction for DC. A really pleasant surprise...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Front Runner (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Candidate for a downfall.
We can all probably rattle off some of the classics movies with US politics as their backdrop. For me, “All the President’s Men”; “Primary Colors”; and “Frost/Nixon” might make that list. In the next tier down there are many great drama/thrillers – “Miss Sloane“; “The Post“; “The Ides of March”; “The American President”; “JFK” – and even some pretty funny comedies – “Dave” and “My Fellow Americans” for example. It’s actually quite difficult to think of many films on the subject that are outright dire, proving it remains a fertile ground for film-makers.
“The Front Runner” fortunately avoids this last category, but it’s certainly not good enough to make it into the ‘classics’ list either.
A true story.
The film is based on the true-story of US presidential hopeful Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman) and if you are NOT aware of the historical background then you might want to skip the rest of this review – and indeed all others – so you can see the film first and let the history come as a surprise to you.
Hart was younger than most candidates: good-looking, floppy-haired and refreshingly matter of fact in his dealings with the public and the press. Any interviews had to be about his politics: not about his family life with wife Lee (Vera Farmiga) and teenage daughter Andrea (Kaitlyn Dever).
Unfortunately, Hart has a weakness for a pretty face (or ten) and his marriage is rocky as a result: “Just don’t embarrass me” is Lee’s one requirement. His “nothing to hide” line to an intelligent Washington Post reporter – AJ Parker (a well cast Mamoudou Athie) – leads to a half-arsed stake-out by Miami Herald reporters and incriminating pictures linking Hart to a Miami pharmaceutical saleswoman Donna Rice (Sara Paxton). As the growing press tsunami rises, and his campaign manager (J.K. Simmons) gets more and more frustrated with him, can his candidacy survive and will his (now very much embarrassed) wife stick by him?
The turns.
Hugh Jackman is perfectly cast here; very believable as the self-centred, self-righteous and stubborn politician. But this central performance is surrounded by a strong team of supporting players. Vera Farmiga is superb as the wounded wife. Sara Paxton is heartbreaking as the intelligent college girl unfairly portrayed as a “slapper” by the media. The scenes between her and Hart-staffer Irene (Molly Ephraim), trying desperately to support her as best she can, are very nicely done. J.K Simmons as campaign manager Bill Dixon is as reliable as ever. And Alfred Molina turns up as the latest film incarnation of The Post’s Ben Bradlee – surely one of the most oft portrayed real-life journalists in film history.
“What did they just say”?
The biggest cause of dissatisfaction I have with the film is with the sound mixing. Was this a deliberate act by director Jason Reitman, to reflect the chaotic nature of political campaigning? Whether it was deliberate or not, much of the film’s dialogue – particularly in the first 30 minutes of the film – is drowned out by background noise. Sometimes I just longed for subtitles!
Just a little bit dull.
The screenplay, by Matt Bai (from his source book), Jay Carson (a Clinton staffer) and director Jason Reitman might align with the history, but the big problem is that the story’s just a little bit dull, particularly by today’s levels of scandal. This suffers the same fate as “House of Cards” (even before the Kevin Spacey allegations) in that the shocking realities of the Trump-era have progressively neutered the shock-factor of the fiction: to the point where it starts to become boring. Here, only once or twice does the screenplay hit a winning beat: for me, it was the scenes between Donna Rice and Irene Kelly and the dramatic press conference towards the end of the film. The rest of the time, the screenplay was perfectly serviceable but nothing spectacular.
When is a politician’s personal life private?
A core tenet of the film is Hart’s view that politics should be about the policies and not about the personality. Looking at the subject nowadays, it’s clearly a ridiculously idealistic viewpoint. Of course it matters. Politicians need to be trusted by their constituents (yeah, like that’s the case in the UK and the US at the moment!) and whether or not they slap their wives around or sleep with farm animals is clearly a material factor in that relationship. But this was clearly not as much the case in the 70’s as it is today, and the suggestion is that the Hart case was a turning point and a wake-up call to politicians around the world. (An interesting article by the Washington Post itself points out that this is also a simplistic view: that Hart should have been well aware of the dangerous game he was playing.)
Fidelity in politics.
Do you think that powerful politicos are driven to infidelity because they are powerful? Or that it is a characteristic of men who have the charisma to become political leaders in the first place? Such was the discussion my wife and I had in the car home after this film. Nature or political nurture? I’m still not sure.
It’s worth pointing out that to this day both Hart and Rice (interestingly, an alleged ex-girlfriend of Eagles front-man Don Henley) stick to their story that they never had sex.
Final thoughts.
The film’s perfectly watchable, has great acting, but is a little bit of a non-event. The end titles came and I thought “OK, that’s that then”…. nothing more. If you’re a fan of this style of historical political film then you probably won’t be disappointed by it; if not, probably best to wait and catch this on the TV.
“The Front Runner” fortunately avoids this last category, but it’s certainly not good enough to make it into the ‘classics’ list either.
A true story.
The film is based on the true-story of US presidential hopeful Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman) and if you are NOT aware of the historical background then you might want to skip the rest of this review – and indeed all others – so you can see the film first and let the history come as a surprise to you.
Hart was younger than most candidates: good-looking, floppy-haired and refreshingly matter of fact in his dealings with the public and the press. Any interviews had to be about his politics: not about his family life with wife Lee (Vera Farmiga) and teenage daughter Andrea (Kaitlyn Dever).
Unfortunately, Hart has a weakness for a pretty face (or ten) and his marriage is rocky as a result: “Just don’t embarrass me” is Lee’s one requirement. His “nothing to hide” line to an intelligent Washington Post reporter – AJ Parker (a well cast Mamoudou Athie) – leads to a half-arsed stake-out by Miami Herald reporters and incriminating pictures linking Hart to a Miami pharmaceutical saleswoman Donna Rice (Sara Paxton). As the growing press tsunami rises, and his campaign manager (J.K. Simmons) gets more and more frustrated with him, can his candidacy survive and will his (now very much embarrassed) wife stick by him?
The turns.
Hugh Jackman is perfectly cast here; very believable as the self-centred, self-righteous and stubborn politician. But this central performance is surrounded by a strong team of supporting players. Vera Farmiga is superb as the wounded wife. Sara Paxton is heartbreaking as the intelligent college girl unfairly portrayed as a “slapper” by the media. The scenes between her and Hart-staffer Irene (Molly Ephraim), trying desperately to support her as best she can, are very nicely done. J.K Simmons as campaign manager Bill Dixon is as reliable as ever. And Alfred Molina turns up as the latest film incarnation of The Post’s Ben Bradlee – surely one of the most oft portrayed real-life journalists in film history.
“What did they just say”?
The biggest cause of dissatisfaction I have with the film is with the sound mixing. Was this a deliberate act by director Jason Reitman, to reflect the chaotic nature of political campaigning? Whether it was deliberate or not, much of the film’s dialogue – particularly in the first 30 minutes of the film – is drowned out by background noise. Sometimes I just longed for subtitles!
Just a little bit dull.
The screenplay, by Matt Bai (from his source book), Jay Carson (a Clinton staffer) and director Jason Reitman might align with the history, but the big problem is that the story’s just a little bit dull, particularly by today’s levels of scandal. This suffers the same fate as “House of Cards” (even before the Kevin Spacey allegations) in that the shocking realities of the Trump-era have progressively neutered the shock-factor of the fiction: to the point where it starts to become boring. Here, only once or twice does the screenplay hit a winning beat: for me, it was the scenes between Donna Rice and Irene Kelly and the dramatic press conference towards the end of the film. The rest of the time, the screenplay was perfectly serviceable but nothing spectacular.
When is a politician’s personal life private?
A core tenet of the film is Hart’s view that politics should be about the policies and not about the personality. Looking at the subject nowadays, it’s clearly a ridiculously idealistic viewpoint. Of course it matters. Politicians need to be trusted by their constituents (yeah, like that’s the case in the UK and the US at the moment!) and whether or not they slap their wives around or sleep with farm animals is clearly a material factor in that relationship. But this was clearly not as much the case in the 70’s as it is today, and the suggestion is that the Hart case was a turning point and a wake-up call to politicians around the world. (An interesting article by the Washington Post itself points out that this is also a simplistic view: that Hart should have been well aware of the dangerous game he was playing.)
Fidelity in politics.
Do you think that powerful politicos are driven to infidelity because they are powerful? Or that it is a characteristic of men who have the charisma to become political leaders in the first place? Such was the discussion my wife and I had in the car home after this film. Nature or political nurture? I’m still not sure.
It’s worth pointing out that to this day both Hart and Rice (interestingly, an alleged ex-girlfriend of Eagles front-man Don Henley) stick to their story that they never had sex.
Final thoughts.
The film’s perfectly watchable, has great acting, but is a little bit of a non-event. The end titles came and I thought “OK, that’s that then”…. nothing more. If you’re a fan of this style of historical political film then you probably won’t be disappointed by it; if not, probably best to wait and catch this on the TV.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Cloud Atlas (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
While I am not familiar with the novel, I was not excited to review the film adaptation of David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas. Though the Screenplay was written and directed by the Wachowskis (The Matrix) and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run) I did not know exactly what I was getting into. The trailer shows it as an epic sci-fi film crossing the time and lives of several stories and how everything and everyone is connected. Needless to say my curiosity was piqued. But I was nervous because I knew it would take a grand effort to keep this epic and ambitious project from falling flat. And well, I can honestly say that I am not quite sure if the combined effort succeeded.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Mar 21, 2018
Full disclosure, I’m a fan of the book and it’s quite possible that it’s swayed my opinion somewhat on the movie. So, the movie then. How is it? It’s fine. I was worried going in. I just had a feeling that it would be one of those movies that winds up being disappointing. I know the trailers weren’t that well received, but I loved them. Hell, I even liked those posters they used for the advertising campaign that got a lot of people’s backs up. And yet, when it comes to the movie itself, I came out of it feeling a little underwhelmed. I enjoyed it and I’m definitely glad I saw it but on the whole, I found it to be oddly a little empty.
Let’s start with what worked then. This is a gorgeous looking film and there were many moments that blew me away in terms of pure spectacle. This is an easy day one purchase on UHD just so I can pause it at various moments to see all the Easter eggs that were impossible to catch the first time around. It’s got a great score too. It very much plays on nostalgia as much as the visuals do and almost every song choice works perfectly.
Then there’s the cast. The main roles here are cast well enough. Tye Sheridan is a likeable lead who’s quest is one that’s easy to get behind. I always love Mark Rylance and Ready Player One does nothing to change that. His Halliday is a nervous man with a clear lack of social skills and he’s played here in a way that makes him seem extremely endearing. Simon Pegg is fun too in a much more understated role than I’m used to seeing him. Perhaps the standout for me though is Olivia Cooke. She really impressed me in The Limehouse Golem (do check that film out) and she does again here. It’s nice to see that her star is rising. It’s only really Ben Mendelsohn that doesn’t come out of this brilliantly, but that’s not really his fault. Sorrento is a bit of a nothing villain on the whole and as such, he isn’t really given anything decent to work with. I understand his goals and desires, but there’s nothing about him that elevates him beyond being just a generic villain.
As for the plot itself, it’s a bit of a cookie-cutter version of the source material in a lot of ways. Take the first key for example (mild spoilers for this bit). In the book, it’s a brilliant moment when Wade works out where it is and the challenge to obtain is fun and wonderfully nerdy. Here, it’s just a race. I mean sure, it’s a race that includes a T-Rex and Kong, but by going for spectacle it loses a lot of the charm. It's like that throughout really. The actual game itself doesn’t seem all that hard and as a result, it’s not all that impactful when players progress to the next stage. Finding Halliday’s easter egg is supposed to be the biggest game the world has ever seen and yet, aside from a climactic final act, it doesn’t feel like it.
A lot of that is down to world building. There’s not much in the way of showing us how the world is reacting to someone finally getting onto the leaderboard, or how the general population is following what Parzival and co are doing. Ready Player One needed that to really enforce what a huge deal it is and how much is at stake. At times, it comes across as if Spielberg is more interested in showing us what is cool in The Oasis rather than how important it is to the people that are so absorbed by it.
That being said, there are moments when the film just comes to life. The second key, for example, features a trip into something that I didn’t see coming and it’s one of the best parts of the movie. There are actually a few moments that made me laugh that I won’t mention for fear of spoilers. One, in particular, comes right around the time the film drops its only F-bomb. On the whole, Ready Player One isn’t a classic, but it is a fun adventure movie that is certainly worth checking out.
Let’s start with what worked then. This is a gorgeous looking film and there were many moments that blew me away in terms of pure spectacle. This is an easy day one purchase on UHD just so I can pause it at various moments to see all the Easter eggs that were impossible to catch the first time around. It’s got a great score too. It very much plays on nostalgia as much as the visuals do and almost every song choice works perfectly.
Then there’s the cast. The main roles here are cast well enough. Tye Sheridan is a likeable lead who’s quest is one that’s easy to get behind. I always love Mark Rylance and Ready Player One does nothing to change that. His Halliday is a nervous man with a clear lack of social skills and he’s played here in a way that makes him seem extremely endearing. Simon Pegg is fun too in a much more understated role than I’m used to seeing him. Perhaps the standout for me though is Olivia Cooke. She really impressed me in The Limehouse Golem (do check that film out) and she does again here. It’s nice to see that her star is rising. It’s only really Ben Mendelsohn that doesn’t come out of this brilliantly, but that’s not really his fault. Sorrento is a bit of a nothing villain on the whole and as such, he isn’t really given anything decent to work with. I understand his goals and desires, but there’s nothing about him that elevates him beyond being just a generic villain.
As for the plot itself, it’s a bit of a cookie-cutter version of the source material in a lot of ways. Take the first key for example (mild spoilers for this bit). In the book, it’s a brilliant moment when Wade works out where it is and the challenge to obtain is fun and wonderfully nerdy. Here, it’s just a race. I mean sure, it’s a race that includes a T-Rex and Kong, but by going for spectacle it loses a lot of the charm. It's like that throughout really. The actual game itself doesn’t seem all that hard and as a result, it’s not all that impactful when players progress to the next stage. Finding Halliday’s easter egg is supposed to be the biggest game the world has ever seen and yet, aside from a climactic final act, it doesn’t feel like it.
A lot of that is down to world building. There’s not much in the way of showing us how the world is reacting to someone finally getting onto the leaderboard, or how the general population is following what Parzival and co are doing. Ready Player One needed that to really enforce what a huge deal it is and how much is at stake. At times, it comes across as if Spielberg is more interested in showing us what is cool in The Oasis rather than how important it is to the people that are so absorbed by it.
That being said, there are moments when the film just comes to life. The second key, for example, features a trip into something that I didn’t see coming and it’s one of the best parts of the movie. There are actually a few moments that made me laugh that I won’t mention for fear of spoilers. One, in particular, comes right around the time the film drops its only F-bomb. On the whole, Ready Player One isn’t a classic, but it is a fun adventure movie that is certainly worth checking out.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Open, black and white apart from Nimue's red dress.
Production notes: Try and make it noir-esque, but we need it done quickly so don't be too bothered by any of the class that goes with it.
As openings go it summed up the backstory quite nicely and Ian McShane's voiceover was good, but despite all of that it wasn't saved from it being quite badly shot.
I didn't want to start this review by moaning, but it's nearly impossible as there's a lot to moan about. I think I'm going to get it all out of the way now and then move on.
That CGI... at one point I wrote down that it was Harry Potter bad, I'm talking Voldemort on the back of the head bad. I'm trying to think of an obvious effect where it was actually good but I'm drawing a blank. Gruagach, our pig-demon-thing, looked like he was wearing a Halloween mask, but had it been real life I suspect it would look better.
Generally the creature effects are terrible, I was briefly hopeful for the giants but then the fight started and things got progressively worse. The blood was a particularly bad offering. I was particularly annoyed with this scene because the bits where Hellboy is thrown around were actually quite good and with a little work it could have been amazing.
Major Ben Daimio, played by Daniel Dae Kim, also got some punishing CGI for his transformation, unfortunately the negativity doesn't stop there. I just couldn't understand what that accent was about... I just... what the... ugh.
He's not the only character that's treated badly. Alice has so much potential in her but it isn't until the end that she discovers what she's really capable of. I can't help but think that they could have used her more to boost the movie.
David Harbour as Hellboy doesn't have me convinced. he's got the laid back attitude and some of the banter that the part needs, but there was a spark missing for me. Perhaps he was slightly more horizontal than laid back.
Quite possibly the best scene in the movie is right at the end when we see the group back together briefly. This scene was so well done that I was a little irritated they didn't manage to replicate that earlier in the film.
Hellboy is probably too long, there are definitely pieces to cut out. As much as I love her, Big Mo has to go, I'd also cut out Baba Yaga. The effects were overly creepy and the scenes added hardly anything apart from what felt like an obvious set up for a sequel.
The story overall isn't that bad, I like the origin of Hellboy, although baby Hellboy felt a lot like they'd taken the Ally McBeal baby and painted it red. I also liked the fact that they didn't let him instantly take the easy route to victory, that really worked in his favour.
I've realised at this point that I haven't really mentioned Nimue. She's one of the main villains, I probably should have talked about her by now but apart from the assembly scene she's not overly memorable, much like most of the other bad guys.
As a last passing note I want to mention the music. I noticed it a lot and it was frequently very good, it certainly helped the transition scenes. I probably would have turned the volume down a bit, but it was a great selection so I don't think it's too much of a problem.
I should probably stop waffling at this point. Despite what has amounted to a lot of moaning and griping Hellboy wasn't a waste of my time. I know lots of you are going to disagree with me on that point. To be entertaining given all of those faults I nitpicked was a great achievement. It delivers on daft action and sometimes that's all I need to have an amusing time at the cinema. We probably just need to keep our fingers crossed for better effects if they come out with a sequel.
What you should do
I would go and see it at the cinema if I were you. If you can get past the fact it isn't Ron Perlman and there's a severe lack of kittens then you're bound to have some fun.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some spirit powers would be quite fun, minus the vomiting part.
Production notes: Try and make it noir-esque, but we need it done quickly so don't be too bothered by any of the class that goes with it.
As openings go it summed up the backstory quite nicely and Ian McShane's voiceover was good, but despite all of that it wasn't saved from it being quite badly shot.
I didn't want to start this review by moaning, but it's nearly impossible as there's a lot to moan about. I think I'm going to get it all out of the way now and then move on.
That CGI... at one point I wrote down that it was Harry Potter bad, I'm talking Voldemort on the back of the head bad. I'm trying to think of an obvious effect where it was actually good but I'm drawing a blank. Gruagach, our pig-demon-thing, looked like he was wearing a Halloween mask, but had it been real life I suspect it would look better.
Generally the creature effects are terrible, I was briefly hopeful for the giants but then the fight started and things got progressively worse. The blood was a particularly bad offering. I was particularly annoyed with this scene because the bits where Hellboy is thrown around were actually quite good and with a little work it could have been amazing.
Major Ben Daimio, played by Daniel Dae Kim, also got some punishing CGI for his transformation, unfortunately the negativity doesn't stop there. I just couldn't understand what that accent was about... I just... what the... ugh.
He's not the only character that's treated badly. Alice has so much potential in her but it isn't until the end that she discovers what she's really capable of. I can't help but think that they could have used her more to boost the movie.
David Harbour as Hellboy doesn't have me convinced. he's got the laid back attitude and some of the banter that the part needs, but there was a spark missing for me. Perhaps he was slightly more horizontal than laid back.
Quite possibly the best scene in the movie is right at the end when we see the group back together briefly. This scene was so well done that I was a little irritated they didn't manage to replicate that earlier in the film.
Hellboy is probably too long, there are definitely pieces to cut out. As much as I love her, Big Mo has to go, I'd also cut out Baba Yaga. The effects were overly creepy and the scenes added hardly anything apart from what felt like an obvious set up for a sequel.
The story overall isn't that bad, I like the origin of Hellboy, although baby Hellboy felt a lot like they'd taken the Ally McBeal baby and painted it red. I also liked the fact that they didn't let him instantly take the easy route to victory, that really worked in his favour.
I've realised at this point that I haven't really mentioned Nimue. She's one of the main villains, I probably should have talked about her by now but apart from the assembly scene she's not overly memorable, much like most of the other bad guys.
As a last passing note I want to mention the music. I noticed it a lot and it was frequently very good, it certainly helped the transition scenes. I probably would have turned the volume down a bit, but it was a great selection so I don't think it's too much of a problem.
I should probably stop waffling at this point. Despite what has amounted to a lot of moaning and griping Hellboy wasn't a waste of my time. I know lots of you are going to disagree with me on that point. To be entertaining given all of those faults I nitpicked was a great achievement. It delivers on daft action and sometimes that's all I need to have an amusing time at the cinema. We probably just need to keep our fingers crossed for better effects if they come out with a sequel.
What you should do
I would go and see it at the cinema if I were you. If you can get past the fact it isn't Ron Perlman and there's a severe lack of kittens then you're bound to have some fun.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some spirit powers would be quite fun, minus the vomiting part.
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.