Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Cinderella (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Sickly Sweet
Taking a look through Disney’s back catalogue of animation is like a lesson in film history. From Snow White to Bambi and The Lion King to The Princess & the Frog, there’s something in there for everyone to enjoy.
However, the studio has in recent times, taken to reimagining its classics as live-action adaptations with last year’s Maleficent starting a generation that will include Beauty & the Beast and a Tim Burton directed Dumbo. The latest offering is Cinderella, but does it hold a candle to its animated counterpart?
The plot of Cinderella needs no introduction, the classic tale of rags to riches and love conquering all doesn’t need an update and director Kenneth Branagh (Thor, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) is just the man for the job.
Following the story of young Ella as she comes to terms with the loss of her parents and the arrival of her overbearing step-cinderella_poster_a_psisters and step-mother, Cinderella is a wonderfully acted and beautifully realised film that borders on a little syrupy at times.
Downton Abbey’s Lily James takes on the title role with a brilliant Cate Blanchett giving her all as Ella’s wicked step-mother. Helena Bonham Carter also stars as Ella’s fairy godmother and brings her usual brand of crazy to the character.
What sets this adaptation apart from Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent is its stunning visuals. Where Maleficent was beautiful in its own way and suited the film’s dark tone, here Kenneth Branagh throws every colour on the spectrum at the screen in breath-taking fashion.
The outfits are to die for and the locations are an explosion of bright colours and textures that are juxtaposed exceptionally with the dark, damp quarters our princess is confined to.
Elsewhere, the performances are, on the whole, sublime. James is good in the titular role but the plodding script lets her down. She comes across, as awful as this sounds, a little idiotic and lacks the charming spirit of her animated counterpart. The same can be said for her prince, played by Richard Madden – though this could be down to the story rushing their love somewhat.
By far the standout is Cate Blanchett, who is truly mesmerising as stepmother Lady Tremaine. Her brash and ridiculously over-the-top performance suits the pantomime feel of the production down to the ground. Unfortunately, her evil is heavily restrained by the film’s U certification, even more so when compared alongside the 1950 film.
Nevertheless, the visuals are simply stunning. Everything from the palace to Ella’s iconic ball gown and all of it in between is nearly flawless with only a few lapses in cartoonish CGI letting things down – though this can be forgiven with the film’s pantomime-esque nature.
Overall, this live-action reimagining of the 1950s classic musical does not in any way attempt to better its predecessor. Instead it wishes to sit alongside it as the studio tries to pave the way for a whole new generation of children to fall in love with Disney’s princesses once again.
Only a few lapses in CGI, a plodding script and a sickly sweet tone stop it from being enjoyable for everyone in the family, instead of just the kids.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/31/sickly-sweet-cinderella-review/
However, the studio has in recent times, taken to reimagining its classics as live-action adaptations with last year’s Maleficent starting a generation that will include Beauty & the Beast and a Tim Burton directed Dumbo. The latest offering is Cinderella, but does it hold a candle to its animated counterpart?
The plot of Cinderella needs no introduction, the classic tale of rags to riches and love conquering all doesn’t need an update and director Kenneth Branagh (Thor, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) is just the man for the job.
Following the story of young Ella as she comes to terms with the loss of her parents and the arrival of her overbearing step-cinderella_poster_a_psisters and step-mother, Cinderella is a wonderfully acted and beautifully realised film that borders on a little syrupy at times.
Downton Abbey’s Lily James takes on the title role with a brilliant Cate Blanchett giving her all as Ella’s wicked step-mother. Helena Bonham Carter also stars as Ella’s fairy godmother and brings her usual brand of crazy to the character.
What sets this adaptation apart from Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent is its stunning visuals. Where Maleficent was beautiful in its own way and suited the film’s dark tone, here Kenneth Branagh throws every colour on the spectrum at the screen in breath-taking fashion.
The outfits are to die for and the locations are an explosion of bright colours and textures that are juxtaposed exceptionally with the dark, damp quarters our princess is confined to.
Elsewhere, the performances are, on the whole, sublime. James is good in the titular role but the plodding script lets her down. She comes across, as awful as this sounds, a little idiotic and lacks the charming spirit of her animated counterpart. The same can be said for her prince, played by Richard Madden – though this could be down to the story rushing their love somewhat.
By far the standout is Cate Blanchett, who is truly mesmerising as stepmother Lady Tremaine. Her brash and ridiculously over-the-top performance suits the pantomime feel of the production down to the ground. Unfortunately, her evil is heavily restrained by the film’s U certification, even more so when compared alongside the 1950 film.
Nevertheless, the visuals are simply stunning. Everything from the palace to Ella’s iconic ball gown and all of it in between is nearly flawless with only a few lapses in cartoonish CGI letting things down – though this can be forgiven with the film’s pantomime-esque nature.
Overall, this live-action reimagining of the 1950s classic musical does not in any way attempt to better its predecessor. Instead it wishes to sit alongside it as the studio tries to pave the way for a whole new generation of children to fall in love with Disney’s princesses once again.
Only a few lapses in CGI, a plodding script and a sickly sweet tone stop it from being enjoyable for everyone in the family, instead of just the kids.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/31/sickly-sweet-cinderella-review/
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Nightmare Alley (2021) in Movies
Feb 5, 2022
In short, Nightmare Alley is a sometimes plodding and bloated piece that gets by thanks to a hugely pleasing aesthetic, and a great cast.
Firstly, there is no reason for NA to be 150 minutes long. One could argue that it gives us more time with the many characters introduced, but it feels gratuitous. The first hour and a half has its moments for sure, but it sometimes feels a little direction-less before the last hour hits, and things kick off a bit. It's an issue that certainly impacts proceedings, and I feel it could have lost 30 minutes and been a tighter final product.
Thankfully, the assembled cast is stacked with royalty. Willem Dafoe and Toni Collette are two of my favourite working actors, so having them both involved is a treat. Bradley Cooper, Cate Blanchett, and Rooney Mara are great as the main leads, and the rest of the ensemble is rounded out by some fantastic character actors - Richard Jenkins, Ron Perlman, Mary Steenburgen, David Strathairn - good stuff all round.
The overall visual style is wonderfully Del Toro, from the gloomy and misty carnival sights pierced by neon lights, to the snowy city scape of Buffalo, New York. A lot of the cinematography is gorgeous as well, hats off to Dan Laustsen, and is truly bought to life by a beautifully haunting music score from Nathan Johnson.
All in all, Nightmare Alley ultimately suffers from its pacing, and feels like a slog here and there. However, there are enough positives to carry it over the finish line. I look forward to checking out the black and white version in the near future.
Firstly, there is no reason for NA to be 150 minutes long. One could argue that it gives us more time with the many characters introduced, but it feels gratuitous. The first hour and a half has its moments for sure, but it sometimes feels a little direction-less before the last hour hits, and things kick off a bit. It's an issue that certainly impacts proceedings, and I feel it could have lost 30 minutes and been a tighter final product.
Thankfully, the assembled cast is stacked with royalty. Willem Dafoe and Toni Collette are two of my favourite working actors, so having them both involved is a treat. Bradley Cooper, Cate Blanchett, and Rooney Mara are great as the main leads, and the rest of the ensemble is rounded out by some fantastic character actors - Richard Jenkins, Ron Perlman, Mary Steenburgen, David Strathairn - good stuff all round.
The overall visual style is wonderfully Del Toro, from the gloomy and misty carnival sights pierced by neon lights, to the snowy city scape of Buffalo, New York. A lot of the cinematography is gorgeous as well, hats off to Dan Laustsen, and is truly bought to life by a beautifully haunting music score from Nathan Johnson.
All in all, Nightmare Alley ultimately suffers from its pacing, and feels like a slog here and there. However, there are enough positives to carry it over the finish line. I look forward to checking out the black and white version in the near future.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Mar 5, 2021
I've got a lot a love for the first Thor movie, but like many others, the second one is probably my least favourite of the whole franchise. So, when one of the mightiest Avengers threatens to become stale, what is the solution? Taika fucking Waititi is the solution.
One of my favourite working directors helming an MCU film is exciting indeed, and manages to deliver a film that injects new life into the Thor series, manages to fit in with other chapters of the franchise without feeling too alien, but still has liberal splashings of Waititi's trademark wit throughout.
The comedy in this entry is thick and fast, but everything lands just right. It's fair to say that it's taken a leaf out the Guardians of the Galaxy playbook, but manages to come across smoother and feel more refined in it's humour than Vol. 2.
Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Mark Ruffalo and Idris Elba are back and as good as ever with MCU newcomers Cate Blanchett, carving a memorable figure as this movies big bad Hela (who I really hope we see again at somepoint), Tessa Thompson as the badass Valkyrie, a wonderful Jeff Goldblum as secondary villain Grandmaster (another that I hope we see again), and Karl Urban as The Executioner. It's a well put together cast.
It's packed full of comic shit too, with references to Man Thing, Beta Ray Bill, and Bi Beast, a tie in appearance from Doctor Strange, the first appearance of Surtur, and Hulk rampaging through Asgard. It has relentlessly entertaining set pieces and an 80s synth style soundtrack that tops everything wonderfully.
Not much to complain about here - easily the best of the Thor trilogy and a solid entry into the wider MCU.
One of my favourite working directors helming an MCU film is exciting indeed, and manages to deliver a film that injects new life into the Thor series, manages to fit in with other chapters of the franchise without feeling too alien, but still has liberal splashings of Waititi's trademark wit throughout.
The comedy in this entry is thick and fast, but everything lands just right. It's fair to say that it's taken a leaf out the Guardians of the Galaxy playbook, but manages to come across smoother and feel more refined in it's humour than Vol. 2.
Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Mark Ruffalo and Idris Elba are back and as good as ever with MCU newcomers Cate Blanchett, carving a memorable figure as this movies big bad Hela (who I really hope we see again at somepoint), Tessa Thompson as the badass Valkyrie, a wonderful Jeff Goldblum as secondary villain Grandmaster (another that I hope we see again), and Karl Urban as The Executioner. It's a well put together cast.
It's packed full of comic shit too, with references to Man Thing, Beta Ray Bill, and Bi Beast, a tie in appearance from Doctor Strange, the first appearance of Surtur, and Hulk rampaging through Asgard. It has relentlessly entertaining set pieces and an 80s synth style soundtrack that tops everything wonderfully.
Not much to complain about here - easily the best of the Thor trilogy and a solid entry into the wider MCU.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Robin Hood (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
If you think you know the tale of Robin Hood in its entirety, think again. A prequel to the traditional story, “Robin Hood” provides the long awaited history of the most classic of well-intentioned thieves and his band of men…who are merry.
Starring Russell Crowe as the lead of Robin Longstride, we see a character that is slightly different than Crowe’s most historic role (in “Gladiator”). But stealing the show is Cate Blanchett as the powerful and strong, yet subtle, Maid Marion Loxley. Other sure-to-be favorites include the beekeeping Friar Tuck played by “The Full Monty’s” Mark Addy and Kevin Durand as the hammer wielding (not so) Little John.
I have to admit, I was reluctant to see this film. Did I really want to watch Russell Crowe lead a small group against wildly impossible odds, again? After having seen “Robin Hood”, the answer is “Yes!” Sure, there is another team of rag-tag characters to battle on behalf of good, but this time they are likeable takes on the merry men of my childhood, with a more historic and adult perspective. The result is simply amusing.
And “Robin Hood” exceeds expectations in the simple details with accurate costumes, well-understood historic locations, and a number of short but sweet fight sequences. The film was so detailed I already plan to be Internet searching away through my next viewing to see how the historic places exposed throughout the film look today. Film students will surely rejoice.
Had I not known the original story to the finest detail, “Robin Hood” might have been a believable tale. The film’s major conflicts all stem from realistic challenges such as food shortages and burdensome taxation. Is it possible that “Robin Hood” will strike a chord of relevance to current economic concerns? Maybe not, but it will be a fun time at the movies.
Starring Russell Crowe as the lead of Robin Longstride, we see a character that is slightly different than Crowe’s most historic role (in “Gladiator”). But stealing the show is Cate Blanchett as the powerful and strong, yet subtle, Maid Marion Loxley. Other sure-to-be favorites include the beekeeping Friar Tuck played by “The Full Monty’s” Mark Addy and Kevin Durand as the hammer wielding (not so) Little John.
I have to admit, I was reluctant to see this film. Did I really want to watch Russell Crowe lead a small group against wildly impossible odds, again? After having seen “Robin Hood”, the answer is “Yes!” Sure, there is another team of rag-tag characters to battle on behalf of good, but this time they are likeable takes on the merry men of my childhood, with a more historic and adult perspective. The result is simply amusing.
And “Robin Hood” exceeds expectations in the simple details with accurate costumes, well-understood historic locations, and a number of short but sweet fight sequences. The film was so detailed I already plan to be Internet searching away through my next viewing to see how the historic places exposed throughout the film look today. Film students will surely rejoice.
Had I not known the original story to the finest detail, “Robin Hood” might have been a believable tale. The film’s major conflicts all stem from realistic challenges such as food shortages and burdensome taxation. Is it possible that “Robin Hood” will strike a chord of relevance to current economic concerns? Maybe not, but it will be a fun time at the movies.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Cinderella (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Throw together two beautiful faces from a couple of popular TV shows, award-winning veterans of the big screen, a director who loves to immerse viewers in story in the most spectacular of ways and what do you get? Sweet, magical enchantment.
Cinderella is Disney’s latest live-action translation of a classic animated film and under Kenneth Branagh’s deft direction it is simply wonderful. Retelling a beloved fairytale and making it feel fresh, delightful and satisfying is no small feat but Branagh does it with engaging actors, charming sets, captivating scenery and gorgeous costumes.
Lily James, recently of Downton Abbey, plays the heroine with sweet, innocent strength. Showered with love by her parents, played by Ben Chaplin and Hayley Atwell, Ella knows nothing about discontent or malice. Even after she loses her mother, and even after her father brings home an uncaring stepmother and disdainful stepsisters, Ella remains faithful to her mother’s dying wish for her daughter to “Have courage. Be Kind.”
Everyone knows how Ella became Cinderella and we all know just how badly she’s treated by her stepmother and stepsisters. Cate Blanchett is wickedly magnificent as the stepmother and Sophie McShera and Holliday Grainger bring new meaning to gaudy and garish.
I have to admit I’m a sucker for any fairytale that involves grand, sweeping ballroom scenes like Beauty and the Beast, Enchanted and now Cinderella. Of course, the scene could not have been possible without the help of a Fairy Godmother. Helena Bonham Carter is simply delightful in her role as Cinderella’s Fairy Godmother. The special effects used to give Cinderella a stunning gown as well as a horse-drawn carriage and driver and footmen were flawless
We also know how the story ends, but that didn’t stop the audience from sighing, holding its collective breath, and cheering when the prince, played handsomely by Richard Madden, finds the maiden whose foot fits perfectly in the glass slipper.
Days after our screener, my husband and I were still discussing the movie, that’s how much we enjoyed it. And when you can get your husband to easily agree to watch it again when it’s released, you know it’s a great movie.
Cinderella is Disney’s latest live-action translation of a classic animated film and under Kenneth Branagh’s deft direction it is simply wonderful. Retelling a beloved fairytale and making it feel fresh, delightful and satisfying is no small feat but Branagh does it with engaging actors, charming sets, captivating scenery and gorgeous costumes.
Lily James, recently of Downton Abbey, plays the heroine with sweet, innocent strength. Showered with love by her parents, played by Ben Chaplin and Hayley Atwell, Ella knows nothing about discontent or malice. Even after she loses her mother, and even after her father brings home an uncaring stepmother and disdainful stepsisters, Ella remains faithful to her mother’s dying wish for her daughter to “Have courage. Be Kind.”
Everyone knows how Ella became Cinderella and we all know just how badly she’s treated by her stepmother and stepsisters. Cate Blanchett is wickedly magnificent as the stepmother and Sophie McShera and Holliday Grainger bring new meaning to gaudy and garish.
I have to admit I’m a sucker for any fairytale that involves grand, sweeping ballroom scenes like Beauty and the Beast, Enchanted and now Cinderella. Of course, the scene could not have been possible without the help of a Fairy Godmother. Helena Bonham Carter is simply delightful in her role as Cinderella’s Fairy Godmother. The special effects used to give Cinderella a stunning gown as well as a horse-drawn carriage and driver and footmen were flawless
We also know how the story ends, but that didn’t stop the audience from sighing, holding its collective breath, and cheering when the prince, played handsomely by Richard Madden, finds the maiden whose foot fits perfectly in the glass slipper.
Days after our screener, my husband and I were still discussing the movie, that’s how much we enjoyed it. And when you can get your husband to easily agree to watch it again when it’s released, you know it’s a great movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 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.
Joe Wright’s 2011 film version of Hanna starring Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett and Eric Bana is an odd movie. It isn’t bad. It just doesn’t work. The idea at its heart is great, as are some of the action sequences, there is just something over styled about it that is jarring. I’ve been back to it a few times to see if age helps, but it really doesn’t – Hanna the movie is an admirable failure.
So when Amazon announced they were resurrecting the character, the basic story and idea and the essential vibe of Hanna in 2019 as a series… I was pretty sceptical. I doubt to this day I would have watched it at all if I hadn’t stumbled across the trailer and been arrested by the presence of this young girl who had been cast in the main role. She looked wild and vulnerable at the same time, her eyes were piercing and something about her was just jumping off the screen. I went to IMDb as is my habit to find out who she was. Turns out her name was Esme Creed-Miles, the daughter of actors Samantha Morton and Charlie Creed-Miles.
Wow, yes, that made sense! I love Samantha Morton in anything – have done ever since she played Joanne Barnes in Cracker, aged 17. She has a ferocious beauty and edge of danger about her that is entirely feminine but also fearlessly strong and individual. Her roles have always been diverse, because she is capable of total power or intense vulnerability, sometimes in the same character, all laced with a focused intelligence that is quite rare. So, I had basically seen all of that in a two minute trailer staring a chip off the old block. Now I was excited to see it!
I wouldn’t say the set up of season one blew me away, but it did have enough going for it to keep me watching. Not as a binge watch, which usually indicates how much I am into something, but for sure as a steady desire to come back for more in time. Joel Kinnaman made a decent replacement as Erik, the father figure who teaches Hanna to survive, and Mireille Enos was doing a lovely job in the Cate Blanchett role as an ambiguous villain / ally. But it was all about Esme Creed-Miles, who was consistently delivering a performance of mesmerising quality – I could not take my eyes off her. As with the character she was playing there was some learning to be done in understanding the rules of this world, but she had obviously been trained well by a parent with huge experience in these things.
Season one ends with a tantalising cliffhanger, and there didn’t seem to be much of a wait to get back into it in season two, which felt more assured and more mature from the start. It came to me at a weird time in lockdown where I had no internet or means to watch anything I hadn’t downloaded already, which was a handful of films I’d already seen and season two of Hanna. I ended up watching each episode at least three times each, sometimes in a row, and sometimes going back… it just became a real companion to me in an odd way. I got hooked on it in a way I would find hard to describe – sometimes a show does that to us, even when objectively we know it isn’t the best, or most original, thing ever made.
It isn’t badly made by any means, but it is perhaps a little predictable at times. It has a high production standard, but still feels very much like TV and not a feature film in episodes. The action choreography is always great, as is the overall story arch. What is perhaps a little lacking is consistently strong dialogue, directing and supporting acting, especially when the cast of season two depends on a lot of teenagers, none of which have half the natural ability of Creed-Miles.
My main feeling about Hanna is to state I really enjoyed it, without overstating that it is any kind of genius, or is treading any new artistic ground. It is just a solid entertainment worth the time, and I will definitely be looking forward to season three. The entire project has a strong female core, and that is worth seeing in 2021. I suspect the main thing watching this will bring, however, is the genesis of a future superstar. Mark my words – Esme Creed-Miles just turned 21 and the film world is ready for the next Emma Stone, Jennifer Lawrence or… Samantha Morton.
So when Amazon announced they were resurrecting the character, the basic story and idea and the essential vibe of Hanna in 2019 as a series… I was pretty sceptical. I doubt to this day I would have watched it at all if I hadn’t stumbled across the trailer and been arrested by the presence of this young girl who had been cast in the main role. She looked wild and vulnerable at the same time, her eyes were piercing and something about her was just jumping off the screen. I went to IMDb as is my habit to find out who she was. Turns out her name was Esme Creed-Miles, the daughter of actors Samantha Morton and Charlie Creed-Miles.
Wow, yes, that made sense! I love Samantha Morton in anything – have done ever since she played Joanne Barnes in Cracker, aged 17. She has a ferocious beauty and edge of danger about her that is entirely feminine but also fearlessly strong and individual. Her roles have always been diverse, because she is capable of total power or intense vulnerability, sometimes in the same character, all laced with a focused intelligence that is quite rare. So, I had basically seen all of that in a two minute trailer staring a chip off the old block. Now I was excited to see it!
I wouldn’t say the set up of season one blew me away, but it did have enough going for it to keep me watching. Not as a binge watch, which usually indicates how much I am into something, but for sure as a steady desire to come back for more in time. Joel Kinnaman made a decent replacement as Erik, the father figure who teaches Hanna to survive, and Mireille Enos was doing a lovely job in the Cate Blanchett role as an ambiguous villain / ally. But it was all about Esme Creed-Miles, who was consistently delivering a performance of mesmerising quality – I could not take my eyes off her. As with the character she was playing there was some learning to be done in understanding the rules of this world, but she had obviously been trained well by a parent with huge experience in these things.
Season one ends with a tantalising cliffhanger, and there didn’t seem to be much of a wait to get back into it in season two, which felt more assured and more mature from the start. It came to me at a weird time in lockdown where I had no internet or means to watch anything I hadn’t downloaded already, which was a handful of films I’d already seen and season two of Hanna. I ended up watching each episode at least three times each, sometimes in a row, and sometimes going back… it just became a real companion to me in an odd way. I got hooked on it in a way I would find hard to describe – sometimes a show does that to us, even when objectively we know it isn’t the best, or most original, thing ever made.
It isn’t badly made by any means, but it is perhaps a little predictable at times. It has a high production standard, but still feels very much like TV and not a feature film in episodes. The action choreography is always great, as is the overall story arch. What is perhaps a little lacking is consistently strong dialogue, directing and supporting acting, especially when the cast of season two depends on a lot of teenagers, none of which have half the natural ability of Creed-Miles.
My main feeling about Hanna is to state I really enjoyed it, without overstating that it is any kind of genius, or is treading any new artistic ground. It is just a solid entertainment worth the time, and I will definitely be looking forward to season three. The entire project has a strong female core, and that is worth seeing in 2021. I suspect the main thing watching this will bring, however, is the genesis of a future superstar. Mark my words – Esme Creed-Miles just turned 21 and the film world is ready for the next Emma Stone, Jennifer Lawrence or… Samantha Morton.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Mowgli (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
When humans encroach on the jungle they get too close to the animals that call the jungle home. It’s inevitable that they clash. When Shere Khan (Benedict Cumberbatch), a tiger who has no regard for the rules of the jungle, slaughters a group of humans only a child survives. A black panther, Bagheera (Christian Bale), saves the boy, Mowgli (Rohan Chand), and takes him to live with a group of wolves. There he is raised by his mother, Nisha (Naomie Harris), and tried to become part of the pack by Baloo (Andy Serkis), a black bear. Mowgli must train with Baloo to become a member of the pack. As he trains he sees that man expand. With this expansion the man brings back Shere Khan. He kills many of the cows and leaves them for the humans to find. This makes the humans enlist a hunter, Lockwood (Matthew Rhys), to kill the tiger. Also Bagheera believes that sending Mowgli to the humans will keep him safe. Mowgli, just a young boy, must now try and bridge the animal world he knows in the jungle and the human world.
This is a live action retelling of the novel by Rudyard Kipling, The Jungle Book. Actor/Director Andy Serkis creates a beautiful story with really well done CGI. The visuals are really well done and by far the best part of the film. The cast, which also includes Cate Blanchett, Eddie Marsan, Tom Hollander, etc. make the animals they voice come to life. This take on the famous story is familiar but also changed ever so slightly from previous versions that it keeps it interesting. Young actor Rohan Chand does a decent job of carrying most of the live acting portions of the film.
The film really made me feel nostalgic at times. The film does take a little darker look at the old classic and would say it is for a little more mature audiences than the 1967 cartoon or 2016 live action, both The Jungle Book, takes on this story. The visuals are really good but the story does miss at times. I really thought that the climax really had a slow build but then really finished quickly. There was definitely room for improvement there but overall it was a pleasant movie experience. The theater viewing was visually really good and I am sure it would be a decent home experience with the Netflix release.
This is a live action retelling of the novel by Rudyard Kipling, The Jungle Book. Actor/Director Andy Serkis creates a beautiful story with really well done CGI. The visuals are really well done and by far the best part of the film. The cast, which also includes Cate Blanchett, Eddie Marsan, Tom Hollander, etc. make the animals they voice come to life. This take on the famous story is familiar but also changed ever so slightly from previous versions that it keeps it interesting. Young actor Rohan Chand does a decent job of carrying most of the live acting portions of the film.
The film really made me feel nostalgic at times. The film does take a little darker look at the old classic and would say it is for a little more mature audiences than the 1967 cartoon or 2016 live action, both The Jungle Book, takes on this story. The visuals are really good but the story does miss at times. I really thought that the climax really had a slow build but then really finished quickly. There was definitely room for improvement there but overall it was a pleasant movie experience. The theater viewing was visually really good and I am sure it would be a decent home experience with the Netflix release.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Bandits (2001) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
This is a film that I saw not long after it came out and didn’t recall much about it besides the fact that it starred Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton and Cate Blanchett.
It’s actually quite a mediocre heist film since it tries much too hard to make this feel as if it’s story is one that could be “ripped from the headlines” and also feel pertinent to Reality TV, which was in its infancy at the time.
The chemistry between the characters is quite weak and the fact that Willis and Thornton don’t feel as if they are on level ground also hurts things since the characters are meant to be equal.
Blanchett’s character is quite annoying the whole way through and it’s pretty difficult to believe that she is able to have a romance with one of these men, and they want us to believe that she has one with both of them.
This love triangle just doesn’t work on any level.
The story itself is quite repetitive and they rehash things much too often instead of trying to break new ground along the way.
This film should have been much shorter and that might have been better if edited together.
The movie fails to decide whether it wants to be seen as a comedy or as a crime thriller and in the end it feels as if it is neither especially when there are too many scenes that play off as being overly melodramatic for their own good.
Bottom Line – Very mediocre heist film that tries too hard to feel as if it is “ripped from the headlines” during the beginning of the days of Reality TV. Willis and Thornton don’t work very well together because they never seem to feel as if their characters are on equal levels. Blanchett’s character is quite annoying throughout and its very hard to believe the love triangle that comes about. The story itself feels too repetitive and things could have been shortened a lot because they try to reestablish things that they previously established. The plot gets a bit too melodramatic for its own good and fails to make the decision of whether they want this to be seen as a comedy or as a crime thriller and in the end, it seems like neither.
It’s actually quite a mediocre heist film since it tries much too hard to make this feel as if it’s story is one that could be “ripped from the headlines” and also feel pertinent to Reality TV, which was in its infancy at the time.
The chemistry between the characters is quite weak and the fact that Willis and Thornton don’t feel as if they are on level ground also hurts things since the characters are meant to be equal.
Blanchett’s character is quite annoying the whole way through and it’s pretty difficult to believe that she is able to have a romance with one of these men, and they want us to believe that she has one with both of them.
This love triangle just doesn’t work on any level.
The story itself is quite repetitive and they rehash things much too often instead of trying to break new ground along the way.
This film should have been much shorter and that might have been better if edited together.
The movie fails to decide whether it wants to be seen as a comedy or as a crime thriller and in the end it feels as if it is neither especially when there are too many scenes that play off as being overly melodramatic for their own good.
Bottom Line – Very mediocre heist film that tries too hard to feel as if it is “ripped from the headlines” during the beginning of the days of Reality TV. Willis and Thornton don’t work very well together because they never seem to feel as if their characters are on equal levels. Blanchett’s character is quite annoying throughout and its very hard to believe the love triangle that comes about. The story itself feels too repetitive and things could have been shortened a lot because they try to reestablish things that they previously established. The plot gets a bit too melodramatic for its own good and fails to make the decision of whether they want this to be seen as a comedy or as a crime thriller and in the end, it seems like neither.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019) in Movies
Jul 3, 2020
Flying On Fumes: Bittersweet End to Dragons - 7/10
How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is the final installment in the trilogy of films based on the books by Cressidia Cowell. It was written and directed by Dean Deblois, produced by DreamWorks Animation and distributed by Universal. With a returning cast starring Jay Burachel, America Ferrera, Cate Blanchett, and Craig Ferguson.
One year after (How To Train Your Dragon 2) Hiccup (Jay Burachel) and friends defended Berk from the threat of Drago Bludvist; the group is still rescuing dragons and relocating them back to their village. Now however the villagers are dealing with a problem of overcrowding and overpopulation of dragons. Hiccup begins the process of finding a new home for everyone to relocate to, the fabled "Hidden World" of the dragons. The conflict of the film enters when the Vikings whose dragons Hiccup has been freeing, seek the help of Grimmel the Grisly (F. Murray Abraham), a dragon hunter responsible for the eradication and near extermination of all Night Furies. And also Toothless being enamoured with the discovery of a female White Fury dragon.
This movie was really good and while watching I had fun seeing the whole group dynamic and how everyone interacted with each other. It felt awesome seeing them again and how they all grew up a little over the last year. When comparing this movie to the others in the series, it felt like it fell short especially for being the last movie in the trilogy. I guess it was hard to surpass how great the last film was. While visually stunning and exhilarating at times it failed to be as great as it could have and felt like something was missing in this conclusion to an epic series. The atmosphere of the movie felt like it never quite matched the tone that they were trying to set with the seriousness of the plot. It's like only the main character felt the weight of the world on his shoulders but it is a kids movie after all. Like I said certainly enjoyable, I give it a 7/10.
One year after (How To Train Your Dragon 2) Hiccup (Jay Burachel) and friends defended Berk from the threat of Drago Bludvist; the group is still rescuing dragons and relocating them back to their village. Now however the villagers are dealing with a problem of overcrowding and overpopulation of dragons. Hiccup begins the process of finding a new home for everyone to relocate to, the fabled "Hidden World" of the dragons. The conflict of the film enters when the Vikings whose dragons Hiccup has been freeing, seek the help of Grimmel the Grisly (F. Murray Abraham), a dragon hunter responsible for the eradication and near extermination of all Night Furies. And also Toothless being enamoured with the discovery of a female White Fury dragon.
This movie was really good and while watching I had fun seeing the whole group dynamic and how everyone interacted with each other. It felt awesome seeing them again and how they all grew up a little over the last year. When comparing this movie to the others in the series, it felt like it fell short especially for being the last movie in the trilogy. I guess it was hard to surpass how great the last film was. While visually stunning and exhilarating at times it failed to be as great as it could have and felt like something was missing in this conclusion to an epic series. The atmosphere of the movie felt like it never quite matched the tone that they were trying to set with the seriousness of the plot. It's like only the main character felt the weight of the world on his shoulders but it is a kids movie after all. Like I said certainly enjoyable, I give it a 7/10.
