Search
Search results
Benedick Lewis (3001 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
Brilliant acting (2 more)
Multiple examples of excellent camera techniques, homaging a lot from that era
Superb direction
Rushed third act (1 more)
Could be too long for some people
A film for people who like to go to the cinema
Once upon a time in Hollywood is not QT’s best film but certainly not the worst. That award goes to Death Proof. It was a difficult film to market because when I got wind of his new film, it was advertised as revolving around the Sharon Tate murders/Charles “Charlie” Bronson but this film is so much more than that. The whole story meanders around like the roads around Cielo Drive, almost to the point of not really going anywhere and really just to enjoy the characters in this fictionalised retelling of that period.
It is quite astonishing that there are still people out there who would think this is a faithful interpretation of what happened and more so that QT has to publicly say ‘this is a story of fiction’ but I am no expert on the case, even though over the years I have dabbled into it through various books and news reports.
The main thing to get across is to go in with no expectations other than QT inevitably will put his spin on things and that, really, is what will draw audiences to this film. There’s always a bit to latch onto with QT films whether it be a character or the world he has created for those characters to live in or a reference to another film or, indeed, something else. It is what makes QT so appealing. He tells stories the way he wants to tell them. That said, the third act (which actually deals with the murders), although fun and frenetic, feels a little rushed and could possibly shows signs of studio meddling with what QT wanted to focus on. That’s the main criticism of this film but the rest of it will have film academics in years to come pick apart individual sequences and dissecting them into pointless philosophical notions and semantical (is that a word?) studies that are completely off point for a long time. Do I want to bore you with how clever QT is by being able to subtly put across to the viewer through camera techniques and direction his influences of 1950s and 60s television and cinema? No, if you’re a cinema fan you’ll get those references and more on repeat viewings. If you’re not a cinema fan, then it establishes enough world for you to warrant the hyperbole ‘fantastic escapism’. The point is you’re going to enjoy this film if you enjoy going to the cinema. Well, most of you. Some may spite that statement and say Legally Blonde is where it is at. Well, if that’s your stance, go rewatch Legally Blonde as the people who came to the cinema to actually enjoy this film have no time for that viewpoint.
See this if you love QT films. He throws in a lot of references to his body of work to make you nod to fellow audience members and silently say ‘I got that reference’. If you’re not a QT fan but a lover of cinema, especially American cinema, you’ll get more than just a kick out of it. There’s even something for the casual viewer if you’re willing to invest your time in it.
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 😆
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Moonstone in Books
Nov 20, 2019
Of all the books I had to read at school, The Moonstone was probably the only novel I really enjoyed. It is one of the first 'whodunnit' type of books and, remarkably, it manages to hit virtually every requirement of the genre dead centre. If this book was written today, it would still be a classic.
The Moonstone of the title is a rare yellow diamond, stolen from an Indian shrine by colonialists. Thought to be unlucky it is left to the young Rachel Verinder. The night after her 18th birthday party the stone is stolen from her rooms, and the rest of the novel describes how the various players eventually manage to solve the crime.
The plot features twists and turns galore, false trails and red herrings enough for two detective stories. Although the crime involved is 'only' theft rather than the more usual murder it is no less engaging as a story. The characters are well drawn and - social reformer that Collins was - there are strong women and intelligent and interesting servants as well as the landed gentry and philanthropists that inhabit the world of country estates in the mid 19th century that the novel is set in.
One feature of the book is that the story is told from the viewpoint of a number of the players. Firstly (and for nearly half the book) we are introduced to the Verinders and the theft by Gabriel Betteredge, a long serving family retainer who is head of the staff and a sort of de facto butler. Betteredge's narrative is charming and witty, full of dry asides and observations. His habit of picking passages from Robinson Crusoe and applying them to daily life is a quirk that is completely in keeping with his character.
Once the story moves to London, the narrative is taken up by various other characters, sometimes just for a short journal entry, sometimes for extended periods of time. Collins imbues each of these parts with a different voice really skillfully, keeping each character very separate.
The solution to the mystery of who stole the diamond and why is convoluted but also very simple. The whole story is well crafted and fits together really well.
The only negative points really are those imposed on Collins by the time he was writing this. There is an overlong introduction about the diamond in India (it seems that in Victorian novels the long winded introduction is somehow expected by the reader) and the pace slows somewhat in London as there is a lot of description about the character's social standings and financial affairs that just aren't as relevant today.
Nevertheless this really is as good a book as I remember. I certainly rate Collins a lot higher than Charles Dickens as a writer. Definitely recommended for anyone who likes a detective mystery which will keep the reader guessing until the very end.
The Moonstone of the title is a rare yellow diamond, stolen from an Indian shrine by colonialists. Thought to be unlucky it is left to the young Rachel Verinder. The night after her 18th birthday party the stone is stolen from her rooms, and the rest of the novel describes how the various players eventually manage to solve the crime.
The plot features twists and turns galore, false trails and red herrings enough for two detective stories. Although the crime involved is 'only' theft rather than the more usual murder it is no less engaging as a story. The characters are well drawn and - social reformer that Collins was - there are strong women and intelligent and interesting servants as well as the landed gentry and philanthropists that inhabit the world of country estates in the mid 19th century that the novel is set in.
One feature of the book is that the story is told from the viewpoint of a number of the players. Firstly (and for nearly half the book) we are introduced to the Verinders and the theft by Gabriel Betteredge, a long serving family retainer who is head of the staff and a sort of de facto butler. Betteredge's narrative is charming and witty, full of dry asides and observations. His habit of picking passages from Robinson Crusoe and applying them to daily life is a quirk that is completely in keeping with his character.
Once the story moves to London, the narrative is taken up by various other characters, sometimes just for a short journal entry, sometimes for extended periods of time. Collins imbues each of these parts with a different voice really skillfully, keeping each character very separate.
The solution to the mystery of who stole the diamond and why is convoluted but also very simple. The whole story is well crafted and fits together really well.
The only negative points really are those imposed on Collins by the time he was writing this. There is an overlong introduction about the diamond in India (it seems that in Victorian novels the long winded introduction is somehow expected by the reader) and the pace slows somewhat in London as there is a lot of description about the character's social standings and financial affairs that just aren't as relevant today.
Nevertheless this really is as good a book as I remember. I certainly rate Collins a lot higher than Charles Dickens as a writer. Definitely recommended for anyone who likes a detective mystery which will keep the reader guessing until the very end.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated American Horror Story - Season 7 in TV
Mar 8, 2020
Season 7 of American Horror Story, subtitled Cult, is a weird one. Instead of focusing on the supernatural, ghosts, witches, haunted houses, Cult is a trip through the delicacy of the human mind. It instead looks at fears, real world issues, and of course, the presence of an all too familiar cult like family.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated I Am Not Okay With This in TV
Mar 3, 2020
Proof that Netflix can rule your life, in an OK way, I guess. Every time I have dropped in for the last two weeks, this is the show they went out of their way to push on me. I watched the trailer and thought hmm, I don’t get it… but after relentless publicity I ended up watching the entire first series within 36 hours of its release on February 26th. Which is easy enough to do, as the entire first series only lasts 2 1/2 hours, in 7 x 23 minute easy to swallow episodes. Another nice tactic for the attention deficient generation.
Based on the graphic novels of Charles Forsman, who also gave us The End of the F***ing World – an equally dark edged teen angst story, that has had 2 full seasons of similarly short episodes. It also continues the partnership of that series’ main director, British born Jonathon Entwistle, who seems happily stuck with this genre on his, as yet, limited CV. It stars the quirky charm of Sophia Lillis, best known from the It reboot movies, and Wyatt Oleff, also plucked from that franchise. And, oh yeah, it shares production credits with a small show called Stranger Things; so it has a pop culture pedigree 100% guaranteed to attract a young audience.
In terms of tone and direction, it does wobble at the beginning, but also shows a lot of promise, thanks largely to the watchability of Lillis, who is perfectly cast as a nervy, nerdy teen with a lot of smarts, but not too many friends. The humour is black, the satire subtle, and the delivery is disarmingly adult; on the surface this is a high school comedy, but underneath it is a fucked up, biting exploration of grief, paranoia and anger (mis)management – it pushes boundaries on content, visually and in use of language that only Netflix can endorse and get away with. Which of course is what audiences want!
The premise is that after the suicide of her father, 17 year old Sydney Novak is having some emotional issues beyond the normal teenage stuff of zits on your thighs. As she keeps a secret journal to document her worries and thoughts (heard in voice-over consistently, giving it a definite graphic novel thought bubble vibe) we are in from the start on the possibility she may have a dubious superpower linked to being pissed off.
It takes a while for that aspect to kick in, however, so don’t expect big, showy, superhero set pieces; this is a comedy drama that borrows from every teenage trope available, and is focussed more on the troubles of high school, a single mom and general growing pains. It is funny – I laughed, and found it a charming mix of something really modern feeling, but with retro vibes; it is clearly 2020, but could be 1985, a trick Stranger Things has taught them well.
Really, it is almost all over before it gets started, with these brief episode times – which is smart; no time to waste, so it moves along, and is always endearingly entertaining. In essence, what we have here is a 2 1/2 hour pilot show, chopped into bite sized chunks and released as a tease for the main show, which will be series 2. Think of it as an origin story, if you will. Undoubtedly, that 2nd series is already on the way. Early critical response is solid, and in about another month you will be hearing everyone and their cat talking about it, for sure.
The lack of originality didn’t massively bother me, as you could see what they were trying to do with it, and the large appeal is to recreate a teen world that feels familiar and comfortable, and then play with those preconceptions, choosing the right moments to flip it upside down. Which eventually it does. The final episode of seven is an absolute doozy! Talk about teasing cliff-hangers! They really know how to keep us hooked!
The best thing about it, by a country mile, is the obvious star quality of Sophia Lillis, who must surely use this as a stepping-stone to a fine career, if she can master the emotional scenes as well as the charming quirky ones, at which she already excels. She reminds me a lot of Ellen Page, without the unlikely gravitas… yet. There is time to mature. I will be there for season 2 for sure, so it will be exciting to find out where it all goes next – this is a big opportunity for a BIG little show. I am only half sure they won’t fuck it up…
Based on the graphic novels of Charles Forsman, who also gave us The End of the F***ing World – an equally dark edged teen angst story, that has had 2 full seasons of similarly short episodes. It also continues the partnership of that series’ main director, British born Jonathon Entwistle, who seems happily stuck with this genre on his, as yet, limited CV. It stars the quirky charm of Sophia Lillis, best known from the It reboot movies, and Wyatt Oleff, also plucked from that franchise. And, oh yeah, it shares production credits with a small show called Stranger Things; so it has a pop culture pedigree 100% guaranteed to attract a young audience.
In terms of tone and direction, it does wobble at the beginning, but also shows a lot of promise, thanks largely to the watchability of Lillis, who is perfectly cast as a nervy, nerdy teen with a lot of smarts, but not too many friends. The humour is black, the satire subtle, and the delivery is disarmingly adult; on the surface this is a high school comedy, but underneath it is a fucked up, biting exploration of grief, paranoia and anger (mis)management – it pushes boundaries on content, visually and in use of language that only Netflix can endorse and get away with. Which of course is what audiences want!
The premise is that after the suicide of her father, 17 year old Sydney Novak is having some emotional issues beyond the normal teenage stuff of zits on your thighs. As she keeps a secret journal to document her worries and thoughts (heard in voice-over consistently, giving it a definite graphic novel thought bubble vibe) we are in from the start on the possibility she may have a dubious superpower linked to being pissed off.
It takes a while for that aspect to kick in, however, so don’t expect big, showy, superhero set pieces; this is a comedy drama that borrows from every teenage trope available, and is focussed more on the troubles of high school, a single mom and general growing pains. It is funny – I laughed, and found it a charming mix of something really modern feeling, but with retro vibes; it is clearly 2020, but could be 1985, a trick Stranger Things has taught them well.
Really, it is almost all over before it gets started, with these brief episode times – which is smart; no time to waste, so it moves along, and is always endearingly entertaining. In essence, what we have here is a 2 1/2 hour pilot show, chopped into bite sized chunks and released as a tease for the main show, which will be series 2. Think of it as an origin story, if you will. Undoubtedly, that 2nd series is already on the way. Early critical response is solid, and in about another month you will be hearing everyone and their cat talking about it, for sure.
The lack of originality didn’t massively bother me, as you could see what they were trying to do with it, and the large appeal is to recreate a teen world that feels familiar and comfortable, and then play with those preconceptions, choosing the right moments to flip it upside down. Which eventually it does. The final episode of seven is an absolute doozy! Talk about teasing cliff-hangers! They really know how to keep us hooked!
The best thing about it, by a country mile, is the obvious star quality of Sophia Lillis, who must surely use this as a stepping-stone to a fine career, if she can master the emotional scenes as well as the charming quirky ones, at which she already excels. She reminds me a lot of Ellen Page, without the unlikely gravitas… yet. There is time to mature. I will be there for season 2 for sure, so it will be exciting to find out where it all goes next – this is a big opportunity for a BIG little show. I am only half sure they won’t fuck it up…
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bringing Up Baby (1938) in Movies
Apr 4, 2020
The Perfect Example of a "Screwball Comedy"
It's always a bit of a crap-shoot when one shows an 82 year old, black and white film to a couple of college age students. But, with a film as crazy/zany as the 1938 Howard Hawks screwball comedy BRINGING UP BABY, the odds are in your favor.
The college students loved it.
Starring Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn - in their screwball comedy best - BRINGING UP BABY tells the story of a paleontologist (Grant) who is looking to land a $1 million donation, but ends up crossing paths with a wealthy heiress (Hepburn) - who marches to the beat of her own drum.
Told at breakneck speed by Hawks - a trademark of screwball comedy - BRINGING UP BABY is smart, witty, wacky and very, very funny. I was surprised at this viewing just how fast-paced this film is - you do not come up for a breath throughout the entire film. It's a bit exhausting - and exhilarating - kind of like hanging onto a wild roller coaster ride.
Remembered more for their dramatic roles, Hepburn and Grant are marvelous as the 2 leads of this film, they banter back and forth - quickly - throughout the film, they have tremendous chemistry with each other and their patter is a hallmark of these types of films and I was amazed at the dexterity and timing of these 2 pros. They make the dialogue work by not commenting on the comedy of it, but just moving onto the next scene, the next line, the next situation.
The supporting cast - featuring such rubber faced character actors as Charles Ruggles, Barry Fitzgerald, Fritz Feld and Leona Roberts - are just as good and add to the insanity that is seen on the screen. All corralled beautifully by one of the greatest Directors of the Old Hollywood era (the era before 1960), Howard Hawks who would end up directing a few years later the epitome of the screwball comedy - HIS GIRL FRIDAY - but who also Directed such classics as SCARFACE, THE BIG SLEEP, TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT and GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES as well as quite a few John Wayne westerns like RED RIVER, RIO BRAVO and EL DORADO.
Oh...and did I mention...the 3rd leading performer of this film is a Leopard?
If you are looking to introduce someone (or maybe yourself) to a film type of a bygone era - you could do worse than BRINGING UP BABY - a screwball comedy that clips along in 102 fast-paced minutes.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
The college students loved it.
Starring Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn - in their screwball comedy best - BRINGING UP BABY tells the story of a paleontologist (Grant) who is looking to land a $1 million donation, but ends up crossing paths with a wealthy heiress (Hepburn) - who marches to the beat of her own drum.
Told at breakneck speed by Hawks - a trademark of screwball comedy - BRINGING UP BABY is smart, witty, wacky and very, very funny. I was surprised at this viewing just how fast-paced this film is - you do not come up for a breath throughout the entire film. It's a bit exhausting - and exhilarating - kind of like hanging onto a wild roller coaster ride.
Remembered more for their dramatic roles, Hepburn and Grant are marvelous as the 2 leads of this film, they banter back and forth - quickly - throughout the film, they have tremendous chemistry with each other and their patter is a hallmark of these types of films and I was amazed at the dexterity and timing of these 2 pros. They make the dialogue work by not commenting on the comedy of it, but just moving onto the next scene, the next line, the next situation.
The supporting cast - featuring such rubber faced character actors as Charles Ruggles, Barry Fitzgerald, Fritz Feld and Leona Roberts - are just as good and add to the insanity that is seen on the screen. All corralled beautifully by one of the greatest Directors of the Old Hollywood era (the era before 1960), Howard Hawks who would end up directing a few years later the epitome of the screwball comedy - HIS GIRL FRIDAY - but who also Directed such classics as SCARFACE, THE BIG SLEEP, TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT and GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES as well as quite a few John Wayne westerns like RED RIVER, RIO BRAVO and EL DORADO.
Oh...and did I mention...the 3rd leading performer of this film is a Leopard?
If you are looking to introduce someone (or maybe yourself) to a film type of a bygone era - you could do worse than BRINGING UP BABY - a screwball comedy that clips along in 102 fast-paced minutes.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Apr 19, 2017
Hugh Jackman completes his journey as Wolverine (1 more)
An emotional journey
Mutant with Human emotion
There are so many superhero movies these days, that the genre becomes somewhat dull and repetitive, especially when it comes to Marvel (not saying Marvel is dull and boring, but some of the films are somewhat lacking due to how many films there are each year - Just my opinion), but Logan is one of the greatest comic book movies I have seen for a while, for the fact that it makes Logan more human and explores the feeling of trying to fit into society, despite being so different.
Logan has always had a part of him deep down that just wants to be normal. He never wanted his power and though he's thankful for it in some ways he feels like he wouldn't have been lost without it if he never had it to begin with. This film explores that notion even further than the previous films as shows us Logan in the role of a father figure to young Laura and a son figure to a now very old Charles Xavier. In this film Logan doesn't feel like he's a mutant in the company of other mutants, He feels like he's apart of a family.
SPOILERS AHEAD!!
Later in the film we see Logan's fatherly side after Charles passes away, and Logan risks everything to keep Laura safe and to teach her right and wrong, and give her a parenting love that she hasn't known before in her young life. This also shines through the portrayal of young Laura (portrayed by the talented Dafne Keen) as we see her become more and more attached to Old Man Logan (I had to!). This is what makes this film the most human feeling superhero movie that I've ever seen.
The R rating makes this film come to life by bringing death in the most brutal of ways because it allows Laura to see what Logan has become and makes his message to her and to the audience a lot clearer. "Don't become what they made you"
Through all of the bloody violence and anger Laura is able to understand those words more clearly than if it was a 15 rated film because we see Logan when he becomes savage and truly unleashes his full anger that's built up over his long lifetime of war and hatred.
When this film comes to an end (my lord that ending had me balling like a baby) and we see Laura say her final goodbyes to Logan, you don't want it to end because you know that this has finally been the one time that Logan felt human and felt a true connection to someone. (Also because we want Hugh Jackman to be Wolverine forever)
The cinematography and directing of this movie is beautiful to look at and witness as the scenes unfold. The cast perform to the highest of standards and really deliver a convincing story the makes you feel sympathetic to each of the main characters.
Wolverine will never be the same without Hugh Jackman, but we must not be too quick to dismiss the new casting choice when it comes around. You never know, they might surprise you.
Logan has always had a part of him deep down that just wants to be normal. He never wanted his power and though he's thankful for it in some ways he feels like he wouldn't have been lost without it if he never had it to begin with. This film explores that notion even further than the previous films as shows us Logan in the role of a father figure to young Laura and a son figure to a now very old Charles Xavier. In this film Logan doesn't feel like he's a mutant in the company of other mutants, He feels like he's apart of a family.
SPOILERS AHEAD!!
Later in the film we see Logan's fatherly side after Charles passes away, and Logan risks everything to keep Laura safe and to teach her right and wrong, and give her a parenting love that she hasn't known before in her young life. This also shines through the portrayal of young Laura (portrayed by the talented Dafne Keen) as we see her become more and more attached to Old Man Logan (I had to!). This is what makes this film the most human feeling superhero movie that I've ever seen.
The R rating makes this film come to life by bringing death in the most brutal of ways because it allows Laura to see what Logan has become and makes his message to her and to the audience a lot clearer. "Don't become what they made you"
Through all of the bloody violence and anger Laura is able to understand those words more clearly than if it was a 15 rated film because we see Logan when he becomes savage and truly unleashes his full anger that's built up over his long lifetime of war and hatred.
When this film comes to an end (my lord that ending had me balling like a baby) and we see Laura say her final goodbyes to Logan, you don't want it to end because you know that this has finally been the one time that Logan felt human and felt a true connection to someone. (Also because we want Hugh Jackman to be Wolverine forever)
The cinematography and directing of this movie is beautiful to look at and witness as the scenes unfold. The cast perform to the highest of standards and really deliver a convincing story the makes you feel sympathetic to each of the main characters.
Wolverine will never be the same without Hugh Jackman, but we must not be too quick to dismiss the new casting choice when it comes around. You never know, they might surprise you.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Ever since X-men First Class was released, Jean Gray one of the more pivotal characters in the X-Men universe has been surprisingly absent. Often portrayed at not only having psychic abilities that rivals Charles Xavier, but also attracted the admiration of both Cyclops and Wolverine. While she was a staple in the original film and subsequent sequels her first appearance in the newest series did not occur until X-Men Apocalypse. With the release of Dark Phoenix, we had hoped to finally get an opportunity to explore a bit of her background story and her transformation into Dark Phoenix.
Dark Phoenix begins on a small country road where a very young Jean Grey is arguing with her parents over what music to listen to. In traditional parent fashion, her mother reminds her that the driver is the one who chooses the music and when she is old enough to drive she can choose her own music. This small disagreement turns into a deadly confrontation, when the young Jean, unable to control her vast powers causes her mom to fall asleep at the wheel, resulting in a head on collision killing both her parents. The doctors are amazed that this young girl has survived without a single scratch and a young Charles Xavier arrives to take her to a place where she can be safe.
Fast Forward to the year 1992 where the space shuttle Endeavor, on a routine mission, encounters a cosmic entity that cripples it in space. The X-men, who are now looked at as heroes by most of the world are tasked to bring the astronauts safely home, it’s a dangerous mission, but one that Charles feels will further cement the hero status of his team and continue to grow trust between mutants and humans alike. The mission goes surprisingly without incident until Jean and Night Crawler attempt to rescue the final remaining astronaut from the doomed shuttle. Night Crawler quickly teleports the astronaut to safety, but Jean is caught by the full force of the cosmic entity, absorbing it completely and destroying the shuttle. The team scrambles to locate her, and with the help of Night Crawler are once again able to bring her back to the safety of the X-Jet. Relieved that she has somehow miraculously survived the encounter the team is unaware that Jean and themselves will never be the same again.
As we’ve come to expect from the previous X-men movies, a star-studded cast leads the way. Familiar cast members such as Jennifer Lawrence (Raven), Tye Sheridan (Cyclops) and James McAvoy (Charles Xavier) are joined once again by Sophie Turner as the iconic Jean Grey. Sophie does an incredible job at bringing out both the uncertainty in her character and the extreme anger and rage that flows through her. Unfortunately for such a major character the movie only briefly touches the surface of who Jean Grey really is. The movie, even from the start tends to focus on Jean as a dangerous and angry young lady, unable to control her emotions which will ultimately open the doorway to her alter ego Dark Phoenix. The movie unfortunately treats her as a one-off character and skips most of her back story choosing to focus only on her Dark Phoenix personality. This leaves the audience with no understanding of the person she was prior to the transformation, only seeing Jean as an uncontrollable child who has now become an uncontrollable adult with “off the chart” powers. While Charles and other members of the team try to assure those around them (and the audience seated in the theaters) that Jean is a good person, a person worth saving, there is very little in the movie that allows us to sympathize with her plight. It ultimately villainizes her and leaves much of the cast (and the audience) wondering whether destroying her is the right choice for all humankind.
Visually Dark Phoenix is a masterpiece, whether it’s the awe-inspiring deepness of space, or the incredible visual effects as the mutants square off against each other with their powers. Buildings topple, subway cars are pulled from underground and general mayhem takes the stage. This is certainly one of the more action-packed movies in the series and getting the opportunity to watch some of our favorite mutants square off against one another is enough to excite even the ones least interested in the franchise.
Dark Phoenix as one might expect is also one of the darkest of the x-men movies. Unlike its other Marvel film counterparts, there is no levity in the movie at all. There are scenes that are heartwarming, but the movie takes itself very seriously. Even in a similarly dark Marvel movie Endgame there were moments that would make you laugh regardless of how dire the situation was, Dark Phoenix is not like this at all. It carries a weight to it that ensures that not only the people on screen, but those in the audience understand how truly dire the situation is. It detracts a bit from the spirit of the source material it derives from and could potentially alienate its core audience. This is a very adult movie, that deals with some very adult themes and parents might want to think twice before taking their youngest to see this film. With the X-Men franchise finally joining the MCU, it’ll be interesting to see how movies down the road treat these characters.
Dark Phoenix represents the end of an X-Men era that has existed in both its original and First-Class installments for over twenty years. The acquisition of Fox by Disney now brings this venerable franchise to the MCU family along with its cast of seemingly endless characters. While the movie is certainly better than Apocalypse, it can’t quite reach the heights of either First-Class or Days of Futures Past. The Dark Phoenix storyline does a good job staying closer to its comic book roots than its previous outing but rushes the origin and character development of Jean far more than she deserves. It’s a fine ending to the series as a whole but can’t quite deliver in all the ways I hoped it would.
Dark Phoenix begins on a small country road where a very young Jean Grey is arguing with her parents over what music to listen to. In traditional parent fashion, her mother reminds her that the driver is the one who chooses the music and when she is old enough to drive she can choose her own music. This small disagreement turns into a deadly confrontation, when the young Jean, unable to control her vast powers causes her mom to fall asleep at the wheel, resulting in a head on collision killing both her parents. The doctors are amazed that this young girl has survived without a single scratch and a young Charles Xavier arrives to take her to a place where she can be safe.
Fast Forward to the year 1992 where the space shuttle Endeavor, on a routine mission, encounters a cosmic entity that cripples it in space. The X-men, who are now looked at as heroes by most of the world are tasked to bring the astronauts safely home, it’s a dangerous mission, but one that Charles feels will further cement the hero status of his team and continue to grow trust between mutants and humans alike. The mission goes surprisingly without incident until Jean and Night Crawler attempt to rescue the final remaining astronaut from the doomed shuttle. Night Crawler quickly teleports the astronaut to safety, but Jean is caught by the full force of the cosmic entity, absorbing it completely and destroying the shuttle. The team scrambles to locate her, and with the help of Night Crawler are once again able to bring her back to the safety of the X-Jet. Relieved that she has somehow miraculously survived the encounter the team is unaware that Jean and themselves will never be the same again.
As we’ve come to expect from the previous X-men movies, a star-studded cast leads the way. Familiar cast members such as Jennifer Lawrence (Raven), Tye Sheridan (Cyclops) and James McAvoy (Charles Xavier) are joined once again by Sophie Turner as the iconic Jean Grey. Sophie does an incredible job at bringing out both the uncertainty in her character and the extreme anger and rage that flows through her. Unfortunately for such a major character the movie only briefly touches the surface of who Jean Grey really is. The movie, even from the start tends to focus on Jean as a dangerous and angry young lady, unable to control her emotions which will ultimately open the doorway to her alter ego Dark Phoenix. The movie unfortunately treats her as a one-off character and skips most of her back story choosing to focus only on her Dark Phoenix personality. This leaves the audience with no understanding of the person she was prior to the transformation, only seeing Jean as an uncontrollable child who has now become an uncontrollable adult with “off the chart” powers. While Charles and other members of the team try to assure those around them (and the audience seated in the theaters) that Jean is a good person, a person worth saving, there is very little in the movie that allows us to sympathize with her plight. It ultimately villainizes her and leaves much of the cast (and the audience) wondering whether destroying her is the right choice for all humankind.
Visually Dark Phoenix is a masterpiece, whether it’s the awe-inspiring deepness of space, or the incredible visual effects as the mutants square off against each other with their powers. Buildings topple, subway cars are pulled from underground and general mayhem takes the stage. This is certainly one of the more action-packed movies in the series and getting the opportunity to watch some of our favorite mutants square off against one another is enough to excite even the ones least interested in the franchise.
Dark Phoenix as one might expect is also one of the darkest of the x-men movies. Unlike its other Marvel film counterparts, there is no levity in the movie at all. There are scenes that are heartwarming, but the movie takes itself very seriously. Even in a similarly dark Marvel movie Endgame there were moments that would make you laugh regardless of how dire the situation was, Dark Phoenix is not like this at all. It carries a weight to it that ensures that not only the people on screen, but those in the audience understand how truly dire the situation is. It detracts a bit from the spirit of the source material it derives from and could potentially alienate its core audience. This is a very adult movie, that deals with some very adult themes and parents might want to think twice before taking their youngest to see this film. With the X-Men franchise finally joining the MCU, it’ll be interesting to see how movies down the road treat these characters.
Dark Phoenix represents the end of an X-Men era that has existed in both its original and First-Class installments for over twenty years. The acquisition of Fox by Disney now brings this venerable franchise to the MCU family along with its cast of seemingly endless characters. While the movie is certainly better than Apocalypse, it can’t quite reach the heights of either First-Class or Days of Futures Past. The Dark Phoenix storyline does a good job staying closer to its comic book roots than its previous outing but rushes the origin and character development of Jean far more than she deserves. It’s a fine ending to the series as a whole but can’t quite deliver in all the ways I hoped it would.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated How Do You Know (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
How Do You Know? is a heartfelt comedy about a woman who thought she had her whole life planned out and had answers to all the questions except for the most important, what she really wants in life.
Reese Witherspoon plays Lisa a former athlete who recently was cut from her team and is left to wonder what she will do with her life. Lisa has always been a confident woman who dated only athletes like herself. Matty (Owen Wilson), is her current love interest and also an athlete who does not really understand women, their feelings and the importance of monogamy.
Knowing this, Lisa still decides to stay with Matty and try and make things work as a couple.
At the same time, George (Paul Rudd), is being investigated by the FBI for wrong doings within the company that his father Charles (Jack Nicholson), owns. In the same day, George learns he is not only being investigated by the FBI, but his girlfriend breaks up with him because of his problems.
Lisa and George’s paths crossed earlier when a friend decides that it would be a great idea for Lisa to go on a date with a corporate type of guy rather than continue with her current athlete fixaton.
Lisa decides to meet George for dinner, but this sadly does not go well for either of them. Matty decides to be spontaneous and asks Lisa to move in but only ends up pushing her away. As a result, Lisa ends up getting to know George more and they become great friends during the on and off again relationship she has with Matty which leads to Lisa trying to find what she wants in life.
Director James L. Brooks did not allow the film to flow very well due to a slow beginning and middle and Jack Nicholson seemed out of place with such a small part for an actor of his status.
I was not a fan of the cinematography in some scenes and I wish the story would have flowed a little better and while this was not my favorite Reese Witherspoon role, Paul Rudd stole the show with his funny dialogue and silly antics.
Reese Witherspoon plays Lisa a former athlete who recently was cut from her team and is left to wonder what she will do with her life. Lisa has always been a confident woman who dated only athletes like herself. Matty (Owen Wilson), is her current love interest and also an athlete who does not really understand women, their feelings and the importance of monogamy.
Knowing this, Lisa still decides to stay with Matty and try and make things work as a couple.
At the same time, George (Paul Rudd), is being investigated by the FBI for wrong doings within the company that his father Charles (Jack Nicholson), owns. In the same day, George learns he is not only being investigated by the FBI, but his girlfriend breaks up with him because of his problems.
Lisa and George’s paths crossed earlier when a friend decides that it would be a great idea for Lisa to go on a date with a corporate type of guy rather than continue with her current athlete fixaton.
Lisa decides to meet George for dinner, but this sadly does not go well for either of them. Matty decides to be spontaneous and asks Lisa to move in but only ends up pushing her away. As a result, Lisa ends up getting to know George more and they become great friends during the on and off again relationship she has with Matty which leads to Lisa trying to find what she wants in life.
Director James L. Brooks did not allow the film to flow very well due to a slow beginning and middle and Jack Nicholson seemed out of place with such a small part for an actor of his status.
I was not a fan of the cinematography in some scenes and I wish the story would have flowed a little better and while this was not my favorite Reese Witherspoon role, Paul Rudd stole the show with his funny dialogue and silly antics.
ClareR (5603 KP) rated The Memoirs of Stockholm Sven in Books
Aug 9, 2022
The Arctic has always seemed to me to be a terrifying, forbidding place, which sounds very much like I’m not going to enjoy “The Memoirs of Stockholm Sven”, doesn’t it?
Well, wrong.
Fascination and terror seem to often walk hand in hand in my reading. There’s no way that I’d willingly go to these freezing, inhospitable places, but that’s no reason not to read a novel about it.
And what a novel this is.
Sven, who unsurprisingly comes from Stockholm, has always stood out from others and wants to go to the Arctic to seek adventure. But when he does go he finds himself working in a mine. Back-breaking, dangerous work, that ultimately ends in disaster for him. The result is a face that makes him even more of an outcast. But it also seems to attract the people who will be his friends. People who will help him to learn to live in the frozen north independently: Tapio, the Finn who teaches him to trap animals, shows him what to eat and when to eat it; Charles MacIntyre, a Scottish geologist who helps him to find his way back to life after the accident.
This is all written in the first person, and it really does feel like a personal account. You could be forgiven for thinking it’s a true story - in fact it is a very human story. Sven’s determination to survive and learn to be self-sufficient is touching, funny at times and always life affirming. Sven experiences great highs and achievements, as well as terrible lows.
I’m so glad that I read this.
Well, wrong.
Fascination and terror seem to often walk hand in hand in my reading. There’s no way that I’d willingly go to these freezing, inhospitable places, but that’s no reason not to read a novel about it.
And what a novel this is.
Sven, who unsurprisingly comes from Stockholm, has always stood out from others and wants to go to the Arctic to seek adventure. But when he does go he finds himself working in a mine. Back-breaking, dangerous work, that ultimately ends in disaster for him. The result is a face that makes him even more of an outcast. But it also seems to attract the people who will be his friends. People who will help him to learn to live in the frozen north independently: Tapio, the Finn who teaches him to trap animals, shows him what to eat and when to eat it; Charles MacIntyre, a Scottish geologist who helps him to find his way back to life after the accident.
This is all written in the first person, and it really does feel like a personal account. You could be forgiven for thinking it’s a true story - in fact it is a very human story. Sven’s determination to survive and learn to be self-sufficient is touching, funny at times and always life affirming. Sven experiences great highs and achievements, as well as terrible lows.
I’m so glad that I read this.