Search
Search results
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Mowgli (2018) in Movies
Nov 20, 2020
Just have to admire not only the technical craft on display, but the clear love for it by Serkis who has built a career involving some of the most iconic performances via motion capturing - here directing himself and an entire cast of elites through the same technology. I was looking forward to the darker answer to the similarly bland and daft Disney version but that one at least looked cute. This one - for whatever that means - is a full-bodied Netflix movie in all the worst ways: so inconsequential, so drab, so generic, home to tons of slimy CGI, and the voice acting is somehow as shallow as the 2016 one. That Benedict Cumberbatch tiger is supposed to look villainous but it looks hilariously silly.
Erika (17788 KP) rated The Grinch (2018) in Movies
Nov 9, 2018 (Updated Nov 9, 2018)
As expected, there was nothing new to see here. The Grinch is one of my favorite Christmas stories, so I had to see this one.
This film reverted back to the original story, in contrast to the film in the early 2000s, where the commercialism was downplayed. There were some unnecessary plot points, and the Grinch was more mildly annoyed with Christmas. Benedict Cumberbatch was kind of perfect for the voice part and he was, by far, the most entertaining. I could have lived without the whole Cindy-Lou Who plot line, but I guess it had to be in there to stretch the story out to nearly 90 minutes. Again , another unnecessary remake, but I still enjoyed it.
This film reverted back to the original story, in contrast to the film in the early 2000s, where the commercialism was downplayed. There were some unnecessary plot points, and the Grinch was more mildly annoyed with Christmas. Benedict Cumberbatch was kind of perfect for the voice part and he was, by far, the most entertaining. I could have lived without the whole Cindy-Lou Who plot line, but I guess it had to be in there to stretch the story out to nearly 90 minutes. Again , another unnecessary remake, but I still enjoyed it.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Electrical Life of Louis Wain (2021) in Movies
Jan 17, 2022
1/2 of a GREAT Movie
It is a fun surprise to be perusing all the streaming services available and tripping across a very entertaining film that, heretofore, was unknown.
Such was the case with THE ELECTRICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN - a biography (of sorts) of the eponymous English painter, known for his fanciful portraits of cats.
Starring Benedict Cumberbatch (in the title role) and Written and Directed by Will Sharpe (BLACK POND) based on a story by Simon Stephenson (who also co-wrote the screenplay with Sharpe), THE ELECTICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN is 1/2 of a very good (maybe even GREAT) film that falls apart in the 2nd half.
The first half of this film finds the eccentric Wain finding love and discovering his artistic talent. It is this 1/2 of the film that draws you in - and must have been what drew the talents of Sharpe, Claire Foy (Queen Elizabeth in the first few seasons of THE CROWN) and Cumberbatch to this film. Cumberbatch, of course, is superb as Wain (especially in this first half) and his chemistry with Foy (who plays his love interest/wife) is tremendous and IS the reason to see this film.
However, the film shifts focus, by necessity, in the 2nd half to the rising stardom of Wain and his descent into madness. Toby Jones (as his benefactor) and the always under-rated Andrea Riseborough (OBLIVION) take center stage with Cumberbatch in this part of the film and the love, fun, whimsey and depth of the first 1/2 of the film disappears. Riseborough, particularly, suffers from a poorly written role where her character - Wain’s disapproving sister - is (in essence) the “bad guy”, so Sharpe and Stephenson replace love, warmth and support with disapproval, anger and madness. While this is true to the life that Wain lived, it didn’t make for a particularly interesting 2nd half of a film.
Come for Benedict’s and Foy’s chemistry and performances, stay for the rest because…well…it’s still pretty good.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Such was the case with THE ELECTRICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN - a biography (of sorts) of the eponymous English painter, known for his fanciful portraits of cats.
Starring Benedict Cumberbatch (in the title role) and Written and Directed by Will Sharpe (BLACK POND) based on a story by Simon Stephenson (who also co-wrote the screenplay with Sharpe), THE ELECTICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN is 1/2 of a very good (maybe even GREAT) film that falls apart in the 2nd half.
The first half of this film finds the eccentric Wain finding love and discovering his artistic talent. It is this 1/2 of the film that draws you in - and must have been what drew the talents of Sharpe, Claire Foy (Queen Elizabeth in the first few seasons of THE CROWN) and Cumberbatch to this film. Cumberbatch, of course, is superb as Wain (especially in this first half) and his chemistry with Foy (who plays his love interest/wife) is tremendous and IS the reason to see this film.
However, the film shifts focus, by necessity, in the 2nd half to the rising stardom of Wain and his descent into madness. Toby Jones (as his benefactor) and the always under-rated Andrea Riseborough (OBLIVION) take center stage with Cumberbatch in this part of the film and the love, fun, whimsey and depth of the first 1/2 of the film disappears. Riseborough, particularly, suffers from a poorly written role where her character - Wain’s disapproving sister - is (in essence) the “bad guy”, so Sharpe and Stephenson replace love, warmth and support with disapproval, anger and madness. While this is true to the life that Wain lived, it didn’t make for a particularly interesting 2nd half of a film.
Come for Benedict’s and Foy’s chemistry and performances, stay for the rest because…well…it’s still pretty good.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Suswatibasu (1701 KP) rated How to Stop Time in Books
Jan 6, 2018
A little glib, better as a young adult novel
Matt Haig's novel, soon to be a motion picture with Benedict Cumberbatch, has had rave reviews, yet I feel I'm in the minority in saying it fell short of expectations.
Following Tom Hazard, an unusual protagonist with a rare condition which has made him live for centuries, has been searching for his daughter ever since he was forced to leave her. Describing major events in history, Hazard continues to change his identity in order to survive becoming a history teacher as his current persona. All the while being controlled by the mysterious Hendricks. Is it better to live for a short while with love, or for eternity alone?
While the story is imaginative, the characters are underdeveloped and the constant time change is inconsistent. The plot may be a little too juvenile for me, not really to my taste. Enjoy the film.
Following Tom Hazard, an unusual protagonist with a rare condition which has made him live for centuries, has been searching for his daughter ever since he was forced to leave her. Describing major events in history, Hazard continues to change his identity in order to survive becoming a history teacher as his current persona. All the while being controlled by the mysterious Hendricks. Is it better to live for a short while with love, or for eternity alone?
While the story is imaginative, the characters are underdeveloped and the constant time change is inconsistent. The plot may be a little too juvenile for me, not really to my taste. Enjoy the film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Power of the Dog (2021) in Movies
Dec 7, 2021
Deep and Layered
If the movie you are watching has a long shot of wheat blowing in the wind, then you are watching a character drama. If that same film also includes a 5 minute scene of someone braiding rope, then you have THE POWER OF THE DOG.
Written and Directed by Jane Campion (THE PIANO) and based on the best-selling novel by Thomas Savage, THE POWER OF THE DOG tells the tale of 2 brothers, talkative and charismatic Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) and quiet and contemplative George (Jesse Plemons) who are tending their cattle ranch in Montana in the mid-1920’s. As horses give way to horseless carriages, George falls for a widow (Kirsten Dunst) who has an effeminate son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and this relationship makes Phil face his own feelings - and a changing world.
In the hands of Campion, this film is a quiet, introspective look at how a hard-drinking, hard-living Cowboy deals with a changing world - and his own pent up emotions - and it works well. She weaves a fascinating story that takes its time unfurling it’s pages and the time that the audience takes in steeping themselves in the story and the characters is time well spent, indeed.
This is because the great Benedict Cumberbatch (TV’s SHERLOCK) is on-screen for 95% of the film as Phil and he commands the screen every moment that his presence is known. It is a bravura - though eerily quiet and introspective - performance by Cumberbatch. Campion and Cumberbatch create a memorable character that fills the screen not because he is wide or high or showy, but because he is deep and layered and the film spends most of its 2 hour and 6 minute running time peeling back the layers and digging deep into this character. It is an Oscar-worthy performance and is a shoo-in Oscar nominee and would not be surprising if Cumberbatch finally wins his Oscar for this role.
Plemons and Dunst (who played a couple in the first season of the TV series FARGO) are the catalyst that set the film - and the discoveries - in motion, but, though they are good, they have very little to do besides react to Cumberbatch’s characters’ moves.
Surprisingly, the character that does stand-out and the actor who does go toe-to-toe with Cumberbatch’s Phil is Peter, the son of Rose and played by Kodi Smit-McPhee (NIghtcrawler in X-MEN:APOCALYPSE) who is (at first) befriended by Phil as a joke and becomes closer and closer to him as the film progresses. It is through Peter that we dig through the layers of Phil - and it is a fascinating journey.
This is a gorgeous film to look at - Cinematographer Ari Wegner (THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE) is a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination as well - and this is good, because Phil (and the audience) spend long stretches looking out in the wilderness, contemplating the world - and change.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever encounter, but if you are in the mood for this sort of thing and can get caught up with discovering the layers of Phil, then you will be rewarded with a layered and deep experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Written and Directed by Jane Campion (THE PIANO) and based on the best-selling novel by Thomas Savage, THE POWER OF THE DOG tells the tale of 2 brothers, talkative and charismatic Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) and quiet and contemplative George (Jesse Plemons) who are tending their cattle ranch in Montana in the mid-1920’s. As horses give way to horseless carriages, George falls for a widow (Kirsten Dunst) who has an effeminate son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and this relationship makes Phil face his own feelings - and a changing world.
In the hands of Campion, this film is a quiet, introspective look at how a hard-drinking, hard-living Cowboy deals with a changing world - and his own pent up emotions - and it works well. She weaves a fascinating story that takes its time unfurling it’s pages and the time that the audience takes in steeping themselves in the story and the characters is time well spent, indeed.
This is because the great Benedict Cumberbatch (TV’s SHERLOCK) is on-screen for 95% of the film as Phil and he commands the screen every moment that his presence is known. It is a bravura - though eerily quiet and introspective - performance by Cumberbatch. Campion and Cumberbatch create a memorable character that fills the screen not because he is wide or high or showy, but because he is deep and layered and the film spends most of its 2 hour and 6 minute running time peeling back the layers and digging deep into this character. It is an Oscar-worthy performance and is a shoo-in Oscar nominee and would not be surprising if Cumberbatch finally wins his Oscar for this role.
Plemons and Dunst (who played a couple in the first season of the TV series FARGO) are the catalyst that set the film - and the discoveries - in motion, but, though they are good, they have very little to do besides react to Cumberbatch’s characters’ moves.
Surprisingly, the character that does stand-out and the actor who does go toe-to-toe with Cumberbatch’s Phil is Peter, the son of Rose and played by Kodi Smit-McPhee (NIghtcrawler in X-MEN:APOCALYPSE) who is (at first) befriended by Phil as a joke and becomes closer and closer to him as the film progresses. It is through Peter that we dig through the layers of Phil - and it is a fascinating journey.
This is a gorgeous film to look at - Cinematographer Ari Wegner (THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE) is a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination as well - and this is good, because Phil (and the audience) spend long stretches looking out in the wilderness, contemplating the world - and change.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever encounter, but if you are in the mood for this sort of thing and can get caught up with discovering the layers of Phil, then you will be rewarded with a layered and deep experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Doctor Strange (2016) in Movies
May 11, 2019
"Try me Beyoncé"
The 14th instalment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe marks the arrival of yet another avenger into the already crowded Marvel family while also bringing mystic arts & alternate dimensions into its ever-expanding universe. But even though it offers a kaleidoscopic journey through astral realms, infinite realities & spacetime contortions, it isn't entirely different from the norm.
Doctor Strange tells the story of Stephen Strange, a brilliant but arrogant neurosurgeon who loses the use of his hands after a car accident, spends all his money on experimental surgeries to regain his abilities, and travels east for a last resort treatment where he meets a powerful sorcerer who teaches him ways to harness energy & shape realities through the mystic arts.
Co-written & directed by Scott Derrickson (best known for The Exorcism of Emily Rose & Sinister), Doctor Strange marks his first stint with comic book movies and while he succeeds in delivering a sufficiently entertaining blockbuster, his latest suffers from the same issues that marred his earlier works as Derrickson begins this story on a promising note but once again loses his grip in the middle.
The screenplay features a universe that's full of imaginations & possibilities yet beneath its parallel universes, time manipulation & astral projections lies the same generic storyline following the same predictable route that we all have seen many times before. What's interesting, however, is how the arc of the eponymous character is handled, for Stephen Strange remains an intriguing character at all times.
Production Design team chips in with set pieces that brim with mystical qualities while props such as ancient artefacts & antiquated relics provide added details to the desired spiritual environment. Camerawork is fine, Editing gets carried away by letting numerous CGI-infested moments overstay their welcome due to which it feels longer than it should. And Michael Giacchino contributes with a score that's fitting yet not enthralling.
Coming to the acting department, the film features a talented ensemble in Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelsen & Tilda Swinton. Cumberbatch as Strange is pitch-perfect casting and does total justice to his role by depicting his stubbornness, arrogance & ambition with precision while Swinton steals nearly every scene she's in. But the main highlight of this film is its shape-shifting & eye-popping visual effects.
On an overall scale, Doctor Strange does serve its purpose by delivering an entertaining, amusing & serviceable origin story but it isn't impressive enough to garner a spot amongst Marvel's finest features. Travelling a safe, risk-free route & sugarcoated with trippy, hallucinatory visuals, it is a typical fun-filled extravaganza that we've come to expect from Marvel Studios and is another enjoyable addition to their ever-inflating repertoire. Definitely worth a shot.
Doctor Strange tells the story of Stephen Strange, a brilliant but arrogant neurosurgeon who loses the use of his hands after a car accident, spends all his money on experimental surgeries to regain his abilities, and travels east for a last resort treatment where he meets a powerful sorcerer who teaches him ways to harness energy & shape realities through the mystic arts.
Co-written & directed by Scott Derrickson (best known for The Exorcism of Emily Rose & Sinister), Doctor Strange marks his first stint with comic book movies and while he succeeds in delivering a sufficiently entertaining blockbuster, his latest suffers from the same issues that marred his earlier works as Derrickson begins this story on a promising note but once again loses his grip in the middle.
The screenplay features a universe that's full of imaginations & possibilities yet beneath its parallel universes, time manipulation & astral projections lies the same generic storyline following the same predictable route that we all have seen many times before. What's interesting, however, is how the arc of the eponymous character is handled, for Stephen Strange remains an intriguing character at all times.
Production Design team chips in with set pieces that brim with mystical qualities while props such as ancient artefacts & antiquated relics provide added details to the desired spiritual environment. Camerawork is fine, Editing gets carried away by letting numerous CGI-infested moments overstay their welcome due to which it feels longer than it should. And Michael Giacchino contributes with a score that's fitting yet not enthralling.
Coming to the acting department, the film features a talented ensemble in Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelsen & Tilda Swinton. Cumberbatch as Strange is pitch-perfect casting and does total justice to his role by depicting his stubbornness, arrogance & ambition with precision while Swinton steals nearly every scene she's in. But the main highlight of this film is its shape-shifting & eye-popping visual effects.
On an overall scale, Doctor Strange does serve its purpose by delivering an entertaining, amusing & serviceable origin story but it isn't impressive enough to garner a spot amongst Marvel's finest features. Travelling a safe, risk-free route & sugarcoated with trippy, hallucinatory visuals, it is a typical fun-filled extravaganza that we've come to expect from Marvel Studios and is another enjoyable addition to their ever-inflating repertoire. Definitely worth a shot.
Larry Eisner (2082 KP) rated The Fifth Estate (2013) in Movies
May 14, 2018
Excellent pacing, great acting.
The factual fiction genre (think this film and The Social Network), is intriguing in that it’s very interesting. Like biography but never intending to be so, teetering on expose but remaining filmic in structure and narrative... anyway, The 5th Estate (or the 5ifth estate...whatever) is about the rise of Wikileaks, its enigmatic founder, Julian Assange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and the line it walks between freedom of information and guerilla journalism.
As such, it’s quite entertaining to watch, and while Cumberbatch’s Assange is more Cumberbatch than Assange (tho props to the makeup team, because he rocks the look!) it’s told in a quite exciting “rise from nobody to someone to dangerous with power” that most of these films take.
The acting is solid. The dialogue is well written and the cinematography is spot-on. Hits the “internet persona” well without too much of the hacker tropes we all expect from Hollywood.
That said, the arc is too linear. It’s too smooth, and too Hollywood to be fully believable as the whole story, and too thin on character to be invested in the Assange character much. His ego is well represented but his depth is not. We don’t get much in terms of motivation, which isn’t sad as there’s a lot to mine that the film barely scratches.
Overall definitely worth a watch. But not one you’ll likely purchase to watch again.
As such, it’s quite entertaining to watch, and while Cumberbatch’s Assange is more Cumberbatch than Assange (tho props to the makeup team, because he rocks the look!) it’s told in a quite exciting “rise from nobody to someone to dangerous with power” that most of these films take.
The acting is solid. The dialogue is well written and the cinematography is spot-on. Hits the “internet persona” well without too much of the hacker tropes we all expect from Hollywood.
That said, the arc is too linear. It’s too smooth, and too Hollywood to be fully believable as the whole story, and too thin on character to be invested in the Assange character much. His ego is well represented but his depth is not. We don’t get much in terms of motivation, which isn’t sad as there’s a lot to mine that the film barely scratches.
Overall definitely worth a watch. But not one you’ll likely purchase to watch again.
Erika (17788 KP) rated The Current War (2017) in Movies
Oct 29, 2019 (Updated Oct 29, 2019)
I believe I have finally reached Benedict Cumberbatch fatigue; all I asked myself during the entire movie was... No other actor could have played Edison? No one else?
First, this movie was supposed to come out in 2017, but was held up because of something to do with Weinstein. This movie hit theaters in the US this past Friday as The Current War - The Director's Cut.
Well, the director didn't cut out enough, in my opinion. It was one of the longest hour and 41 minute movies of my life. Cumberbatch's Alan Turing, sorry, Thomas Edison, was fine. My main issue with the film was that, I didn't know what the point was, it just kept going. I found out at the end, the point was who was going to light The World's Fair in Chicago. That probably should have been introduced a little bit earlier in the film.
I was mostly looking forward to Nicholas Hoult's Tesla. The movie needed more Tesla, and probably shouldn't have sidelined him for the majority of the movie. Shannon's Westinghouse and Macfayden's JP Morgan were both good too.
If anything comes out of this movie's release, hopefully it's that people stop thinking we use the current Edison used.
First, this movie was supposed to come out in 2017, but was held up because of something to do with Weinstein. This movie hit theaters in the US this past Friday as The Current War - The Director's Cut.
Well, the director didn't cut out enough, in my opinion. It was one of the longest hour and 41 minute movies of my life. Cumberbatch's Alan Turing, sorry, Thomas Edison, was fine. My main issue with the film was that, I didn't know what the point was, it just kept going. I found out at the end, the point was who was going to light The World's Fair in Chicago. That probably should have been introduced a little bit earlier in the film.
I was mostly looking forward to Nicholas Hoult's Tesla. The movie needed more Tesla, and probably shouldn't have sidelined him for the majority of the movie. Shannon's Westinghouse and Macfayden's JP Morgan were both good too.
If anything comes out of this movie's release, hopefully it's that people stop thinking we use the current Edison used.
Nick Beaty (70 KP) rated The Grinch (2018) in Movies
Dec 8, 2019 (Updated Dec 8, 2019)
Unnecessary to say the least...
Where to start with Illuminations take on this classic Christmas tale. It felt very uninspiring, underwhelming and unnecessary.
From the get go the narration from Pharrell Williams was very poor and don't get me started on the music. Every time I felt like I could get into this movie the next awful track came on and ruined the moment.
There were very few likeable Characters, with the exception of Max the dog and a screaming goat that had my 3 year old laughing, I believe this is very much their target audience though.
It is very hard not to compare it to Jim Carrey's version or even the 1966 original short which are much darker, creepier and grumpier, all of the things you would expect from The Grinch. This version looks too clean cut, the voice of Benedict Cumberbatch is too friendly in my opinion and the whole thing just feels like a sugar coated version aimed at very young children.
I personally believe there was no real need for this movie to have ever been made other than to cash in on a brilliant Christmas story, that has already been told in much better ways than this.
From the get go the narration from Pharrell Williams was very poor and don't get me started on the music. Every time I felt like I could get into this movie the next awful track came on and ruined the moment.
There were very few likeable Characters, with the exception of Max the dog and a screaming goat that had my 3 year old laughing, I believe this is very much their target audience though.
It is very hard not to compare it to Jim Carrey's version or even the 1966 original short which are much darker, creepier and grumpier, all of the things you would expect from The Grinch. This version looks too clean cut, the voice of Benedict Cumberbatch is too friendly in my opinion and the whole thing just feels like a sugar coated version aimed at very young children.
I personally believe there was no real need for this movie to have ever been made other than to cash in on a brilliant Christmas story, that has already been told in much better ways than this.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Courier (2020) in Movies
Aug 16, 2021
Cumberbatch is brilliant. (1 more)
Great real life history lesson
A peerless Cumberbatch and a miscast Buckley.
It's not to be confused with the Olga Kurylenko / Gary Oldman 2019 movie of the same title. But with a fresh Berlin current-day Russian spy scandal in the news this week, seeing the cold war spy drama "The Courier" is a timely thing to do.
Positives:
- Benedict Cumberbatch is outstandingly good in this. He could have been born to play the slightly bemused English gentlemen of the time. All golf, tweed suits and gentlemen's clubs. No spoilers, but there is a physical transformation as well that's impressive to observe. The film would have been decidedly so-so I think without that core central performance.
- The film is based on a true story. As someone who was born in 1961, it's a good reminder to count our blessings that you, me and everyone else are still around to live our lives at all. The world was on the brink of a precipice and learning the story of Wynne's part in this was insightful history.
- There's a nice catchy Russian-themed score by Abel Korzeniowski.
Negatives:
- I'm a big fan of Jessie Buckley. Really, I am. And to be fair to her, her performance is really good. I particularly liked a scene where she dismissed on the doorstep a local busybody. But I just didn't see her as Wynne's pearl-neckless-wearing wife in this part. Perhaps the problem is that although there's a 13 year age gap between the leads, I always imagine Buckley as being much younger that her 31 years. For whatever reason, the casting didn't work for me.
Summary Thoughts on "The Courier": As a true-life spy story, the movie is interesting and Cumberbatch's performance is brilliant. But I can't say that I was 100% grabbed by it. While having a few moments of high drama and tension - particularly one on a plane - I never felt that to be maintained for enough of the movie. Director Dominic Cooke has a limited filmography (with the Saoirse Ronan movie "On Chesil Beach" being his only other feature) and writer Tom O'Connor is the guy behind the more flippant "Hitman's Bodyguard" films. Perhaps a more experienced writer/director team would have elevated this to a higher level.
So it's eminently watchable but not memorable. Just a marginal hit in my book.
(For the full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- Benedict Cumberbatch is outstandingly good in this. He could have been born to play the slightly bemused English gentlemen of the time. All golf, tweed suits and gentlemen's clubs. No spoilers, but there is a physical transformation as well that's impressive to observe. The film would have been decidedly so-so I think without that core central performance.
- The film is based on a true story. As someone who was born in 1961, it's a good reminder to count our blessings that you, me and everyone else are still around to live our lives at all. The world was on the brink of a precipice and learning the story of Wynne's part in this was insightful history.
- There's a nice catchy Russian-themed score by Abel Korzeniowski.
Negatives:
- I'm a big fan of Jessie Buckley. Really, I am. And to be fair to her, her performance is really good. I particularly liked a scene where she dismissed on the doorstep a local busybody. But I just didn't see her as Wynne's pearl-neckless-wearing wife in this part. Perhaps the problem is that although there's a 13 year age gap between the leads, I always imagine Buckley as being much younger that her 31 years. For whatever reason, the casting didn't work for me.
Summary Thoughts on "The Courier": As a true-life spy story, the movie is interesting and Cumberbatch's performance is brilliant. But I can't say that I was 100% grabbed by it. While having a few moments of high drama and tension - particularly one on a plane - I never felt that to be maintained for enough of the movie. Director Dominic Cooke has a limited filmography (with the Saoirse Ronan movie "On Chesil Beach" being his only other feature) and writer Tom O'Connor is the guy behind the more flippant "Hitman's Bodyguard" films. Perhaps a more experienced writer/director team would have elevated this to a higher level.
So it's eminently watchable but not memorable. Just a marginal hit in my book.
(For the full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
