Search
Search results
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated The Assassin's Mark in Books
Nov 5, 2018
Firstly I must thank Ebsworth not only for providing a complimentary copy of this book in return for an honest review, but also for having immense patience in waiting for me to provide him with that review. I must also point out how much I have enjoyed reading this book, even if I did struggle to get into the book at first.
There are several aspects which I feel to be major strengths in this book, particularly the characterisation. The assembled cast of characters are all extravagantly wonderful in their own ways, working well together and being entirely believable in the context of the text. In addition, it is worth commenting that they work as well individually as they do collectively, a great testament to Ebsworth's writing style. Jack Telford, as the main character, is a wonderful example of manhood and his cynicism in the tour breathes a breath of fresh air, prompting much thought by the reader on the matters discussed.
A further strength of this book is it's intricate and well developed plot. It is brilliantly put together, with mystery and thought provoking elements all combined with some humour and great history. I can't compliment enough the many well written twists and turns in this novel, whether it's sudden and unexpected deaths or mysterious figures appearing at odd intervals, there's always something that keeps the reader on the edge of their seats and thinking of what could be happening behind closed doors. It's a fantastic read for making you think about what you are reading, however, this is an occasional downside as it makes it a difficult book to read when you only have a few minutes spare.
Perhaps, for me, the best aspect of this book is the detailed research that shines through on every page. It is evident, even to someone with a limited knowledge of the Spanish Civil War, that there is much to learn in this book and that it has been incredibly well researched. Clearly, Ebsworth put much time into his research, and to his credit, as it adds an extra dimension to this story.
Finally, there is little else for me to say other than to recommend this book to all who enjoy history, a good mystery and a strong leading character.
There are several aspects which I feel to be major strengths in this book, particularly the characterisation. The assembled cast of characters are all extravagantly wonderful in their own ways, working well together and being entirely believable in the context of the text. In addition, it is worth commenting that they work as well individually as they do collectively, a great testament to Ebsworth's writing style. Jack Telford, as the main character, is a wonderful example of manhood and his cynicism in the tour breathes a breath of fresh air, prompting much thought by the reader on the matters discussed.
A further strength of this book is it's intricate and well developed plot. It is brilliantly put together, with mystery and thought provoking elements all combined with some humour and great history. I can't compliment enough the many well written twists and turns in this novel, whether it's sudden and unexpected deaths or mysterious figures appearing at odd intervals, there's always something that keeps the reader on the edge of their seats and thinking of what could be happening behind closed doors. It's a fantastic read for making you think about what you are reading, however, this is an occasional downside as it makes it a difficult book to read when you only have a few minutes spare.
Perhaps, for me, the best aspect of this book is the detailed research that shines through on every page. It is evident, even to someone with a limited knowledge of the Spanish Civil War, that there is much to learn in this book and that it has been incredibly well researched. Clearly, Ebsworth put much time into his research, and to his credit, as it adds an extra dimension to this story.
Finally, there is little else for me to say other than to recommend this book to all who enjoy history, a good mystery and a strong leading character.
David McK (3188 KP) rated Lost Stars (Star Wars) in Books
Jan 28, 2019
Earlier this year, I read the first of the 'new' Star Wars books leading up the The Force Awakens, following Disney's abolition of the old Expanded Universe (said book was [a:Chuck Wendig|17152|Chuck Wendig|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1294919586p2/17152.jpg] 's [b:Aftermath|25131600|Aftermath (Star Wars Aftermath, #1)|Chuck Wendig|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1426620007s/25131600.jpg|44828548] ).
While th ebook was all right, it didn't (I felt) live up the 'original' (now no longer canon) continuation of [a:Timothy Zahn|12479|Timothy Zahn|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1215545810p2/12479.jpg]'s 'Heir to the Empire' trilogy, or of some of the books that came after.
I only discovered recently, when I read an article released just before the second of Wendig's Star Wars books, that he is actually a screen-writer rather than a novelist, which goes some way (I felt) towards explaining the choppy structure of the novel.
In the comments on that article, a couple of the contributors had mentioned other 'new' Star Wars books they had read, with most stating this was one of the best, so I decided to give it a go :)
Starting roughly 8 years after 'Revenge of the Sith', this novel follows the exploits of 2 childhood friends (who grow up to be more than friends) from a backwater planet, who end up fighting on different sides of the Galactic Civil War. As such, this takes in all the key events of the original trilogy - The Tantive IV chase, destruction of Alderaan, blowing up of the first Death Star, attack on Hoth, Asteroid chase, Bespin, the space battle above Endor/second Death Star - and goes slightly beyond into explaining why there is a crashed Star Destroyer on the planet Jakku (from the start of The Force Awakens).
Remember in the movies, the lines 'There goes another one / hold your fire' right at the start of the original, with the jettison of an escape pod that holds R2-D2 and C3PO? The character who utters those (NOT either of the two main character here) is given a background, as is that who has 'analysed their attack, and has found a danger'.
Of the two leading-into-The Force Awakens novels I've read so far this year, this is the better
While th ebook was all right, it didn't (I felt) live up the 'original' (now no longer canon) continuation of [a:Timothy Zahn|12479|Timothy Zahn|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1215545810p2/12479.jpg]'s 'Heir to the Empire' trilogy, or of some of the books that came after.
I only discovered recently, when I read an article released just before the second of Wendig's Star Wars books, that he is actually a screen-writer rather than a novelist, which goes some way (I felt) towards explaining the choppy structure of the novel.
In the comments on that article, a couple of the contributors had mentioned other 'new' Star Wars books they had read, with most stating this was one of the best, so I decided to give it a go :)
Starting roughly 8 years after 'Revenge of the Sith', this novel follows the exploits of 2 childhood friends (who grow up to be more than friends) from a backwater planet, who end up fighting on different sides of the Galactic Civil War. As such, this takes in all the key events of the original trilogy - The Tantive IV chase, destruction of Alderaan, blowing up of the first Death Star, attack on Hoth, Asteroid chase, Bespin, the space battle above Endor/second Death Star - and goes slightly beyond into explaining why there is a crashed Star Destroyer on the planet Jakku (from the start of The Force Awakens).
Remember in the movies, the lines 'There goes another one / hold your fire' right at the start of the original, with the jettison of an escape pod that holds R2-D2 and C3PO? The character who utters those (NOT either of the two main character here) is given a background, as is that who has 'analysed their attack, and has found a danger'.
Of the two leading-into-The Force Awakens novels I've read so far this year, this is the better
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated X-Men: Apocalypse (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Another case of threequel-itis
“At least we can agree the third one is always the worst” barks a young Jean Grey in X-Men: Apocalypse. And whilst the film stays well away from the poor efforts of Spider-Man 3 and The Last Stand, there’s more truth to that statement here than director Bryan Singer would want you to believe.
X-Men: Apocalypse picks up after the events of its brilliant predecessor, Days of Future Past, as mutants and humans continue to live alongside each other, not necessarily in peace – but not in war either.
The film begins with an introduction to our titular villain, played by Oscar Issac, in Cairo as he aims to recruit four followers – the four horsemen of the apocalypse if you will. Soon after, the audience is whisked away to a more familiar sight, Charles Xavier’s school for gifted youngsters.
After the awakening of Oscar Issac’s villain, and his recruitment of Storm, Magneto, Angel and Psylocke, the X-Men must unite to save humans and mutants alike from being destroyed.
The majority of the ‘younger’ cast return in this instalment with some exciting, and some not so exciting additions. Game of Thrones’ Sophie Turner joins the series as Jean Grey, channelling Famke Janssen reasonably well. Kodi Smit-McPhee is fantastic as Nightcrawler and Tye Sheridan finally does away with James Marsden’s whiney Cyclops.
Apocalypse belongs to Evan Peters and Quicksilver. As with Days of Future Past, he brings the screen to life and as with its predecessor, stars in the film’s standout sequence. However, in an effort to improve on what came before it, the writers have tried too hard to make it bigger and better – the finished product lacks finesse with some poorly finished CGI detracting from the overall effect.
Elsewhere, Michael Fassbender is the perfect man to play Magneto but James McAvoy remains miscast as Charles Xavier. It’s only once he loses his hair that we start to see the character he should’ve been right from the beginning. Jennifer Lawrence finally gets into her groove as Mystique after failing to make an impact in First Class and Days of Future Past.
The story is a little underdeveloped, especially after the great writing brought to life in Captain America: Civil War. Despite constantly being told about the stakes never being higher, it doesn’t really feel like anything awful is going to happen. This is, in part, not helped by Apocalypse being a little bit of a wet lettuce when it comes to superhero villains.
Unfortunately, the abundance of CGI only hampers the film further. There is far too much green screen and certain scenes feel unbelievable as a result. The finale in particular is incredibly underwhelming and becomes an ugly mix of special effects.
There’s a problem with the pacing too. After spending nearly an hour introducing the audience to the new mutants; Apocalypse takes a scalpel to the ending with, well the results you’d expect. It’s choppily edited and hastily stitched back together
Nevertheless, this is not a bad film. For the most part, it’s exciting, well-acted, nicely choreographed and beautifully shot with exotic locations brilliantly juxtaposed with the lush landscape of Xavier’s school.
Overall, X-Men: Apocalypse falls some way short of the standard set by its predecessor. In yet another case of threequel-itis, the film is hampered by an underdeveloped story, poor pacing and a ridiculous amount of CGI. Bigger isn’t always better, and unfortunately, this is the case here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/05/20/another-case-of-threequel-itis-x-men-apocalypse-review/
X-Men: Apocalypse picks up after the events of its brilliant predecessor, Days of Future Past, as mutants and humans continue to live alongside each other, not necessarily in peace – but not in war either.
The film begins with an introduction to our titular villain, played by Oscar Issac, in Cairo as he aims to recruit four followers – the four horsemen of the apocalypse if you will. Soon after, the audience is whisked away to a more familiar sight, Charles Xavier’s school for gifted youngsters.
After the awakening of Oscar Issac’s villain, and his recruitment of Storm, Magneto, Angel and Psylocke, the X-Men must unite to save humans and mutants alike from being destroyed.
The majority of the ‘younger’ cast return in this instalment with some exciting, and some not so exciting additions. Game of Thrones’ Sophie Turner joins the series as Jean Grey, channelling Famke Janssen reasonably well. Kodi Smit-McPhee is fantastic as Nightcrawler and Tye Sheridan finally does away with James Marsden’s whiney Cyclops.
Apocalypse belongs to Evan Peters and Quicksilver. As with Days of Future Past, he brings the screen to life and as with its predecessor, stars in the film’s standout sequence. However, in an effort to improve on what came before it, the writers have tried too hard to make it bigger and better – the finished product lacks finesse with some poorly finished CGI detracting from the overall effect.
Elsewhere, Michael Fassbender is the perfect man to play Magneto but James McAvoy remains miscast as Charles Xavier. It’s only once he loses his hair that we start to see the character he should’ve been right from the beginning. Jennifer Lawrence finally gets into her groove as Mystique after failing to make an impact in First Class and Days of Future Past.
The story is a little underdeveloped, especially after the great writing brought to life in Captain America: Civil War. Despite constantly being told about the stakes never being higher, it doesn’t really feel like anything awful is going to happen. This is, in part, not helped by Apocalypse being a little bit of a wet lettuce when it comes to superhero villains.
Unfortunately, the abundance of CGI only hampers the film further. There is far too much green screen and certain scenes feel unbelievable as a result. The finale in particular is incredibly underwhelming and becomes an ugly mix of special effects.
There’s a problem with the pacing too. After spending nearly an hour introducing the audience to the new mutants; Apocalypse takes a scalpel to the ending with, well the results you’d expect. It’s choppily edited and hastily stitched back together
Nevertheless, this is not a bad film. For the most part, it’s exciting, well-acted, nicely choreographed and beautifully shot with exotic locations brilliantly juxtaposed with the lush landscape of Xavier’s school.
Overall, X-Men: Apocalypse falls some way short of the standard set by its predecessor. In yet another case of threequel-itis, the film is hampered by an underdeveloped story, poor pacing and a ridiculous amount of CGI. Bigger isn’t always better, and unfortunately, this is the case here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/05/20/another-case-of-threequel-itis-x-men-apocalypse-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2018
In a word - fun
By this time, either you are "in" on the Marvel Cinematic Universe or you are "out". If you are "out", there's not a whole lot that I (or any other reviewer) will be able to do to change your mind. Which is too bad, for the Marvel Cinematic Universe is a pretty fun ride. The folks at Marvel "have it down" and I can't remember the last time that I was disappointed by a Marvel movie.
And that goes for the latest installment - ANTMAN AND THE WASP.
Starring Paul Rudd and Evangaline Lilly as the titular characters, ANT-MAN AND THE WASP is the follow-up to 2015's ANT-MAN and (more directly) 2016's CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR. It also answers the question as to why these characters were not involved in the other Marvel movie this summer - AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR, Part 1.
But, like most of the Marvel films, the plot doesn't really matter, it is the characters and the situations they are put in that matter. And, in the case of this film, the word I would use for both is FUN.
Starting with bickering stars Rudd and Lilly. They do the "frenemies with a no-doubter mutual attraction" thing very well. They play off each other smartly, with Lilly's common sense, physicality and "cut the crap" attitude in vast contrast to Rudd's "man-child". Both are winning presences on the screen, with Rudd's natural charm jumping at you in places where (if it didn't) his character would seem like a jerk.
Joining in the fun is Michael Douglas as, basically, the referee for these two. He looks like he's having fun - despite himself - and really comes into his own with his character. Randall Park does a fun turn as a Federal Agent charged with keeping an eye on Rudd's character and Lawrence Fishburne brings "Morpheus-like" gravitas to his role as a fellow scientist.
But...like in the first Ant-Man film...the characters that steal the film are Michael Pena and his two dim-witted assistants, David Dastmalchian and T.I. When any one of these three (but, especially Pena) are on the screen, the maniacal, fun energy of this film rises dramatically. They had me wishing that they would have their own film to themselves. But..maybe I like them so much because they are being fed to us in very small doses.
Unfortunately, Judy Greer and Bobby Canavale (from the first film) and Walton Goggins (new to this film) don't really have enough to do - and when they are given something to do, it pales in comparison to the others - and to the action.
And what terrific action there is! Filmmaker Peyton Reed (he also Directed Ant Man) does a nice job of keeping the action simple (enough) that you always knew what was going on and playing with size (now they're BIG, now they're SMALL, now they're NORMAL size...) was used wisely to always drive the film - and the action - forward.
As with all Marvel films, this one has a place in the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe (a place I won't spoil here), but I was satisfied with how they dealt with this film as a stand alone, "chase" movie, yet still connected to the rest.
A good time was had.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that goes for the latest installment - ANTMAN AND THE WASP.
Starring Paul Rudd and Evangaline Lilly as the titular characters, ANT-MAN AND THE WASP is the follow-up to 2015's ANT-MAN and (more directly) 2016's CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR. It also answers the question as to why these characters were not involved in the other Marvel movie this summer - AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR, Part 1.
But, like most of the Marvel films, the plot doesn't really matter, it is the characters and the situations they are put in that matter. And, in the case of this film, the word I would use for both is FUN.
Starting with bickering stars Rudd and Lilly. They do the "frenemies with a no-doubter mutual attraction" thing very well. They play off each other smartly, with Lilly's common sense, physicality and "cut the crap" attitude in vast contrast to Rudd's "man-child". Both are winning presences on the screen, with Rudd's natural charm jumping at you in places where (if it didn't) his character would seem like a jerk.
Joining in the fun is Michael Douglas as, basically, the referee for these two. He looks like he's having fun - despite himself - and really comes into his own with his character. Randall Park does a fun turn as a Federal Agent charged with keeping an eye on Rudd's character and Lawrence Fishburne brings "Morpheus-like" gravitas to his role as a fellow scientist.
But...like in the first Ant-Man film...the characters that steal the film are Michael Pena and his two dim-witted assistants, David Dastmalchian and T.I. When any one of these three (but, especially Pena) are on the screen, the maniacal, fun energy of this film rises dramatically. They had me wishing that they would have their own film to themselves. But..maybe I like them so much because they are being fed to us in very small doses.
Unfortunately, Judy Greer and Bobby Canavale (from the first film) and Walton Goggins (new to this film) don't really have enough to do - and when they are given something to do, it pales in comparison to the others - and to the action.
And what terrific action there is! Filmmaker Peyton Reed (he also Directed Ant Man) does a nice job of keeping the action simple (enough) that you always knew what was going on and playing with size (now they're BIG, now they're SMALL, now they're NORMAL size...) was used wisely to always drive the film - and the action - forward.
As with all Marvel films, this one has a place in the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe (a place I won't spoil here), but I was satisfied with how they dealt with this film as a stand alone, "chase" movie, yet still connected to the rest.
A good time was had.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Judas and the Black Messiah (2021) in Movies
Apr 25, 2021
Kaluuya and Stanfield excel (1 more)
Great US history lesson on the Black Panther movement
"Politics is war without bloodshed"
The ‘Judas’ in “Judas and the Black Messiah” is Bill O’Neil (LaKeith Stanfield). He works as an informer for FBI man Mitchell (Jesse Plemons), who has him over a barrel for impersonating an FBI officer. Fred Hampton (Daniel Kaluuya) runs the Chicago chapter of the Black Panther party and O’Neil is a trusted comrade on the inside.
Will O’Neil – always concerned that ‘snitches get stiches’ – stay on the side of ‘the pigs’, or be influenced by the ideals and good deeds of Chairman Fred?
Positives:
- Before this movie, I really had no idea what the Black Panthers were or how they operated. (If pushed, I would have tagged them as “internal terrorists” or similar). So this movie was really valuable to me in further understanding their role as a political movement. And their use of community programmes – focused, for example, around child nutrition and health improvements in inner cities – was a revelation.
- Given the BLM movement, and further ‘blue-on-black’ shootings, the film is timely. (Even more so for me, since the George Floyd trial verdict came out last night). “The United States vs Billie Holiday” showed how brutally the civil rights movement was put down by the authorities in the 40’s. This shows the same thing happened in the 70’s too. It’s again a movie that leaves you angry and frustrated at how poorly the black community have been abused in America. I guess counter to that is the positive view that things HAVE evidently improved significantly since then, albeit that the US is still on this journey.
- Nominated for Best Supporting Actor Oscars are both Stanfield and Kaluuya. (This is a highly debatable point, since arguably both of these gents are lead actors in the movie!) Both of them deliver outstanding performances, and Kaluuya has already picked up the BAFTA. Kaluuya demonstrates a huge amount of energy and charisma, particularly during the delivery of his stirring speeches. But Stanfield delivers a superbly nuanced performance, and perhaps impressed me even more.
- Also deserved, in a movie predominantly featuring a black cast, is recognition of the ever-excellent Jesse Plemons. As the steely-eyed FBI family man, he’s chilling to watch.
Negatives:
- I had issues with the sound mixing here. I found some of the dialogue – already hard for me to follow sometimes due to the speed of delivery and the accents – drowned out by background music and foley sounds.
- Martin Sheen’s make-up as J. Edgar Hoover was rather over-the-top and detracted from the role. (Sheen is in little more than a few cameo scenes).
Summary Thoughts:
I’m pleased I’ve managed to see this impressive Oscar contender before Sunday’s Academy Awards event. Interestingly, I noticed that historical advisors on the movie were Deborah Johnson (played here beautifully by Dominique Fishback) and the baby she was carrying (now Fred Hampton Jnr.).
As well as the two Supporting Actor nominations, it’s also up for Best Film, Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography (Sean Bobbitt) and Best Song (for “Fight for You”, played over the end titles, and very good).
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/judas-and-the-black-messiah-war-is-politics-with-bloodshed/. Thanks.)
Will O’Neil – always concerned that ‘snitches get stiches’ – stay on the side of ‘the pigs’, or be influenced by the ideals and good deeds of Chairman Fred?
Positives:
- Before this movie, I really had no idea what the Black Panthers were or how they operated. (If pushed, I would have tagged them as “internal terrorists” or similar). So this movie was really valuable to me in further understanding their role as a political movement. And their use of community programmes – focused, for example, around child nutrition and health improvements in inner cities – was a revelation.
- Given the BLM movement, and further ‘blue-on-black’ shootings, the film is timely. (Even more so for me, since the George Floyd trial verdict came out last night). “The United States vs Billie Holiday” showed how brutally the civil rights movement was put down by the authorities in the 40’s. This shows the same thing happened in the 70’s too. It’s again a movie that leaves you angry and frustrated at how poorly the black community have been abused in America. I guess counter to that is the positive view that things HAVE evidently improved significantly since then, albeit that the US is still on this journey.
- Nominated for Best Supporting Actor Oscars are both Stanfield and Kaluuya. (This is a highly debatable point, since arguably both of these gents are lead actors in the movie!) Both of them deliver outstanding performances, and Kaluuya has already picked up the BAFTA. Kaluuya demonstrates a huge amount of energy and charisma, particularly during the delivery of his stirring speeches. But Stanfield delivers a superbly nuanced performance, and perhaps impressed me even more.
- Also deserved, in a movie predominantly featuring a black cast, is recognition of the ever-excellent Jesse Plemons. As the steely-eyed FBI family man, he’s chilling to watch.
Negatives:
- I had issues with the sound mixing here. I found some of the dialogue – already hard for me to follow sometimes due to the speed of delivery and the accents – drowned out by background music and foley sounds.
- Martin Sheen’s make-up as J. Edgar Hoover was rather over-the-top and detracted from the role. (Sheen is in little more than a few cameo scenes).
Summary Thoughts:
I’m pleased I’ve managed to see this impressive Oscar contender before Sunday’s Academy Awards event. Interestingly, I noticed that historical advisors on the movie were Deborah Johnson (played here beautifully by Dominique Fishback) and the baby she was carrying (now Fred Hampton Jnr.).
As well as the two Supporting Actor nominations, it’s also up for Best Film, Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography (Sean Bobbitt) and Best Song (for “Fight for You”, played over the end titles, and very good).
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/judas-and-the-black-messiah-war-is-politics-with-bloodshed/. Thanks.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Black Widow (2021) in Movies
Jun 29, 2021
After a delay lasting 19 months; the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has returned to the big screen with “Black Widow”. The film takes place between “Captain America: Civil War” and “Avengers: Infinity War”; audiences get more of the backstory of Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), as we are introduced to her early life before the Red Room.
This is not to say that the film is an origin story as it uses her backstory through a clever introduction that establishes her “family” as sleeper agents in Ohio before they escape and she and her cover sister are tuned over for conditioning and training.
Since Natasha is on the run from the authorities; she finds a remote location in Norway to bide her time. This does not last as a dangerous adversary known as the Taskmaster arrives and sets a chain of events into motion.
Natasha has been sent a package from her cover sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) who also went through the Red Room and became a top assassin in the years since she and Natasha last saw one another.
Despite her mixed feelings; Natasha ventures to Budapest and confronts Yelena who in turn reveals the package she sent her contains a compound that can free the other Black Widows from the control of the Red Room which despite Natasha’s insistence is still very much alive as is the head of the institute which she is convinced she killed long ago.
With Taskmaster and other Widows hot on their trail, Natasha and Yelena are forced to seek the help of their former “Father” the imprisoned hero Red Guardian (David Harbour), and their cover Mother Melina (Rachel Weisz), to find the location of the new Red Room; free the Widows, and end the program once and for all.
What follows is an engaging story with solid action and effects that remains at its core a character story as Natasha attempts to reconcile her cover family with her new Avengers family and the pain of her upbringing and conditioning.
Marvel resisted calls from some to release the film on Disney+ last year when the Pandemic caused multiple delays to the planned release dates. This decision to me was very wise as this is a film that needs to be seen and heard on the big screen as it is an experience that is best experienced in a cinema with others.
While many attempts were made over the decades to adapt comic heroes to film and television; most of them came up lacking and disappointed fans of the source material. Marvel for over a decade has continued to succeed as they have a clear plan, cast well, and have engaging characters that develop over time.
“Black Widow” fills in a missing gap of time in the MCU well and also sets up future adventures as a scene in the credits clearly links two of the live-action Disney+ series and shows that the long-term plan for the MCU continues and incorporates the film and television series well.
From the moment the Marvel intro and music appeared on the screen until the very end; “Black Widow” was a very enjoyable and engaging blockbuster adventure that shows Marvel at the top of their game; and why they continue to set event-level movies not to miss.
This is not to say that the film is an origin story as it uses her backstory through a clever introduction that establishes her “family” as sleeper agents in Ohio before they escape and she and her cover sister are tuned over for conditioning and training.
Since Natasha is on the run from the authorities; she finds a remote location in Norway to bide her time. This does not last as a dangerous adversary known as the Taskmaster arrives and sets a chain of events into motion.
Natasha has been sent a package from her cover sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) who also went through the Red Room and became a top assassin in the years since she and Natasha last saw one another.
Despite her mixed feelings; Natasha ventures to Budapest and confronts Yelena who in turn reveals the package she sent her contains a compound that can free the other Black Widows from the control of the Red Room which despite Natasha’s insistence is still very much alive as is the head of the institute which she is convinced she killed long ago.
With Taskmaster and other Widows hot on their trail, Natasha and Yelena are forced to seek the help of their former “Father” the imprisoned hero Red Guardian (David Harbour), and their cover Mother Melina (Rachel Weisz), to find the location of the new Red Room; free the Widows, and end the program once and for all.
What follows is an engaging story with solid action and effects that remains at its core a character story as Natasha attempts to reconcile her cover family with her new Avengers family and the pain of her upbringing and conditioning.
Marvel resisted calls from some to release the film on Disney+ last year when the Pandemic caused multiple delays to the planned release dates. This decision to me was very wise as this is a film that needs to be seen and heard on the big screen as it is an experience that is best experienced in a cinema with others.
While many attempts were made over the decades to adapt comic heroes to film and television; most of them came up lacking and disappointed fans of the source material. Marvel for over a decade has continued to succeed as they have a clear plan, cast well, and have engaging characters that develop over time.
“Black Widow” fills in a missing gap of time in the MCU well and also sets up future adventures as a scene in the credits clearly links two of the live-action Disney+ series and shows that the long-term plan for the MCU continues and incorporates the film and television series well.
From the moment the Marvel intro and music appeared on the screen until the very end; “Black Widow” was a very enjoyable and engaging blockbuster adventure that shows Marvel at the top of their game; and why they continue to set event-level movies not to miss.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Is the MCU all out of surprises?
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has become one of the most successful movie franchises ever made, and it’s easy to see why. Featuring incredible actors, up-and-coming directors and that trademark sense of humour, each film in the MCU has something to offer.
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Beguiled in Books
Jun 5, 2019
“A classic slice of Southern Gothic, shot through with psychological suspense, which is the basis for Sofia Coppola’s (winner of Best Director at Cannes) 2017 film of the same name starring Nicola Kidman, Colin Farrell and Kirsten Dunst”. Source: wiki/The_Beguiled_(2017_film).
The book was originally written with the title A Painted Devil and some of you eagle-eyed readers and film fanatics may also remember this was a film starring Clint Eastwood and Geraldine Page in the ’70s. The maid in the latter film and this 1966 novel, was black and there was also another bi-racial character, too. However, in the new film, mentioned above, this bi-racial character was played by Kirsten Dunst. This totally ruined the whole point of the book that the black woman was really a slave in their household and the bi-racial woman (who was a free woman) could not seem to see that she herself was not truly white. And that, dear readers, is a very relevant part of the original book, why change it? (Rolls eyes). Is it so wrong to portray this black woman exactly how the author intended her to be? The way I see it, what she did in that house was her way of surviving. It’s an integral part of the story. Why hide it?
After all, if you look at the underage sex and the way the main male character acts by taking advantage of his position in a household full of young girls who are basically shut away from society, should he also be seen as wrong? These young girls are easy prey, but some, are also very willing to learn… Incidentally, I must say the heat and sexual tension within the book is superbly done.
I found parts of the way this was written to be a little repetitive and confusing in style, despite this, it was still a great story. It’s only told from the girls’ perspective, which in many ways adds to this atmospheric, hothouse of lies and deceit the further into the story you delve.
The Beguiled is chock full with a Gothic sense of foreboding and unease, set against a backdrop of the Civil War, which made for some serious, ghostly tension. Who is this injured solider who turns up on their doorstep? How can these girls protect themselves from this seductive man when they have no idea what life is like outside the four walls of the house they live in?
If you read right to the end you’ll find out the brilliant twist of fate this story has in store for you. A devious surprise!
The book was originally written with the title A Painted Devil and some of you eagle-eyed readers and film fanatics may also remember this was a film starring Clint Eastwood and Geraldine Page in the ’70s. The maid in the latter film and this 1966 novel, was black and there was also another bi-racial character, too. However, in the new film, mentioned above, this bi-racial character was played by Kirsten Dunst. This totally ruined the whole point of the book that the black woman was really a slave in their household and the bi-racial woman (who was a free woman) could not seem to see that she herself was not truly white. And that, dear readers, is a very relevant part of the original book, why change it? (Rolls eyes). Is it so wrong to portray this black woman exactly how the author intended her to be? The way I see it, what she did in that house was her way of surviving. It’s an integral part of the story. Why hide it?
After all, if you look at the underage sex and the way the main male character acts by taking advantage of his position in a household full of young girls who are basically shut away from society, should he also be seen as wrong? These young girls are easy prey, but some, are also very willing to learn… Incidentally, I must say the heat and sexual tension within the book is superbly done.
I found parts of the way this was written to be a little repetitive and confusing in style, despite this, it was still a great story. It’s only told from the girls’ perspective, which in many ways adds to this atmospheric, hothouse of lies and deceit the further into the story you delve.
The Beguiled is chock full with a Gothic sense of foreboding and unease, set against a backdrop of the Civil War, which made for some serious, ghostly tension. Who is this injured solider who turns up on their doorstep? How can these girls protect themselves from this seductive man when they have no idea what life is like outside the four walls of the house they live in?
If you read right to the end you’ll find out the brilliant twist of fate this story has in store for you. A devious surprise!
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Birth of a Nation (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
America was not born with the landing of the Mayflower. It was not born at Jamestown. It was not born with the Declaration of Independence or Treaty of Paris. It wasn’t born on the battlefields of the Civil War, nor was it born with D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation in 1915. America was born in the fire and spilt blood from the institution of slavery and revolts by slaves seeking to break free. Nat Turner’s revolt was an omen to America signifying that human beings would no longer tolerate being subjugated, dehumanized, brutalized, and degraded without some form of pushback.
Nate Parker’s The Birth of a Nation tells a full story of Nat Turner and does not simply rely on the revolt to convey his message of a call for equality and fighting injustice. It is emblematic of resistance to the many sins this nation has committed. The film and story are a punch to the gut reminding Americans that there is much left unfinished with respect to telling the full story of slavery and American history as a whole. There is much of our past that we must reconcile with no matter how uncomfortable. Parker’s film demonstrates the power film has as historical record and permitting audiences to have a greater idea and picture of the past.
The Birth of A Nation allows audiences to become consumed with the horrors of slavery, but it is not limited to that aspect. It humanizes the slaves and demonstrates cultural aspects and relationships that have often gone ignored or overlooked with previous films. It does not rely on sensationalizing events in order to drive the points home. There is subtlety and honesty in the portrayal of the events and circumstances.
This is a film that will have audiences speechless at the end as the come to terms with their emotions about events as they unfold and coming to terms with what the witnessed onscreen. There is nothing that can prepare audiences for this film. It is a work of art that you cannot help but feel compelled to reflect on what you witnessed.
There are those who will not see the film due to the subject matter. There are others who won’t see it because of the sexual assault allegations against Nate Parker. There are many who won’t see it out of a pure lack of interest. Regardless of your stance, this is a film that needs to be seen. It is essential to telling a more complete story about America.
Nate Parker’s The Birth of a Nation tells a full story of Nat Turner and does not simply rely on the revolt to convey his message of a call for equality and fighting injustice. It is emblematic of resistance to the many sins this nation has committed. The film and story are a punch to the gut reminding Americans that there is much left unfinished with respect to telling the full story of slavery and American history as a whole. There is much of our past that we must reconcile with no matter how uncomfortable. Parker’s film demonstrates the power film has as historical record and permitting audiences to have a greater idea and picture of the past.
The Birth of A Nation allows audiences to become consumed with the horrors of slavery, but it is not limited to that aspect. It humanizes the slaves and demonstrates cultural aspects and relationships that have often gone ignored or overlooked with previous films. It does not rely on sensationalizing events in order to drive the points home. There is subtlety and honesty in the portrayal of the events and circumstances.
This is a film that will have audiences speechless at the end as the come to terms with their emotions about events as they unfold and coming to terms with what the witnessed onscreen. There is nothing that can prepare audiences for this film. It is a work of art that you cannot help but feel compelled to reflect on what you witnessed.
There are those who will not see the film due to the subject matter. There are others who won’t see it because of the sexual assault allegations against Nate Parker. There are many who won’t see it out of a pure lack of interest. Regardless of your stance, this is a film that needs to be seen. It is essential to telling a more complete story about America.
