Search
Search results
Ross (3282 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Mar 6, 2018 (Updated Mar 6, 2018)
I never fall asleep during films. I fell asleep.
The script and overall plot of this movie did not warrant big name actors like Cruise and Crowe. If anything, I think they played their parts badly and stopped a mediocre script from achieving the levels of mediocrity as a film. Cruise no longer has the charisma to play the cheeky, loveable rogue that this film needed (someone like hmmm Brendan Fraser) - that's not just saying what was needed to make it a decent remake of the "original", but what was needed for this script.
The plot relied on a number of stupid, illogical decisions by the main characters, and a lot of special effects. The aspects of the plot and the Mummy's mission which differed from the Fraser version were not well enough developed or explained to fully embed them in the plot - really, she just fancied Cruise?!
And the plot relied on too many coincidences, the discovery of the crusaders' tomb and the Mummy's tomb being almost exactly at the same time?! Really?!
And finally, the notion that there could be an area of London that is as-yet undiscovered and not covered in graffiti, human faeces and broken bottles is frankly ludicrous.
The plot relied on a number of stupid, illogical decisions by the main characters, and a lot of special effects. The aspects of the plot and the Mummy's mission which differed from the Fraser version were not well enough developed or explained to fully embed them in the plot - really, she just fancied Cruise?!
And the plot relied on too many coincidences, the discovery of the crusaders' tomb and the Mummy's tomb being almost exactly at the same time?! Really?!
And finally, the notion that there could be an area of London that is as-yet undiscovered and not covered in graffiti, human faeces and broken bottles is frankly ludicrous.
Blazing Minds (92 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Nov 1, 2021 (Updated Nov 3, 2021)
Ah The Mummy, one of my all-time favourite movies, I remember the first time I saw the 1932 film with Boris Karloff when I was very young, scared the living daylights out of me, thank heavens for big backed sofas!
Then many, many, years later in 1999 Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz brought The Mummy back to life (excuse the pun) on the big screen with it wit, wonderful chemistry between Fraser and Weisz, some pretty nifty CGI during the transformation scenes of Arnold Vosloo’s Mummy and not forgetting that one line that so many off would throw into conversations as much as we could, “Apparently he was having a very good time!”.
Now 18 years later (oh damn now I do feel really old!) The Mummy is back with not only a reboot of the film, but also the start of the “Dark Universe“, a new world of gods and monsters that will be unleashed on to cinemas screens, starting with The Mummy, all the films will be connected by a mysterious organisation known as the “Prodigium” which is led by Dr. Henry Jekyll (Russell Crowe, (Nice Guys, Les Miserables) who we have been introduced to in this movie.
Then many, many, years later in 1999 Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz brought The Mummy back to life (excuse the pun) on the big screen with it wit, wonderful chemistry between Fraser and Weisz, some pretty nifty CGI during the transformation scenes of Arnold Vosloo’s Mummy and not forgetting that one line that so many off would throw into conversations as much as we could, “Apparently he was having a very good time!”.
Now 18 years later (oh damn now I do feel really old!) The Mummy is back with not only a reboot of the film, but also the start of the “Dark Universe“, a new world of gods and monsters that will be unleashed on to cinemas screens, starting with The Mummy, all the films will be connected by a mysterious organisation known as the “Prodigium” which is led by Dr. Henry Jekyll (Russell Crowe, (Nice Guys, Les Miserables) who we have been introduced to in this movie.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Doom Patrol in TV
Jul 4, 2020
Not Your Average Superhero Show - 7/10
Doom Patrol Is a 2019 action/sci-fi, comedy/drama superhero TV series based on the DC comic created by writers Arnold Drake and Bob Haney and artist Bruno Premiani. It was developed by Jeremy Carver, and produced by DC Entertainment and Warner Bros. Television for DC Universe. Doom Patrol is a spin-off of Titans, a superhero TV series also on DC Universe. Starring Brendan Fraser, Timothy Dalton, Alan Tudyk, Matt Bomer and April Bowlby.
Doom Patrol picks up after the events of Titans, and finds the titular heroes in the town of Cloverton, Ohio. However they are a long, long way from being anything resembling heroes. The group consisting of Robotman/Clifford "Cliff" Steele (Brendan Fraser), Negative-man/Larry Trainor (Matt Bomer), Elasti-woman/Rita Farr (April Bowlby) and Crazy Jane/Kay (Diane Guerrero) are taken in by Chief/Dr. Niles Caulder (Timothy Dalton).
They each have suffered horrible accidents that have left them scarred or disfigured but also imbued them with superpowers. They have come together in Doom Manor under the guidance of Dr. Caulder to try and overcome their own demons. However when the good Dr. leaves the manor, a quick venture into the town for the team has far-reaching consequences. An enemy called Mr. Nobody (Alan Tudyk) comes to exact revenge and takes the doctor and everyone in the town with him. Luckily they are left with a possible new member and old friend of the doctor, who has come to check on the town and him, Cyborg (Jovian Wade) from Titans.
This show is really weird and definitely not for everyone. I didn't have the opportunity to watch the Titans show before this, so I don't know how much it affects it in anyway or if it's in the same vein. I also never read the Doom Patrol comics. It didn't seem to me like there was a clear plot at first but the writers are definitely going for a unique and captivating way of grabbing the audience. It's also rated TV-MA and it feels like they're kind of going for that Deadpool audience and a dark humor comedy feel. That being said it's not terrible, it really grows on you. To me the first episode was kind of hit or miss but by the second episode it really pulls you in. The characters motivations and backgrounds are very unique and emotionally appealing. The general atmosphere of the show was kind of all over the place; I mean it's a little bit drama, a little bit action, sometimes slightly horror and kind of gory and a superhero element on top of all all of it, plus sci-fi.
There is a pretty exclusively entertaining character, the narrator/villain Mr. nobody who is played by Alan Tudyk. He is very funny and charismatic and isn't afraid to break the fourth wall, right away in the beginning of the first episode. I guess it's a pretty good show but not for everyone, I would give it a 7/10.
Doom Patrol picks up after the events of Titans, and finds the titular heroes in the town of Cloverton, Ohio. However they are a long, long way from being anything resembling heroes. The group consisting of Robotman/Clifford "Cliff" Steele (Brendan Fraser), Negative-man/Larry Trainor (Matt Bomer), Elasti-woman/Rita Farr (April Bowlby) and Crazy Jane/Kay (Diane Guerrero) are taken in by Chief/Dr. Niles Caulder (Timothy Dalton).
They each have suffered horrible accidents that have left them scarred or disfigured but also imbued them with superpowers. They have come together in Doom Manor under the guidance of Dr. Caulder to try and overcome their own demons. However when the good Dr. leaves the manor, a quick venture into the town for the team has far-reaching consequences. An enemy called Mr. Nobody (Alan Tudyk) comes to exact revenge and takes the doctor and everyone in the town with him. Luckily they are left with a possible new member and old friend of the doctor, who has come to check on the town and him, Cyborg (Jovian Wade) from Titans.
This show is really weird and definitely not for everyone. I didn't have the opportunity to watch the Titans show before this, so I don't know how much it affects it in anyway or if it's in the same vein. I also never read the Doom Patrol comics. It didn't seem to me like there was a clear plot at first but the writers are definitely going for a unique and captivating way of grabbing the audience. It's also rated TV-MA and it feels like they're kind of going for that Deadpool audience and a dark humor comedy feel. That being said it's not terrible, it really grows on you. To me the first episode was kind of hit or miss but by the second episode it really pulls you in. The characters motivations and backgrounds are very unique and emotionally appealing. The general atmosphere of the show was kind of all over the place; I mean it's a little bit drama, a little bit action, sometimes slightly horror and kind of gory and a superhero element on top of all all of it, plus sci-fi.
There is a pretty exclusively entertaining character, the narrator/villain Mr. nobody who is played by Alan Tudyk. He is very funny and charismatic and isn't afraid to break the fourth wall, right away in the beginning of the first episode. I guess it's a pretty good show but not for everyone, I would give it a 7/10.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated The Mummy Returns (2001) in Movies
Aug 13, 2019
Brendan Fraser (6 more)
Rachel Weiss
John Hannah
Oded Fehr
Arnold Vosloo
Continuity of cast
Not as good as the first one, but still better than the next....
Introduction of concepts and elements that weren't present in the first - reincarnation, Rick's tattoo and it's significance, etc (1 more)
The Scorpion King's introduction looks like a PS2 cutscene.
A solid sequel
This is a solid sequel, even if it falls short of the mark set by it's predecessor. The entire (surviving) cast returns, which I appreciate in a franchise, and the story mostly delivers. There are a few frustrating elements, such as all of a sudden adding concepts such as reincarnation (especially given that the concurring reveal would have been relevant to the story of the first film) or Rick's tattoo that he's had since his childhood, except that he didn't have it in the first movie. Where this film really falls short, though, is a couple bad animation moments. Mostly the film is a lot like the first in terms of effects - decent animation for 2002, if occasionally dated, but a couple of sequences are jarringly bad, especially the Rock's entrance as the Scorpion King. Is it enough to keep me from watching? No. But I still cringe at that point every time.
Ronyell (38 KP) rated Monkeybone (2001) in Movies
Aug 4, 2020
Get Boned With Monkeybone!
I had watched almost all the movies directed by Henry Selick at this point and I had enjoyed almost all of them! However, "Monkeybone" was that one case that I could have enjoyed it much better if the plot and the characters were handled a bit better, but I'll get into that later. What I did like about this movie was the fact that the world of Downtown was so creative to look at as all the characters look like they came out of various mythologies and fantasy works and seeing them interact with each other was brilliant to see! I also loved how all the actors and actresses in this film gave their all by acting so hammy yet convincing towards the audience in detailing the characters' plight throughout this movie. Probably the actors and actresses in this film that I really enjoyed their performances were Whoopi Goldberg and Brendan Fraser as they really made their characters truly stand out in this film! I loved the way that Brendan Fraser was able to balance between being hammy and being emotional as Stu Miley and it really made me get into Stu's predicament of trying to confess his love towards Julie and try to find his way out of Downtown so he could tell Julie he loves her. Whoopi Goldberg was also fantastic as Death as she made Death into a truly hilarious and sympathetic character and I really liked the relationship she develops with Stu. I also loved the fact that Stu truly does care about Julie and is willing to do anything to get back to her and confess his love to her.
Some problems that I had with this film was that I felt that the story could have been much better if the characters and the story were developed better. Now, I did look at the deleted scenes for this movie and I realized that the creative team were forced to cut out a lot of parts to help this film retain a PG-13 rating, but in doing that, they cut out a lot of parts that were essential to the plot of the story, even if they probably wouldn't make the movie any better than it is. I would have liked this movie better if we actually got to know more about the characters themselves, especially about the pact between Stu and his sister Kimmy where Kimmy will pull the plug on Stu if Stu goes into a coma, which the movie failed to go into more detail about. Also, there were times where the movie was forcing in crude humor where they didn't need to be and it made viewing this movie a bit awkward since one moment I would be enjoying the story of the film and then the next moment, they introduce a crude moment that involves toilet humor that kind of ruins the scenes for me.
Overall, while "Monkeybone" does have a lot of creative moments, especially during the Downtown sequences, the movie suffers from lack of character development that makes viewing this movie a bit hard at times.
Some problems that I had with this film was that I felt that the story could have been much better if the characters and the story were developed better. Now, I did look at the deleted scenes for this movie and I realized that the creative team were forced to cut out a lot of parts to help this film retain a PG-13 rating, but in doing that, they cut out a lot of parts that were essential to the plot of the story, even if they probably wouldn't make the movie any better than it is. I would have liked this movie better if we actually got to know more about the characters themselves, especially about the pact between Stu and his sister Kimmy where Kimmy will pull the plug on Stu if Stu goes into a coma, which the movie failed to go into more detail about. Also, there were times where the movie was forcing in crude humor where they didn't need to be and it made viewing this movie a bit awkward since one moment I would be enjoying the story of the film and then the next moment, they introduce a crude moment that involves toilet humor that kind of ruins the scenes for me.
Overall, while "Monkeybone" does have a lot of creative moments, especially during the Downtown sequences, the movie suffers from lack of character development that makes viewing this movie a bit hard at times.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Titans - Season 1 in TV
Sep 26, 2019 (Updated Jan 7, 2020)
A silly good surprise
Contains spoilers, click to show
In a world awash with CW shows based on DC comics (don't get me wrong, I have a small space in my heart for the 'Arrowverse'), who would have thought that a live action series based on Teen Titans would absolutely smash it out of the park!?
When the trailers dropped for Titans, I was intrigued, slightly worried that it would be linked to the sub par DCEU - it's not by the way, and it's also seperate from CW universe, allowing Titans to do its own thing, and do it well.
Titans is both gritty and colourful, both humourous and emotional, and hugely enjoyable.
The main cast are introduced slowly, but it doesn't take long for the group to matter to you.
Brenton Thwaites (Robin), Teegan Croft (Raven), Anna Diop (Starfire), and Ryan Potter (Beast Boy) form the core team and are all extremely likable.
Alan Ritchson and Minka Kelly (Hawk and Dove respectively) drop in from time to time to flesh out the team, and provide some of the series more emotional moments. In fact, one episode is dedicated entirely to their origins and how they met, and it's one of the seasons strong points.
Another great episode early on introduced us to the Doom Patrol (who includes bloody Brendan Fraser!) providing the jump off episode for the Doom Patrol spin off show. This episode is probably the funniest episode in the series.
Elsewhere we are introduced to other DC characters such as Jason Todd, Wonder Girl, Trigon, Superboy, and the Nuclear Family, and it shows that Titans has been able to establish a far reaching universe in the space of 11 episodes.
The season finale is a real treat, which is sort of based in Gotham. We are treated to Batman references galore, given glimpses of his rogues gallery, and absolutely crazy climatic action scene involving the Bat himself.
Titans is drenched in bad language, and moments of nasty violence, flexing itself as an adult show from the get go, and it's a huge strength.
I can't wait to see where it goes in the future!
When the trailers dropped for Titans, I was intrigued, slightly worried that it would be linked to the sub par DCEU - it's not by the way, and it's also seperate from CW universe, allowing Titans to do its own thing, and do it well.
Titans is both gritty and colourful, both humourous and emotional, and hugely enjoyable.
The main cast are introduced slowly, but it doesn't take long for the group to matter to you.
Brenton Thwaites (Robin), Teegan Croft (Raven), Anna Diop (Starfire), and Ryan Potter (Beast Boy) form the core team and are all extremely likable.
Alan Ritchson and Minka Kelly (Hawk and Dove respectively) drop in from time to time to flesh out the team, and provide some of the series more emotional moments. In fact, one episode is dedicated entirely to their origins and how they met, and it's one of the seasons strong points.
Another great episode early on introduced us to the Doom Patrol (who includes bloody Brendan Fraser!) providing the jump off episode for the Doom Patrol spin off show. This episode is probably the funniest episode in the series.
Elsewhere we are introduced to other DC characters such as Jason Todd, Wonder Girl, Trigon, Superboy, and the Nuclear Family, and it shows that Titans has been able to establish a far reaching universe in the space of 11 episodes.
The season finale is a real treat, which is sort of based in Gotham. We are treated to Batman references galore, given glimpses of his rogues gallery, and absolutely crazy climatic action scene involving the Bat himself.
Titans is drenched in bad language, and moments of nasty violence, flexing itself as an adult show from the get go, and it's a huge strength.
I can't wait to see where it goes in the future!
Lilyn G - Sci-Fi & Scary (91 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2018
Blech
The Mummy was a completely awesome movie! Filled with perfectly timed comedy, a strong female heroine, a somewhat sinister Mummy, and great lines! I’m talking, of course, about the 1999 version of The Mummy. The one starring Brendan Fraser and the wonderful Rachel Weisz.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A new franchise is reborn
It seems that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has kicked off a trend over in tinseltown. Shared franchises are all the rage at the moment, and why not. Marvel has taken over $10billion. DC has finally found its footing with Wonder Woman and Legendary are fusing Godzilla with Kong: Skull Island to create their own monster universe.
But for every success story there is a failed series that didn’t quite grab the cinema-going public with The Golden Compass and The Last Airbender immediately springing to mind. Nevertheless, Universal Pictures has pushed ahead with creating its own ‘Dark Universe’. Proceedings kick off with The Mummy. But how does this reboot fare?
Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) is a soldier of fortune who plunders ancient sites for timeless artefacts and sells them to the highest bidder. When Nick and his partner (Jake Johnson) come under attack in the Middle East, the ensuing battle accidentally unearths Ahmanet, a betrayed Egyptian princess (Sofia Boutella) who was entombed under the desert for thousands of years. With her powers constantly evolving, Morton must now stop the resurrected monster as she embarks on a furious rampage through the streets of London.
First-time director and long-time screenwriter Alex Kurtzman crafts a film that moves at breakneck speed, features a lot of nifty set-pieces and is an intriguing precursor to the next instalment of the franchise. It’s pretty good fun to be honest.
Tom Cruise is as reliable as ever, and does all the Tom Cruise staples; running, heavy breathing, shirtless preening, but the stand-out performance here is Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll (yes, that’s right). Despite being slightly underused, Crowe is a fantastic choice to play this multi-layered character. Elsewhere, Sofia Boutella is very good as Ahmanet.
Unfortunately, Jake Johnson (Jurassic World) and Cruise’s love interest Annabelle Wallis (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) feel miscast with Wallis in particular having no believable chemistry with her co-star.
To look at The Mummy is first-rate. Gone are the campy special effects of the Brendan Fraser-era films, instead replaced with crisp CGI – though the dark and gloomy filming style hampers the obviously great effects. Nevertheless, the aircraft and subsequent crash sequences that have been marketed in the trailers are gripping and produced very well indeed.
Unfortunately, The Mummy relies heavily on jump scares, of which there are far too many, and the trade-off for that rollercoaster pace is a film that feels disjointed, relying on visually stunning action sequences to cover over cracks in the story. Some of the humour also falls flat.
Ultimately though, these are small gripes in a vastly entertaining popcorn flick that is a very solid starting point to a series that will include films like The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein and The Wolfman.
Whilst not the most original film you will see this year, The Mummy opens up some intriguing doors and whilst I’m in no rush to see it again, despite its competence, I’m excited to see how Universal will bring all of their iconic monsters back to the big screen in one unified franchise.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/10/a-new-franchise-is-reborn-the-mummy-review/
But for every success story there is a failed series that didn’t quite grab the cinema-going public with The Golden Compass and The Last Airbender immediately springing to mind. Nevertheless, Universal Pictures has pushed ahead with creating its own ‘Dark Universe’. Proceedings kick off with The Mummy. But how does this reboot fare?
Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) is a soldier of fortune who plunders ancient sites for timeless artefacts and sells them to the highest bidder. When Nick and his partner (Jake Johnson) come under attack in the Middle East, the ensuing battle accidentally unearths Ahmanet, a betrayed Egyptian princess (Sofia Boutella) who was entombed under the desert for thousands of years. With her powers constantly evolving, Morton must now stop the resurrected monster as she embarks on a furious rampage through the streets of London.
First-time director and long-time screenwriter Alex Kurtzman crafts a film that moves at breakneck speed, features a lot of nifty set-pieces and is an intriguing precursor to the next instalment of the franchise. It’s pretty good fun to be honest.
Tom Cruise is as reliable as ever, and does all the Tom Cruise staples; running, heavy breathing, shirtless preening, but the stand-out performance here is Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll (yes, that’s right). Despite being slightly underused, Crowe is a fantastic choice to play this multi-layered character. Elsewhere, Sofia Boutella is very good as Ahmanet.
Unfortunately, Jake Johnson (Jurassic World) and Cruise’s love interest Annabelle Wallis (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) feel miscast with Wallis in particular having no believable chemistry with her co-star.
To look at The Mummy is first-rate. Gone are the campy special effects of the Brendan Fraser-era films, instead replaced with crisp CGI – though the dark and gloomy filming style hampers the obviously great effects. Nevertheless, the aircraft and subsequent crash sequences that have been marketed in the trailers are gripping and produced very well indeed.
Unfortunately, The Mummy relies heavily on jump scares, of which there are far too many, and the trade-off for that rollercoaster pace is a film that feels disjointed, relying on visually stunning action sequences to cover over cracks in the story. Some of the humour also falls flat.
Ultimately though, these are small gripes in a vastly entertaining popcorn flick that is a very solid starting point to a series that will include films like The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein and The Wolfman.
Whilst not the most original film you will see this year, The Mummy opens up some intriguing doors and whilst I’m in no rush to see it again, despite its competence, I’m excited to see how Universal will bring all of their iconic monsters back to the big screen in one unified franchise.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/10/a-new-franchise-is-reborn-the-mummy-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Killers of the Flower moon (2023) in Movies
Oct 27, 2023
Best Thing Scorses (and DeNiro) have done in many, many years
The BankofMarquis would highly recommend you see the latest epic (and we do mean EPIC) film from famed Director Martin Scorsese in a movie theater. Not because of the beautiful Cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto, not because of the Epic-ness of the tale told and not because movie theaters could use your business (all of which are reasons to see it in the movie theaters). You need to see KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON in a movie theater so that you cannot be distracted by things around you (most, notably your PHONE). One needs to immerse themselves in the experience of this 3 1/2 movie to totally understand and appreciate it.
And that is because KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON is as much atmosphere, mood and setting as it is story. Early on, one of the characters warns another one that the Osage people (the central group in this story) “don’t say much, listen more and let long pauses hang between words” and Scorsese does much of the same. Letting the story hang - and be told in - the silence between the words. And it works…if you are paying attention.
Starring Scorsese regulars Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert DeNiro and featuring a wonderful, soon-to-be-Oscar-Nominated performance by newcomer Lily Gladstone, KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON is based on the novel of the same name by David Gann and tells the tale of the Osage Nation who discover oil on their land in the 1920’s and the white men who come to try to connive and steal it away from them.
Taken on the surface, this story could be a pretty straight-forward white-man steals from the Indians story (substitute Buffalo for Oil and we have a story told so many times before - most notably in the Oscar winning movie DANCING WITH WOLVES), but in the hands of master craftsman Scorsese, this movie is much, much more than that.
Easily his best work in at least 10 years, Scorsese lets this story breathe and focuses in on the mood and atmosphere of the period - and the disparate people that inhabit…and battle for…this land and oil. It is the work of a maestro nearing the end of his tenure, skillfully conducting the Orchestra, one last, loving, magnificent time.
Like Scorsese, this is Oscar winner Robert DeNiro’s best performance in years and will not be surprised if he garners his first Oscar nomination in many, many years. Gone are the histrionics and over-the-top gestures and facial ticks that mar his comedic work (and in some cases his non-comedic work). DeNiro returns to the compact, internal “method” acting that was the hallmark of his early (best) work. You can see that this player still has “game” and he gives the role of William “King” Hale some dimension. This is good for this character could have, in lesser hands, turned into a “mustache-twirling” villain tying the heroine to the railroad tracks but in DeNiro’s capable hands (with Scorsese skillfully leading him) it is so much more.
Speaking of the Heroine, newcomer Lily Gladstone is just a strong and compact in her portrayal of Mollie Burkhart - the Osage woman in the center of the story. She gives Lily some sharp edges along with the rounded corners she is given in the script and the story and more than holds her own with the likes of DeNiro and DiCaprio in the many, many scenes she has with them. Most of the time, she needs to express quite a bit with a look or silence (while looking away) and she is able to convey that very, very well.
Fairing less well in this film is Leonardo DiCaprio as Ernest Burkhart, the sad-sack that is the pawn of “King” Hale and the love interest of Lily…or is he? DiCaprio is very good as Burkhart (when has he ever given a bad performance) but this character is thinly written and you can almost see the puppet strings on him. This, probably, is on purpose by Scorsese…but against two solid characters like DeNiro’s “King” Hale and Gladstone’s Molly, there just needed to be a bit more to DiCaprio’s character to make him more interesting.
Since this is a Scorsese film, it is fleshed out by some wonderful character actors led by the always watchable Jesse Plemons as the FBI agent sent to unpack what is going on. Joining him in what are (essentially) extended cameos are John Lithgow, newly minted Oscar winner Brendan Fraser, the always good Tantoo Cardinal, Scott Shepherd (as Leo’s brother) and a myriad of “that guy” and “interesting looking roughnecks” to flesh the feel of the film out - both on the white man as well as the Osage sides of the story.
The aforementioned Cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto along with the Costuming (Jacqueline West), Production Design (Jack Fisk) and Score (Robbie Peterson) all add to the mood of the piece and makes it very successful, indeed.
Just be forewarned, it is as every bit of 3 1/2 hours as it’s runtime dictates. There will be long, slow, silent parts that will make you tempted to pick up your phone - but resist that and enjoy the epic mood piece that is KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON. You won’t regret it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
And that is because KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON is as much atmosphere, mood and setting as it is story. Early on, one of the characters warns another one that the Osage people (the central group in this story) “don’t say much, listen more and let long pauses hang between words” and Scorsese does much of the same. Letting the story hang - and be told in - the silence between the words. And it works…if you are paying attention.
Starring Scorsese regulars Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert DeNiro and featuring a wonderful, soon-to-be-Oscar-Nominated performance by newcomer Lily Gladstone, KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON is based on the novel of the same name by David Gann and tells the tale of the Osage Nation who discover oil on their land in the 1920’s and the white men who come to try to connive and steal it away from them.
Taken on the surface, this story could be a pretty straight-forward white-man steals from the Indians story (substitute Buffalo for Oil and we have a story told so many times before - most notably in the Oscar winning movie DANCING WITH WOLVES), but in the hands of master craftsman Scorsese, this movie is much, much more than that.
Easily his best work in at least 10 years, Scorsese lets this story breathe and focuses in on the mood and atmosphere of the period - and the disparate people that inhabit…and battle for…this land and oil. It is the work of a maestro nearing the end of his tenure, skillfully conducting the Orchestra, one last, loving, magnificent time.
Like Scorsese, this is Oscar winner Robert DeNiro’s best performance in years and will not be surprised if he garners his first Oscar nomination in many, many years. Gone are the histrionics and over-the-top gestures and facial ticks that mar his comedic work (and in some cases his non-comedic work). DeNiro returns to the compact, internal “method” acting that was the hallmark of his early (best) work. You can see that this player still has “game” and he gives the role of William “King” Hale some dimension. This is good for this character could have, in lesser hands, turned into a “mustache-twirling” villain tying the heroine to the railroad tracks but in DeNiro’s capable hands (with Scorsese skillfully leading him) it is so much more.
Speaking of the Heroine, newcomer Lily Gladstone is just a strong and compact in her portrayal of Mollie Burkhart - the Osage woman in the center of the story. She gives Lily some sharp edges along with the rounded corners she is given in the script and the story and more than holds her own with the likes of DeNiro and DiCaprio in the many, many scenes she has with them. Most of the time, she needs to express quite a bit with a look or silence (while looking away) and she is able to convey that very, very well.
Fairing less well in this film is Leonardo DiCaprio as Ernest Burkhart, the sad-sack that is the pawn of “King” Hale and the love interest of Lily…or is he? DiCaprio is very good as Burkhart (when has he ever given a bad performance) but this character is thinly written and you can almost see the puppet strings on him. This, probably, is on purpose by Scorsese…but against two solid characters like DeNiro’s “King” Hale and Gladstone’s Molly, there just needed to be a bit more to DiCaprio’s character to make him more interesting.
Since this is a Scorsese film, it is fleshed out by some wonderful character actors led by the always watchable Jesse Plemons as the FBI agent sent to unpack what is going on. Joining him in what are (essentially) extended cameos are John Lithgow, newly minted Oscar winner Brendan Fraser, the always good Tantoo Cardinal, Scott Shepherd (as Leo’s brother) and a myriad of “that guy” and “interesting looking roughnecks” to flesh the feel of the film out - both on the white man as well as the Osage sides of the story.
The aforementioned Cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto along with the Costuming (Jacqueline West), Production Design (Jack Fisk) and Score (Robbie Peterson) all add to the mood of the piece and makes it very successful, indeed.
Just be forewarned, it is as every bit of 3 1/2 hours as it’s runtime dictates. There will be long, slow, silent parts that will make you tempted to pick up your phone - but resist that and enjoy the epic mood piece that is KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON. You won’t regret it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Suswatibasu (1701 KP) Mar 6, 2018