Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 29, 2020
Well Acted
In 2012, the conservative Pope Benedict - citing failing health - made the rare move of stepping down from the Papacy. He was, ultimately, replaced by the more Liberal Pope Francis. THE TWO POPES is a fictional account of a conversation that these two men had prior to Benedict's stepping down.
If you are looking for a hard-hitting expose of the issues the Catholic Church was facing at the time with the conservative Benedict facing off against the Liberal Francis, then you will be disappointed. But...if you are looking for an interesting, gentle acting exercise where 2 strong actors take Center Stage to move from enemies to frenemies to friends, then you will enjoy THE TWO POPES.
The review of this film begins and ends with the performances of the 2 leads - Jonathan Pryce as Pope Francis (Cardinal Bergoglio in the film) and Anthony Hopkins as Pope Benedict - and they are terrific. Pryce was nominated in the Best Actor Oscar category while Hopkins sits in the Best Supporting Actor category (deservedly so - Pryce has much more screen time and focus).
As Francis, Pryce is conflicted by both what is currently happening with the Church and his own demons. His Cardinal Bergoglio is alternately strong and weak - and Pryce plays this well. It is just about the best performance I have ever seen from Pryce on film. Unfortunately for him, he pales in comparison with the withering, wilted and strong portrayal of Pope Benedict that is put on by Hopkins. This is Sir Anthony's best work in years and shows that this ol' trouper "still has it." As I stated earlier, they are both nominated (deservedly) for Oscars, for it is an actor's movie, but only Hopkins would be a deserving winner (though neither of them will win).
THE TWO POPES is Directed by Brazilian Fernando Meirelles based on a screen play by Anthony McCarten (DARKEST HOUR). McCarten's script is stronger than Meirelles Direction. I felt like I was watching a filmed stage play with both Popes sitting and talking for long stretches of time. Do not be surprised to see a stage version of this film on Broadway sometime soon. It played more like an extended episode of Masterpiece Theater than a Theatrical Film.
At just over 2 hours, this film is just a bit too long, but (of course) both Popes have their "Oscar moment" in the tail end of the movie so that helps it to cross the finish line strong.
If you are looking for strong acting, look no further than THE TWO POPES, you will not be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
If you are looking for a hard-hitting expose of the issues the Catholic Church was facing at the time with the conservative Benedict facing off against the Liberal Francis, then you will be disappointed. But...if you are looking for an interesting, gentle acting exercise where 2 strong actors take Center Stage to move from enemies to frenemies to friends, then you will enjoy THE TWO POPES.
The review of this film begins and ends with the performances of the 2 leads - Jonathan Pryce as Pope Francis (Cardinal Bergoglio in the film) and Anthony Hopkins as Pope Benedict - and they are terrific. Pryce was nominated in the Best Actor Oscar category while Hopkins sits in the Best Supporting Actor category (deservedly so - Pryce has much more screen time and focus).
As Francis, Pryce is conflicted by both what is currently happening with the Church and his own demons. His Cardinal Bergoglio is alternately strong and weak - and Pryce plays this well. It is just about the best performance I have ever seen from Pryce on film. Unfortunately for him, he pales in comparison with the withering, wilted and strong portrayal of Pope Benedict that is put on by Hopkins. This is Sir Anthony's best work in years and shows that this ol' trouper "still has it." As I stated earlier, they are both nominated (deservedly) for Oscars, for it is an actor's movie, but only Hopkins would be a deserving winner (though neither of them will win).
THE TWO POPES is Directed by Brazilian Fernando Meirelles based on a screen play by Anthony McCarten (DARKEST HOUR). McCarten's script is stronger than Meirelles Direction. I felt like I was watching a filmed stage play with both Popes sitting and talking for long stretches of time. Do not be surprised to see a stage version of this film on Broadway sometime soon. It played more like an extended episode of Masterpiece Theater than a Theatrical Film.
At just over 2 hours, this film is just a bit too long, but (of course) both Popes have their "Oscar moment" in the tail end of the movie so that helps it to cross the finish line strong.
If you are looking for strong acting, look no further than THE TWO POPES, you will not be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Embodiment of Evil (2008) in Movies
May 31, 2020
Embodiment of Evil
Embodiment of Evil is the third film of the Brazilian ‘Coffin Joe’ trilogy, following after ‘At Midnight I’ll take your soul’ and ‘This night I’ll Posses your corpse’. Set and filmed 40 years after ‘This night I’ll possess your corpse’ Embodiment of Evil follows the same basic plot as the previous two films, Josefel Zanatas aka Coffin Joe returns after seeming to die at the end of the previous film to continue his search for the perfect woman to help him continue his blood line.
Embodiment of Evil is probably best described as a ‘Slasher’, Coffin Joe is a man on a mission and he’s not afraid to make enemy’s and then kill them if they get in his way. There are also elements of torture in the film as Joe tests his followers, and the women he chooses to make sure they are strong enough for him.
Like the first two films, Embodiment of evil starts off slow, using the time to explain how Coffin Joe survived his death, this is done with a flashback which uses footage from the end of the 'This night I'll possess your corpse' and adding footage that looks like it was shot at the same time but never use at the time.
Once Joe's survival has been explained the film falls back into the narrative of the trilogy, aided by his hunchbacked sidekick, Bruno, Joe returns to his old job as a gravedigger and is soon making waves in the community with his (anti) religious views. Joe is also being hunted by victims and relatives of victims from the previous films but, this time Coffin Joe also has help, not only from Bruno but from four cult like followers.
As in the previous films it doesn't take long before Joe is cursed by witches and seeing ghosts blurring the line between what Coffin Joe sees as reality and fantasy.
Coffin Joe himself is an interesting character, he is arrogant, self-assured and superior. He is constantly fighting against authority and most of the normal people, all of whom he sees as weak, mainly due to their religious belief. He is driven by his own belief that 'blood' is the only purpose in life and his need to find the perfect, strongest woman to have his child is the only driving force in his life.
Embodiment of Evil is UK rated 18 and there is a good reason for this, there is blood, nudity, cannibalism, torture, (off screen) child murder and implied rape so it will be safe to say that this film is not for everybody. It is also worth noting that, even though some of of these subjects are also in the first two films, Embodiment of evil was made 40 years later so the effects and content is a lot more graphic.
Embodiment of Evil is the third film of the Brazilian ‘Coffin Joe’ trilogy, following after ‘At Midnight I’ll take your soul’ and ‘This night I’ll Posses your corpse’. Set and filmed 40 years after ‘This night I’ll possess your corpse’ Embodiment of Evil follows the same basic plot as the previous two films, Josefel Zanatas aka Coffin Joe returns after seeming to die at the end of the previous film to continue his search for the perfect woman to help him continue his blood line.
Embodiment of Evil is probably best described as a ‘Slasher’, Coffin Joe is a man on a mission and he’s not afraid to make enemy’s and then kill them if they get in his way. There are also elements of torture in the film as Joe tests his followers, and the women he chooses to make sure they are strong enough for him.
Like the first two films, Embodiment of evil starts off slow, using the time to explain how Coffin Joe survived his death, this is done with a flashback which uses footage from the end of the 'This night I'll possess your corpse' and adding footage that looks like it was shot at the same time but never use at the time.
Once Joe's survival has been explained the film falls back into the narrative of the trilogy, aided by his hunchbacked sidekick, Bruno, Joe returns to his old job as a gravedigger and is soon making waves in the community with his (anti) religious views. Joe is also being hunted by victims and relatives of victims from the previous films but, this time Coffin Joe also has help, not only from Bruno but from four cult like followers.
As in the previous films it doesn't take long before Joe is cursed by witches and seeing ghosts blurring the line between what Coffin Joe sees as reality and fantasy.
Coffin Joe himself is an interesting character, he is arrogant, self-assured and superior. He is constantly fighting against authority and most of the normal people, all of whom he sees as weak, mainly due to their religious belief. He is driven by his own belief that 'blood' is the only purpose in life and his need to find the perfect, strongest woman to have his child is the only driving force in his life.
Embodiment of Evil is UK rated 18 and there is a good reason for this, there is blood, nudity, cannibalism, torture, (off screen) child murder and implied rape so it will be safe to say that this film is not for everybody. It is also worth noting that, even though some of of these subjects are also in the first two films, Embodiment of evil was made 40 years later so the effects and content is a lot more graphic.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Eat Pray Love: One Woman's Search for Everything in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I started this book with the warning that the author comes off as very selfish. Considering that this is a memoir, I don't really see what the big deal is. The best way for me to review this book is in three parts, since the book is divided that way. The epiphany that Gilbert has about herself at the beginning of the book I felt I could relate to in some ways - I know what it feels like to spend years gearing yourself up to do something at a certain age, only to arrive and realize that you don't want to do it - and be shocked by this realization. The specifics of her realization were quite different from mine, as I have always wanted children and I could not imagine never having any, but what bugged me was that her husband could not grasp this epiphany of hers. Luckily, the book was more about her than about her mysterious ex-husband.
As for her trip to Italy, I loved every page of it. I felt like I was living it through her words and experiences, wishing I was there with her to taste the food and learn the language. Italy has always been a dream of mine, though I intend to visit the sites, too, not just experience the food and language. I found the scene in which she is fasinated by the Italian man cursing at the soccer game to be a great example of her love for Italy and something I would probably do myself. I was only disappointed that this section was not longer and she did not go into greater detail about everything that she ate. I will certainly have to remember to try the pizza in Naples.
I found her trip to India the most difficult to get through, especially when I reached the point in which she decides to not do any traveling around India - a major disappointment for me. Richard from Texas was the highlight of this section for me, since he seemed to be the most down-to-earth of all the interesting people she meets here, and offers her the soundest advice. The focus of this section was on spirituality, but as it is heavily influenced by Eastern religions, I found myself disagreeing with many of her personal beliefs, even though I admired her dedication and determination. Her views of "kundalini shakti" are a perfect example - Christianity teaches that this is a demonic / occult practice, but Gilbert believes that it is the same thing as the Holy Spirit. This section alone is proof enough for me as to why I stay away from philosophical books.
Her final trip to Bali, Indonesia was educational in many ways, as I knew nothing about the culture and history there. Her medicine man, Ketut Liyer, was quite an interesting character, and I really felt for the young man she befriended, Yudhi, who was forced unfairly to leave the United States thanks to the Homeland Security Act. I find it interesting that she failed in completing her year of celibacy, but I'm sure those Brazilian men can be quite tempting when they want to be. Those who say that Gilbert appears very selfish in this book seem to ignore that she helped a divorced woman - an unheard-of thing in Bali - with three children, obtained a piece of land for her own home and business before Gilbert had to leave the country.
Overall, this year in the life of Elizabeth Gilbert was certainly a memorable one, and one that many, many other women would happily take her place in. I don't find her any more selfish than anyone else who is trying to find a way out of grief and depression, as well as break destructive cycles in his or her life. She was just blessed enough to be payed for the effort to document the experience.
As for her trip to Italy, I loved every page of it. I felt like I was living it through her words and experiences, wishing I was there with her to taste the food and learn the language. Italy has always been a dream of mine, though I intend to visit the sites, too, not just experience the food and language. I found the scene in which she is fasinated by the Italian man cursing at the soccer game to be a great example of her love for Italy and something I would probably do myself. I was only disappointed that this section was not longer and she did not go into greater detail about everything that she ate. I will certainly have to remember to try the pizza in Naples.
I found her trip to India the most difficult to get through, especially when I reached the point in which she decides to not do any traveling around India - a major disappointment for me. Richard from Texas was the highlight of this section for me, since he seemed to be the most down-to-earth of all the interesting people she meets here, and offers her the soundest advice. The focus of this section was on spirituality, but as it is heavily influenced by Eastern religions, I found myself disagreeing with many of her personal beliefs, even though I admired her dedication and determination. Her views of "kundalini shakti" are a perfect example - Christianity teaches that this is a demonic / occult practice, but Gilbert believes that it is the same thing as the Holy Spirit. This section alone is proof enough for me as to why I stay away from philosophical books.
Her final trip to Bali, Indonesia was educational in many ways, as I knew nothing about the culture and history there. Her medicine man, Ketut Liyer, was quite an interesting character, and I really felt for the young man she befriended, Yudhi, who was forced unfairly to leave the United States thanks to the Homeland Security Act. I find it interesting that she failed in completing her year of celibacy, but I'm sure those Brazilian men can be quite tempting when they want to be. Those who say that Gilbert appears very selfish in this book seem to ignore that she helped a divorced woman - an unheard-of thing in Bali - with three children, obtained a piece of land for her own home and business before Gilbert had to leave the country.
Overall, this year in the life of Elizabeth Gilbert was certainly a memorable one, and one that many, many other women would happily take her place in. I don't find her any more selfish than anyone else who is trying to find a way out of grief and depression, as well as break destructive cycles in his or her life. She was just blessed enough to be payed for the effort to document the experience.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Hippie in Books
Nov 26, 2018
Full review on www.diaryofdifference.com
Hippie is the autobiography by Paulo Coelho, told in third person. This is a story about people that travel the world, wear funny clothes and flowers in their hairs, and believe in peace, love and freedom.
I have read many of Coelho’s books, even since I was a teenage girl. And all of them share something in common – the path of finding yourself. After reading Hippie, I believe that this is the the best one that covers this subject quite perfectly.
‘’He was a human being, with all the fragility that entails, he didn’t understand everything that happened in his life, but he truly wished to believe he was travelling in search of the light.’’
The book is a story of two people, Paulo and Karla. Paulo, a Brazilian guy, searching for freedom and travels. Karla, a lady born and living in Amsterdam, wanting to find herself so badly in the world. When she hears that a hippie bus is going all the way to Nepal, she is willing to go if she meets her ideal companion.
‘’She wished they could see her for her beauty, but all anyone ever saw was the hurricane, and they never sought shelter from it. They preferred to flee to safer ground.’’
Their adventure begins in such an adorable way, only hippies can relate to. Their search for what they want and need feeds with every stop and every destination. A beautiful story about friendship, love and travel.
I actually wished that they had spoken more about the travels and less about some individual stories that didn’t quite correlate to the plot. I also wished that they actually reached out the final destination the way they are supposed to (this was not a spoiler).
‘’Our travels teach us everything we need to know for the rest of our lives, as long as there’s no need to explain this to our parents.’’
Even though a sad end, it is a realistic story about a way of life before, where people loved to be free, and were free to find love, in a world of peace, love, marijuana and travels. A place where no one cares what you look like.
Right now, hippies are a normal thing, people that we all secretly enjoy reading about, and listening to their stories, but in the past, these people fought so hard to change the system of how people’s minds worked, the system people were stuck in, to make people realise that they have the freedom to believe in anything they think is right, to do anything that makes them happy, to be happy, and share this with the world. To live in a world full of happiness, love, peace, to travel and see places, discover places and people, see new cultures, explore people’s minds and customs.
‘’The sun had come out, as though to say that finally the Renaissance was making a return, to change everyone’s habits and customs – and one day very soon, people would no longer depend on the opinions of others but rather on their own ways of seeing life.’’
The one thing that I couldn’t enjoy was the constant religion mentioning in this book. All religions were mentioned, and with such intensity, that peace and love and freedom and the hippie meaning started to be in relation to religion, which is something I personally don’t want to put together. I am aware that lots of hippies believe in God in their own way, but I also think that love and peace should gather them together as a group, not religion. And this point was clearly states a lot of times throughout the book. Not enjoyable, at least for me.
For all of you out there, the hippies, the ordinary people that love travelling, love, life, happiness, music – this is a book for you. Another amazing Paulo Coelho novel, full of wisdom and quotes to underline.
Hippie is the autobiography by Paulo Coelho, told in third person. This is a story about people that travel the world, wear funny clothes and flowers in their hairs, and believe in peace, love and freedom.
I have read many of Coelho’s books, even since I was a teenage girl. And all of them share something in common – the path of finding yourself. After reading Hippie, I believe that this is the the best one that covers this subject quite perfectly.
‘’He was a human being, with all the fragility that entails, he didn’t understand everything that happened in his life, but he truly wished to believe he was travelling in search of the light.’’
The book is a story of two people, Paulo and Karla. Paulo, a Brazilian guy, searching for freedom and travels. Karla, a lady born and living in Amsterdam, wanting to find herself so badly in the world. When she hears that a hippie bus is going all the way to Nepal, she is willing to go if she meets her ideal companion.
‘’She wished they could see her for her beauty, but all anyone ever saw was the hurricane, and they never sought shelter from it. They preferred to flee to safer ground.’’
Their adventure begins in such an adorable way, only hippies can relate to. Their search for what they want and need feeds with every stop and every destination. A beautiful story about friendship, love and travel.
I actually wished that they had spoken more about the travels and less about some individual stories that didn’t quite correlate to the plot. I also wished that they actually reached out the final destination the way they are supposed to (this was not a spoiler).
‘’Our travels teach us everything we need to know for the rest of our lives, as long as there’s no need to explain this to our parents.’’
Even though a sad end, it is a realistic story about a way of life before, where people loved to be free, and were free to find love, in a world of peace, love, marijuana and travels. A place where no one cares what you look like.
Right now, hippies are a normal thing, people that we all secretly enjoy reading about, and listening to their stories, but in the past, these people fought so hard to change the system of how people’s minds worked, the system people were stuck in, to make people realise that they have the freedom to believe in anything they think is right, to do anything that makes them happy, to be happy, and share this with the world. To live in a world full of happiness, love, peace, to travel and see places, discover places and people, see new cultures, explore people’s minds and customs.
‘’The sun had come out, as though to say that finally the Renaissance was making a return, to change everyone’s habits and customs – and one day very soon, people would no longer depend on the opinions of others but rather on their own ways of seeing life.’’
The one thing that I couldn’t enjoy was the constant religion mentioning in this book. All religions were mentioned, and with such intensity, that peace and love and freedom and the hippie meaning started to be in relation to religion, which is something I personally don’t want to put together. I am aware that lots of hippies believe in God in their own way, but I also think that love and peace should gather them together as a group, not religion. And this point was clearly states a lot of times throughout the book. Not enjoyable, at least for me.
For all of you out there, the hippies, the ordinary people that love travelling, love, life, happiness, music – this is a book for you. Another amazing Paulo Coelho novel, full of wisdom and quotes to underline.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated the PlayStation 3 version of 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
With the World Cup almost upon us it’s time for gamers and soccer fans the world over to hit the pitch with the latest game in the phenomenally popular FIFA series from EA Sports. 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil is an improvement over FIFA 14 and will get fans ready for the action with real Brazilian stadiums expertly re-created to capture the fanaticism that will be on display when the games take place in their real-life counterparts. Since this is the World Cup animations bragging rights for the next four years are on the line expect passion to be at an all-time high.
The game offers 203 national teams all of whom will be competing for the ultimate honor and glory. There are over 100 new crowd animation so anybody who thinks this is simply FIFA 14 with World Cup rosters and stadiums is simply not getting it. This is definitely an upgrade over FIFA 14 not just in content but in terms of gameplay and challenge.
Entering into the game and expecting to light up the scoreboard as many have done with previous versions the game is setting yourself up for failure. This is soccer after all and the emphasis is supposed to be on team-based play and low-scoring games where every chance on goal is crucial to the success or failure of a team.
While you may become frustrated with the exceptionally skilled tackling ability of the CPU players or the way they often benefit from lucky bounces and deflections, that is the way the game goes. Your teammates could possibly make better use of the space around them however this could be said of many flesh and blood teams competing in the tournament. The emphasis here is not to have an unstoppable juggernaut that crushes all the teams around it but rather on emphasizing skill and adapting to new and ever-changing gameplay modes.
I spoke to some people who had in their words mastered the 2010 version of the game and have regularly played FIFA games from the start. Many had commented to me on how much more difficulty they had scoring goals this timeout over previous versions of the game. One touted to me that he would often score 5 or more goals in a match whereas with this versionof the game he struggles to get 1 to 2 goals a match.
To me this was a welcome validation that my lack of prowess in putting the ball in the back of the net was not just my lack of ability but rather a testimonial to the developers desire to keep the game more in keeping with its on the field counterparts. While I did notice some of the commentators comments seemed recycled from earlier games and it was a little frustrating not being able to modify a roster the way that I had hoped, I have to give great praise to the developers for the control system in game.
I was able to pass, shoot, and move with greater precision and pacing then I happen previous versions the game and the visual qualities really helped bring the excitement of the game to life.
While passionate fans will always find something to complain about in game without realizing the difficulty in capturing all the nuances and complexities of the game and virtual environment, I can safely say this is definitely one of the more enjoyable FIFA experiences I have had in quite some time and this game will appeal not only to hard-core fans but casual fans as well as long as you’re willing to accept the game for what it is and not nitpick about what it is not.
Until then, this should more than tide fans over until the real World Cup and FIFA 15 arrive.
http://sknr.net/2014/04/27/2014-fifa-world-cup-brazil/
The game offers 203 national teams all of whom will be competing for the ultimate honor and glory. There are over 100 new crowd animation so anybody who thinks this is simply FIFA 14 with World Cup rosters and stadiums is simply not getting it. This is definitely an upgrade over FIFA 14 not just in content but in terms of gameplay and challenge.
Entering into the game and expecting to light up the scoreboard as many have done with previous versions the game is setting yourself up for failure. This is soccer after all and the emphasis is supposed to be on team-based play and low-scoring games where every chance on goal is crucial to the success or failure of a team.
While you may become frustrated with the exceptionally skilled tackling ability of the CPU players or the way they often benefit from lucky bounces and deflections, that is the way the game goes. Your teammates could possibly make better use of the space around them however this could be said of many flesh and blood teams competing in the tournament. The emphasis here is not to have an unstoppable juggernaut that crushes all the teams around it but rather on emphasizing skill and adapting to new and ever-changing gameplay modes.
I spoke to some people who had in their words mastered the 2010 version of the game and have regularly played FIFA games from the start. Many had commented to me on how much more difficulty they had scoring goals this timeout over previous versions of the game. One touted to me that he would often score 5 or more goals in a match whereas with this versionof the game he struggles to get 1 to 2 goals a match.
To me this was a welcome validation that my lack of prowess in putting the ball in the back of the net was not just my lack of ability but rather a testimonial to the developers desire to keep the game more in keeping with its on the field counterparts. While I did notice some of the commentators comments seemed recycled from earlier games and it was a little frustrating not being able to modify a roster the way that I had hoped, I have to give great praise to the developers for the control system in game.
I was able to pass, shoot, and move with greater precision and pacing then I happen previous versions the game and the visual qualities really helped bring the excitement of the game to life.
While passionate fans will always find something to complain about in game without realizing the difficulty in capturing all the nuances and complexities of the game and virtual environment, I can safely say this is definitely one of the more enjoyable FIFA experiences I have had in quite some time and this game will appeal not only to hard-core fans but casual fans as well as long as you’re willing to accept the game for what it is and not nitpick about what it is not.
Until then, this should more than tide fans over until the real World Cup and FIFA 15 arrive.
http://sknr.net/2014/04/27/2014-fifa-world-cup-brazil/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The pop culture phenomenon that is Twilight is wrapping up as the film adaptation of the final book in the series, Twilight: Breaking Dawn, has arrived in theaters. With the previous three films doing brisk business at the box office, it came as no surprise when it was announced that the final book in the series was being split into two films so that the studio could maximize the box office of the series.
The film opens with awkward, melancholy teen Bella (Kristen Stewart), preparing for her wedding to Edward (Robert Pattinson), as their human and vampire friends assemble for the ceremony. Of course Edward’s rival Jacob (Tayler Lautner), is highly against the union as he still carries a flame for Bella. Nonetheless, the ceremony goes off as planned and Edward whisks Bella away to a remote Brazilian island to consummate their union, which apparently is a tricky endeavor, being that she is still a mortal and he is a century old vampire.
What at first is an ideal honeymoon is soon complicated when Bella and Edward discover an unexpected challenge that threatens Bella’s well-being and poses a threat to the pact between the vampires and werewolves. I will not spoil the film, even though fans of the series and books will not be any strangers to the drama and politics of the situation, but suffice it to say there is a lot on the line for all of the characters involved.
The film was rife with issues, the main one being the atrocious acting. One would think that after three previous films with the same cast, these actors would have developed some timing and chemistry with one another, especially Stewart and Pattinson who are a couple offscreen. Nothing could be further from the truth as they stiffly deliver their lines with pained and remote expressions. I am honestly at a loss as to why Bella is so captivating to both Edward and Jacob
as she is basically a dour girl who looks incredibly uncomfortable in her own skin, and yet the two are utterly captivated by her. I found the supporting cast far more interesting than the heroine and her besotted heroes. Another issue I had was that Pattinson, who got to show his acting ability in “Water for Elephants” is given little to do aside from staring at Bella and doing profile shots.
The first half of the film is basically an MTV-style wedding and honeymoon music video but the second half of the film did manage to grab and hold my attention with the ongoing plot points. It is obvious that the story is being stretched to cover two films as there are numerous unnecessary scenes such as people walking up stairs, throwing things in a garbage can, looking in mirrors, which serve little purpose other than increasing the run time of the film. Of course all of this matters little to fans of the series. The studio knows who the core audience is and the movie panders to them every chance they can, as proven by Lautner doffing his shirt not 60 seconds into the film to the squeals of delight from the teens, tweens and grown women in the audience.
Still, because it pits the Cullens against the werewolves who were their allies in the previous film, Breaking Dawn is better than the previous films. While it raises the angst and tension, it does not provide much growth for the actors as they dutifully go through the motions as best they can with the material. While it attempts to be a darker and more mature film, it still comes across as eye candy and fantasy for young women when the story and cast deserved so
much more. That being said, the film stays true to it’s core audience and gives them exactly what they have come to expect and does not stray from what has been a successful formula.
The film opens with awkward, melancholy teen Bella (Kristen Stewart), preparing for her wedding to Edward (Robert Pattinson), as their human and vampire friends assemble for the ceremony. Of course Edward’s rival Jacob (Tayler Lautner), is highly against the union as he still carries a flame for Bella. Nonetheless, the ceremony goes off as planned and Edward whisks Bella away to a remote Brazilian island to consummate their union, which apparently is a tricky endeavor, being that she is still a mortal and he is a century old vampire.
What at first is an ideal honeymoon is soon complicated when Bella and Edward discover an unexpected challenge that threatens Bella’s well-being and poses a threat to the pact between the vampires and werewolves. I will not spoil the film, even though fans of the series and books will not be any strangers to the drama and politics of the situation, but suffice it to say there is a lot on the line for all of the characters involved.
The film was rife with issues, the main one being the atrocious acting. One would think that after three previous films with the same cast, these actors would have developed some timing and chemistry with one another, especially Stewart and Pattinson who are a couple offscreen. Nothing could be further from the truth as they stiffly deliver their lines with pained and remote expressions. I am honestly at a loss as to why Bella is so captivating to both Edward and Jacob
as she is basically a dour girl who looks incredibly uncomfortable in her own skin, and yet the two are utterly captivated by her. I found the supporting cast far more interesting than the heroine and her besotted heroes. Another issue I had was that Pattinson, who got to show his acting ability in “Water for Elephants” is given little to do aside from staring at Bella and doing profile shots.
The first half of the film is basically an MTV-style wedding and honeymoon music video but the second half of the film did manage to grab and hold my attention with the ongoing plot points. It is obvious that the story is being stretched to cover two films as there are numerous unnecessary scenes such as people walking up stairs, throwing things in a garbage can, looking in mirrors, which serve little purpose other than increasing the run time of the film. Of course all of this matters little to fans of the series. The studio knows who the core audience is and the movie panders to them every chance they can, as proven by Lautner doffing his shirt not 60 seconds into the film to the squeals of delight from the teens, tweens and grown women in the audience.
Still, because it pits the Cullens against the werewolves who were their allies in the previous film, Breaking Dawn is better than the previous films. While it raises the angst and tension, it does not provide much growth for the actors as they dutifully go through the motions as best they can with the material. While it attempts to be a darker and more mature film, it still comes across as eye candy and fantasy for young women when the story and cast deserved so
much more. That being said, the film stays true to it’s core audience and gives them exactly what they have come to expect and does not stray from what has been a successful formula.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The New Mutants (2020) in Movies
Sep 9, 2020
Character-driven storyline rather than wham-bam Marvel action (1 more)
Illyana Rasputin - great character
"Glass" - Half Full.
So, I've heard a lot of bad word-of-mouth about this X-Men flick, but otherwise knew very little about it. As such, I went in with low expectations. And although there is nothing remotely novel about the movie, I didn't think it was too bad at all.
The plot: So, my review title suggests that the plot is very closely aligned to M Night Shymalan's "Glass" - his "Split" sequel from last year. A Victorian-style hospital-cum-prison similarly forms the claustrophobic setting for the majority of the movie. This is where the troubled teen Dani Moonstar (Blu Hunt) is taken after being suddenly orphaned in dramatic and mysterious circumstances. The only doctor present, Dr Reyes (Alice Braga), says she is being held there for her own - and society's safety - while her puberty-driven mutant tendencies emerge.
Locked away with her is Rahne (Maisie Williams), Charlie (Sam Guthrie), 'hot' Brazilian hunk Roberto (Henry Zaga) and the gloriously named Illyana Rasputin (Anya-Taylor Joy). Danni's arrival sparks a serious of escalating events that literally lead to all hell breaking loose.
Blu is the warmest colour: What made this Marvel movie stand-out for me, from the normal glass-shattering standard, is that it is predominantly a character-led piece. We spend quite a bit of time (for a Marvel movie) in building relationships between the teens, including a sweet lesbian-coming-out 'will they/won't they' tension between Rahne and Danni.
I was also very much attracted to the performance of Blu Hunt. I admit that this might not just be due to her interesting performance (the indigenous / LBGT angle is intriguing) but because she reminded me strongly of a girl at school who I had a mad crush on and completely failed to get off with! Blu is actually native American (from the Lakota tribe). Given she is the lead and has to carry the movie, it's a surprise that she is only about 5th in the billing: I'd have been upset with the director (Josh "A Fault in our Stars" Boone) about that.
Maisie Williams is also effective in this, and gets top billing, although arguably Anya-Taylor-Joy has emerged - with her wonderful "Emma" - as the bigger star since filming.
But it's Taylor-Joy's Rasputin that really stands out as the most interesting of the characters on show. There's a scene where she goes into action - eyes blazing and 'daemon' hovering - that would make a splendid PC screensaver! Stuff the "Black Widow" standalone movie: I'd go watch Illyana Rasputin kicking ass in her own follow-up movie! (Of course, Anya Taylor-Joy was also prominent in "Glass", which unfortunately cements the similarities between the films.)
The movie has had a long and tortuous path to its final release, being made waaaaaayyyyy back in 2017. As an X-Men movie, it's appeared after the X-Men universe finally imploded (with the disappointing whimper of "Dark Phoenix"). So in that sense it's a bit of a ghost of a flick.
Overall, it's a mixed bag. There's a sense of great familiarity with the contents - particularly with the strong echoes of "Glass", actually filmed after this one (but with 'inversion', who knows anymore?). Even the "Indian legend" that runs through the movie swaps a bear for a wolf but ends with a familiar, rather groan-inducing, motto. (It was used in "Tomorrowland" I think?)
But the young cast are attractive and entertained me for the (pleasantly short) running time. It's not going to win any prizes for originality, or indeed anything else. But it really wasn't the X-Men bust I expected it to be.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/09/08/x-men-the-new-mutants-2020-glass-half-full/ . Thanks.)
The plot: So, my review title suggests that the plot is very closely aligned to M Night Shymalan's "Glass" - his "Split" sequel from last year. A Victorian-style hospital-cum-prison similarly forms the claustrophobic setting for the majority of the movie. This is where the troubled teen Dani Moonstar (Blu Hunt) is taken after being suddenly orphaned in dramatic and mysterious circumstances. The only doctor present, Dr Reyes (Alice Braga), says she is being held there for her own - and society's safety - while her puberty-driven mutant tendencies emerge.
Locked away with her is Rahne (Maisie Williams), Charlie (Sam Guthrie), 'hot' Brazilian hunk Roberto (Henry Zaga) and the gloriously named Illyana Rasputin (Anya-Taylor Joy). Danni's arrival sparks a serious of escalating events that literally lead to all hell breaking loose.
Blu is the warmest colour: What made this Marvel movie stand-out for me, from the normal glass-shattering standard, is that it is predominantly a character-led piece. We spend quite a bit of time (for a Marvel movie) in building relationships between the teens, including a sweet lesbian-coming-out 'will they/won't they' tension between Rahne and Danni.
I was also very much attracted to the performance of Blu Hunt. I admit that this might not just be due to her interesting performance (the indigenous / LBGT angle is intriguing) but because she reminded me strongly of a girl at school who I had a mad crush on and completely failed to get off with! Blu is actually native American (from the Lakota tribe). Given she is the lead and has to carry the movie, it's a surprise that she is only about 5th in the billing: I'd have been upset with the director (Josh "A Fault in our Stars" Boone) about that.
Maisie Williams is also effective in this, and gets top billing, although arguably Anya-Taylor-Joy has emerged - with her wonderful "Emma" - as the bigger star since filming.
But it's Taylor-Joy's Rasputin that really stands out as the most interesting of the characters on show. There's a scene where she goes into action - eyes blazing and 'daemon' hovering - that would make a splendid PC screensaver! Stuff the "Black Widow" standalone movie: I'd go watch Illyana Rasputin kicking ass in her own follow-up movie! (Of course, Anya Taylor-Joy was also prominent in "Glass", which unfortunately cements the similarities between the films.)
The movie has had a long and tortuous path to its final release, being made waaaaaayyyyy back in 2017. As an X-Men movie, it's appeared after the X-Men universe finally imploded (with the disappointing whimper of "Dark Phoenix"). So in that sense it's a bit of a ghost of a flick.
Overall, it's a mixed bag. There's a sense of great familiarity with the contents - particularly with the strong echoes of "Glass", actually filmed after this one (but with 'inversion', who knows anymore?). Even the "Indian legend" that runs through the movie swaps a bear for a wolf but ends with a familiar, rather groan-inducing, motto. (It was used in "Tomorrowland" I think?)
But the young cast are attractive and entertained me for the (pleasantly short) running time. It's not going to win any prizes for originality, or indeed anything else. But it really wasn't the X-Men bust I expected it to be.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/09/08/x-men-the-new-mutants-2020-glass-half-full/ . Thanks.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Long Shot (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
#Punching.
#Punching refers to an in-family joke….. my WhatsApp reply to my son when he sent me a picture of his new “Brazilian supermodel girlfriend” (she’s not). Bronwyn is now my daughter-in-law!
Similarly, the ‘out-there’ journalist Fred Flarsky (Seth Rogan) has been holding a candle for the glacial ice-queen Charlotte Field (Charlize Theron) for nearly twenty years. At the age of 16 she was his babysitter. Always with an interest in school issues, she has now risen to the dizzy heights of secretary (“of State”) to the President of the United States (Bob Odenkirk). With Charlotte getting the opportunity to run for President, fate arranges for Fred to get hired as a speechwriter on the team to help inject some necessary humour into Charlotte’s icy public persona. But in terms of romantic options, the shell-suited Fred is surely #punching isn’t he?
A rare thing.
Getting the balance right for a “romantic comedy” is a tricky job, but “Long Shot” just about gets it spot on. The comedy is sharp with a whole heap of great lines, some of which will need a second watch to catch. It’s also pleasingly politically incorrect, with US news anchors in particular being lampooned for their appallingly sexist language.
Just occasionally, the humour flips into Farrelly-levels of dubious taste (one “Mary-style” incident in particular was, for me, very funny but might test some viewer’s “ugh” button). The film also earns its UK15 certificate from the extensive array of “F” words utilized, and for some casual drug use.
Romantically, the film harks back to a classic blockbuster of 1990, but is well done and touching.
Writing and Directing
The sharp and tight screenplay was written by Dan Sterling, who wrote the internationally controversial Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy “The Interview” from 2014, and Liz Hannah, whose movie screenplay debut was the Spielberg drama “The Post“.
Behind the camera is Jonathan Levine, who previously directed the pretty awful “Snatched” from 2017 (a film I have started watching on a plane but never finished) but on the flip side he has on his bio the interesting rom-com-zombie film “Warm Bodies” and the moving cancer comedy “50:50”, also with Rogan, from 2011.
Also worthy of note in the technical department is the cinematography by Yves Bélanger (“The Mule“, “Brooklyn“, “Dallas Buyers Club“) with some lovely angles and tracking shots (a kitchen dance scene has an impressively leisurely track-away).
The Cast
Seth Rogen is a bit of an acquired taste: he’s like the US version of Johnny Vegas. Here he is suitably geeky when he needs to be, but has the range to make some of the pathos work in the inevitable “downer” scenes. Theron is absolutely gorgeous on-screen (although unlike the US anchors I OBVIOUSLY also appreciate her style and acting ability!). She really is the Grace Kelly of the modern age. She’s no stranger to comedy, having been in the other Seth (Macfarlane)’s “A Million Ways to Die in the West“. But she seems to be more comfortable with this material, and again gets the mix of comedy, romance and drama spot-on.
The strong supporting cast includes the unknown (to me) June Diane Raphael who is very effective at the cock-blocking Maggie, Charlotte’s aide; O’Shea Jackson Jr. as Fred’s buddy Lance; and Ravi Patel as the staffer Tom.
But winning the prize for the most unrecognizable cast member was Andy Serkis as the wizened old Rupert Murdoch-style media tycoon Parker Wembley: I genuinely got a shock as the titles rolled that this was him.
Final thoughts.
Although possibly causing offence to some, this is a fine example of a US comedy that delivers consistent laughs. Most of the audience chatter coming out of the screening was positive. At just over 2 hours, it breaks my “90 minute comedy” rule, but just about gets away with it. It’s not quite for me at the bar of “Game Night“, but it’s pretty close. Recommended.
#Punching refers to an in-family joke….. my WhatsApp reply to my son when he sent me a picture of his new “Brazilian supermodel girlfriend” (she’s not). Bronwyn is now my daughter-in-law!
Similarly, the ‘out-there’ journalist Fred Flarsky (Seth Rogan) has been holding a candle for the glacial ice-queen Charlotte Field (Charlize Theron) for nearly twenty years. At the age of 16 she was his babysitter. Always with an interest in school issues, she has now risen to the dizzy heights of secretary (“of State”) to the President of the United States (Bob Odenkirk). With Charlotte getting the opportunity to run for President, fate arranges for Fred to get hired as a speechwriter on the team to help inject some necessary humour into Charlotte’s icy public persona. But in terms of romantic options, the shell-suited Fred is surely #punching isn’t he?
A rare thing.
Getting the balance right for a “romantic comedy” is a tricky job, but “Long Shot” just about gets it spot on. The comedy is sharp with a whole heap of great lines, some of which will need a second watch to catch. It’s also pleasingly politically incorrect, with US news anchors in particular being lampooned for their appallingly sexist language.
Just occasionally, the humour flips into Farrelly-levels of dubious taste (one “Mary-style” incident in particular was, for me, very funny but might test some viewer’s “ugh” button). The film also earns its UK15 certificate from the extensive array of “F” words utilized, and for some casual drug use.
Romantically, the film harks back to a classic blockbuster of 1990, but is well done and touching.
Writing and Directing
The sharp and tight screenplay was written by Dan Sterling, who wrote the internationally controversial Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy “The Interview” from 2014, and Liz Hannah, whose movie screenplay debut was the Spielberg drama “The Post“.
Behind the camera is Jonathan Levine, who previously directed the pretty awful “Snatched” from 2017 (a film I have started watching on a plane but never finished) but on the flip side he has on his bio the interesting rom-com-zombie film “Warm Bodies” and the moving cancer comedy “50:50”, also with Rogan, from 2011.
Also worthy of note in the technical department is the cinematography by Yves Bélanger (“The Mule“, “Brooklyn“, “Dallas Buyers Club“) with some lovely angles and tracking shots (a kitchen dance scene has an impressively leisurely track-away).
The Cast
Seth Rogen is a bit of an acquired taste: he’s like the US version of Johnny Vegas. Here he is suitably geeky when he needs to be, but has the range to make some of the pathos work in the inevitable “downer” scenes. Theron is absolutely gorgeous on-screen (although unlike the US anchors I OBVIOUSLY also appreciate her style and acting ability!). She really is the Grace Kelly of the modern age. She’s no stranger to comedy, having been in the other Seth (Macfarlane)’s “A Million Ways to Die in the West“. But she seems to be more comfortable with this material, and again gets the mix of comedy, romance and drama spot-on.
The strong supporting cast includes the unknown (to me) June Diane Raphael who is very effective at the cock-blocking Maggie, Charlotte’s aide; O’Shea Jackson Jr. as Fred’s buddy Lance; and Ravi Patel as the staffer Tom.
But winning the prize for the most unrecognizable cast member was Andy Serkis as the wizened old Rupert Murdoch-style media tycoon Parker Wembley: I genuinely got a shock as the titles rolled that this was him.
Final thoughts.
Although possibly causing offence to some, this is a fine example of a US comedy that delivers consistent laughs. Most of the audience chatter coming out of the screening was positive. At just over 2 hours, it breaks my “90 minute comedy” rule, but just about gets away with it. It’s not quite for me at the bar of “Game Night“, but it’s pretty close. Recommended.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Daddy's Home 2 (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Some good comedy moments drowned in schmaltz.
Comedy and tragedy have always gone together hand-in-hand. Every great comedy tends to have its bitter-sweet moments: Roberts Blossom as the “shovel-killer” grandad in “Home Alone” (who always reminds me of my late Dad… in appearance I might add, not that he was a shovel killer!); John Candy’s depressed shower-ring salesman in “Planes Trains and Automobiles”; Ron Burgundy bawling in a phone box in “Anchorman”. The balance between the two is the key thing and comedies can sometimes get it wrong (the Bird Woman in “Home Alone 2” for example!).
Here is another case in point: “Daddy’s Home 2”, which has some laugh-out-loud comedy moments, but is generally so utterly drenched in schmaltz and sentimentality that the film becomes far harder work than it should be. (By the way, I never saw “Daddy’s Home” (but read the IMDB synopsys): it was not a prerequisite for seeing this movie).
A Christmas cast. From left, Alessandra Ambrosio, Didi Costine, Mark Wahlberg, Scarlett Estevez, Will Ferrell, Owen Vaccaro, Linda Cardellini, Conor or Daphne or Dylan Wise(!) and Mel Gibson.
Will Ferrell (“Get Hard“, “Anchorman“) reprises his role as the somewhat incompetent Brad, ‘sharing’ his family of kids and stepkids with the much more streetwise Dusty (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day“). After a poignant school recital, the pair realise the damage that a distributed Christmas is doing to their offspring and they determine to spend Christmas all together this year. In the process they vow to try to put aside their attempts at one-upmanship – “the harbour is closed” – in the interests of giving everyone the best Christmas ever.
But their plans are turned upside down when their fathers also turn up for Christmas: Mel Gibson (in a sublime piece of casting) plays Dusty’s dad, astronaut-hero Kurt, who is even more macho and extreme than Dusty, and John Lithgow (“Miss Sloane“; “The Accountant“) plays Brad’s airy-fairy father Don… the apple has not fallen far from the tree there.
Kurt forces the family to ‘fight’ Christmas on a neutral turf by renting a palatial AirBnB in a snowy wilderness. Tensions rise between the diverse individuals until a breaking point is inevitably reached.
There are some great farcical sight-gags in this movie. Quite a few of the funniest ones are spoiled by the trailer, but there are still a few standout routines that made me guffaw. A hi-tech shower is predictable but funny; and Brad’s use of a snowblower to apocalyptic ends is the funniest scene in the movie.
Wahlberg and Ferrell are a trustworthy double act (after their initial surprise pairing in “The Other Guys”). Gibson and Lithgow also inhabit their roles perfectly, although it was hard of me to relate to either of them. The scene on the airport escalator as they arrive is very well done.
The supporting cast all play their parts well: ER’s Linda Cardellini as Brad’s wife and Dusty’s ex-wife; Brazilian model and actress Alessandra Ambrosio, as Dusty’s (almost unbelievably good-looking) new wife Karen; and WWE star John Cena as Karen’s ex-husband. (Doesn’t ANYONE stay married in the US any more?). The kid stars – Didi Costine, Scarlett Estevez and Owen Vaccaro – are also good, with Estevez being particularly appealing.
Watch out for a funny cameo in the final scene as well, which I found very amusing (“You only have one story” … LoL).
“Will my bum look big in this?” – erm… no! Sara (Linda Cardellini) and Karen (Alessandra Ambrosio) on a shopping trip.
What drowns out the comedy though is the sentimental storyline around a personal tragedy being lived out by one of the family. The angst and nasty back-biting that surrounds this I found neither funny nor pleasant. The story builds to a snow-bound cinema (showing “Missile Tow” starring Liam Neeson… a great “pointless answer” for the BBC’s “Pointless” quiz!) and a finale song that is just so over the top that it has both an “awww” factor and is bile-inducing all at the same time. The screenplay is by Sean Anders and John Morris, with Anders also directing.
Will Ferrell films can be like a game of Russian Roulette, and I fully expected this to be truly awful. It wasn’t, and as a Christmas comedy it is an OK watch… and thankfully significantly above “Jingle all the Way”!
Here is another case in point: “Daddy’s Home 2”, which has some laugh-out-loud comedy moments, but is generally so utterly drenched in schmaltz and sentimentality that the film becomes far harder work than it should be. (By the way, I never saw “Daddy’s Home” (but read the IMDB synopsys): it was not a prerequisite for seeing this movie).
A Christmas cast. From left, Alessandra Ambrosio, Didi Costine, Mark Wahlberg, Scarlett Estevez, Will Ferrell, Owen Vaccaro, Linda Cardellini, Conor or Daphne or Dylan Wise(!) and Mel Gibson.
Will Ferrell (“Get Hard“, “Anchorman“) reprises his role as the somewhat incompetent Brad, ‘sharing’ his family of kids and stepkids with the much more streetwise Dusty (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day“). After a poignant school recital, the pair realise the damage that a distributed Christmas is doing to their offspring and they determine to spend Christmas all together this year. In the process they vow to try to put aside their attempts at one-upmanship – “the harbour is closed” – in the interests of giving everyone the best Christmas ever.
But their plans are turned upside down when their fathers also turn up for Christmas: Mel Gibson (in a sublime piece of casting) plays Dusty’s dad, astronaut-hero Kurt, who is even more macho and extreme than Dusty, and John Lithgow (“Miss Sloane“; “The Accountant“) plays Brad’s airy-fairy father Don… the apple has not fallen far from the tree there.
Kurt forces the family to ‘fight’ Christmas on a neutral turf by renting a palatial AirBnB in a snowy wilderness. Tensions rise between the diverse individuals until a breaking point is inevitably reached.
There are some great farcical sight-gags in this movie. Quite a few of the funniest ones are spoiled by the trailer, but there are still a few standout routines that made me guffaw. A hi-tech shower is predictable but funny; and Brad’s use of a snowblower to apocalyptic ends is the funniest scene in the movie.
Wahlberg and Ferrell are a trustworthy double act (after their initial surprise pairing in “The Other Guys”). Gibson and Lithgow also inhabit their roles perfectly, although it was hard of me to relate to either of them. The scene on the airport escalator as they arrive is very well done.
The supporting cast all play their parts well: ER’s Linda Cardellini as Brad’s wife and Dusty’s ex-wife; Brazilian model and actress Alessandra Ambrosio, as Dusty’s (almost unbelievably good-looking) new wife Karen; and WWE star John Cena as Karen’s ex-husband. (Doesn’t ANYONE stay married in the US any more?). The kid stars – Didi Costine, Scarlett Estevez and Owen Vaccaro – are also good, with Estevez being particularly appealing.
Watch out for a funny cameo in the final scene as well, which I found very amusing (“You only have one story” … LoL).
“Will my bum look big in this?” – erm… no! Sara (Linda Cardellini) and Karen (Alessandra Ambrosio) on a shopping trip.
What drowns out the comedy though is the sentimental storyline around a personal tragedy being lived out by one of the family. The angst and nasty back-biting that surrounds this I found neither funny nor pleasant. The story builds to a snow-bound cinema (showing “Missile Tow” starring Liam Neeson… a great “pointless answer” for the BBC’s “Pointless” quiz!) and a finale song that is just so over the top that it has both an “awww” factor and is bile-inducing all at the same time. The screenplay is by Sean Anders and John Morris, with Anders also directing.
Will Ferrell films can be like a game of Russian Roulette, and I fully expected this to be truly awful. It wasn’t, and as a Christmas comedy it is an OK watch… and thankfully significantly above “Jingle all the Way”!