Search
Search results
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)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) in Movies
Dec 16, 2020
Gal Gadot: stunning (2 more)
Movie with real heart
Excellent cinematography
WW dot Well Worth Waiting for Gadot
The long delayed release of the Wonder Woman sequel has finally happened, and it is well worth waiting for.
Gal Gadot is fabulous as the Amazonian beauty (and then some) with Chris Pine reprising his role from the first thing. (Of all the WTF moments of 2020 trailers, this was top of the list.... just HOW? A McGuffin is involved, but no spoilers here!).
In brief, Patty Jenkins delivers a popcorn blockbuster than has legs (over and above Gadot's perfect specimens!): the Goblet-of-Fire-Potteresque pre-title sequence is thrilling and engaging. And the story builds cleverly through the first half of the movie. Above all, there is a heap of HEART involved here.... this is not your run of the mill supervillain showdown flick. In fact, it's a movie with TWO villain (normally a doom-laden premise for this reviewer... "Spider Man 3".... shudder), but here it really works well.
Sure, there is a requirement for a suspension of belief, but - hey - it's a DC movie. On a slight downside, the second half of the movie - for me -unfortunately doesn't quite live up to the promise of first half, blending "Bruce Almighty" with "Superman 2" and rather over-egging the pudding.
But in a morass of B-pics, this sequel is one that is gorgeous to look at (Matthew Jensen's cinematography is superb), gorgeous to listen to (an epic score by Hans Zimmer) and is genuinely engaging. There's also a nice vein of humour running through it... when Kristen Wiig is in a park, a rough sleeper on a bench is reading "Waiting for Godot".... or is it "Waiting for Gadot"??
It's such a brief scene, I wasn't sure!
Although I DEPLORE the Warner Brother's decision to release their material in parallel to streaming, here is a movie that is WELL WORTH you getting out to the cinema to see... assuming that you can find a UK cinema open (I saw this in the excellent Showcase De Luxe in Southampton).
Oh, and if you are someone who dives for the exit at the first title... resist... there is an excellent mid-title sequence featuring a wonderful cameo for us older folks!
(Please check out the full graphical review on bob-the-movie-man, which will be going live shortly. Thanks).
Gal Gadot is fabulous as the Amazonian beauty (and then some) with Chris Pine reprising his role from the first thing. (Of all the WTF moments of 2020 trailers, this was top of the list.... just HOW? A McGuffin is involved, but no spoilers here!).
In brief, Patty Jenkins delivers a popcorn blockbuster than has legs (over and above Gadot's perfect specimens!): the Goblet-of-Fire-Potteresque pre-title sequence is thrilling and engaging. And the story builds cleverly through the first half of the movie. Above all, there is a heap of HEART involved here.... this is not your run of the mill supervillain showdown flick. In fact, it's a movie with TWO villain (normally a doom-laden premise for this reviewer... "Spider Man 3".... shudder), but here it really works well.
Sure, there is a requirement for a suspension of belief, but - hey - it's a DC movie. On a slight downside, the second half of the movie - for me -unfortunately doesn't quite live up to the promise of first half, blending "Bruce Almighty" with "Superman 2" and rather over-egging the pudding.
But in a morass of B-pics, this sequel is one that is gorgeous to look at (Matthew Jensen's cinematography is superb), gorgeous to listen to (an epic score by Hans Zimmer) and is genuinely engaging. There's also a nice vein of humour running through it... when Kristen Wiig is in a park, a rough sleeper on a bench is reading "Waiting for Godot".... or is it "Waiting for Gadot"??
It's such a brief scene, I wasn't sure!
Although I DEPLORE the Warner Brother's decision to release their material in parallel to streaming, here is a movie that is WELL WORTH you getting out to the cinema to see... assuming that you can find a UK cinema open (I saw this in the excellent Showcase De Luxe in Southampton).
Oh, and if you are someone who dives for the exit at the first title... resist... there is an excellent mid-title sequence featuring a wonderful cameo for us older folks!
(Please check out the full graphical review on bob-the-movie-man, which will be going live shortly. Thanks).
Fred (860 KP) rated Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) in Movies
Dec 27, 2020
Not such a wonder
Contains spoilers, click to show
There are some good scenes in WW84. The beginning scene, followed by the mall scene, both great scenes. The highway scene, the invisible jet scene, very cool. But scenes don't make a movie. Well, they do, but you know what I mean. A few good scenes doesn't make a movie good. The movie is very slow, badly paced & the story, quite frankly, stinks.
Again, Wonder Woman is pitted against a villain that is boring. He is played very well by the Mandolorian, Pedro Pascal. But the character is weak. We also have Kristen Wiig as the Cheetah, I guess. She's just an 80s chick until the very end, when she is turned into a cheetah woman & we're "treated" to a CGI fight, that is so dark & so badly directed, you'll struggle to see anything going on or get a good look at Cheetah, except for the bad make-up job on Wiig's face. Speaking of Wiig, she's okay, but nothing special.
I know I'm in the minority, but I don't find Gal Gadot a very good Wonder Woman. She's pretty, she kicks ass, but her acting is not very good. The character is dull. And I find the way her accent is there one minute & gone the next annoying. I laughed out loud when she tells the guy at the end that she likes his Auschwitz (outfit). She's easily the weakest character in the film. And like the first movie, we're spending most of the time wanting to see Wonder Woman on screen instead of Diana.
Chris Pine is great, as always & the reverse "seeing new things" scenes as he's introduced to the 80s are as great as they were in the first movie when Diana is shown new things.
But the real problem of the film is the story. Wonder Woman saves the day by asking people to give up their wishes. Nice dream, but would never happen. We know the world is full of scumbags that would never give up power, or money or anything for anyone else. WW talks to us, the audience & makes a plea that would flop just as much as this film. Throw in the 2 & a half hour runtime, far too long and I found myself bored for most of it. Not every superhero movie has to be so long. And instead of spending time on character & story development, they wasted it on scenes that did nothing to advance the plot.
Oh, stay tuned for the mid-credit scene. It's okay & worth it.
Again, Wonder Woman is pitted against a villain that is boring. He is played very well by the Mandolorian, Pedro Pascal. But the character is weak. We also have Kristen Wiig as the Cheetah, I guess. She's just an 80s chick until the very end, when she is turned into a cheetah woman & we're "treated" to a CGI fight, that is so dark & so badly directed, you'll struggle to see anything going on or get a good look at Cheetah, except for the bad make-up job on Wiig's face. Speaking of Wiig, she's okay, but nothing special.
I know I'm in the minority, but I don't find Gal Gadot a very good Wonder Woman. She's pretty, she kicks ass, but her acting is not very good. The character is dull. And I find the way her accent is there one minute & gone the next annoying. I laughed out loud when she tells the guy at the end that she likes his Auschwitz (outfit). She's easily the weakest character in the film. And like the first movie, we're spending most of the time wanting to see Wonder Woman on screen instead of Diana.
Chris Pine is great, as always & the reverse "seeing new things" scenes as he's introduced to the 80s are as great as they were in the first movie when Diana is shown new things.
But the real problem of the film is the story. Wonder Woman saves the day by asking people to give up their wishes. Nice dream, but would never happen. We know the world is full of scumbags that would never give up power, or money or anything for anyone else. WW talks to us, the audience & makes a plea that would flop just as much as this film. Throw in the 2 & a half hour runtime, far too long and I found myself bored for most of it. Not every superhero movie has to be so long. And instead of spending time on character & story development, they wasted it on scenes that did nothing to advance the plot.
Oh, stay tuned for the mid-credit scene. It's okay & worth it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The best movie of the summer has arrived, and it’s Star Trek Into Darkness!
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).