Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Man Who Knew Infinity (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
In 1914, Srinivasa Ramanujan (Dev Patel) traveled from his poverty-stricken existence in Madras, India to Trinity College, Cambridge in the hope that he would have his theories published and be recognized for the mathematical genius he was. While there, despite facing racism, hostility and severe illness, he formed an important relationship with G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons) that would lead to breakthroughs in mathematics that are still relevant today.
It would be easy to prattle on about the tremendous talent onscreen in The Man Who Knew Infinity and with a supporting cast that features some of Britain’s best; we get exactly what we’d expect from the likes of Jeremy Irons, Toby Jones and Kevin McNally. All at the top of their game, they serve the story well with nuanced and well-rounded performances, and I’m certainly not going to take anything away from the exceptional jobs they’ve all done here. All the praise this film deserves however, needs to be directed at Dev Patel. In his role as Ramanujan, he’s completely stepped out of the shadow of his big-screen debut in Slumdog Millionaire and has proved his worth as a leading man capable of carrying the weight of an entire feature. Distancing himself also from the lovable, bumbling hotel owner in The Best Exotic Marigold movies, with Ramanujan he is allowed the room to display an incredible range, from quiet intensity to outspoken, unbridled passion and determination. Kudos also to the writers for not going The Big Short route (e.g. talking down to the uninitiated with ridiculous cutaways), but by using simple logic and examples to help convey complex information relevant to the plot.
For the performances alone, this is a solid entry in the biopic genre, but structurally speaking, it’s the editing that lets the film down. This very easily could have emerged as the next A Beautiful Mind, but between a bloated first act, a middling and wandering second act and a truncated final third, The Man Who Knew Infinity falls just short of greatness. Not only is no attention paid to Ramanujan’s achievements as a child, but too much time is given to details and subplots that are arguably inconsequential to the main narrative. This is especially evident in the inclusion of Bertrand Russell (who lived such a rich and fascinating life himself, it would take several films to do that story justice) and his being here feels like just a hollow excuse to include a cameo from another figure of historical importance. The biggest disservice though comes with the ending where we are denied a much needed catharsis and are left to suffer through a slap-dash, halfhearted montage. A restructuring from a more seasoned hand would have undoubtedly led to stronger word-of-mouth and perhaps a wider release. I also wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this is a case of “too many cooks” as the film has a staggering 43 credited producers. I get that independent features can be forced to source their funding from many places, but you can’t tell me that with all those opinions flying about that some of the original intent didn’t get lost in the noise.
As an aside, what Stephen Fry is doing here is beyond me. He’s given two scenes with perhaps a half a dozen lines, leaving his incomparable persona entirely wasted on a completely throwaway character. It’s a pity he wasn’t given a meatier role as one of Ramanujan’s antagonists.
It would be easy to prattle on about the tremendous talent onscreen in The Man Who Knew Infinity and with a supporting cast that features some of Britain’s best; we get exactly what we’d expect from the likes of Jeremy Irons, Toby Jones and Kevin McNally. All at the top of their game, they serve the story well with nuanced and well-rounded performances, and I’m certainly not going to take anything away from the exceptional jobs they’ve all done here. All the praise this film deserves however, needs to be directed at Dev Patel. In his role as Ramanujan, he’s completely stepped out of the shadow of his big-screen debut in Slumdog Millionaire and has proved his worth as a leading man capable of carrying the weight of an entire feature. Distancing himself also from the lovable, bumbling hotel owner in The Best Exotic Marigold movies, with Ramanujan he is allowed the room to display an incredible range, from quiet intensity to outspoken, unbridled passion and determination. Kudos also to the writers for not going The Big Short route (e.g. talking down to the uninitiated with ridiculous cutaways), but by using simple logic and examples to help convey complex information relevant to the plot.
For the performances alone, this is a solid entry in the biopic genre, but structurally speaking, it’s the editing that lets the film down. This very easily could have emerged as the next A Beautiful Mind, but between a bloated first act, a middling and wandering second act and a truncated final third, The Man Who Knew Infinity falls just short of greatness. Not only is no attention paid to Ramanujan’s achievements as a child, but too much time is given to details and subplots that are arguably inconsequential to the main narrative. This is especially evident in the inclusion of Bertrand Russell (who lived such a rich and fascinating life himself, it would take several films to do that story justice) and his being here feels like just a hollow excuse to include a cameo from another figure of historical importance. The biggest disservice though comes with the ending where we are denied a much needed catharsis and are left to suffer through a slap-dash, halfhearted montage. A restructuring from a more seasoned hand would have undoubtedly led to stronger word-of-mouth and perhaps a wider release. I also wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this is a case of “too many cooks” as the film has a staggering 43 credited producers. I get that independent features can be forced to source their funding from many places, but you can’t tell me that with all those opinions flying about that some of the original intent didn’t get lost in the noise.
As an aside, what Stephen Fry is doing here is beyond me. He’s given two scenes with perhaps a half a dozen lines, leaving his incomparable persona entirely wasted on a completely throwaway character. It’s a pity he wasn’t given a meatier role as one of Ramanujan’s antagonists.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Dictator (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Sacha Baron Cohen is undoubtedly one of the most daring names in comedy recently. A Cambridge graduate, the comedian-actor who has starred in fairly controversial films “Bruno” and “Borat” returns with director Larry Charles in 2012’s “The Dictator”. What can be said about Cohen, over other contemporary comedians, is his absolutely excellent ability to inhabit a character role – both in and out of the film he is portrayed in. “The Dictator” is no exception to this, yet it might be the controversy regarding the Academy Awards snub that is remembered more than this film.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
Jeff Nichols recommended The Hustler (1961) in Movies (curated)
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated One Two Three in Books
Jun 10, 2021
A touching read about family and resilience
Nothing new ever happens in the town of Bourne. Everyone knows everyone. So when the moving trucks arrive, it causes a stir. Bourne is a town known for one thing: seventeen years ago, their water turned green. Many of their citizens of died, others have cancer and other illnesses, and others gave birth to children with birth defects. You'll never find a town more accommodating to wheelchairs. But it has one doctor (also the priest) and one therapist (Nora Mitchell). Bourne houses Nora's triplets, beloved by all: Mab, the "normal" one, who is expected to go to college and escape this place; Monday, who runs the town library from their home and prefers yellow everything (food, clothes, and more); and Mirabel, the smartest of them all, confined to her wheelchair, dependent on her sisters and mom for so much and on a computer to act as her Voice. Nora has been fighting for justice since the water turned green. When the newcomers come to town, the past roars up, involving the Mitchell triplets and bringing to light decades old secrets. How hard will Mab, Monday, and Mirabel fight for their town?
This is such an original book from the author of THIS IS HOW IT ALWAYS IS. It sneaks up on you with its quiet and touching story. Frankel weaves an emotional tale that makes you think. It's utterly fascinating, this devastated town and its broken people. So many of its citizens are sick or have lost someone they love. Yet there is a lot of hope in Bourne, especially as the story is told through young Mab, Monday, and Mirabel's eyes. They've only known their mom's sadness and bitterness, never having met their father, yet each has their own (often quirky) way of looking at life.
Frankel alternates viewpoints from each triplet, naming her chapters One (Mab), Two (Monday), and Three (Mirabel) and repeating from there. It takes a moment to get into the groove of each triplets' voice, but once you do, it's easy to get attached to them. Mab feels the weight of the world on her shoulders, sweet Monday takes everything literally, and Mirabel must remain cheerful, despite all her medical issues. Their mom holds a variety of jobs, including town therapist and working at the local bar, and maintains a decades long lawsuit and grievance. It's hard to know what the triplets' life might be like without Nora's anger and bitterness.
Still, ONE TWO THREE highlights the power of sisterhood and family. You'd think a book about a broken town would be depressing and a slugfest, but it's anything but. In many ways, I found this to be almost a mystery, as the sisters work together to figure out about the newcomers in their town and how they relate to the years of devastation wrecked upon Bourne. The result is utterly compelling, with years of intertwined secrets making for a fascinating read.
Still, at the core, this is a story about teenage girls and how they relate to the world. It's sweet, heartbreaking, and extremely well-written. There are a few points where I wish the plot sped up a bit, but overall, this is a touching and lovely story about a family and their small town.
I received a copy of this book from Henry Holt & Company and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. Look for ONE TWO THREE on 6/8/2021!
This is such an original book from the author of THIS IS HOW IT ALWAYS IS. It sneaks up on you with its quiet and touching story. Frankel weaves an emotional tale that makes you think. It's utterly fascinating, this devastated town and its broken people. So many of its citizens are sick or have lost someone they love. Yet there is a lot of hope in Bourne, especially as the story is told through young Mab, Monday, and Mirabel's eyes. They've only known their mom's sadness and bitterness, never having met their father, yet each has their own (often quirky) way of looking at life.
Frankel alternates viewpoints from each triplet, naming her chapters One (Mab), Two (Monday), and Three (Mirabel) and repeating from there. It takes a moment to get into the groove of each triplets' voice, but once you do, it's easy to get attached to them. Mab feels the weight of the world on her shoulders, sweet Monday takes everything literally, and Mirabel must remain cheerful, despite all her medical issues. Their mom holds a variety of jobs, including town therapist and working at the local bar, and maintains a decades long lawsuit and grievance. It's hard to know what the triplets' life might be like without Nora's anger and bitterness.
Still, ONE TWO THREE highlights the power of sisterhood and family. You'd think a book about a broken town would be depressing and a slugfest, but it's anything but. In many ways, I found this to be almost a mystery, as the sisters work together to figure out about the newcomers in their town and how they relate to the years of devastation wrecked upon Bourne. The result is utterly compelling, with years of intertwined secrets making for a fascinating read.
Still, at the core, this is a story about teenage girls and how they relate to the world. It's sweet, heartbreaking, and extremely well-written. There are a few points where I wish the plot sped up a bit, but overall, this is a touching and lovely story about a family and their small town.
I received a copy of this book from Henry Holt & Company and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. Look for ONE TWO THREE on 6/8/2021!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated George and Lizzie in Books
Oct 29, 2020
This is the seventh book in my #atozchallenge! I'm challenging myself to read a book from my shelves that starts with each letter of the alphabet.
In high school, Lizzie made a choice--one she soon regrets--participating in something called the Great Game. The event alters the course of her life forever, along with a passionate relationship that ends in college. These moments, plus the influence of Lizzie's psychologist parents, who offer her little support as a kid, turn her into a melancholy and unfulfilled adult. Her husband, George, however, comes from a happy childhood with loving parents. He adores his family and they him. He also worships Lizzie, giving the two an unbalanced marriage. Can George and Lizzie survive an union on such unequal ground?
I'll confess that this book was not what I was expecting--I thought it was going to be a cheerful love story and a pick-me-up. It is a love story, though, all the same. George loves Lizzie. Lizzie, though, is lost in a love from the past. I'm not going to lie: Lizzie is a very frustrating character and a hard one for whom to care. She doesn't appreciate George, nor, really, much of her life. Now, she was truly saddled with terrible parents, so you have to grant her that. Her fixation on her past relationship makes you want to shake her, though.
"And because for years and years the voices in her head never let Lizzie forget that the Great Game had been a stupid idea right from the beginning and that she'd been an idiot for participating in it, her past was always there, a living thing. It shaped her present and future."
And of, of course, there is the Great Game--the event from high school which alters Lizzie's future. We can understand why Lizzie is Lizzie, but we can't always forgive her for her Lizzie type ways. Also, please note, there are a lot of football references in this book. A lot. I like football, but I'm not sure everyone who picks up a book like this will feel the same.
The story of George and Lizzie is told in very short vignettes (each with a title) that slowly move forward in time and alternate with Lizzie's past, mainly focusing on the Great Game, which so defined her life. This format takes much getting used to. There is no linear story here, but tiny bits and pieces of narrative from George and Lizzie. I almost abandoned the book when I first started--I couldn't get in the groove (and honestly, it's depressing). When I reluctantly returned to it a few days later, more prepared for the format, I could read it more easily.
In the end, I can't say I enjoyed this story. If I rated it purely on "like" factor, it would probably be a two-star read. Incorporating in Lizzie's life experiences and how a few things slowly grew on me, I'm giving this three stars, but only barely. (Also, I have real issues with how many kids from Lizzie's high school football team went on to the NFL. Maybe it's possible, but it seems insane.) 3 stars, but only eked out when they brought the chains out on the field to measure (too much?).
In high school, Lizzie made a choice--one she soon regrets--participating in something called the Great Game. The event alters the course of her life forever, along with a passionate relationship that ends in college. These moments, plus the influence of Lizzie's psychologist parents, who offer her little support as a kid, turn her into a melancholy and unfulfilled adult. Her husband, George, however, comes from a happy childhood with loving parents. He adores his family and they him. He also worships Lizzie, giving the two an unbalanced marriage. Can George and Lizzie survive an union on such unequal ground?
I'll confess that this book was not what I was expecting--I thought it was going to be a cheerful love story and a pick-me-up. It is a love story, though, all the same. George loves Lizzie. Lizzie, though, is lost in a love from the past. I'm not going to lie: Lizzie is a very frustrating character and a hard one for whom to care. She doesn't appreciate George, nor, really, much of her life. Now, she was truly saddled with terrible parents, so you have to grant her that. Her fixation on her past relationship makes you want to shake her, though.
"And because for years and years the voices in her head never let Lizzie forget that the Great Game had been a stupid idea right from the beginning and that she'd been an idiot for participating in it, her past was always there, a living thing. It shaped her present and future."
And of, of course, there is the Great Game--the event from high school which alters Lizzie's future. We can understand why Lizzie is Lizzie, but we can't always forgive her for her Lizzie type ways. Also, please note, there are a lot of football references in this book. A lot. I like football, but I'm not sure everyone who picks up a book like this will feel the same.
The story of George and Lizzie is told in very short vignettes (each with a title) that slowly move forward in time and alternate with Lizzie's past, mainly focusing on the Great Game, which so defined her life. This format takes much getting used to. There is no linear story here, but tiny bits and pieces of narrative from George and Lizzie. I almost abandoned the book when I first started--I couldn't get in the groove (and honestly, it's depressing). When I reluctantly returned to it a few days later, more prepared for the format, I could read it more easily.
In the end, I can't say I enjoyed this story. If I rated it purely on "like" factor, it would probably be a two-star read. Incorporating in Lizzie's life experiences and how a few things slowly grew on me, I'm giving this three stars, but only barely. (Also, I have real issues with how many kids from Lizzie's high school football team went on to the NFL. Maybe it's possible, but it seems insane.) 3 stars, but only eked out when they brought the chains out on the field to measure (too much?).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Why Him? (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
When an “out of touch” Midwesterner owner of a paper factory (Bryan Cranston) decides to take his family to California to spend Christmas with his college student daughter (Zoey Deutch) and meet her new tech-millionaire, but socially inept boyfriend (James Franco), a typical father vs boyfriend faceoff ensues. For many, Why Him? will be enough to satisfy the comedy itch. Those expecting to find the next gut busting comedy will be disappointed, while those thinking it will be a dull comedy will be pleasantly surprised. This film is somewhere in the middle. A constant stream of chuckles with a few bigger laughs here or there. But ultimately forgettable at the lack of main characters to root for.
The highlights of this film include Cranston who reminds us that he has comedic timing from his years in Malcom in the Middle. His chemistry and timing is played well across Megan Mullally who perfectly delivers a few genuine laughs as a Midwestern suburban wife trying to maintain the niceties. Their son (Griffin Gluck) also adds to the humorous family affair as a teenage brother trying to be taken seriously as an adult but still being treated as a child. Lastly, the always funny Keegan-Michael Key hilariously plays Gustav, the “estate manager” to the tech-millionaire boyfriend and spices up the film every time he seems to appear.
James Franco on the other hand quickly wears out is welcome as the socially inept tech-millionaire boyfriend. At times he is funny, however after the dropping the “f-bomb” so many times you begin to sees him as a basic, depthless “caricature” only going for the low hanging fruit of crude jokes. Still, his crude, repeated, jokes are no longer funny after the first few times we see them. The film tries to give Franco some “mysterious depth” through an eluded troubled childhood and his genuine honesty. Only the film never gives you any payoff, as Franco’s character never actually evolves past his caricature shortcomings. It is a shame, because we actually like the girlfriend character (Zoey Deutch) and want to understand what she sees in Franco’s character, however since he never really evolves, there really is no reason to like or root for them to be together.
I also want to point out that this film acknowledges its biggest flaw. At one point in the film a character points out that there is a war going on between father and boyfriend, only the boyfriend isn’t actually fighting. That’s true, and thus there is no real conflict and no real reason to root for any of the characters. Franco’s boyfriend character never evolves past his caricature. While Cranston’s father character only evolves because the movie devolves into “paint by numbers” territory in the last 10 minutes. Since there is no one to root, we do not really care the outcome as we got our chuckles throughout the film but will forget about it shortly after walking out the theater.
Why Him? Has a solid cast, a few unexpected cameos and delivers constant chuckles throughout, however without giving us a likeable boyfriend or any characters to root for, the lack of memorable gut busting laughs has this film as nothing more than a typical forgettable comedy.
The highlights of this film include Cranston who reminds us that he has comedic timing from his years in Malcom in the Middle. His chemistry and timing is played well across Megan Mullally who perfectly delivers a few genuine laughs as a Midwestern suburban wife trying to maintain the niceties. Their son (Griffin Gluck) also adds to the humorous family affair as a teenage brother trying to be taken seriously as an adult but still being treated as a child. Lastly, the always funny Keegan-Michael Key hilariously plays Gustav, the “estate manager” to the tech-millionaire boyfriend and spices up the film every time he seems to appear.
James Franco on the other hand quickly wears out is welcome as the socially inept tech-millionaire boyfriend. At times he is funny, however after the dropping the “f-bomb” so many times you begin to sees him as a basic, depthless “caricature” only going for the low hanging fruit of crude jokes. Still, his crude, repeated, jokes are no longer funny after the first few times we see them. The film tries to give Franco some “mysterious depth” through an eluded troubled childhood and his genuine honesty. Only the film never gives you any payoff, as Franco’s character never actually evolves past his caricature shortcomings. It is a shame, because we actually like the girlfriend character (Zoey Deutch) and want to understand what she sees in Franco’s character, however since he never really evolves, there really is no reason to like or root for them to be together.
I also want to point out that this film acknowledges its biggest flaw. At one point in the film a character points out that there is a war going on between father and boyfriend, only the boyfriend isn’t actually fighting. That’s true, and thus there is no real conflict and no real reason to root for any of the characters. Franco’s boyfriend character never evolves past his caricature. While Cranston’s father character only evolves because the movie devolves into “paint by numbers” territory in the last 10 minutes. Since there is no one to root, we do not really care the outcome as we got our chuckles throughout the film but will forget about it shortly after walking out the theater.
Why Him? Has a solid cast, a few unexpected cameos and delivers constant chuckles throughout, however without giving us a likeable boyfriend or any characters to root for, the lack of memorable gut busting laughs has this film as nothing more than a typical forgettable comedy.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Jul 14, 2019
A nice "palate cleanser" after Endgame
After the richness - both in emotion and spectacle - of the previous entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (that would be the epic that is AVENGERS: ENDGAME), SPIDERMAN: FAR FROM HOME is a palate cleanser.
And that is a smart move by the honchos at Marvel. It brings us back into this Universe acknowledging - and playing homage to - the previous film - but also points us to the future as we fondly remember, but don't dwell on, the past. This Spidey-film takes the titular web-slinger on a roadtrip to Europe where he teams up with Mysterio to fight the Elementals as Peter Parker grapples with the legacy of Tony Stark and a blossoming relationship with MJ.
And...it's a darn fine film. Director Jon Watts and writers Chis McKenna and Erik Sommers craft a light, fun action flick that leans heavily on the personality and charm of Peter Parker/Spiderman and this succeeds tremendously thanks to the continued strong performance of Tom Holland. He has grown into this role and has now fully embraced it a makes it his own. This is the 5th film that Holland has played Spiderman and he is fully in control of the character and is a joyous character to watch.
Ably joining in is Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio - another hero who just might be another strong mentor-like presence for Parker. A fine actor of interesting dimensions, Gyllenhaal understands the type of film that he is in and adapts his performance (and presence) accordingly. Jacob Batalon returns as Peter's friend Ned, and he is everything we've come to expect from Ned. The same can be said for Jon Favreau's Happy Hogan and Marisa Tomei's Aunt May - both are welcome, warming, presences that help everyone feel good.
The biggest surprise for me is Zendaya's performance as MJ - I really enjoyed it - and that's a surprise. It is one of those nuanced-type performances (in a Superhero film - of all things) that will make me re-assess my thinking about her as a performer. I thought she was that good.
Samuel L. Jackson and Cobie Smulders reprise their roles as Nick Fury and Maria Hill and they are solid while Martin Starr and J.B. Smoove provide broad comic relief as the two teachers who are chaperones of these high school kids (remember they are high school aged in this film - they'll have to graduate into college for the next one, their age is beginning to show). I've read/heard some negative comments on how "out of place" the 2 teachers were in style to the rest of this film (and the MCU in general) and I couldn't disagree more. I thought they brought just the right size of comedy to what is a light film.
And, make no mistake, this is a light film (which is why I call it a "palate cleanser" after Endgame) and that's just fine. The stakes are an excuse to spend time with this characters - and to dazzle with some interesting special effects that I thought were very well done.
If you're into Spiderman - or the Marvel Cinematic Universe - you'll like this film.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that is a smart move by the honchos at Marvel. It brings us back into this Universe acknowledging - and playing homage to - the previous film - but also points us to the future as we fondly remember, but don't dwell on, the past. This Spidey-film takes the titular web-slinger on a roadtrip to Europe where he teams up with Mysterio to fight the Elementals as Peter Parker grapples with the legacy of Tony Stark and a blossoming relationship with MJ.
And...it's a darn fine film. Director Jon Watts and writers Chis McKenna and Erik Sommers craft a light, fun action flick that leans heavily on the personality and charm of Peter Parker/Spiderman and this succeeds tremendously thanks to the continued strong performance of Tom Holland. He has grown into this role and has now fully embraced it a makes it his own. This is the 5th film that Holland has played Spiderman and he is fully in control of the character and is a joyous character to watch.
Ably joining in is Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio - another hero who just might be another strong mentor-like presence for Parker. A fine actor of interesting dimensions, Gyllenhaal understands the type of film that he is in and adapts his performance (and presence) accordingly. Jacob Batalon returns as Peter's friend Ned, and he is everything we've come to expect from Ned. The same can be said for Jon Favreau's Happy Hogan and Marisa Tomei's Aunt May - both are welcome, warming, presences that help everyone feel good.
The biggest surprise for me is Zendaya's performance as MJ - I really enjoyed it - and that's a surprise. It is one of those nuanced-type performances (in a Superhero film - of all things) that will make me re-assess my thinking about her as a performer. I thought she was that good.
Samuel L. Jackson and Cobie Smulders reprise their roles as Nick Fury and Maria Hill and they are solid while Martin Starr and J.B. Smoove provide broad comic relief as the two teachers who are chaperones of these high school kids (remember they are high school aged in this film - they'll have to graduate into college for the next one, their age is beginning to show). I've read/heard some negative comments on how "out of place" the 2 teachers were in style to the rest of this film (and the MCU in general) and I couldn't disagree more. I thought they brought just the right size of comedy to what is a light film.
And, make no mistake, this is a light film (which is why I call it a "palate cleanser" after Endgame) and that's just fine. The stakes are an excuse to spend time with this characters - and to dazzle with some interesting special effects that I thought were very well done.
If you're into Spiderman - or the Marvel Cinematic Universe - you'll like this film.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated On the Corner of Love and Hate in Books
Sep 2, 2019
Emma Peroni works in the Community Development Office (CDO) in the small town of Hope Lake. She works with her childhood friend Cooper Campbell-Endicott, who is now running for office as mayor of Hope Lake. Cooper has a political pedigree; his mother is governor. He's the beloved golden boy of Hope Lake. But he also has a playboy reputation, and his opponent, Kirby, is capitalizing on it. If Cooper loses, Kirby will set back all the progress of the CDO in Hope Lake. So the current mayor--who just happens to be Emma's father--devises a plan. Emma will manage Cooper's campaign, and he will pretend to settle down with a former girlfriend. Emma and Cooper haven't gotten along since college, but the more time they spend together now, the more feelings get stirred up: anger, resentment, and... lust.
So I think it does a disservice to bill this book as a Christina Lauren-type romance, as I went in expecting a certain type of story and it just didn't deliver. I believe if I just read it as a romance, I might have enjoyed it more. And, please note, that a 3-star review isn't bad (!), I just didn't 4-star love love it.
The book is set up with the "love/hate" premise. We have hard-working Emma, who is scared of commitment and letting down her guard. Meanwhile, Cooper needs to buckle down and get serious about everything in his life. Emma holds a long-standing grudge against Cooper, but, of course, oh there are feelings, right? The problem is that things get repetitive: so much fighting about his bad behavior and then her thinking over and over about her feelings. (Of course she doesn't have feelings for Cooper, she hates him, etc.). We all know they are going to show some spark together, but good grief, it takes forever.
"He might have been the single most irritating person in the world to me, but still, I could appreciate his appearance."
Also, while I liked that there were political things woven into this novel, my goodness, I've never seen such drama over a mayoral race in my life. Is this a small town thing, or something? I have lived in small towns. The attention and drama focused on this race felt like a senatorial campaign and there was little explanation why Cooper's opponent was so bad, except that he was, indeed, really bad and would ruin the whole town, so this portion felt very two-dimensional. (Oh and if Emma called her father "Mayor Dad" one more time, I was going to scream.)
Still, this is a cute read. There are some really fun scenes with Emma's friends--she, Nick, Henry, and Cooper have been pals since they were kids. There is wit and humor throughout the book. I could certainly identify with Emma, being a closed off workaholic myself! The small town vibe in this book is really adorable--Hope Lake practically flies off the page, and it's a very atmospheric setting.
And, let's be honest: a love/hate dynamic is enjoyable. We pick up a romance knowing exactly what we are getting into. Cooper was a bit irritating at times, but it still boils down that I'm a total sucker for a sappy love story and the chosen two getting together. I was rooting for these two, and I liked the end of the book. This was a sweet, funny read overall. 3 stars.
So I think it does a disservice to bill this book as a Christina Lauren-type romance, as I went in expecting a certain type of story and it just didn't deliver. I believe if I just read it as a romance, I might have enjoyed it more. And, please note, that a 3-star review isn't bad (!), I just didn't 4-star love love it.
The book is set up with the "love/hate" premise. We have hard-working Emma, who is scared of commitment and letting down her guard. Meanwhile, Cooper needs to buckle down and get serious about everything in his life. Emma holds a long-standing grudge against Cooper, but, of course, oh there are feelings, right? The problem is that things get repetitive: so much fighting about his bad behavior and then her thinking over and over about her feelings. (Of course she doesn't have feelings for Cooper, she hates him, etc.). We all know they are going to show some spark together, but good grief, it takes forever.
"He might have been the single most irritating person in the world to me, but still, I could appreciate his appearance."
Also, while I liked that there were political things woven into this novel, my goodness, I've never seen such drama over a mayoral race in my life. Is this a small town thing, or something? I have lived in small towns. The attention and drama focused on this race felt like a senatorial campaign and there was little explanation why Cooper's opponent was so bad, except that he was, indeed, really bad and would ruin the whole town, so this portion felt very two-dimensional. (Oh and if Emma called her father "Mayor Dad" one more time, I was going to scream.)
Still, this is a cute read. There are some really fun scenes with Emma's friends--she, Nick, Henry, and Cooper have been pals since they were kids. There is wit and humor throughout the book. I could certainly identify with Emma, being a closed off workaholic myself! The small town vibe in this book is really adorable--Hope Lake practically flies off the page, and it's a very atmospheric setting.
And, let's be honest: a love/hate dynamic is enjoyable. We pick up a romance knowing exactly what we are getting into. Cooper was a bit irritating at times, but it still boils down that I'm a total sucker for a sappy love story and the chosen two getting together. I was rooting for these two, and I liked the end of the book. This was a sweet, funny read overall. 3 stars.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Telling Jase in Books
Sep 10, 2019
Genre: Contemporary, LGBTQ
My rating: 4/5 stars
Jase grinned, “you were about to tell me why you always hated Marcus?”
Sean closed his eyes. Truth, he reminded himself. He took a few deep breaths. “I envied him, Jase.”
“What? Why?”
Truth, truth, truth. “Because he got to have you, and I didn’t. Because I wanted you. I wanted to be with you. Jase, I… I think I still want that.”
Sean “Tag” Taggert’s fiancee abandoning him and their son, Cody, is a blessing in disguise. Sean had never loved her and only committed to her for Cody’s sake. He was really in love with his best friend and former college roommate Jase, and now he might have the chance to tell him that.
But there was just one problem. Jase didn’t know Sean was bisexual. And Sean had no idea how Jase would react to the news that he had been in love him for three years.
Jase is incredibly hot and I can see why Sean’s attracted to him. He’s sexy and dominant, but also sweet, and caring, and great with kids. Jase is always there for Sean and a good friend. And Jase is also very attracted to Sean. There is no question at all about that.
And damn, they have good chemistry between them. Their relationship isn’t forced or fake at all.
Jase pulled off his t-shirt and tossed in on a chair. Tag stared at him with hungry eyes, and pulled his shirt over his head as well. Jase bit his lip and held back a groan. Tag had more tattoos. There were at least three new ones that he could see, tribal patterns on each pec, and a dragon, low on his left stomach, that halfway disappeared beneath his drawstring pants.
Jase ended up hopping quickly into the bed, when the thought of following the dragon’s tail into Tag’s pants caused in him a very noticeable reaction.
Sean killed the light and climbed in next to him. He scooted over till his shoulder was pressed against Jase’s chest. Jase reached across Tag’s body and grabbed his hand. His forehead touched the side of Tag’s head. He smells like home, he thought. He squeezed Tag’s hand and whispered. “Nite, Tag.”
“Nite Jase.”
They are so cute together. Telling Jase is the perfect story to put you in a good mood.
But it’s not completely perfect. The beginning is awkward. Sean comes home early to hear Jase and his then-boyfriend having sex in their room and within a matter of minutes he knows for sure he’s bi and in love with Jase. Just because he got turned on by sex sounds. That felt forced and insta-love, even if most of the story doesn’t.
I also couldn’t picture Lisa as a real person at all. Even though we never actually see her in the story, she plays a huge part. Despite all of the time Sean and Jase spend talking about her and all the time Sean spends thinking about her, she remains an undeveloped plot device instead of a real character.
Despite those flaws, this story is worth 4 stars. It’s a quick, fun read that I highly recommend.
My rating: 4/5 stars
Jase grinned, “you were about to tell me why you always hated Marcus?”
Sean closed his eyes. Truth, he reminded himself. He took a few deep breaths. “I envied him, Jase.”
“What? Why?”
Truth, truth, truth. “Because he got to have you, and I didn’t. Because I wanted you. I wanted to be with you. Jase, I… I think I still want that.”
Sean “Tag” Taggert’s fiancee abandoning him and their son, Cody, is a blessing in disguise. Sean had never loved her and only committed to her for Cody’s sake. He was really in love with his best friend and former college roommate Jase, and now he might have the chance to tell him that.
But there was just one problem. Jase didn’t know Sean was bisexual. And Sean had no idea how Jase would react to the news that he had been in love him for three years.
Jase is incredibly hot and I can see why Sean’s attracted to him. He’s sexy and dominant, but also sweet, and caring, and great with kids. Jase is always there for Sean and a good friend. And Jase is also very attracted to Sean. There is no question at all about that.
And damn, they have good chemistry between them. Their relationship isn’t forced or fake at all.
Jase pulled off his t-shirt and tossed in on a chair. Tag stared at him with hungry eyes, and pulled his shirt over his head as well. Jase bit his lip and held back a groan. Tag had more tattoos. There were at least three new ones that he could see, tribal patterns on each pec, and a dragon, low on his left stomach, that halfway disappeared beneath his drawstring pants.
Jase ended up hopping quickly into the bed, when the thought of following the dragon’s tail into Tag’s pants caused in him a very noticeable reaction.
Sean killed the light and climbed in next to him. He scooted over till his shoulder was pressed against Jase’s chest. Jase reached across Tag’s body and grabbed his hand. His forehead touched the side of Tag’s head. He smells like home, he thought. He squeezed Tag’s hand and whispered. “Nite, Tag.”
“Nite Jase.”
They are so cute together. Telling Jase is the perfect story to put you in a good mood.
But it’s not completely perfect. The beginning is awkward. Sean comes home early to hear Jase and his then-boyfriend having sex in their room and within a matter of minutes he knows for sure he’s bi and in love with Jase. Just because he got turned on by sex sounds. That felt forced and insta-love, even if most of the story doesn’t.
I also couldn’t picture Lisa as a real person at all. Even though we never actually see her in the story, she plays a huge part. Despite all of the time Sean and Jase spend talking about her and all the time Sean spends thinking about her, she remains an undeveloped plot device instead of a real character.
Despite those flaws, this story is worth 4 stars. It’s a quick, fun read that I highly recommend.