Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated This Means War (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
It’s been said that all’s fair in love and war and never was the case more evident than in the tale of FDR and Tuck, two best friends who also happen to be partners and top agents at the CIA. After a covert operation doesn’t go as planned the duo find themselves riding their desks in the Los Angeles agency office much to their chagrin.
FDR (Chris Pine) is very confident ladies’ man while Tuck (Tom Hardy) is a divorced father of a little boy looking for “the one”. The more reserved Tuck decides to take his chances with online dating while FDR is content to cruise the local video store searching for his latest conquest. Enter Lauren (Reese Witherspoon), an attractive, independent woman who appears to have everything except a love life.
When Lauren encounters her former fiancé engaged to another woman, she vents her frustration to her best friend Trish (Chelsea Handler) who decides to take matters into her own hands and, unbeknownst to Lauren, produces an online dating profile for Lauren which matches her with Tuck. The first meeting between the two goes very well and they decide to take things slowly and see where this promising start leads. Unfortunately as Trish is heading home she stops in the same video store were FDR is on the prowl and the two mix like oil and water. Undeterred, FDR decides to pursue Lauren.
Eventually Tuck and FDR realize that they’re seeing the same woman and, not wanting to put their friendship in jeopardy, agree that they will continue to see her and let Lauren decide whom she prefers. The fact that neither men in this love triangle acknowledges that they know each other leads to some interesting complications, and naturally jealousies arise between the two friends.
With the full resources of the CIA at their disposal, Tuck and FDR, who’ve both become captivated with Lauren, soon take advantage of their job not only to spy on each other’s dates with Lauren but also to do their best to undermine the other and gain valuable information to help them appear more desirable to Lauren. As if this wasn’t complicated enough, an international criminal named Heinrich (Til Schweiger) is searching for the two agents to seek revenge. Constantly battling one another as well as the impending threat of Heinrich, FDR and Tuck embark on a hysterical and action-packed adventure that is one of the most enjoyable romantic comedies in recent memory.
Sure the film does take a few leaps in logic, such as the CIA turning a blind eye to their use of so many high-level resources in the world of dating but anyone seeing this type of film obviously isn’t expecting realism.
Directed by McG the film mixes action and comedy with a touch of romance and creates an entertaining formula. The three leads work exceptionally well with one another and Hardy and Pine are clearly stars on the rise. Handler does some great supporting work in the film and gets more than her share of laughs. This is definitely one you will not want to miss.
FDR (Chris Pine) is very confident ladies’ man while Tuck (Tom Hardy) is a divorced father of a little boy looking for “the one”. The more reserved Tuck decides to take his chances with online dating while FDR is content to cruise the local video store searching for his latest conquest. Enter Lauren (Reese Witherspoon), an attractive, independent woman who appears to have everything except a love life.
When Lauren encounters her former fiancé engaged to another woman, she vents her frustration to her best friend Trish (Chelsea Handler) who decides to take matters into her own hands and, unbeknownst to Lauren, produces an online dating profile for Lauren which matches her with Tuck. The first meeting between the two goes very well and they decide to take things slowly and see where this promising start leads. Unfortunately as Trish is heading home she stops in the same video store were FDR is on the prowl and the two mix like oil and water. Undeterred, FDR decides to pursue Lauren.
Eventually Tuck and FDR realize that they’re seeing the same woman and, not wanting to put their friendship in jeopardy, agree that they will continue to see her and let Lauren decide whom she prefers. The fact that neither men in this love triangle acknowledges that they know each other leads to some interesting complications, and naturally jealousies arise between the two friends.
With the full resources of the CIA at their disposal, Tuck and FDR, who’ve both become captivated with Lauren, soon take advantage of their job not only to spy on each other’s dates with Lauren but also to do their best to undermine the other and gain valuable information to help them appear more desirable to Lauren. As if this wasn’t complicated enough, an international criminal named Heinrich (Til Schweiger) is searching for the two agents to seek revenge. Constantly battling one another as well as the impending threat of Heinrich, FDR and Tuck embark on a hysterical and action-packed adventure that is one of the most enjoyable romantic comedies in recent memory.
Sure the film does take a few leaps in logic, such as the CIA turning a blind eye to their use of so many high-level resources in the world of dating but anyone seeing this type of film obviously isn’t expecting realism.
Directed by McG the film mixes action and comedy with a touch of romance and creates an entertaining formula. The three leads work exceptionally well with one another and Hardy and Pine are clearly stars on the rise. Handler does some great supporting work in the film and gets more than her share of laughs. This is definitely one you will not want to miss.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hell or High Water (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Sometimes a blind pig finds a truffle”.
One of the joys (and stresses) of the run up to the Oscar weekend is to try to catch all the major award films before the big event. As I bitched about in my BAFTA write-up, UK release dates do NOT make this an easy task, with some films like Paul Verhoeven’s “Elle”, featuring Best Actress nominee Isabelle Huppert, not released until mid March.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
This is not your father’s Jack Ryan; but it should’ve been.
Chris Pine stars as the famed Jack Ryan in this reboot of the character. We open the movie with Ryan
attending school in London on the day many won’t soon forget: September 11, 2001. The events
this day push Ryan into enlisting in the Marines and we join him 3 years later where we see Ryan in
a helicopter with some brothers-in-arms. It doesn’t take long for the helo to be shot down, but not
without Ryan becoming a hero. After extensive rehab from a broken spine, Mr. Ryan is approached by
Thomas Harper (Kevin Costner) to join the CIA as an analyst.
This intro to the movie was short. But what lacks in length it makes up for in the eloquence in which
it delivers the back story for Jack Ryan, thus setting up a whole new franchise and getting new viewers
ready for the ride. After this intro, we flash forward 10 years later to find Ryan working on Wall Street,
but he’s undercover and is an analyst for the CIA. He is with his one-time physical therapist, Cathy
Muller (Keira Knightley), and he discovers the details of a planned economic attack against the USA.
It isn’t long before he is whisked away to Russia to do some wet work, and he bumbles into the life
of a field agent facing off against the mastermind of the villainy in the film, Viktor Cherevin (Kenneth
Branagh).
Some may find that the movie lacks the quick-paced, non-stop action that we have seen from spy
movies these days (including the famous 007), but it does keep a good pace and puts an intelligent story
line on the screen and actually entices the audience to think, all the while including some action for the
adrenaline-junkies.
Pine plays a very believable Jack Ryan. He portrays a character that is more closely linked to Tom
Clancy’s original stories and vision for the character than even Harrison Ford did in Patriot Games (which
I thought was an excellent movie). He nailed the bumbling analyst-turned-field-agent in such a way that
you’d believe it was really his personality. They explain his ability to handle himself with the military
background so expertly set up at the beginning of the movie. Adding Costner to the cast was a stroke
of genius as he plays the mentor/superior part extremely well, but he wasn’t in the film so much as
to distract from the focus of Ryan. Branagh (who also directed the film) played an excellent Russian
adversary to Ryan, who was nothing short of a genius in the way he delivered his character’s stoic
responses and reactions.
If I had to name one gripe with the movie, which believe me was no small feat, it was the Cathy
Muller character. Don’t get me wrong, the character was amazing and Knightley did an admirable job
portraying her. I just felt that she seemed to accept things that most people would question a little too
quickly, and without any reservation.
Other than that, the movie rocked. The action scenes were gripping and the actual story-line was
intelligent. The best thing is that story was plausible. It was not over the top or wildly impossible in the
real world. The scary part is just that. The plot of this movie could actually happen. I would definitely
recommend checking it out in theaters, and it most certainly made my “gotta buy it on bluray” list.
Chris Pine stars as the famed Jack Ryan in this reboot of the character. We open the movie with Ryan
attending school in London on the day many won’t soon forget: September 11, 2001. The events
this day push Ryan into enlisting in the Marines and we join him 3 years later where we see Ryan in
a helicopter with some brothers-in-arms. It doesn’t take long for the helo to be shot down, but not
without Ryan becoming a hero. After extensive rehab from a broken spine, Mr. Ryan is approached by
Thomas Harper (Kevin Costner) to join the CIA as an analyst.
This intro to the movie was short. But what lacks in length it makes up for in the eloquence in which
it delivers the back story for Jack Ryan, thus setting up a whole new franchise and getting new viewers
ready for the ride. After this intro, we flash forward 10 years later to find Ryan working on Wall Street,
but he’s undercover and is an analyst for the CIA. He is with his one-time physical therapist, Cathy
Muller (Keira Knightley), and he discovers the details of a planned economic attack against the USA.
It isn’t long before he is whisked away to Russia to do some wet work, and he bumbles into the life
of a field agent facing off against the mastermind of the villainy in the film, Viktor Cherevin (Kenneth
Branagh).
Some may find that the movie lacks the quick-paced, non-stop action that we have seen from spy
movies these days (including the famous 007), but it does keep a good pace and puts an intelligent story
line on the screen and actually entices the audience to think, all the while including some action for the
adrenaline-junkies.
Pine plays a very believable Jack Ryan. He portrays a character that is more closely linked to Tom
Clancy’s original stories and vision for the character than even Harrison Ford did in Patriot Games (which
I thought was an excellent movie). He nailed the bumbling analyst-turned-field-agent in such a way that
you’d believe it was really his personality. They explain his ability to handle himself with the military
background so expertly set up at the beginning of the movie. Adding Costner to the cast was a stroke
of genius as he plays the mentor/superior part extremely well, but he wasn’t in the film so much as
to distract from the focus of Ryan. Branagh (who also directed the film) played an excellent Russian
adversary to Ryan, who was nothing short of a genius in the way he delivered his character’s stoic
responses and reactions.
If I had to name one gripe with the movie, which believe me was no small feat, it was the Cathy
Muller character. Don’t get me wrong, the character was amazing and Knightley did an admirable job
portraying her. I just felt that she seemed to accept things that most people would question a little too
quickly, and without any reservation.
Other than that, the movie rocked. The action scenes were gripping and the actual story-line was
intelligent. The best thing is that story was plausible. It was not over the top or wildly impossible in the
real world. The scary part is just that. The plot of this movie could actually happen. I would definitely
recommend checking it out in theaters, and it most certainly made my “gotta buy it on bluray” list.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Hell or High Water (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
There are numerous films about bank robbers, loveable villains who we find
ourselves cheering for throughout their escapades. Something was always
missing, though. The actions always seemed simple, shallow, and, at times,
comical in their approach. Hell or High Water breaks from many of the
tropes that we are accustomed to with reality-based crime movies. The film
follows two brothers as they rob a chain of banks in the attempt to save
their home and land from foreclosure.
Hell or High Water demonstrates to the audience the complexity with the
story in which this film is based. Marcus (Ben Foster), who is a career
criminal, returns to a life of crime in order to help his brother Toby
(Chris Pine) create a stable future for his children. He has been pushed
to his limits by the banks who have taken advantage of his dying mother
and sees robbing them as the only possible path. They must be quick,
proficient, and calculated in their actions as they are being pursued by a
Texas Ranger (Jeff Bridges) who sees this case as his chance to achieve
some peace as it keeps him further from retirement.
The film is phenomenal in being able to carry several different
storylines, issues, and directions. The film is about Americans with bank
robbing as the backdrop. It demonstrates how working people feel taken
advantage of by the banks and have no sympathy for them as they argue that
the banks are the real criminals in shady deals that result in people
losing their homes. It is an ideal modern western with “the law” hot on
the tail of the bandits. There is no clear bad guy with the brothers, just
a flawed antiheroes that several in the community will not turn against
because they understand that the boys are “one of them” and applaud them
for taking action against the banks.
Audiences will find themselves engrossed in the storyline, expansive views
of Texas, relating to the anger towards financial institutions, and
rooting for these brothers as they try to save their land and legacy.
ourselves cheering for throughout their escapades. Something was always
missing, though. The actions always seemed simple, shallow, and, at times,
comical in their approach. Hell or High Water breaks from many of the
tropes that we are accustomed to with reality-based crime movies. The film
follows two brothers as they rob a chain of banks in the attempt to save
their home and land from foreclosure.
Hell or High Water demonstrates to the audience the complexity with the
story in which this film is based. Marcus (Ben Foster), who is a career
criminal, returns to a life of crime in order to help his brother Toby
(Chris Pine) create a stable future for his children. He has been pushed
to his limits by the banks who have taken advantage of his dying mother
and sees robbing them as the only possible path. They must be quick,
proficient, and calculated in their actions as they are being pursued by a
Texas Ranger (Jeff Bridges) who sees this case as his chance to achieve
some peace as it keeps him further from retirement.
The film is phenomenal in being able to carry several different
storylines, issues, and directions. The film is about Americans with bank
robbing as the backdrop. It demonstrates how working people feel taken
advantage of by the banks and have no sympathy for them as they argue that
the banks are the real criminals in shady deals that result in people
losing their homes. It is an ideal modern western with “the law” hot on
the tail of the bandits. There is no clear bad guy with the brothers, just
a flawed antiheroes that several in the community will not turn against
because they understand that the boys are “one of them” and applaud them
for taking action against the banks.
Audiences will find themselves engrossed in the storyline, expansive views
of Texas, relating to the anger towards financial institutions, and
rooting for these brothers as they try to save their land and legacy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Horrible Bosses 2 (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Kurt, Nick and Dale are back, and with them comes all the rest in Horrible Bosses 2. This time around, we see our would-be criminals (Jason Sudekis, Jason Bateman and Charlie Dale, respectively) as their own bosses.
Horrible Bosses 2 opens on the trio as a guest on a cheesy day-time talk show. They are there to show off their new invention, the Shower Buddy. This spot gets them some notice from the head of a big time, SkyMall-esque, corporation who wants to place a large order. But when the deal goes south, our boys have to figure out a way to save their own skin, and get back at the corporation.
The greatest thing about this sequel? It was not just a rehashing of the first movie. Yes, there are a lot of the elements there, but the plot was different enough that it could have been a movie of its own and not a prequel. Of course, there were some great call backs to the first movie during the film and the closing credits. But there were new things introduced, and not just the same old re-hashing.
Sudekis, Bateman and Day have such a great chemistry together, too. They played very well off each other, and had near perfect timing through the whole movie. Add to this the returning cast from the first film (Jennifer Aniston, Kevin Spacey, and Jamie Foxx), and introduce Chris Pine and Christoph Waltz to the mix, and it only increases the fun. Our newcomers blew me away too, because I am not used to seeing them in roles such as this.
There is not a lot bad that I can say about this movie. Great performances by main and supporting cast, a well-rounded plot, with the exception of one part of the wrap-up in the end (I won’t spoil it for you), and a very complimentary soundtrack makes this one of the best comedies I have seen in a while. Thumbs up to these guys! I’m hoping they might be able to find the same magic for a third film!
4.5 Stars out of 5
Horrible Bosses 2 opens on the trio as a guest on a cheesy day-time talk show. They are there to show off their new invention, the Shower Buddy. This spot gets them some notice from the head of a big time, SkyMall-esque, corporation who wants to place a large order. But when the deal goes south, our boys have to figure out a way to save their own skin, and get back at the corporation.
The greatest thing about this sequel? It was not just a rehashing of the first movie. Yes, there are a lot of the elements there, but the plot was different enough that it could have been a movie of its own and not a prequel. Of course, there were some great call backs to the first movie during the film and the closing credits. But there were new things introduced, and not just the same old re-hashing.
Sudekis, Bateman and Day have such a great chemistry together, too. They played very well off each other, and had near perfect timing through the whole movie. Add to this the returning cast from the first film (Jennifer Aniston, Kevin Spacey, and Jamie Foxx), and introduce Chris Pine and Christoph Waltz to the mix, and it only increases the fun. Our newcomers blew me away too, because I am not used to seeing them in roles such as this.
There is not a lot bad that I can say about this movie. Great performances by main and supporting cast, a well-rounded plot, with the exception of one part of the wrap-up in the end (I won’t spoil it for you), and a very complimentary soundtrack makes this one of the best comedies I have seen in a while. Thumbs up to these guys! I’m hoping they might be able to find the same magic for a third film!
4.5 Stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Rise of the Guardians (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Remember what it was like when you were in elementary school and it snowed? Remember that feeling of anticipation waiting for your mom to say, “No school today kids”, and once she did you just knew you were going to have a blast? If not, you will when you see “Rise of the Guardians”, The newest animated movie from Dreamworks casts Jack Frost (Chris Pine), the Sand Man, Santa Claus (Alec Baldwin), the Tooth Fairy (Isla Fisher), the Easter Bunny (Hugh Jackman), and the Boogie Man (Jude Law). The later four, except the Boogie Man, all fulfill their individual roles and come together as a group to protect children as the Guardians.
Cast out centuries ago; Pitch (Law) concocts a plan to bring fear back into children’s hearts by turning their dreams into nightmares. This fear will make him more powerful and, as the Guardian’s lose children’s belief, they become less powerful and are not as able to fight him off. Around the same time that Pitch was cast out, the Man in the Moon picks Jack to be the newest Guardian. Jack is literally left out in the cold for the next 300 years which he spends having fun, creating mischief, and causing snow days. However, he is also on a search for what he is meant to do in life, and why he is here. Something that people of all ages can understand. Through helping the Guardians he finds his purpose.
You know you are at a good show when you sit in an audience consisting mostly of children and hear nothing but the movie. This was a great movie for kids of all ages; I laughed through the whole thing! I loved Santa Claus and his Yetis. They added comic relief that any adult will enjoy. The voice casting was spot on, and each character is relatable in some way. The story of finding one’s self will capture children’s attention and remind adults that they are always on that journey, but it is supposed to be fun. Both children and adults alike will be captivated by the dreams, wonder, memories, hope, and fun this movie provides.
Cast out centuries ago; Pitch (Law) concocts a plan to bring fear back into children’s hearts by turning their dreams into nightmares. This fear will make him more powerful and, as the Guardian’s lose children’s belief, they become less powerful and are not as able to fight him off. Around the same time that Pitch was cast out, the Man in the Moon picks Jack to be the newest Guardian. Jack is literally left out in the cold for the next 300 years which he spends having fun, creating mischief, and causing snow days. However, he is also on a search for what he is meant to do in life, and why he is here. Something that people of all ages can understand. Through helping the Guardians he finds his purpose.
You know you are at a good show when you sit in an audience consisting mostly of children and hear nothing but the movie. This was a great movie for kids of all ages; I laughed through the whole thing! I loved Santa Claus and his Yetis. They added comic relief that any adult will enjoy. The voice casting was spot on, and each character is relatable in some way. The story of finding one’s self will capture children’s attention and remind adults that they are always on that journey, but it is supposed to be fun. Both children and adults alike will be captivated by the dreams, wonder, memories, hope, and fun this movie provides.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) in Movies
Jan 10, 2021
Misses more than it hits
The first Gal Gadot-led WONDER WOMAN film (2017) is generally regarded by most (myself included) as the finest film in the DCEU and Gal Gadot’s portrayal of Diana Prince/Wonder Woman is the highlight of any DCEU film that she appears in, so it was with much (delayed) anticipation that a viewing of WONDER WOMAN 1984 (finally) took place.
It’s too bad that the filmmakers couldn’t take the time in the delay of this movie’s release to craft a better film.
WONDER WOMAN 1984 takes the titular character and places this ageless Supehero in the titular timeframe. What Director Patty Jenkins (who so wonderfully brought us the first Wonder Woman film) and the her co-script writer Geoff Johns and all of the others who crafted this film failed to do was to capitalize on their hero and this timeline.
After an opening scene that flashbacks to Diana Prince’s youth on her isolated island of Themyscira (a scene who’s sole purpose, it seems, is to shoehorn favorites Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen from the first film into this one). We then go to a fight in a 1980’s mall (in a clear homage to such fights as the ones in COMMANDO and TRUE LIES - action sequences, that I might add, that were done better by Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron). So back-to-back, this film starts off on unsure footing.
Enter Pedro Pascal’s main villain Maxwell Lord with the ability of a truly wonderful, memorable, villain to elevate the proceedings.
He does not.
Plain and simple, Pascal’s Maxwell Lord just doesn’t work as as a villain. He would have been a nice “secondary villain”.
Which is how I would recommend that Jenkins and Johns approach this character and film, for the secondary villain, Barbara Minerva/Cheetah worked better for me.
As portrayed by Kristen Wiig, we first encounter Minerva as a mousey, insecure co-worker of Diana Prince but slowly - over the course of the film - Minerva becomes stronger and more self-assured and when her transformation into Cheetah is complete, she is a viable opponent for Wonder Woman. And with Gadot’s strong (expected) portrayal of Diana/Wonder Woman the scenes of these 2 playing off each other - both physically and verbally - elevates this film above mediocrity.
As does the chemistry between Gadot and Chris Pine as Steve Trevor (from the first film). This relationship was one of the best parts of the first film, so the filmmakers had to figure out how to bring him back - and how they decided to do it was “fine” (with one issue I have that I can’t reveal but I also think a simple “tweak” in the storyline would have fixed). Because these 2 have such tremendous character - and because Pascal’s villain character is weak - this movie spends way too much time on Diana and Steve and this film loses it’s focus multiple times.
But…a few good action scenes would have saved things - but there aren’t really any. Certainly none that are as visually interesting, and emotionally satisfying, as the “no man’s land” scene in the first film.
This movie is “fine” and with the performances of Gadot, Pine and Wiig, they elevate the needle a little above “fine”. So I will give this movie about a point more than I (probably) should - which puts this film as one of the better films of the DCEU - which says more about the state of the DCEU than it does about this movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It’s too bad that the filmmakers couldn’t take the time in the delay of this movie’s release to craft a better film.
WONDER WOMAN 1984 takes the titular character and places this ageless Supehero in the titular timeframe. What Director Patty Jenkins (who so wonderfully brought us the first Wonder Woman film) and the her co-script writer Geoff Johns and all of the others who crafted this film failed to do was to capitalize on their hero and this timeline.
After an opening scene that flashbacks to Diana Prince’s youth on her isolated island of Themyscira (a scene who’s sole purpose, it seems, is to shoehorn favorites Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen from the first film into this one). We then go to a fight in a 1980’s mall (in a clear homage to such fights as the ones in COMMANDO and TRUE LIES - action sequences, that I might add, that were done better by Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron). So back-to-back, this film starts off on unsure footing.
Enter Pedro Pascal’s main villain Maxwell Lord with the ability of a truly wonderful, memorable, villain to elevate the proceedings.
He does not.
Plain and simple, Pascal’s Maxwell Lord just doesn’t work as as a villain. He would have been a nice “secondary villain”.
Which is how I would recommend that Jenkins and Johns approach this character and film, for the secondary villain, Barbara Minerva/Cheetah worked better for me.
As portrayed by Kristen Wiig, we first encounter Minerva as a mousey, insecure co-worker of Diana Prince but slowly - over the course of the film - Minerva becomes stronger and more self-assured and when her transformation into Cheetah is complete, she is a viable opponent for Wonder Woman. And with Gadot’s strong (expected) portrayal of Diana/Wonder Woman the scenes of these 2 playing off each other - both physically and verbally - elevates this film above mediocrity.
As does the chemistry between Gadot and Chris Pine as Steve Trevor (from the first film). This relationship was one of the best parts of the first film, so the filmmakers had to figure out how to bring him back - and how they decided to do it was “fine” (with one issue I have that I can’t reveal but I also think a simple “tweak” in the storyline would have fixed). Because these 2 have such tremendous character - and because Pascal’s villain character is weak - this movie spends way too much time on Diana and Steve and this film loses it’s focus multiple times.
But…a few good action scenes would have saved things - but there aren’t really any. Certainly none that are as visually interesting, and emotionally satisfying, as the “no man’s land” scene in the first film.
This movie is “fine” and with the performances of Gadot, Pine and Wiig, they elevate the needle a little above “fine”. So I will give this movie about a point more than I (probably) should - which puts this film as one of the better films of the DCEU - which says more about the state of the DCEU than it does about this movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Solid Bounceback for the DCEU
After the safety of her homeland Themyscira is threatened, Diana (Gal Gadot), strongest of the Amazon warriors, hurls herself into the middle of World War I to find the source of the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 2
The movie starts off a bit slow, but does pick up rather quickly after the first ten minutes. I wasn’t in love in how they tried to establish the land of the Amazonians. Felt too factual and not very story driven. I know it’s one of those things that has to be done, but I’ve seen it done way better a number of times before so I can’t excuse it.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The beautiful shots of Themyscira and the Amazonian training rituals borders on poetic at times, something you might read about in a famous ballad. Director Patty Jenkins does an amazing job of capturing the sanctity of this place, a place you don’t want to see get violated. Themyscira is pictured perfectly, it’s not just a Hawaii with women warriors. You can feel the change when Diana hits the real world and things become darker.
I thought it might be hard to capture Wonder Woman’s true strength on the big screen, but it is done almost effortlessly here with gritty scenes and slow-motion shots on impact blows. While I thought BVS overdid things with its slow-motion efforts, Jenkins has a way of capturing the perfect mood when she slows the camera down rather than it being just a mere effect. She really captures the heart of the story in every shot.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Story was great except…Did we really need that one scene between Diana and Steve (Chris Pine)? I thought, not only did it betray the overall message of the film, but it felt forced and unnecessary. I would much rather have watched Wonder Woman just kick ass and take names and remain true to who her character was.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 89
After a couple crappy movies, DC finally began to right the ship with Wonder Woman. I am hoping the future will bring more movies like this and less movies like Suicide Squad. Not only is it a great film for women superheroes, but it’s just a great film period.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 2
The movie starts off a bit slow, but does pick up rather quickly after the first ten minutes. I wasn’t in love in how they tried to establish the land of the Amazonians. Felt too factual and not very story driven. I know it’s one of those things that has to be done, but I’ve seen it done way better a number of times before so I can’t excuse it.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The beautiful shots of Themyscira and the Amazonian training rituals borders on poetic at times, something you might read about in a famous ballad. Director Patty Jenkins does an amazing job of capturing the sanctity of this place, a place you don’t want to see get violated. Themyscira is pictured perfectly, it’s not just a Hawaii with women warriors. You can feel the change when Diana hits the real world and things become darker.
I thought it might be hard to capture Wonder Woman’s true strength on the big screen, but it is done almost effortlessly here with gritty scenes and slow-motion shots on impact blows. While I thought BVS overdid things with its slow-motion efforts, Jenkins has a way of capturing the perfect mood when she slows the camera down rather than it being just a mere effect. She really captures the heart of the story in every shot.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Story was great except…Did we really need that one scene between Diana and Steve (Chris Pine)? I thought, not only did it betray the overall message of the film, but it felt forced and unnecessary. I would much rather have watched Wonder Woman just kick ass and take names and remain true to who her character was.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 89
After a couple crappy movies, DC finally began to right the ship with Wonder Woman. I am hoping the future will bring more movies like this and less movies like Suicide Squad. Not only is it a great film for women superheroes, but it’s just a great film period.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated A Wrinkle in Time (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The classic children’s book A Wrinkle In Time has come to the big screen with a big-budget presentation under the direction of noted Director Ava DuVernay.
The story had been adapted prior in a 2003 television movie but this time out the scope is much larger as are the names associated with it.
The story follows a young girl named Meg (Storm Reid), who has withdrawn following the disappearance of her father (Chris Pine), four years earlier. Her brilliant adopted brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) is very protective of Meg and wants to help ease the suffering she has endured over the loss of their father.
Enter the quirky Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspon), who Charles Wallace has been talking to unbeknownst to his family who in turn seem taken aback by her arrival and strange nature. Charles Wallace soon introduces his sister and schoolmate Calvin (Levi Miller), to Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), who also shares some unusual quirks as well. With the arrival of the final piece in Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), the children are whisked away to another planet on a search to find the missing father and help restore light to the universe from a dark threat that endangers the universe.
What follows is a series of adventures, quirky characters, and bright visuals as the children and mysterious strangers embark on a grand adventure.
The cast is very appealing but I would love to know if the three stars filmed their scenes at the same time as it did appear at times if they were added in post-production as they did not seem to have much direct interactions with one another. The film does tackle some deep and at times dark subject matter which may be a bit much for younger viewers. One would think that Quantum Entanglements and folding space would be subjects more likely found in Star Trek vs a family film but the film does have some good messages and themes which are essential for younger viewers to note.
The film moves at a deliberate pace and does not erupt into overblown action sequences so viewers expecting a rousing action/adventure will need to temper their expectations.
For those looking for a film with an empowering message aimed at younger viewers, than “A Wrinkle in Time”, may be just the thing for an enjoyable family outing to the local cinema.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/07/a-wrinkle-in-time/
The story had been adapted prior in a 2003 television movie but this time out the scope is much larger as are the names associated with it.
The story follows a young girl named Meg (Storm Reid), who has withdrawn following the disappearance of her father (Chris Pine), four years earlier. Her brilliant adopted brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) is very protective of Meg and wants to help ease the suffering she has endured over the loss of their father.
Enter the quirky Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspon), who Charles Wallace has been talking to unbeknownst to his family who in turn seem taken aback by her arrival and strange nature. Charles Wallace soon introduces his sister and schoolmate Calvin (Levi Miller), to Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), who also shares some unusual quirks as well. With the arrival of the final piece in Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), the children are whisked away to another planet on a search to find the missing father and help restore light to the universe from a dark threat that endangers the universe.
What follows is a series of adventures, quirky characters, and bright visuals as the children and mysterious strangers embark on a grand adventure.
The cast is very appealing but I would love to know if the three stars filmed their scenes at the same time as it did appear at times if they were added in post-production as they did not seem to have much direct interactions with one another. The film does tackle some deep and at times dark subject matter which may be a bit much for younger viewers. One would think that Quantum Entanglements and folding space would be subjects more likely found in Star Trek vs a family film but the film does have some good messages and themes which are essential for younger viewers to note.
The film moves at a deliberate pace and does not erupt into overblown action sequences so viewers expecting a rousing action/adventure will need to temper their expectations.
For those looking for a film with an empowering message aimed at younger viewers, than “A Wrinkle in Time”, may be just the thing for an enjoyable family outing to the local cinema.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/07/a-wrinkle-in-time/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) in Movies
Dec 28, 2018
The first "true" comic book movie
The animated feature, SPIDERMAN: INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE, is the first, true "comic-book" film I have ever seen.
"But wait", you say, "How about the Marvel films? Or the DC Universe films? Or the X-Men or DeadPool? Aren't they Comic-Book films?".
I would have to answer - "no". At least not in the same way. All of those properties are films that are BASED on comic-books. Spider-verse, brilliantly, is a comic-book brought to life. It includes scenes that look like pages of a comic book (or graphic novel). It uses thought bubbles,sound effect words and abstract images. The characters are distorted and when other versions of the Spider-Verse are scene (not a spoiler: it's in the title), they are designed in a different graphic style.
Credit for this unique vision/type of film must start with the writers, Phil Lord (The Lego Movie) and Rodney Rothman (22 Jump Street) as well as Directors Bob Persischetti (in his Directing debut) and Rothman (again). These 3 brought to the screen a dazzling visual storytelling vision that is engrossing and interesting and (I am sure) will become richer and richer the more that this film is viewed.
This vision must have been apparent from the "get-go" as these 3 were able to load some top-notch voice talent into this film - Mahershala Ali, Hailee Steinfeld, Jake Johnson, Lily Tomlin(!), Zoe Kravitz, John Mulaney, Kathryn Hahn, Liev Schrieber, Chris Pine and good ol' Nicholas Cage all bring their "A" game to the voices, presenting (instantly) interesting, distinct characters to this interesting, distinct world.
The action of this film moves at a fast-pace, but not so fast that you get lost and the emotions of the film are strong, so the "slow" scenes are just as well paced and don't seem too slow.
I see alot of films, and it is rare when I am struck with how "unusual" a film is. And this one IS unusual - in a very good way. I was thoroughly entertained throughout and I cannot wait to see this film again to catch some of the things I missed the first time through and have a deeper and richer experience for knowing what is to come.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars (yes, it's that good!) and you can take this to the Bank(ofMarquis)
"But wait", you say, "How about the Marvel films? Or the DC Universe films? Or the X-Men or DeadPool? Aren't they Comic-Book films?".
I would have to answer - "no". At least not in the same way. All of those properties are films that are BASED on comic-books. Spider-verse, brilliantly, is a comic-book brought to life. It includes scenes that look like pages of a comic book (or graphic novel). It uses thought bubbles,sound effect words and abstract images. The characters are distorted and when other versions of the Spider-Verse are scene (not a spoiler: it's in the title), they are designed in a different graphic style.
Credit for this unique vision/type of film must start with the writers, Phil Lord (The Lego Movie) and Rodney Rothman (22 Jump Street) as well as Directors Bob Persischetti (in his Directing debut) and Rothman (again). These 3 brought to the screen a dazzling visual storytelling vision that is engrossing and interesting and (I am sure) will become richer and richer the more that this film is viewed.
This vision must have been apparent from the "get-go" as these 3 were able to load some top-notch voice talent into this film - Mahershala Ali, Hailee Steinfeld, Jake Johnson, Lily Tomlin(!), Zoe Kravitz, John Mulaney, Kathryn Hahn, Liev Schrieber, Chris Pine and good ol' Nicholas Cage all bring their "A" game to the voices, presenting (instantly) interesting, distinct characters to this interesting, distinct world.
The action of this film moves at a fast-pace, but not so fast that you get lost and the emotions of the film are strong, so the "slow" scenes are just as well paced and don't seem too slow.
I see alot of films, and it is rare when I am struck with how "unusual" a film is. And this one IS unusual - in a very good way. I was thoroughly entertained throughout and I cannot wait to see this film again to catch some of the things I missed the first time through and have a deeper and richer experience for knowing what is to come.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars (yes, it's that good!) and you can take this to the Bank(ofMarquis)