Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated The Longest Yard (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Continuing the current trend of remakes, Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison production company set their sights on remaking the classic prison football film The Longest Yard. Like most projects that Sandler puts his Midas touch upon, this too has some moments of true gold.
The film stars Adam Sandler as Paul Crewe, a former NFL star quarterback who was banned from the league after allegedly throwing a game. As the film opens, Crewe is spending his time as a boy toy for a snobby socialite who is happy to capitalize on being seen with him, and parading Paul through various promotional ventures.
After reaching his breaking point, Paul lashes back by “borrowing” her car and leading several police officers on a high speed, and drunken chase through the streets. The resulting carnage is not only captured on live television, but awards Paul a three year prison term.
Upon arriving in the remote prison location, Crewe is introduced to Warden Hazen (James Cromwell), who attempts to recruit Crewe to help him with his semi-pro team. Crewe declines as he was urged to forcibly by Captain of the Guards Captain Knauer (William Fitchtner).
Paul eventually meets a helpful inmate known as Caretaker (Chris Rock), who shows him the ropes of prison life, and becomes a good friend for Crewe, who certainly needs friends, as there are more than a few guards and prisoners who lost money on the game he through years ago.
In time, Crew is forced by the Warden to organize a team of prisoners for a tune up game with the guards. In a series of comedic moments, Paul and Caretaker have to take drastic measures in order to organize a team from the prisoners including a game of basketball that is rougher than most games Paul had to face on the playing fields of the NFL.
Onboard to assist Paul is Coach Nate Scarborough (Burt Reynolds), who provides a much needed spark and wisdom to the team and as a former football great, allows Paul to unload some of the burden of getting the team and himself ready to play.
Of course there will be some subterfuge afoot, and the guards are not about to allow the prisoners any sense of hope, which all leads to a very funny series of point/counterpoint moves on the part of both teams to undermine the other.
When news of the game gets out, it is not long before ESPN 2 wants to televise the return of Paul Crewe, and the game soon becomes a national showcase. Since Warden Hazen has political aspirations, the outcome of the game in his favor becomes paramount forcing him to increase the pressure, and forces Paul to make a very important choice.
While the film follows the basic premise of the original, it has been updated to take advantage of modern humor and fine supporting cast. Many ex-NFL players ranging from Brian Bosworth, Michael Irvin, Bill Romanowski, and Bill Goldberg are in the film as well as wrestlers Steve Austin, Kevin Nash, and rapper Nelly.
While some may say the film is predictable, Sandler and the supporting cast do a great job in mixing humor with some of the more serious issues of prison life which results in a film that masterfully mixes humor, sports action, and human drama to create one of the better sports films in recent memory.
The film stars Adam Sandler as Paul Crewe, a former NFL star quarterback who was banned from the league after allegedly throwing a game. As the film opens, Crewe is spending his time as a boy toy for a snobby socialite who is happy to capitalize on being seen with him, and parading Paul through various promotional ventures.
After reaching his breaking point, Paul lashes back by “borrowing” her car and leading several police officers on a high speed, and drunken chase through the streets. The resulting carnage is not only captured on live television, but awards Paul a three year prison term.
Upon arriving in the remote prison location, Crewe is introduced to Warden Hazen (James Cromwell), who attempts to recruit Crewe to help him with his semi-pro team. Crewe declines as he was urged to forcibly by Captain of the Guards Captain Knauer (William Fitchtner).
Paul eventually meets a helpful inmate known as Caretaker (Chris Rock), who shows him the ropes of prison life, and becomes a good friend for Crewe, who certainly needs friends, as there are more than a few guards and prisoners who lost money on the game he through years ago.
In time, Crew is forced by the Warden to organize a team of prisoners for a tune up game with the guards. In a series of comedic moments, Paul and Caretaker have to take drastic measures in order to organize a team from the prisoners including a game of basketball that is rougher than most games Paul had to face on the playing fields of the NFL.
Onboard to assist Paul is Coach Nate Scarborough (Burt Reynolds), who provides a much needed spark and wisdom to the team and as a former football great, allows Paul to unload some of the burden of getting the team and himself ready to play.
Of course there will be some subterfuge afoot, and the guards are not about to allow the prisoners any sense of hope, which all leads to a very funny series of point/counterpoint moves on the part of both teams to undermine the other.
When news of the game gets out, it is not long before ESPN 2 wants to televise the return of Paul Crewe, and the game soon becomes a national showcase. Since Warden Hazen has political aspirations, the outcome of the game in his favor becomes paramount forcing him to increase the pressure, and forces Paul to make a very important choice.
While the film follows the basic premise of the original, it has been updated to take advantage of modern humor and fine supporting cast. Many ex-NFL players ranging from Brian Bosworth, Michael Irvin, Bill Romanowski, and Bill Goldberg are in the film as well as wrestlers Steve Austin, Kevin Nash, and rapper Nelly.
While some may say the film is predictable, Sandler and the supporting cast do a great job in mixing humor with some of the more serious issues of prison life which results in a film that masterfully mixes humor, sports action, and human drama to create one of the better sports films in recent memory.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated The Equalizer 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Ex-government assassin Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) takes it upon himself to right the wrongs of those who have been exploited. He spends his days driving a Lyft around making chance encounters with people. When one of those people is in need he will go to any length to dispense justice. His brand of justice is brutal and swift but he always give the oppressors the chance to redeem themselves. He does this for people passing though his life but when his best friend, and one of the only former colleges to know his alive, Susan Plummer (Melissa Leo) is killed while on an investigation he sets out to dispatch vengeance rather than justice. He will stop at nothing to find out why his friend was murdered and eliminate those responsible. Robert must first reveal that he is still alive to his former partner Dave York (Pedro Pascal) so he can have access to the investigation. Once he has access the pair will try and find the killers and exact revenge. That is before the killers find them.
This film is the follow up to 2014’s The Equalizer. It returns both Washington and Leo as well as Director Antoine Fuqua (Shooter, South Paw) and Writer Richard Wenk (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, 16 Blocks) and Bill Pullman, as Brian Plummer. The action scenes in the beginning of the film are really well done. Maybe a spoiler here so caution, the climatic fight scene at the end is less well done and because it is set in a hurricane a lot of it is blurry and hard to follow. It puts you in the setting of the weather but because the action is hand to hand you can really miss a lot of what is going on. It didn’t really work for me personally. The story started out really how I expected and followed the first films story of McCall helping out those who had no other options. This part felt very much like the first film but not redundant. However, it really slowed down when it got into the main story of the film. This part really seemed overly predictable and unoriginal. You, or rather I, could see how the entire movie was laid out and the inevitable conclusion with very few plot twist. This made pace of the film is tough for me. Really action packed at the beginning and then really slow drawn out drama in the middle.
On its own this film is an okay movie. One of many action/crime/mystery films that are made each year. It didn’t really do a good job of distinguishing itself from the rest of the genre. But fans of this type of movie can enjoy how it is heartfelt and warm at times and bloody and action packed at others. The end I discussed above I was not a fan of. Also there is the issue of when you compare it to the original film it really is lacking some key things that the made the first film a success. The villain in this film really leaves something to be desired while the first film had a pretty good antagonist. The pace of the first film was much better and the story flowed more naturally. Sometimes it is really hard to recreate something and I think this film falls way short.
This film is the follow up to 2014’s The Equalizer. It returns both Washington and Leo as well as Director Antoine Fuqua (Shooter, South Paw) and Writer Richard Wenk (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, 16 Blocks) and Bill Pullman, as Brian Plummer. The action scenes in the beginning of the film are really well done. Maybe a spoiler here so caution, the climatic fight scene at the end is less well done and because it is set in a hurricane a lot of it is blurry and hard to follow. It puts you in the setting of the weather but because the action is hand to hand you can really miss a lot of what is going on. It didn’t really work for me personally. The story started out really how I expected and followed the first films story of McCall helping out those who had no other options. This part felt very much like the first film but not redundant. However, it really slowed down when it got into the main story of the film. This part really seemed overly predictable and unoriginal. You, or rather I, could see how the entire movie was laid out and the inevitable conclusion with very few plot twist. This made pace of the film is tough for me. Really action packed at the beginning and then really slow drawn out drama in the middle.
On its own this film is an okay movie. One of many action/crime/mystery films that are made each year. It didn’t really do a good job of distinguishing itself from the rest of the genre. But fans of this type of movie can enjoy how it is heartfelt and warm at times and bloody and action packed at others. The end I discussed above I was not a fan of. Also there is the issue of when you compare it to the original film it really is lacking some key things that the made the first film a success. The villain in this film really leaves something to be desired while the first film had a pretty good antagonist. The pace of the first film was much better and the story flowed more naturally. Sometimes it is really hard to recreate something and I think this film falls way short.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Seeker (Seeker, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
I was honestly excited to read Arwen Elys Dayton's <i>Seeker</i>, as the idea seemed very promising and the book is set in Scotland and Hong Kong – a rarity in books. Simply put, I thought this would actually go quite well.
Let's face it: Dayton does have talent. The setting of Scotland is richly detailed to the point where it's as though you're there; the book is action-packed, page-turning (in the first part), and intriguing; and the characters seem to be <i>extremely</i> well-developed.
But here's the conclusion: <i>Seeker</i> had a lot of potential to be an amazing book, but somehow, in the execution of the book, something must have exploded and went horribly wrong (because I wouldn't have DNF it if it were THAT good).
The first chapter went pretty well, aside from the hefty load of information about the characters, the setting, and whatnot. Personally I don't mind it that much as long as I don't feel like I'm reading a textbook and reading unnecessary information like a character's weight (unless it pertains to the story).
The second chapter though... I had thoughts of DNFing because throughout the most of the chapter (if not the entire chapter), John wouldn't stop yapping about how he's had a crush on Quin since he first arrived on the Kincaid estate in Scotland, and his desire for her, blah blah blah – all in all, John is quite cringe-cheesy in the romance department. I could have sworn at one point there was going to be a scene that I would feel very awkward reading about and would absolutely hightail out of the book with my tail between my legs as soon it happened.
<blockquote>But she and John had daydreamed about camping trips across the river, or rooms in an inn somewhere, someday, when they would finally be able to give themselves to each other.</blockquote>
And here's the nutshell version of what happens later: John fails, he gets kicked out of training by Briac Kincaid, there's a centuries old power struggle between "houses." As a result, John decides to attack the Kincaid estate just to get an athame and he and Quin aren't even allies when that happens. All of the characters go on their separate ways or died in the process of the attack and we don't hear any of them make a peep aside from the love triangle (Quin, John, and Shinobu) since forever. Then, when Quin gets to Hong Kong, she chooses to lose all of her memories and doesn't remember anything from the last fifteen to sixteen years, Shinobu makes a living by searching for artifacts in Victoria Harbor with a dude named Brian and they spend their money from that on "drug bars" and looking like gangsters. Then John makes an appearance in Hong Kong and makes an attempt to win Quin's heart back after shooting her in the chest and nearly killing her during the attack in Scotland.
Tell me that isn't a bit questionable, because between the end of Part 1, the Interlude and Part 2, my brain got horribly scrambled and I became overly puzzled.
Simply put, <i>Seeker</i> didn't turn out well – it crashed and burned.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-arc-review-seeker-by-arwen-elys-dayton/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I was honestly excited to read Arwen Elys Dayton's <i>Seeker</i>, as the idea seemed very promising and the book is set in Scotland and Hong Kong – a rarity in books. Simply put, I thought this would actually go quite well.
Let's face it: Dayton does have talent. The setting of Scotland is richly detailed to the point where it's as though you're there; the book is action-packed, page-turning (in the first part), and intriguing; and the characters seem to be <i>extremely</i> well-developed.
But here's the conclusion: <i>Seeker</i> had a lot of potential to be an amazing book, but somehow, in the execution of the book, something must have exploded and went horribly wrong (because I wouldn't have DNF it if it were THAT good).
The first chapter went pretty well, aside from the hefty load of information about the characters, the setting, and whatnot. Personally I don't mind it that much as long as I don't feel like I'm reading a textbook and reading unnecessary information like a character's weight (unless it pertains to the story).
The second chapter though... I had thoughts of DNFing because throughout the most of the chapter (if not the entire chapter), John wouldn't stop yapping about how he's had a crush on Quin since he first arrived on the Kincaid estate in Scotland, and his desire for her, blah blah blah – all in all, John is quite cringe-cheesy in the romance department. I could have sworn at one point there was going to be a scene that I would feel very awkward reading about and would absolutely hightail out of the book with my tail between my legs as soon it happened.
<blockquote>But she and John had daydreamed about camping trips across the river, or rooms in an inn somewhere, someday, when they would finally be able to give themselves to each other.</blockquote>
And here's the nutshell version of what happens later: John fails, he gets kicked out of training by Briac Kincaid, there's a centuries old power struggle between "houses." As a result, John decides to attack the Kincaid estate just to get an athame and he and Quin aren't even allies when that happens. All of the characters go on their separate ways or died in the process of the attack and we don't hear any of them make a peep aside from the love triangle (Quin, John, and Shinobu) since forever. Then, when Quin gets to Hong Kong, she chooses to lose all of her memories and doesn't remember anything from the last fifteen to sixteen years, Shinobu makes a living by searching for artifacts in Victoria Harbor with a dude named Brian and they spend their money from that on "drug bars" and looking like gangsters. Then John makes an appearance in Hong Kong and makes an attempt to win Quin's heart back after shooting her in the chest and nearly killing her during the attack in Scotland.
Tell me that isn't a bit questionable, because between the end of Part 1, the Interlude and Part 2, my brain got horribly scrambled and I became overly puzzled.
Simply put, <i>Seeker</i> didn't turn out well – it crashed and burned.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-arc-review-seeker-by-arwen-elys-dayton/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
JT (287 KP) rated Fast & Furious 6 (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
I've been a fan of this franchise since the very first film, and while Tokyo Drift might have been a little blip, or bump in the road, there is no denying that the films have delivered box office success. Fast and Furious 6 is the second film to be left on a cliffhanger (we’ll get to that later) and delves deep into the story of the mystery surrounding Letty’s (Michelle Rodriguez) death a few films ago. I don’t regard that as a plot spoiler as it’s in the trailer. Having demolished most of Rio and now living peacefully in a country with no extradition Dom and new dad Brian think that they have put all their troubles behind them.
After the opening credits montage, agent Hobbs (Johnson) comes knocking. His offer requires all the team converge once again, this time they have to track down and capture a ruthless mercenary called Owen Shaw (Luke Evans). Hobbs and Toretto have to stand side by side working together to take down the villain. Letty of course has returned and is working for the bad guys but has no memory of her past life. If you’re a true fan then the plot will reveal more back story and as it turns out part six is practically a sequel to part four with past villains announcing a few home truths.
The film and action is set in the heart of London which, includes a car chase that defies belief, a ménage à trois of fist fights on the underground, shoot outs and a drag race that drifts through Piccadilly Circus. The action is pulsating and over the top but you shouldn’t care in the least about that. What were you expecting the film to do? Each vehicular sequence is more mind bending than the next.
Take the opening chase for example. A modified F1 style car pursued by Toretto and his crew as well as local police weaves its way through the streets with the ability to flip oncoming cars. Justin Lin who directed the last four films is well in control and more than happy to up the action.
Fast and Furious 6 is guilty of plot holes, but these will only be deconstructed by people who have nothing better to do. That said, even I was left wondering what distance the longest runway in the world was? There is a good level of humour with Tyrese Gibson’s Roman providing much of the light heartedness that the film needed. Let’s face it The Avengers had the same level of action and humour mixed and that seemed to work.
One of the dangers for this was having a cast that was pretty extensive, regrouping the team meant that there was jostling for position. But on the whole everyone has their time to shine and no one is really cast to the shadows. Evans does a good job as the main antagonist and Gina Carano also proves her worth after the abject Haywire a few years back.
Fast and Furious 7 takes place back in LA after the events of this film and has a teasing post credit sequence that will bait those fans to come back once again. James Wan steps into the directors chair for the seventh film switching from the comfort of the horror genre. I found Fast and Furious 6 to be a highly entertaining film, and you’ll need to check your brain in at the door. To quote a cliché it ‘does what it says on the tin’, and doesn’t take itself too seriously.
After the opening credits montage, agent Hobbs (Johnson) comes knocking. His offer requires all the team converge once again, this time they have to track down and capture a ruthless mercenary called Owen Shaw (Luke Evans). Hobbs and Toretto have to stand side by side working together to take down the villain. Letty of course has returned and is working for the bad guys but has no memory of her past life. If you’re a true fan then the plot will reveal more back story and as it turns out part six is practically a sequel to part four with past villains announcing a few home truths.
The film and action is set in the heart of London which, includes a car chase that defies belief, a ménage à trois of fist fights on the underground, shoot outs and a drag race that drifts through Piccadilly Circus. The action is pulsating and over the top but you shouldn’t care in the least about that. What were you expecting the film to do? Each vehicular sequence is more mind bending than the next.
Take the opening chase for example. A modified F1 style car pursued by Toretto and his crew as well as local police weaves its way through the streets with the ability to flip oncoming cars. Justin Lin who directed the last four films is well in control and more than happy to up the action.
Fast and Furious 6 is guilty of plot holes, but these will only be deconstructed by people who have nothing better to do. That said, even I was left wondering what distance the longest runway in the world was? There is a good level of humour with Tyrese Gibson’s Roman providing much of the light heartedness that the film needed. Let’s face it The Avengers had the same level of action and humour mixed and that seemed to work.
One of the dangers for this was having a cast that was pretty extensive, regrouping the team meant that there was jostling for position. But on the whole everyone has their time to shine and no one is really cast to the shadows. Evans does a good job as the main antagonist and Gina Carano also proves her worth after the abject Haywire a few years back.
Fast and Furious 7 takes place back in LA after the events of this film and has a teasing post credit sequence that will bait those fans to come back once again. James Wan steps into the directors chair for the seventh film switching from the comfort of the horror genre. I found Fast and Furious 6 to be a highly entertaining film, and you’ll need to check your brain in at the door. To quote a cliché it ‘does what it says on the tin’, and doesn’t take itself too seriously.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Knight of Cups (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I’ll just come out and say it … This movie for all it’s grandeur with its ensemble cast and it’s amazing photographic work and direction is something that should be shown at film festivals and in art house movie theaters and NOT your mainstream chain theaters. Someplace where you can order a meal and perhaps a glass of wine or a local ale. Why? If the movie has Christian Bale in its cast you know there’s going to be drama involved regardless of whether or not the movie itself is dramatic. THIS particular film is a drama that could be compared to something written by Shakespeare.
‘Knight Of Cups’ is a romantic drama written and directed by Terrence Malick and stars an ensemble cast including Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Antonio Banderas, Natalie Portman, Brian Dennehy, Armin Muller-Stahl, Isabel Lucas, Freida Pinto, Wes Bentley, Imogen Poots, Teresa Palmer, and Peter Matthiessen.
“Once there was a young prince whose father, the king of the East, sent him down into Egypt to find a pearl. But when the prince arrived, the people poured him a cup. Drinking it, he forgot he was the son of a king, forgot about the pearl and fell into a deep sleep.”
Rick (Bale) is a successful writer born into a powerful family in L.A. The son of Joseph (Dennehy) and brother to Barry (Bently). After the lose of a second brother as well as his mother, Rick becomes disillusioned and loses himself in the excesses found in the ‘City Of Angles’ and nearby Las Vegas. Along this aimless journey he encounters 6 different women Nancy (Blanchett) a doctor, Elizabeth (Portman) a married woman, Helen (Pinto), Isabel (Lucas), Karen (Palmer), and Della (Poots) looking to form some sort of bond or connection. Perhaps even to discover love only to encounter more lose. He wanders from cities, to beaches, then from mountains to deserts. Searching for something meaningful, some purpose all the while trying to hold what remains of his family and his own sanity together and along the way encounters a cast of colorful characters who have their own ideas about life and their own views on how he should live his.
This film was pretty much Malick’s attempt at making an art film with a large budget and a star studded cast. That’s just the thing. He succeeded and it was just too much. From a technical standpoint, it was wonderfully directed with its landscapes and ‘not-the-norm’ angles and close-ups but it simultaneously took away from the people and the story. It was almost as though they were trying to combine a film on the Discovery Channel with a drama. The film was two minutes shy of 2 hours long. Had the director been able to shave 20 minutes from it, then I could see it given a limited run in major theaters. I have to give kudos to the actors and actresses who were on top of their game which made the film worth sitting through once. The film is rated R for scenes of violence, nudity, and language. If you’re enduring one of those days where you just need to disappear and NOT communicate with anyone for a while, go see this movie. It’s runtime and complexity will help take your mind off your troubles. I’d highly recommend though that you save the film for viewing at home. I’ll give this film 3 out of 5 stars.
‘Knight Of Cups’ is a romantic drama written and directed by Terrence Malick and stars an ensemble cast including Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Antonio Banderas, Natalie Portman, Brian Dennehy, Armin Muller-Stahl, Isabel Lucas, Freida Pinto, Wes Bentley, Imogen Poots, Teresa Palmer, and Peter Matthiessen.
“Once there was a young prince whose father, the king of the East, sent him down into Egypt to find a pearl. But when the prince arrived, the people poured him a cup. Drinking it, he forgot he was the son of a king, forgot about the pearl and fell into a deep sleep.”
Rick (Bale) is a successful writer born into a powerful family in L.A. The son of Joseph (Dennehy) and brother to Barry (Bently). After the lose of a second brother as well as his mother, Rick becomes disillusioned and loses himself in the excesses found in the ‘City Of Angles’ and nearby Las Vegas. Along this aimless journey he encounters 6 different women Nancy (Blanchett) a doctor, Elizabeth (Portman) a married woman, Helen (Pinto), Isabel (Lucas), Karen (Palmer), and Della (Poots) looking to form some sort of bond or connection. Perhaps even to discover love only to encounter more lose. He wanders from cities, to beaches, then from mountains to deserts. Searching for something meaningful, some purpose all the while trying to hold what remains of his family and his own sanity together and along the way encounters a cast of colorful characters who have their own ideas about life and their own views on how he should live his.
This film was pretty much Malick’s attempt at making an art film with a large budget and a star studded cast. That’s just the thing. He succeeded and it was just too much. From a technical standpoint, it was wonderfully directed with its landscapes and ‘not-the-norm’ angles and close-ups but it simultaneously took away from the people and the story. It was almost as though they were trying to combine a film on the Discovery Channel with a drama. The film was two minutes shy of 2 hours long. Had the director been able to shave 20 minutes from it, then I could see it given a limited run in major theaters. I have to give kudos to the actors and actresses who were on top of their game which made the film worth sitting through once. The film is rated R for scenes of violence, nudity, and language. If you’re enduring one of those days where you just need to disappear and NOT communicate with anyone for a while, go see this movie. It’s runtime and complexity will help take your mind off your troubles. I’d highly recommend though that you save the film for viewing at home. I’ll give this film 3 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated A Walk Among the Tombstones (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
A Walk Among the Tombstones stars Liam Neeson as former cop, and former alcoholic, Matthew Scudder in this adaptation of the tenth novel in Lawrence Block’s long-running series. Set in 1999, amid the Y2K scare, Scudder operates just outside of the law as an unlicensed private investigator. Approached by a fellow AA member, he is tasked with finding the men responsible for kidnapping and murdering the wife of a local drug trafficker. Along the way, he receives help from homeless teen T.J. (played, with admirable restraint in a role easy to overdo, by newcomer Brian ‘Astro’ Bradley) and discovers that the two men he is investigating have killed before, and will do so again.
This is exactly the type of movie that I find myself drawn to, a brooding, hard-edged film-noir, but what stops me from enjoying it more and rating it higher is that right from the opening frames, Tombstones, unlike last year’s Prisoners, which defied all my expectations, doesn’t strive to do anything more than to satisfy the requirements of its genre and lean heavily on the performance of its lead.
That being said, it is another fantastic performance from Neeson and, still sporting that questionable American accent, he brings real weight to the character of Scudder. Don’t expect to see a tour-de-force the likes of Denzel Washington battling alcoholism in Flight, but it is refreshing to see these types of characters humanized and played straight in roles that have previously been over-the-top and laughably romanticized.
Another highlight is the relationship between Scudder and T.J, something that from the outset seems a cliché and had the potential to detract from the plot, it is however surprisingly well-constructed. One scene in particular between them is a stand-out as we see Scudder’s reaction to finding out that T.J. has been carrying a presumably stolen firearm. I will refrain from ruining the punchline, but it is a rare piece of frank dialogue and is deservedly shocking in its delivery.
Where A Walk Among the Tombstones unfortunately falls short is in its lack of subtlety, through a heavy-handed score and, more importantly, a bloated running time. More times than I would have liked, I found myself asking, “Is this scene necessary, or relevant?” Less would have been so much more, especially in the case of the two antagonists, who are set up as being formidable psychopaths for our anti-hero, they are instantly deflated through a single moment that depicts the normality of what we assume is their morning routine. Though it’s not unheard of that the most violent of criminals lead ordinary lives, the tongue-in-cheek nature of the scene does nothing to intensify the fear and dread we are supposed to feel toward these men.
Fans of Liam Neeson should be pleased, but what we’re given here is a solid first act and dialogue that ranges from good to great, but ultimately a predictable, over-long, paint-by-numbers effort. Sure, it hits all the right notes atmospherically, but I can’t expect that it will be more or less memorable than any of the other recent thriller entries in Neeson’s oeuvre (anyone remember 2011’s Unknown?). Between this and knowing that a third Taken is on the way, I now find myself longing for another great dramatic turn from him along the lines of Five Minutes of Heaven, or Kinsey.
This is exactly the type of movie that I find myself drawn to, a brooding, hard-edged film-noir, but what stops me from enjoying it more and rating it higher is that right from the opening frames, Tombstones, unlike last year’s Prisoners, which defied all my expectations, doesn’t strive to do anything more than to satisfy the requirements of its genre and lean heavily on the performance of its lead.
That being said, it is another fantastic performance from Neeson and, still sporting that questionable American accent, he brings real weight to the character of Scudder. Don’t expect to see a tour-de-force the likes of Denzel Washington battling alcoholism in Flight, but it is refreshing to see these types of characters humanized and played straight in roles that have previously been over-the-top and laughably romanticized.
Another highlight is the relationship between Scudder and T.J, something that from the outset seems a cliché and had the potential to detract from the plot, it is however surprisingly well-constructed. One scene in particular between them is a stand-out as we see Scudder’s reaction to finding out that T.J. has been carrying a presumably stolen firearm. I will refrain from ruining the punchline, but it is a rare piece of frank dialogue and is deservedly shocking in its delivery.
Where A Walk Among the Tombstones unfortunately falls short is in its lack of subtlety, through a heavy-handed score and, more importantly, a bloated running time. More times than I would have liked, I found myself asking, “Is this scene necessary, or relevant?” Less would have been so much more, especially in the case of the two antagonists, who are set up as being formidable psychopaths for our anti-hero, they are instantly deflated through a single moment that depicts the normality of what we assume is their morning routine. Though it’s not unheard of that the most violent of criminals lead ordinary lives, the tongue-in-cheek nature of the scene does nothing to intensify the fear and dread we are supposed to feel toward these men.
Fans of Liam Neeson should be pleased, but what we’re given here is a solid first act and dialogue that ranges from good to great, but ultimately a predictable, over-long, paint-by-numbers effort. Sure, it hits all the right notes atmospherically, but I can’t expect that it will be more or less memorable than any of the other recent thriller entries in Neeson’s oeuvre (anyone remember 2011’s Unknown?). Between this and knowing that a third Taken is on the way, I now find myself longing for another great dramatic turn from him along the lines of Five Minutes of Heaven, or Kinsey.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Earth to Echo (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Earth to Echo really excited me when I first heard about it. The premise reminded me of movies of my youth, such as Goonies, E.T.: Extra Terrestrial and Explorers. In fact, Echo actually seems like a mix of these three movies, which made me even more excited about it.
Earth to Echo sees three childhood friends Alex (Teo Halm), Tuck (Brian “Astro” Bradley) and Munch (Reese Hartwig) as they deal with moving away from each other because their neighborhood is being torn down to make way for a new freeway. Shortly before the final move date, something weird starts happening to their phones, and it turns out that a map is being fed into them. On their last night together as a group, they decide to pursue the map, not knowing the great adventure they have waiting for them, or the dangers that lie ahead. Of course, without any spoilers that are not already in the commercials/trailers, they find an alien life-form in a small owl-like creature. The creature is hurt and trying to get off planet, and the kids decide to help.
Overall the main story-arch of Echo was great. While a little unbelievable in this day and age that an established neighborhood is going to be uprooted for a new freeway (at least to me), the story was solid and things are not exactly as they seem. All three boys, and a love interest Emma (Ella Wahlestedt) did an excellent job in their performances, and you forget that the actors are actually the age of the children they are portraying. The visual effects were awesome, and the score was spot-on. The film was very enjoyable and knocked it out of the park in these aspects.
Now, this movie unfortunately suffers from its cinematography. The movie is viewed through cameras that are “controlled” by the characters themselves. Think Chronicle. Tuck is the camera-fanatic of the group and we see the adventures of the friends through his GoPro camera, spy glasses and handheld camcorder, as well as through the cell phones of the various characters. There is nothing wrong with this method of filming, and in fact could have worked really well, especially as it does play into the plot with our little alien friend. However, this filming technique was not used appropriately. There was just way too much “shaky-cam”. In fact, every single person in my party became nauseated by the overuse of the film style. While two in my group were able to overcome the sick feeling, the rest of us could not shake it. There are several things that could have happened on our part to prevent this (i.e., sitting farther back in the theater), but many will not know this going in and it could be a bane to their movie-going experience.
It really is too bad that the camera-work had this much effect on the film. As I said, overall it was a very enjoyable movie. My suggestion is to sit toward the back of the theater, or even just wait until it comes out on Blu-ray/DVD/Digital. I think that being able to see it on a smaller screen, or sitting in the back of theater, will allow you to frame the film and not be so submersed into it. This will prevent the nausea that my party, as well as other moviegoers I heard expressing the same concern. I will definitely be picking it up when it is released for purchase, despite my experience in the theater.
Earth to Echo sees three childhood friends Alex (Teo Halm), Tuck (Brian “Astro” Bradley) and Munch (Reese Hartwig) as they deal with moving away from each other because their neighborhood is being torn down to make way for a new freeway. Shortly before the final move date, something weird starts happening to their phones, and it turns out that a map is being fed into them. On their last night together as a group, they decide to pursue the map, not knowing the great adventure they have waiting for them, or the dangers that lie ahead. Of course, without any spoilers that are not already in the commercials/trailers, they find an alien life-form in a small owl-like creature. The creature is hurt and trying to get off planet, and the kids decide to help.
Overall the main story-arch of Echo was great. While a little unbelievable in this day and age that an established neighborhood is going to be uprooted for a new freeway (at least to me), the story was solid and things are not exactly as they seem. All three boys, and a love interest Emma (Ella Wahlestedt) did an excellent job in their performances, and you forget that the actors are actually the age of the children they are portraying. The visual effects were awesome, and the score was spot-on. The film was very enjoyable and knocked it out of the park in these aspects.
Now, this movie unfortunately suffers from its cinematography. The movie is viewed through cameras that are “controlled” by the characters themselves. Think Chronicle. Tuck is the camera-fanatic of the group and we see the adventures of the friends through his GoPro camera, spy glasses and handheld camcorder, as well as through the cell phones of the various characters. There is nothing wrong with this method of filming, and in fact could have worked really well, especially as it does play into the plot with our little alien friend. However, this filming technique was not used appropriately. There was just way too much “shaky-cam”. In fact, every single person in my party became nauseated by the overuse of the film style. While two in my group were able to overcome the sick feeling, the rest of us could not shake it. There are several things that could have happened on our part to prevent this (i.e., sitting farther back in the theater), but many will not know this going in and it could be a bane to their movie-going experience.
It really is too bad that the camera-work had this much effect on the film. As I said, overall it was a very enjoyable movie. My suggestion is to sit toward the back of the theater, or even just wait until it comes out on Blu-ray/DVD/Digital. I think that being able to see it on a smaller screen, or sitting in the back of theater, will allow you to frame the film and not be so submersed into it. This will prevent the nausea that my party, as well as other moviegoers I heard expressing the same concern. I will definitely be picking it up when it is released for purchase, despite my experience in the theater.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Fast & Furious 6 (2013) in Movies
Feb 22, 2020
Flying...Headbutt
The gang is back in Fast & Furious 6 to take down a group of criminals led by someone that was once their own…I gotta tell you, after I watched this movie, my inner me clapped. Not because this was a phenomenal movie, but because director Justin Lin got a legit grasp on what this franchise is supposed to be. Sure it’s action and car chases, rinse and repeat, but I think that was taken way too seriously in the previous five movies. I mean, serious to the point of being flat-out obnoxious. In this sixth installment, Lin embraces the craziness of it all and plays on it, makes it bigger and more ridiculous at times. Seeing this put a smile on my face and made me think this franchise, with however many movies it has left, just might have some legs afterall. Clearly I feel some kind of way as this is the longest Intro I’ve written in a long time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
If you’ve seen one of these beginnings, you’ve seen them all. There’s not much new under the sun here but it’s definitely better than average. I’ve seen worse starts, I’ll just say that.
Characters: 10
Ok, so these guys are not going to wow you with their exponential growth throughout the movie, but they’re still fun characters. Dom, Letty, Brian…when you see them all together, you get a real sense of what they are going for: really creating a family-like atmosphere. These guys have been through hell and back together and you can’t help but feel connected to them at this sixth installment. Roman (Tyrese Gibson) is just the best. His comedic timing can be everything in a scene and he’s a blast to watch. His character is literally there for a charm effect and you know what? It works.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 7
Here’s what makes this movie entertaining: The absolute ridiculousness of it all. After seeing Dom singlehandedly lift a car and snidely joke about it, nothing surprises me anymore about these movies. Also two words for you: Flying Headbutt. You’ll thank me later.
Memorability: 7
As always, there are some extremely fun car chases scattered throughout the movie, including one involving a big airplane stunt. Not bad as action movies go. And also: Flying Headbutt.
Pace: 7
Plot: 4
These stories will never be nominated for any type of major awards, that’s no secret. The plans are completely improbable, the bad guys usually over-the-top ridiculous, and the story is a rollercoaster of keeping things interesting. And why the hell does the GOVERNMENT keep calling on these clowns to save the world? Seriously! Just put your expectations aside of finding any plausible story and just enjoy the damn movie.
Resolution: 10
Once the Flying Headbutt (yes, that’s my third mention) happens, it’s all downhill from there. However, the movie does wrap nicely and gives me a sense of completion for the story. It ended with me thinking, “You know, I could probably stomach one more of these.”
Overall: 78
Based on my previous experience with this franchise, I was really surprised by my level of enjoyment for Fast & Furious 6. It’s not a movie I would put on if I had multiple choices, but it’s a movie I could have on in the background as I’m working on my scripts. This franchise is growing…even if its characters aren’t.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
If you’ve seen one of these beginnings, you’ve seen them all. There’s not much new under the sun here but it’s definitely better than average. I’ve seen worse starts, I’ll just say that.
Characters: 10
Ok, so these guys are not going to wow you with their exponential growth throughout the movie, but they’re still fun characters. Dom, Letty, Brian…when you see them all together, you get a real sense of what they are going for: really creating a family-like atmosphere. These guys have been through hell and back together and you can’t help but feel connected to them at this sixth installment. Roman (Tyrese Gibson) is just the best. His comedic timing can be everything in a scene and he’s a blast to watch. His character is literally there for a charm effect and you know what? It works.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 7
Here’s what makes this movie entertaining: The absolute ridiculousness of it all. After seeing Dom singlehandedly lift a car and snidely joke about it, nothing surprises me anymore about these movies. Also two words for you: Flying Headbutt. You’ll thank me later.
Memorability: 7
As always, there are some extremely fun car chases scattered throughout the movie, including one involving a big airplane stunt. Not bad as action movies go. And also: Flying Headbutt.
Pace: 7
Plot: 4
These stories will never be nominated for any type of major awards, that’s no secret. The plans are completely improbable, the bad guys usually over-the-top ridiculous, and the story is a rollercoaster of keeping things interesting. And why the hell does the GOVERNMENT keep calling on these clowns to save the world? Seriously! Just put your expectations aside of finding any plausible story and just enjoy the damn movie.
Resolution: 10
Once the Flying Headbutt (yes, that’s my third mention) happens, it’s all downhill from there. However, the movie does wrap nicely and gives me a sense of completion for the story. It ended with me thinking, “You know, I could probably stomach one more of these.”
Overall: 78
Based on my previous experience with this franchise, I was really surprised by my level of enjoyment for Fast & Furious 6. It’s not a movie I would put on if I had multiple choices, but it’s a movie I could have on in the background as I’m working on my scripts. This franchise is growing…even if its characters aren’t.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Untouchables (1987) in Movies
Dec 16, 2020 (Updated Dec 16, 2020)
A little melodramatic
(not) Film #7 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: The Untouchables
As with most of the films on this list, The Untouchables is a film that has garnered a great deal of acclaim over the years, and yet if I’ve ever seen it, I’m ashamed to admit that I don’t remember it.
The Untouchables (1987) was directed by Brian De Palma and stars Kevin Costner as Eliot Ness, a treasury agent who recruits a group of fellow cops and agents to take down mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) in Prohibition-era Chicago, with Ness and his agents soon becoming known as the “untouchables” after refusing large bribes. Sean Connery, Andy Garcia and Charles Martin Smith make up the rest of the Untouchables.
An American gangster film is a dime a dozen, there have been countless over the years and the 1920s and 30s are always featured fairly heavily, no doubt due to the large number of criminal gangs and mobsters around in that era. Personally whilst The Untouchables is a good film, I don’t think there’s a lot in this to make it particularly notable or outstanding above any of the others. It’s engaging and interesting, which it should be considering the subject matter – it is based on a true story after all. The entire production looks great too; the sets, costumes and locations are very well done and definitely look the part.
The issue with The Untouchables is it’s too melodramatic, too over the top and clichéd. This isn’t helped by Ennio Morricone’s score, which feels far too heavy handed, cheesy and out of place for the scenes. Even the open title credits is ridiculously over dramatic. You can definitely tell this film was made in the 80s and I’m afraid that’s not a good thing. There’s also some questionable acting from Kevin Costner, and while admittedly I’ve never been a big fan of his, the script and some of the almost cringeworthy scenes with Ness’s wife don’t help matters. And De Niro’s Capone pops up in scenes that feel rather random and forced during the first hour, and seem completely out of place with the rest of the story.
Despite this, The Untouchables is still fairly enjoyable and this is mostly due to Sean Connery’s Malone, the role that he won his only Oscar for. The Irishman, despite sounding very Scottish, injects some much needed heart, humour and spirit into the film and without him, this would have been a very lacklustre film indeed. Even Connery’s horrific Irish accent is a source of amusement, and without the character having been described as Irish, I would’ve just assumed he was Scottish.
Overall, I found The Untouchables to be a decent and entertaining gangster film as long as you can ignore the melodramatic overtones. But I’m not convinced that it’s anything memorable or above average, and if it even deserves a place on this list.
Update: So after having watched this film and headed to my Bucket List to scratch it off, I realised that the film on this list is actually The Intouchables, a French film from 2012 also known as Untouchable. Oops. So I’m afraid The Untouchables isn’t number 7 ticked off my bucket list after all 😆
As with most of the films on this list, The Untouchables is a film that has garnered a great deal of acclaim over the years, and yet if I’ve ever seen it, I’m ashamed to admit that I don’t remember it.
The Untouchables (1987) was directed by Brian De Palma and stars Kevin Costner as Eliot Ness, a treasury agent who recruits a group of fellow cops and agents to take down mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) in Prohibition-era Chicago, with Ness and his agents soon becoming known as the “untouchables” after refusing large bribes. Sean Connery, Andy Garcia and Charles Martin Smith make up the rest of the Untouchables.
An American gangster film is a dime a dozen, there have been countless over the years and the 1920s and 30s are always featured fairly heavily, no doubt due to the large number of criminal gangs and mobsters around in that era. Personally whilst The Untouchables is a good film, I don’t think there’s a lot in this to make it particularly notable or outstanding above any of the others. It’s engaging and interesting, which it should be considering the subject matter – it is based on a true story after all. The entire production looks great too; the sets, costumes and locations are very well done and definitely look the part.
The issue with The Untouchables is it’s too melodramatic, too over the top and clichéd. This isn’t helped by Ennio Morricone’s score, which feels far too heavy handed, cheesy and out of place for the scenes. Even the open title credits is ridiculously over dramatic. You can definitely tell this film was made in the 80s and I’m afraid that’s not a good thing. There’s also some questionable acting from Kevin Costner, and while admittedly I’ve never been a big fan of his, the script and some of the almost cringeworthy scenes with Ness’s wife don’t help matters. And De Niro’s Capone pops up in scenes that feel rather random and forced during the first hour, and seem completely out of place with the rest of the story.
Despite this, The Untouchables is still fairly enjoyable and this is mostly due to Sean Connery’s Malone, the role that he won his only Oscar for. The Irishman, despite sounding very Scottish, injects some much needed heart, humour and spirit into the film and without him, this would have been a very lacklustre film indeed. Even Connery’s horrific Irish accent is a source of amusement, and without the character having been described as Irish, I would’ve just assumed he was Scottish.
Overall, I found The Untouchables to be a decent and entertaining gangster film as long as you can ignore the melodramatic overtones. But I’m not convinced that it’s anything memorable or above average, and if it even deserves a place on this list.
Update: So after having watched this film and headed to my Bucket List to scratch it off, I realised that the film on this list is actually The Intouchables, a French film from 2012 also known as Untouchable. Oops. So I’m afraid The Untouchables isn’t number 7 ticked off my bucket list after all 😆
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated King of Thieves (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I'd been on the fence about this one. The trailer King Of Thieves looked both good and bad in equal measures. Some of the clips they used weren't even particularly good when you saw them in the context of the whole films so I have no idea how they made it into such an important cut. Since seeing the Unlimited Screening I've seen the second trailer that is actually much better than the first. It's probably a god send that I didn't see it before the film otherwise I think I'd have been even more disappointed.
The film runs at a surprisingly short 1 hour 48 minutes, but don't worry, it feels like a lot longer than that. At one point I checked my phone for the time and nearly audibly swore (which probably would have been drowned out by the swearing of the film) about there being 20 minutes to go.
The idea is a great one, and the true life story behind it gives some opportunities for hilariously comedic moments, and yet somehow nothing was really fulfilled. I laughed a little, but I really didn't find it as amusing as some of the other cinema goers. The were a couple of voices in the darkness who were laughing hard that then set of a tiny ripple of tittering. I'm glad they enjoyed it so much, but I didn't once feel the need to laugh so hard.
Looking back on it I was left wondering something... did any of the police characters actually speak? The only things I remember were screamed words while arrests were made and lots of knowing looks and satisfied grins. Honestly can't remember any lines at all. I'm thinking they hired the main line-up and went "well that blew the acting budget, better cut all the other speaking parts."
Something that bugged me slightly was the use of spliced footage from the actor's younger days. It's a nice idea, but ultimately, when it was used undermined the message at the end of the film. Brian doesn't want them to be seen as old boys who are past their prime, so the film should have let them walk off to their sunset retirement not jumble it up with their younger selves and losing that moment between them all. It would have made perfect sense having the footage mixed into the scenes where the police were uncovering their identities and piecing the case together.
That line up was indeed fantastic, and that's why this film was so disappointing to me. All of them have done much better work than this. The script, or real lack thereof is what contributed the most to this let down. I'm not really sure that it should have two stars at all. In fact, no... *I'm revoking one of them, I've just been reading my criteria and I can't let it have two. ★☆☆☆☆ The story behind it and the cast potential don't make up for this lacklustre film.
What should you do?
There are some good scenes and a truly star studded cast, but even those don't really make up for the potential that this film squandered. If you like heist movies then it might be worth a watch but I feel like there are better ones out there to see.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All that loot, obviously!
The film runs at a surprisingly short 1 hour 48 minutes, but don't worry, it feels like a lot longer than that. At one point I checked my phone for the time and nearly audibly swore (which probably would have been drowned out by the swearing of the film) about there being 20 minutes to go.
The idea is a great one, and the true life story behind it gives some opportunities for hilariously comedic moments, and yet somehow nothing was really fulfilled. I laughed a little, but I really didn't find it as amusing as some of the other cinema goers. The were a couple of voices in the darkness who were laughing hard that then set of a tiny ripple of tittering. I'm glad they enjoyed it so much, but I didn't once feel the need to laugh so hard.
Looking back on it I was left wondering something... did any of the police characters actually speak? The only things I remember were screamed words while arrests were made and lots of knowing looks and satisfied grins. Honestly can't remember any lines at all. I'm thinking they hired the main line-up and went "well that blew the acting budget, better cut all the other speaking parts."
Something that bugged me slightly was the use of spliced footage from the actor's younger days. It's a nice idea, but ultimately, when it was used undermined the message at the end of the film. Brian doesn't want them to be seen as old boys who are past their prime, so the film should have let them walk off to their sunset retirement not jumble it up with their younger selves and losing that moment between them all. It would have made perfect sense having the footage mixed into the scenes where the police were uncovering their identities and piecing the case together.
That line up was indeed fantastic, and that's why this film was so disappointing to me. All of them have done much better work than this. The script, or real lack thereof is what contributed the most to this let down. I'm not really sure that it should have two stars at all. In fact, no... *I'm revoking one of them, I've just been reading my criteria and I can't let it have two. ★☆☆☆☆ The story behind it and the cast potential don't make up for this lacklustre film.
What should you do?
There are some good scenes and a truly star studded cast, but even those don't really make up for the potential that this film squandered. If you like heist movies then it might be worth a watch but I feel like there are better ones out there to see.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All that loot, obviously!