Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
“Fame and fortune and everything that goes with it”.
Sometimes a trailer generates a bit of a buzz of excitement with a cinema audience and the first showings of the trailer for “Bohemian Rhapsody” was a case in point. But would the film live up to the potential?
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Videodrome: Days of O'Blivion in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book from the author in exchange for an honest review</i>
Written as a prequel to David Cronenberg’s horror film, Lee McGeorge explores the potential scenario that led up to the surrealist events in <i>Videodrome</i>. This short story is more science fiction than horror in nature as it only builds up the background and setting to the point in which the film begins.
<i>Days of O’Blivion</i>, as well as the original film, is set during the cold war between the US and USSR. It is a period of time threatened with atomic weapons of mass destruction, and the competition to create the most superior technology. In this particular scenario, two men: Professor Brian Olivier and his friend Barry have been experimenting with special television technology resulting in interesting outcomes. Their product, which they name <i>Veraceo</i> –a compound of Veracity and Video –, has the ability to make everyone believe what they are seeing on screen to be true. This could be a big boon to advertising establishments, however cause dire consequences if found in the wrong hands, i.e. communists.
Readers, including those unfamiliar with the film, should be able to ascertain several problems this technological advancement could pose, making it all the more foreboding when an unknown but powerful company pays out thousands of dollars to become partners with Brian and Barry. What makes it all the more ominous is Brian’s hesitancy in accepting the offer in contrast with Barry’s excitement. As the technology is adapted further it becomes clear that they are dealing with very dangerous concepts and people – hallucinations being only the smallest of side affects.
Although Lee McGeorge is using an already existing story, he makes this prequel his own by exploring the hows and whys <i>Veraceo</i> came to be developed. His narrative is accurate in terms of the way it builds up to coincide with the film script without damaging or giving new meaning to Cronenberg’s original storyline.
Although not horror as in scary, <i>Days of O’Blivion</i> contains many horrific scenes. Most of these are pornographic in nature and rather disturbing, particularly more so as the story progresses – something that lessened the general enjoyment of the book. The overall nature of the book (and film, probably) may appeal more towards a male market, particularly those with a less delicate temperament.
As with his previous books, which also incorporate pre-existing ideas, Lee McGeorge writes well in a way that engages the reader and even interests those without prior knowledge of the subject. There is also additional digital content alongside this book. Those lucky enough to own a paper back copy will be able to access these using an NFC enabled device.
Written as a prequel to David Cronenberg’s horror film, Lee McGeorge explores the potential scenario that led up to the surrealist events in <i>Videodrome</i>. This short story is more science fiction than horror in nature as it only builds up the background and setting to the point in which the film begins.
<i>Days of O’Blivion</i>, as well as the original film, is set during the cold war between the US and USSR. It is a period of time threatened with atomic weapons of mass destruction, and the competition to create the most superior technology. In this particular scenario, two men: Professor Brian Olivier and his friend Barry have been experimenting with special television technology resulting in interesting outcomes. Their product, which they name <i>Veraceo</i> –a compound of Veracity and Video –, has the ability to make everyone believe what they are seeing on screen to be true. This could be a big boon to advertising establishments, however cause dire consequences if found in the wrong hands, i.e. communists.
Readers, including those unfamiliar with the film, should be able to ascertain several problems this technological advancement could pose, making it all the more foreboding when an unknown but powerful company pays out thousands of dollars to become partners with Brian and Barry. What makes it all the more ominous is Brian’s hesitancy in accepting the offer in contrast with Barry’s excitement. As the technology is adapted further it becomes clear that they are dealing with very dangerous concepts and people – hallucinations being only the smallest of side affects.
Although Lee McGeorge is using an already existing story, he makes this prequel his own by exploring the hows and whys <i>Veraceo</i> came to be developed. His narrative is accurate in terms of the way it builds up to coincide with the film script without damaging or giving new meaning to Cronenberg’s original storyline.
Although not horror as in scary, <i>Days of O’Blivion</i> contains many horrific scenes. Most of these are pornographic in nature and rather disturbing, particularly more so as the story progresses – something that lessened the general enjoyment of the book. The overall nature of the book (and film, probably) may appeal more towards a male market, particularly those with a less delicate temperament.
As with his previous books, which also incorporate pre-existing ideas, Lee McGeorge writes well in a way that engages the reader and even interests those without prior knowledge of the subject. There is also additional digital content alongside this book. Those lucky enough to own a paper back copy will be able to access these using an NFC enabled device.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
How many of these reviews are going to start with “Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?” A lot I am willing to bet. The thing is, it’s a good way to start. Bohemian Rhapsody has been a highly anticipated film for many years. I remember back when they were considering Johnny Depp for Freddie Mercury. Then it was Sasha Baren Cohen. And then they announced Rami Malek, and a majority of the country went, “Who?” Rami Malek is mostly known for his work as the lead in the USA Network series Mr. Robot. He got his start in the Night at the Museum series, and has scene big screen time in Need for Speed and, most recently, Papillion alongside Charlie Hunnam. I think it’s safe to say that after November 2, 2018, people will definitely know who he is.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Wolves of Savin Hill (2014) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
The indie movie, The Wolves of Savin Hill is a very fine directorial debut for John Beaton Hill. He also wrote this story where sentimentalities and brutality clash between two best friends who have lost touch over the years. In their youth, they made a promise youth that now haunts them as they are adults. In what results is a trial of what’s left of their friendship. In how this film treats the subject matter is like that of silent lucidity.
In what they have become, Tom (David Cooley) stayed in Boston only to grow up to be an alcoholic troublemaker and Sean (Brian Scannell) relocated to Los Angeles with Tom’s sister Emily to eventually work the beat as a cop with an axe to grind. Anyone who tries to mess with him often got the end of the stick. But when Emily is found dead and news reaches home, Tom goes to LA to confront Sean. The web of deceit he finds himself in is more than he can handle.
Cooley and Scannel deliver strong performances. The plot only gets stranger at every succeeding moment, and the draw this film creates gets viewers invested into wanting to understand the psyche of each of these leading men. Hill crafted a nicely enticing film that wraps two time periods together to reveal the darkest nature of what friends are willing to do for each other. The flashbacks are far more interesting than the now.
To reveal anymore information will only spoil the causality of how these two have to contend with each other. When this film hits more festivals, viewers can discover for themselves in what human nature means according to this filmmaker. The hills have eyes and what he sees may not be necessarily good.
In what they have become, Tom (David Cooley) stayed in Boston only to grow up to be an alcoholic troublemaker and Sean (Brian Scannell) relocated to Los Angeles with Tom’s sister Emily to eventually work the beat as a cop with an axe to grind. Anyone who tries to mess with him often got the end of the stick. But when Emily is found dead and news reaches home, Tom goes to LA to confront Sean. The web of deceit he finds himself in is more than he can handle.
Cooley and Scannel deliver strong performances. The plot only gets stranger at every succeeding moment, and the draw this film creates gets viewers invested into wanting to understand the psyche of each of these leading men. Hill crafted a nicely enticing film that wraps two time periods together to reveal the darkest nature of what friends are willing to do for each other. The flashbacks are far more interesting than the now.
To reveal anymore information will only spoil the causality of how these two have to contend with each other. When this film hits more festivals, viewers can discover for themselves in what human nature means according to this filmmaker. The hills have eyes and what he sees may not be necessarily good.
Dakotah Salazar (12 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Jul 1, 2019
Good Kills (1 more)
Good Doll Design
Slasher Cliches (1 more)
Predictable
A.I. Chucky reborn in a tech savvy world.
As Chucky embarks into a new century, the filmmakers realize that it was time to make Chucky into artificial intelligence. In previous films, there was always a sense of witchcraft going on where it made Chucky come to life. This makes more sense of making Chucky as a Amazon Alexa type of technology. A Buddi of sorts.
They cleverly weave that into the depth of where Chucky's madness is taking over him. In how it started was a little far fetched. A guy decided to break the rules at his job because of poor working conditions and a over the top douche of a boss. It was mishandled how it happened.
I think that Aubrey Plaza, Gabriel Bateman, and Brian Tyree Howard are amazing in this movie. They really sell the world that was created for them, especially Bateman who is tortured by Chucky's antics.
As for the doll design, I think it looked really good. There are moments where rendering in the CGI was needed, but overall, it looked amazing in some scenes. I specifically remember the moment where Bateman is walking Chucky into his room and the way his facial expressions are used makes him weirdly human, and that increases the creepy factor within Chucky.
As for the negatives, it follows the typical ground plan of every slasher, especially Child's Play movies. Mom's boyfriend is a douche. Mom doesn't believe her son. Friends believe Andy. Nice cop who lives with mother may be the knight in shining armor. We can see where this is going, and it also takes a while for Chucky to actually kill something. It panders too much and I think they could've had more potential with the horror.
They cleverly weave that into the depth of where Chucky's madness is taking over him. In how it started was a little far fetched. A guy decided to break the rules at his job because of poor working conditions and a over the top douche of a boss. It was mishandled how it happened.
I think that Aubrey Plaza, Gabriel Bateman, and Brian Tyree Howard are amazing in this movie. They really sell the world that was created for them, especially Bateman who is tortured by Chucky's antics.
As for the doll design, I think it looked really good. There are moments where rendering in the CGI was needed, but overall, it looked amazing in some scenes. I specifically remember the moment where Bateman is walking Chucky into his room and the way his facial expressions are used makes him weirdly human, and that increases the creepy factor within Chucky.
As for the negatives, it follows the typical ground plan of every slasher, especially Child's Play movies. Mom's boyfriend is a douche. Mom doesn't believe her son. Friends believe Andy. Nice cop who lives with mother may be the knight in shining armor. We can see where this is going, and it also takes a while for Chucky to actually kill something. It panders too much and I think they could've had more potential with the horror.
Edgar Wright recommended Two-Lane Blacktop (1971) in Movies (curated)
Living on the Volcano: The Secrets of Surviving as a Football Manager
Book
This book was short listed for the William Hill Sports Book of the Year Award 2015. A man punches...
I'll Tell You What...: My Take on the Modern Game of Football
Book
'A brilliant take on the modern game - Robbie tells it like it is' Rio Ferdinand Robbie Savage is...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fast & Furious 9 (2021) in Movies
Jul 11, 2021
I might not be obsessed with this series but I can't argue with its ridiculous action. I had a catch up on the others as it had been a while, though I discovered I watched them in the wrong order... never mind! Here's a bit of a rundown.
The Fast and the Furious - good
2 Fast 2 Furious - meh
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift - too peoply, not enough cars
Fast & Furious - good
Fast Five - my favourite
Fast & Furious 6 - good
Furious 7 - good
The Fate of the Furious - good
F9...
Who really needs an extended synopsis on this one? Cars, family, Corona, space the final frontier. And does it even need any comments on the plot? At this point it's very much random bits of chaos and ridiculous things with cars. Quite honestly, that's the reason I enjoy the films more now they lean into it. Although this one may have become a little too self-aware... in an amusing way.
It wasn't until I did the rewatch that I noticed how much they ignore the concept of genetics when it comes to adding family members. Here we have John Cena playing Jakob, Dom and Mia's brother. It's not the most unbelievable thing in the movie, but it's well up there. Cena has grown on me as an actor, I enjoyed him in The Marine, Bumblebee, and his comedy stylings in Blockers... but we don't talk about Playing With Fire... we never talk about Playing With Fire. He can do funny and he can do serious, but I'm not convinced he was the best choice to combine the two here. His performance was okay, but his style didn't really fit with any of the others. I don't know who I might have put in this role instead, but I think they could have gone with recognisable but not quite as high profile/
As for the other cast members, well, same sh*t different day as they say! Gibson and Ludacris have the same fun dynamic and bring their comedic element to the proceedings. Vin Diesel says the requisite amount of "family" throughout the films, and everyone else does their thing.
Doing the rewatch made me surprisingly emotional when they did the Paul Walker send-off, and there was a nice out to keep the legacy intact. And while it's nice that they keep him in the films, maybe it should just be something that's accepted and not talked about. There's a moment in the film where they say Dom's son is with Brian, and my first thought was horror because I forgot Brian is alive in the franchise, and the look on Dom's face didn't help in that moment either.
F9 has some even whackier action, and it is entirely satisfying to watch. Though unsurprisingly it doesn't take them long to defy the laws of physics... spectacular destruction nevertheless. We know we're in for a tenth instalment, we can only hope for a musical or LEGO version... that last one would be my approved choice.
(I have so many spoiler comments t make about this, but I don't want to ruin the fun of discovering them all for yourself.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/f9-fast-saga-movie-review.html
The Fast and the Furious - good
2 Fast 2 Furious - meh
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift - too peoply, not enough cars
Fast & Furious - good
Fast Five - my favourite
Fast & Furious 6 - good
Furious 7 - good
The Fate of the Furious - good
F9...
Who really needs an extended synopsis on this one? Cars, family, Corona, space the final frontier. And does it even need any comments on the plot? At this point it's very much random bits of chaos and ridiculous things with cars. Quite honestly, that's the reason I enjoy the films more now they lean into it. Although this one may have become a little too self-aware... in an amusing way.
It wasn't until I did the rewatch that I noticed how much they ignore the concept of genetics when it comes to adding family members. Here we have John Cena playing Jakob, Dom and Mia's brother. It's not the most unbelievable thing in the movie, but it's well up there. Cena has grown on me as an actor, I enjoyed him in The Marine, Bumblebee, and his comedy stylings in Blockers... but we don't talk about Playing With Fire... we never talk about Playing With Fire. He can do funny and he can do serious, but I'm not convinced he was the best choice to combine the two here. His performance was okay, but his style didn't really fit with any of the others. I don't know who I might have put in this role instead, but I think they could have gone with recognisable but not quite as high profile/
As for the other cast members, well, same sh*t different day as they say! Gibson and Ludacris have the same fun dynamic and bring their comedic element to the proceedings. Vin Diesel says the requisite amount of "family" throughout the films, and everyone else does their thing.
Doing the rewatch made me surprisingly emotional when they did the Paul Walker send-off, and there was a nice out to keep the legacy intact. And while it's nice that they keep him in the films, maybe it should just be something that's accepted and not talked about. There's a moment in the film where they say Dom's son is with Brian, and my first thought was horror because I forgot Brian is alive in the franchise, and the look on Dom's face didn't help in that moment either.
F9 has some even whackier action, and it is entirely satisfying to watch. Though unsurprisingly it doesn't take them long to defy the laws of physics... spectacular destruction nevertheless. We know we're in for a tenth instalment, we can only hope for a musical or LEGO version... that last one would be my approved choice.
(I have so many spoiler comments t make about this, but I don't want to ruin the fun of discovering them all for yourself.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/f9-fast-saga-movie-review.html
Family Guy Freakin Mobile Game
Games and Entertainment
App
It's time you wet your whistle and put a little Peter in your pocket! From the producers of the hit...