Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Wreck-It-Ralph (2012) in Movies
Nov 12, 2018
Deserves greater credit than it currently is getting
Not being a big video game guy, I was late to the party to the original WRECK-IT RALPH in 2012 and when I saw it, I thought "it's fine" and didn't really think more about it. Now that it's sequel is coming out, I thought it would be good time to revisit this film (and to also remind me of the characters of the first one). And I'm glad I did, for I enjoyed myself much more this go around with this film than I did in my initial experience.
Taking a page out of PIXAR, this WALT DISNEY ANIMATION STUDIOS picture tells the "inside story" of what happens to Video Game characters when the lights go off. Following a "villain" in a game, WRECK-IT RALPH tells the story of Ralph's attempt to become a hero by winning a medal in another video game, only to become something more when he encounters a "glitch" in another game.
This is a well made, smart animation film that has enough action, suspense and silliness to appeal to children, but enough "adult content" (read: smart humor that goes over the heads of the kids) to appeal to the adults that have taken the kids to the movies. It pays great homage to video games - many of which went over my head, but (I am assured) were well played (at least according to the video gamers that I am acquainted).
Like all animated movies, a good percentage of the joy of this film is in the voice work - and this picture has very good ones from Sarah Silverman's Vanellope to Jack McBrayer's Fix-It Felix and Jane Lynch's kick-butt Calhoun, the voices strongly portray the character - and character types - quickly and easily. Special mention should be made of Allan Tudyk's King Candy (an homage to the the great Vaudeville and early film comedian Ed Wynn) and, especially, John C. Reilly in the title role. He is perfectly cast as Ralph, showing the weight of the size of the character in his voice with a sweetness and vulnerability that shows the size of the character's heart.
This is a wonderful and winning film, one that deserves greater praise than it is currently given, and I, for one, am looking forward to the sequel coming out.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Taking a page out of PIXAR, this WALT DISNEY ANIMATION STUDIOS picture tells the "inside story" of what happens to Video Game characters when the lights go off. Following a "villain" in a game, WRECK-IT RALPH tells the story of Ralph's attempt to become a hero by winning a medal in another video game, only to become something more when he encounters a "glitch" in another game.
This is a well made, smart animation film that has enough action, suspense and silliness to appeal to children, but enough "adult content" (read: smart humor that goes over the heads of the kids) to appeal to the adults that have taken the kids to the movies. It pays great homage to video games - many of which went over my head, but (I am assured) were well played (at least according to the video gamers that I am acquainted).
Like all animated movies, a good percentage of the joy of this film is in the voice work - and this picture has very good ones from Sarah Silverman's Vanellope to Jack McBrayer's Fix-It Felix and Jane Lynch's kick-butt Calhoun, the voices strongly portray the character - and character types - quickly and easily. Special mention should be made of Allan Tudyk's King Candy (an homage to the the great Vaudeville and early film comedian Ed Wynn) and, especially, John C. Reilly in the title role. He is perfectly cast as Ralph, showing the weight of the size of the character in his voice with a sweetness and vulnerability that shows the size of the character's heart.
This is a wonderful and winning film, one that deserves greater praise than it is currently given, and I, for one, am looking forward to the sequel coming out.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Oh Dear Silvia in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>Oh Dear Silvia</i> is a contemporary, somewhat humorous, novel by British comedian, Dawn French. Set in England it focuses on a sixty-year-old woman, Silvia Shute, who has fallen from a balcony, sustaining a serious head injury that has left her in a coma.
Knowing this you cannot help wondering how you do write a book where the main character is unconscious and how would this affect the narrative? This is how. Although Silvia is indeed the main character, the tale is actually told through observing family members and friends when they visit her in hospital. The entire book plays out in Silvia’s hospital room, Suite 5, but each character brings something else to story through their thoughts, feelings and actions.
Ed, Silvia’s ex husband, provides details of what has happened since their divorce. Jo, her older sister, reminisces about their childhood whist trying and failing to use a number of New Age ideas to wake Silvia up. There is Cat, her best friend, through who we discover what actually happened to Silvia, whilst, Tia, her cleaner is bringing in her favourite foods and updating her on the various goings on in the celebrity world. Cassie, her daughter however, portrays Silvia in a different light that makes us question what kind of person Silvia really was. And finally there is Winnie, a nurse at the hospital. Winnie’s accounts provide the reader with an extra storyline that is nothing to do with Silvia and her accident.
The story being told in this way gives the reader a chance to learn about who Silvia was which causes us to think different things about her which we would not have had the opportunity to feel had Silvia been able to tell the story herself. Firstly we feel worry for her, but then we begin to hate her particularly with the help of Cassie as well as Ed, who admits that had Silvia been conscious he would not have been visiting. Finally we get to a stage of understanding. Understanding who Silvia was, understanding why she did what she did, understanding what has happened to her.
The book takes on many themes: drama, mystery… and humour. Well, it is meant to be humour. I can understand the funny parts but personally it was not my type of humour. Too much swearing in my opinion. But then if you enjoy that type of thing, <i>Oh Dear Silvia</i> has the potential to be a really funny book.
Knowing this you cannot help wondering how you do write a book where the main character is unconscious and how would this affect the narrative? This is how. Although Silvia is indeed the main character, the tale is actually told through observing family members and friends when they visit her in hospital. The entire book plays out in Silvia’s hospital room, Suite 5, but each character brings something else to story through their thoughts, feelings and actions.
Ed, Silvia’s ex husband, provides details of what has happened since their divorce. Jo, her older sister, reminisces about their childhood whist trying and failing to use a number of New Age ideas to wake Silvia up. There is Cat, her best friend, through who we discover what actually happened to Silvia, whilst, Tia, her cleaner is bringing in her favourite foods and updating her on the various goings on in the celebrity world. Cassie, her daughter however, portrays Silvia in a different light that makes us question what kind of person Silvia really was. And finally there is Winnie, a nurse at the hospital. Winnie’s accounts provide the reader with an extra storyline that is nothing to do with Silvia and her accident.
The story being told in this way gives the reader a chance to learn about who Silvia was which causes us to think different things about her which we would not have had the opportunity to feel had Silvia been able to tell the story herself. Firstly we feel worry for her, but then we begin to hate her particularly with the help of Cassie as well as Ed, who admits that had Silvia been conscious he would not have been visiting. Finally we get to a stage of understanding. Understanding who Silvia was, understanding why she did what she did, understanding what has happened to her.
The book takes on many themes: drama, mystery… and humour. Well, it is meant to be humour. I can understand the funny parts but personally it was not my type of humour. Too much swearing in my opinion. But then if you enjoy that type of thing, <i>Oh Dear Silvia</i> has the potential to be a really funny book.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Hustle (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
The Hustle stars Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson as a pair of con artists who extract money from men using their feminine wiles. Hathaway and Wilson have a great chemistry on screen and some of the physical humor had me laughing so hard that my eyes were watering from laughter. Other times the jokes fell so flat I cringed, especially early on with the lampooning of male behavior so over the top that it seemed like an SNL bit rather than a part of a story they were trying to tell. It takes the movie a while to get its feet underneath it and really start running, but it does eventually get there.
What I didn’t realize going into this movie was that it is actually a reboot of the Steve Martin, Michael Caine and the late Glenne Headly classic, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. As soon as you realize this you know exactly how the story will go down to the last punch line. That is a real bummer for fans of the original because you know one of the biggest end reveals about half way through the movie.
Knowing the twist at the end doesn’t ruin the movie, but it did take a lot of the fun out of it and I wish they changed the twist to outsmart the audience who knew they were following the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels playbook.
Rebel Wilson plays off Anne Hathaway really well, I’d actually like to see them do something original together in the future. The chemistry reminds me of David Spade and Chris Farley with Hathaway playing the straight man and Wilson playing the physical comedian. The best parts of this movie are when these two are facing off in a scene trying to outdo one another.
I can’t say this enough; I really wish they changed the twist at the end so that I could have enjoyed it more because I really wanted to like it. Those who have never seen Dirty Rotten Scoundrels may enjoy it more than I did. The lady behind me was so shocked with the twist reveal at the end that her gasp was audible across the theater, so obviously not everyone has seen the original.
Because of the big laughs I did have while watching this movie I can’t say I hated the movie, it was definitely good for some laughs. But the con of the movie is to get you into the theater without you realizing that it’s just a replica reboot of a classic.
What I didn’t realize going into this movie was that it is actually a reboot of the Steve Martin, Michael Caine and the late Glenne Headly classic, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. As soon as you realize this you know exactly how the story will go down to the last punch line. That is a real bummer for fans of the original because you know one of the biggest end reveals about half way through the movie.
Knowing the twist at the end doesn’t ruin the movie, but it did take a lot of the fun out of it and I wish they changed the twist to outsmart the audience who knew they were following the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels playbook.
Rebel Wilson plays off Anne Hathaway really well, I’d actually like to see them do something original together in the future. The chemistry reminds me of David Spade and Chris Farley with Hathaway playing the straight man and Wilson playing the physical comedian. The best parts of this movie are when these two are facing off in a scene trying to outdo one another.
I can’t say this enough; I really wish they changed the twist at the end so that I could have enjoyed it more because I really wanted to like it. Those who have never seen Dirty Rotten Scoundrels may enjoy it more than I did. The lady behind me was so shocked with the twist reveal at the end that her gasp was audible across the theater, so obviously not everyone has seen the original.
Because of the big laughs I did have while watching this movie I can’t say I hated the movie, it was definitely good for some laughs. But the con of the movie is to get you into the theater without you realizing that it’s just a replica reboot of a classic.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Tusk (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
To legions of his many fans, writer, director, producer, and podcaster Kevin Smith is a man fanboys find easy to root for. His films have become pop-culture gold to comic book, science fiction, and general geekdom fans the world over. Smith has built a career on independent films with characters that are as real as they are raw and raunchy. The crude nature of his jokes often put him in a “love them or hate them” category for many critics as it is definitely not a style that is for the masses. That being said, the films are witty, honest, and most times relatable, no matter how bad the situations and the characters become. Recently, Smith took a detour to the darker side with his film “Red State” that looked at a group of kids who became the victims of a fanatical cult leader and his followers.
While Smith was reportedly working to get funding for “Clerks 3”, an idea was presented to him during his Smodcast about a guy in rural Canada who is offering free room and board to anybody who would live with him on the condition that they wear a walrus costume from time to time. Buoyed by his followers on Twitter, Smith decided to make a horror film based on the situation even after learning that the incident in question was the result of a prank by a comedian.
In his new film Tusk, we are introduced to a successful podcaster named Wallace (Justin Long), who along with his costar Teddy (Haley Joel Osment), run a show called the Not See Party, whose name leads to several double takes and comical and uncomfortable situations down the line. Wallace’s girlfriend Ally (Genesis Rodriguez) wishes to accompany Wallace to his trip up to Canada in order to interview someone for a show.
Since Teddy is not a flyer, Wallace travels to locations to interview people and then in turn tells the stories to Teddy so the two can comment about them on air. Ally longs for the Wallace of old who was a struggling comedian as she believes that the successful Wallace is not that fun to be around as he no longer makes her a priority in life. Wallace admits as much when he discloses a series of infidelities to Teddy and dismisses them as nothing more than clearing of the head while traveling or before doing a live show for an audience.
Upon arriving in Manitoba, Wallace learns that his intended interview has befallen tragedy and faced without a topic for his next show, Wallace is intrigued by a flyer from a man offering room and board as well as plenty of stories.
Wallace makes contact with the individual and travels two hours into rural Manitoba at night to meet the man at his expansive estate. Upon meeting Howard Howe (Michael Parks), Wallace is captivated by the elderly wheelchair-bound gentleman and his tales of life at sea including meeting Ernest Hemingway during the war. As Wallace sat spellbound by the tales Howard is telling him, he soon falls unconscious as a result of being drugged by his host. Things take a very dark turn the following morning when Howard learns that he has lost a leg of which Howard proclaims was the tragic result of a spider bite. Things become a living nightmare as Wallace quickly learns just how devious and diabolical Michael’s plans are for him and trapped in a remote area his humanity and faith are slowly stripped away by the situation he finds himself in.
Teddy and Ally travel to Manitoba due to a frantic call Wallace makes and not finding much assistance from the local authorities, turn to quirky and eccentric former homicide detective Guy LaPointe (Johnny Depp), who fears that Wallace has become the victim of an elusive killer whom LaPointe has been trying to find for years.
What follows is a dark, disturbing, and utterly captivating thriller in a race against time with the very essence and humanity of Wallace hanging in the balance.
While Smith inserts his trademark humor into the film, this is very much a psychological thriller and not a comedy. Depp does a fantastic job and is almost unrecognizable in his role as a homicide detective who is scheduled to appear in a subsequent film currently shooting. While it seemed a bit of a stretch that Ally would want be involved with Wallace, there was nonetheless a good bit of chemistry between them even though the majority of their scenes are shown via flashback.
Long and Parks propel the story as it is pretty much about the dramatic struggle between the two of them. Parks is captivating and creepy while the brash Wallace gets a lesson in humanity and what truly matters in life. While some will no doubt find the subject matter highly disturbing and may be quick to dismiss the film, this is one of the more clever and enjoyable thrillers in recent years and proves that Smith is a filmmaker capable of doing things other than his trademark comedies and should be encouraged to continue to broaden his horizons.
As it stands the film should delight fans of Smith but also allows him to expand his audience into new areas as this truly is one of the more memorable and entertaining films of the year.
http://sknr.net/2014/09/19/tusk/
While Smith was reportedly working to get funding for “Clerks 3”, an idea was presented to him during his Smodcast about a guy in rural Canada who is offering free room and board to anybody who would live with him on the condition that they wear a walrus costume from time to time. Buoyed by his followers on Twitter, Smith decided to make a horror film based on the situation even after learning that the incident in question was the result of a prank by a comedian.
In his new film Tusk, we are introduced to a successful podcaster named Wallace (Justin Long), who along with his costar Teddy (Haley Joel Osment), run a show called the Not See Party, whose name leads to several double takes and comical and uncomfortable situations down the line. Wallace’s girlfriend Ally (Genesis Rodriguez) wishes to accompany Wallace to his trip up to Canada in order to interview someone for a show.
Since Teddy is not a flyer, Wallace travels to locations to interview people and then in turn tells the stories to Teddy so the two can comment about them on air. Ally longs for the Wallace of old who was a struggling comedian as she believes that the successful Wallace is not that fun to be around as he no longer makes her a priority in life. Wallace admits as much when he discloses a series of infidelities to Teddy and dismisses them as nothing more than clearing of the head while traveling or before doing a live show for an audience.
Upon arriving in Manitoba, Wallace learns that his intended interview has befallen tragedy and faced without a topic for his next show, Wallace is intrigued by a flyer from a man offering room and board as well as plenty of stories.
Wallace makes contact with the individual and travels two hours into rural Manitoba at night to meet the man at his expansive estate. Upon meeting Howard Howe (Michael Parks), Wallace is captivated by the elderly wheelchair-bound gentleman and his tales of life at sea including meeting Ernest Hemingway during the war. As Wallace sat spellbound by the tales Howard is telling him, he soon falls unconscious as a result of being drugged by his host. Things take a very dark turn the following morning when Howard learns that he has lost a leg of which Howard proclaims was the tragic result of a spider bite. Things become a living nightmare as Wallace quickly learns just how devious and diabolical Michael’s plans are for him and trapped in a remote area his humanity and faith are slowly stripped away by the situation he finds himself in.
Teddy and Ally travel to Manitoba due to a frantic call Wallace makes and not finding much assistance from the local authorities, turn to quirky and eccentric former homicide detective Guy LaPointe (Johnny Depp), who fears that Wallace has become the victim of an elusive killer whom LaPointe has been trying to find for years.
What follows is a dark, disturbing, and utterly captivating thriller in a race against time with the very essence and humanity of Wallace hanging in the balance.
While Smith inserts his trademark humor into the film, this is very much a psychological thriller and not a comedy. Depp does a fantastic job and is almost unrecognizable in his role as a homicide detective who is scheduled to appear in a subsequent film currently shooting. While it seemed a bit of a stretch that Ally would want be involved with Wallace, there was nonetheless a good bit of chemistry between them even though the majority of their scenes are shown via flashback.
Long and Parks propel the story as it is pretty much about the dramatic struggle between the two of them. Parks is captivating and creepy while the brash Wallace gets a lesson in humanity and what truly matters in life. While some will no doubt find the subject matter highly disturbing and may be quick to dismiss the film, this is one of the more clever and enjoyable thrillers in recent years and proves that Smith is a filmmaker capable of doing things other than his trademark comedies and should be encouraged to continue to broaden his horizons.
As it stands the film should delight fans of Smith but also allows him to expand his audience into new areas as this truly is one of the more memorable and entertaining films of the year.
http://sknr.net/2014/09/19/tusk/
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Angry Optimist: The Life and Times of Jon Stewart in Books
Sep 6, 2017
Insight into a beloved but flawed role model
So I’m a little ambivalent about this book. Jon Stewart took over at The Daily Show the same year I graduated high school. I was 16 and only starting to pay attention to politics. I was also raised quite conservative Christian – the pundit we listened to the most was Rush Limbaugh. And here was a man saying things that were the total opposite of what I’d been taught – but also things that resonated a lot more with me. Many years later, when The Daily Show and Jon Stewart were labeled the most trusted voices in news media, I had no trouble at all believing it. He not only knew how to speak to my generation, he also spoke for us. All the things we were thinking, he was out there shouting. He was our window into this grown up, corrupted world of politics, and we loved him for it.
Not to say he’s perfect. I’d heard – and Angry Optimist mentions – that he can occasionally be a rage-filled asshole. That the staff of The Daily Show has a woman problem. (As in, not enough of them, and can’t keep them.) So while I do admire the man, I am not blind to his flaws.
The book is interesting – I learned more about his early life and career – but nothing really game-changing. And perhaps that says something about Stewart. There aren’t really any skeletons in his closet, or scandalous stories. He’s just an angry Jewish comedian.
Rogak’s style of writing is easily consumed; I read the entire book in about three hours. Perhaps part of why I find it so anticlimactic is that she ends it with this sense of not knowing what Stewart might be up to next, and whether, if he does decide to leave The Daily Show eventually, if the show will end with him – and we know those answers now, three years after the book was published. Stewart has retired (barring the occasional appearance on Colbert’s show) and Trevor Noah is doing an admirable job of holding down the fort after Stewart’s exit. (With less anger, and a little more befuddlement, which is a fun change.) I was also a little disappointed that she mentions Stewart’s friendship with Anthony Weiner – but doesn’t say anything about how he took the ribbing from Stewart over Weiner’s rather unglamorous exit from politics.
I have also heard that the audio book is not good – apparently the narrator is boring. So I’d recommend the print book over the audio, if you choose to read it.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Not to say he’s perfect. I’d heard – and Angry Optimist mentions – that he can occasionally be a rage-filled asshole. That the staff of The Daily Show has a woman problem. (As in, not enough of them, and can’t keep them.) So while I do admire the man, I am not blind to his flaws.
The book is interesting – I learned more about his early life and career – but nothing really game-changing. And perhaps that says something about Stewart. There aren’t really any skeletons in his closet, or scandalous stories. He’s just an angry Jewish comedian.
Rogak’s style of writing is easily consumed; I read the entire book in about three hours. Perhaps part of why I find it so anticlimactic is that she ends it with this sense of not knowing what Stewart might be up to next, and whether, if he does decide to leave The Daily Show eventually, if the show will end with him – and we know those answers now, three years after the book was published. Stewart has retired (barring the occasional appearance on Colbert’s show) and Trevor Noah is doing an admirable job of holding down the fort after Stewart’s exit. (With less anger, and a little more befuddlement, which is a fun change.) I was also a little disappointed that she mentions Stewart’s friendship with Anthony Weiner – but doesn’t say anything about how he took the ribbing from Stewart over Weiner’s rather unglamorous exit from politics.
I have also heard that the audio book is not good – apparently the narrator is boring. So I’d recommend the print book over the audio, if you choose to read it.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
JT (287 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
This is the film of the year for me. A comic book adaptation like no other. Thought-provoking and difficult to watch it conveys more than just the transformation from abnormal loner to one of the greatest comic villains ever. Joaquin Phoenix’s performance goes some way to matching the psychotic heights of Heath Ledger’s incarnation in The Dark Knight. Ledger was posthumously awarded an Oscar for that performance and I would expect Phoenix to be front and centre when award season comes around.
Arthur Fleck is a clown for hire. Scraping to make ends meet while looking after his ailing mother (Frances Conroy) he has ambitions of making it as a stand-up comedian. Sadly his narcissistic personality and uncontrollable fits of laughter (through no fault of his own) make him a target for society. Gotham City is an unforgiving place and for Arthur, it is a constant struggle of acceptance. He’s belittled and beaten down at every turn and he’s not strong enough to fight back. The bruises on his skeletal frame are a testament to this. He’s an awkward character not least because his quiet personality simmers beneath someone ready to explode – and explode he does.
A comic book adaptation like no other it’s thought-provoking and difficult to watch
But Arthur is sick. That much is clear. Society no longer wants to help. As a result, his social worker explains that the city has cut all funding and the facility and access to his medication he relies on will stop – “All I have are negative thoughts,” he says. When the brutality takes a serious turn he unwittingly becomes a figurehead for Gotham’s society. The clown is a symbol of defiance. Fighting against the rich, of all people Thomas Wayne, who is running for Mayor. Wayne becomes wrapped up in a storyline that brings Arthur together with a familiar young face.
The strong comparisons to Taxi Driver are unavoidable, but there is a definite Scorsese feel to the film. The casting of Robert De Niro as talk show host Murray Franklin is almost a direct nod to King of Comedy in which De Niro stalks and kidnaps his idol to take the spotlight for himself. Here it’s Arthur who lovingly worships Murray. The build up to the clown prince of crime is worth the wait as the transformation builds up to a frenetic and gruesome final act.
One of the biggest takeaways from Joker is its focus on mental illness. Arthur’s battered notebook is not only a journal for his jokes but for his dark thoughts. This is a topic that will hit close to home for many people who might experience similar, with an outward animosity to society.
Arthur Fleck is a clown for hire. Scraping to make ends meet while looking after his ailing mother (Frances Conroy) he has ambitions of making it as a stand-up comedian. Sadly his narcissistic personality and uncontrollable fits of laughter (through no fault of his own) make him a target for society. Gotham City is an unforgiving place and for Arthur, it is a constant struggle of acceptance. He’s belittled and beaten down at every turn and he’s not strong enough to fight back. The bruises on his skeletal frame are a testament to this. He’s an awkward character not least because his quiet personality simmers beneath someone ready to explode – and explode he does.
A comic book adaptation like no other it’s thought-provoking and difficult to watch
But Arthur is sick. That much is clear. Society no longer wants to help. As a result, his social worker explains that the city has cut all funding and the facility and access to his medication he relies on will stop – “All I have are negative thoughts,” he says. When the brutality takes a serious turn he unwittingly becomes a figurehead for Gotham’s society. The clown is a symbol of defiance. Fighting against the rich, of all people Thomas Wayne, who is running for Mayor. Wayne becomes wrapped up in a storyline that brings Arthur together with a familiar young face.
The strong comparisons to Taxi Driver are unavoidable, but there is a definite Scorsese feel to the film. The casting of Robert De Niro as talk show host Murray Franklin is almost a direct nod to King of Comedy in which De Niro stalks and kidnaps his idol to take the spotlight for himself. Here it’s Arthur who lovingly worships Murray. The build up to the clown prince of crime is worth the wait as the transformation builds up to a frenetic and gruesome final act.
One of the biggest takeaways from Joker is its focus on mental illness. Arthur’s battered notebook is not only a journal for his jokes but for his dark thoughts. This is a topic that will hit close to home for many people who might experience similar, with an outward animosity to society.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 6, 2019 (Updated Oct 6, 2019)
Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) is a down on his luck loner, currently taking seven different kinds of medication and living with his frail old mother (Frances Conroe). Arthur fantasises about living a ‘normal’ life, with hopes of becoming a stand up comedian and dating his next door neighbour, and the lines between reality and fantasy begin to become just as blurred for us during the movie as they do within Arthur’s mind.
We’re in Gotham City during the early eighties. A garbage strike means that the city is currently suffering from a build up of garbage on the streets and the subsequent arrival of ‘super rats’. The rich are getting richer, the poor and the underprivileged even more so. And, at the forefront of all the wealth and power in the city is Thomas Wayne, who is currently looking to run for mayor. There is growing divide and unrest throughout Gotham, all of which serves to add fuel to the increasingly unstable mind of Arthur Fleck.
We’ve had our fair share of Joker portrayals over the decades, the most memorable of which being in 2008, and Heath Ledger’s brilliant take on the character in The Dark Knight. But Joaquin Phoenix brings a side to the Joker we’ve not experienced before - all skin and bone, abused, downtrodden, ridiculed and with a neurological condition that sees him suddenly laughing maniacally and uncontrollably, even during times of stress or sadness. Throughout the movie, we learn that Arthur also had a pretty unpleasant childhood and, for a while, you really can sympathise with him and the suffering he experiences. “I just don’t want to feel so bad any more” he says at one point.
Joker features no CGI, no costumed antics (other than the clowned kind), or any of the traditional comic book movie themes that we’re now so used to seeing. Instead, Joker treats us to something of a slow-burn character study, one mans slow descent into madness, and the birth of one of the most iconic villains of all time. Joaquin Phoenix is incredible in the role, supported by an outstanding cast, including Robert De Niro as a late night talk show host idolised by Arthur and Zazie Beets as the neighbour Arthur becomes obsessed with.
Joker isn’t exactly enjoyable in the traditional sense, uncomfortable at times and a brutally honest depiction of extreme mental health issues. But it’s beautifully shot, subtly weaving itself into the familiar DC universe while remaining unique and original. I was gripped from start to finish and I just hope that the upcoming Robert Pattison incarnation of The Batman fits into the universe and style that has been introduced here within Joker.
We’re in Gotham City during the early eighties. A garbage strike means that the city is currently suffering from a build up of garbage on the streets and the subsequent arrival of ‘super rats’. The rich are getting richer, the poor and the underprivileged even more so. And, at the forefront of all the wealth and power in the city is Thomas Wayne, who is currently looking to run for mayor. There is growing divide and unrest throughout Gotham, all of which serves to add fuel to the increasingly unstable mind of Arthur Fleck.
We’ve had our fair share of Joker portrayals over the decades, the most memorable of which being in 2008, and Heath Ledger’s brilliant take on the character in The Dark Knight. But Joaquin Phoenix brings a side to the Joker we’ve not experienced before - all skin and bone, abused, downtrodden, ridiculed and with a neurological condition that sees him suddenly laughing maniacally and uncontrollably, even during times of stress or sadness. Throughout the movie, we learn that Arthur also had a pretty unpleasant childhood and, for a while, you really can sympathise with him and the suffering he experiences. “I just don’t want to feel so bad any more” he says at one point.
Joker features no CGI, no costumed antics (other than the clowned kind), or any of the traditional comic book movie themes that we’re now so used to seeing. Instead, Joker treats us to something of a slow-burn character study, one mans slow descent into madness, and the birth of one of the most iconic villains of all time. Joaquin Phoenix is incredible in the role, supported by an outstanding cast, including Robert De Niro as a late night talk show host idolised by Arthur and Zazie Beets as the neighbour Arthur becomes obsessed with.
Joker isn’t exactly enjoyable in the traditional sense, uncomfortable at times and a brutally honest depiction of extreme mental health issues. But it’s beautifully shot, subtly weaving itself into the familiar DC universe while remaining unique and original. I was gripped from start to finish and I just hope that the upcoming Robert Pattison incarnation of The Batman fits into the universe and style that has been introduced here within Joker.
Eilidh G Clark (177 KP) rated Serious Sweet: Longlisted for the Man Booker Prize in Books
May 13, 2017
This novel is a work of art, l I would expect nothing less from a Man Booker contender.
‘The trouble was, that Margaret Thatcher got her drunk.’
A.L. Kennedy is an award-winning novelist, short story writer, and comedian. Her most recent novel, Serious Sweet, 2016, was long listed for this year’s Man Booker prize. Prior to reading the novel, I read some reviews and was fascinated by their diversity, comments ranging from disappointing to outright marvellous. This told me that I was about to embark on a work of art, after all I would expect nothing less from a Man Booker contender.
The novel is set in the heart of contemporary London and follows its two main characters, John Sigurdsson and Meg Williams through a single day. John is a fickle character, who at 59-year of age, has recently divorced is adulterous wife, and his professional life is hanging in the balance. Working as a senior civil servant in Westminster, he is attempting to uncover some pretty immoral activity. John has a talent for letter writing, this, he finds, is a romantic way to connect to women, whilst otherwise remaining inconspicuous. This is how he meets Meg.
Meg Williams is a 45-year-old bankrupt accountant, now working in an animal shelter because, ‘people who’ve been damaged by people go and work with salvaged animals because the animals have also been damaged by people’ (128). Meg is a victim of sexual abuse from a previous partner, something that we only learn in smatterings throughout the novel. A struggling alcoholic, Meg is on the wagon then off the wagon and blames her more recent fall on Margaret Thatcher, ‘The trouble was that Margaret Thatcher got her drunk.’
While the novel itself can be read as a political satire, and political corruption is plentiful in the narrative, I feel it is simply a back-story. The real story is the unfolding of the human consciousness and the power of the mind. Kennedy shows the reader the power of will through the thoughts of each character, stripping them back to their rawest and purest selves, and showing real courage and hope.
When John and Meg eventually meet at the end of the novel, it is not without some supercharged emotional turmoil. Connecting initially through letter writing, however, allowed the characters to open up their inner thoughts and feelings and gave a platform to be open and honest without the restrictions of reality. This, I believe, is where hope is born in the story.
Watching these two characters evolve was a real delight for me and I feel that Kennedy did the novel justice. You can almost feel each character battle with their own heads while their consciousness’ begins to intertwine. And let us not forget those beautifully written vignettes between chapters. Kennedy has written a wonderful novel, and Serious Sweet, I believe was worthy of its Man Booker place.
A.L. Kennedy is an award-winning novelist, short story writer, and comedian. Her most recent novel, Serious Sweet, 2016, was long listed for this year’s Man Booker prize. Prior to reading the novel, I read some reviews and was fascinated by their diversity, comments ranging from disappointing to outright marvellous. This told me that I was about to embark on a work of art, after all I would expect nothing less from a Man Booker contender.
The novel is set in the heart of contemporary London and follows its two main characters, John Sigurdsson and Meg Williams through a single day. John is a fickle character, who at 59-year of age, has recently divorced is adulterous wife, and his professional life is hanging in the balance. Working as a senior civil servant in Westminster, he is attempting to uncover some pretty immoral activity. John has a talent for letter writing, this, he finds, is a romantic way to connect to women, whilst otherwise remaining inconspicuous. This is how he meets Meg.
Meg Williams is a 45-year-old bankrupt accountant, now working in an animal shelter because, ‘people who’ve been damaged by people go and work with salvaged animals because the animals have also been damaged by people’ (128). Meg is a victim of sexual abuse from a previous partner, something that we only learn in smatterings throughout the novel. A struggling alcoholic, Meg is on the wagon then off the wagon and blames her more recent fall on Margaret Thatcher, ‘The trouble was that Margaret Thatcher got her drunk.’
While the novel itself can be read as a political satire, and political corruption is plentiful in the narrative, I feel it is simply a back-story. The real story is the unfolding of the human consciousness and the power of the mind. Kennedy shows the reader the power of will through the thoughts of each character, stripping them back to their rawest and purest selves, and showing real courage and hope.
When John and Meg eventually meet at the end of the novel, it is not without some supercharged emotional turmoil. Connecting initially through letter writing, however, allowed the characters to open up their inner thoughts and feelings and gave a platform to be open and honest without the restrictions of reality. This, I believe, is where hope is born in the story.
Watching these two characters evolve was a real delight for me and I feel that Kennedy did the novel justice. You can almost feel each character battle with their own heads while their consciousness’ begins to intertwine. And let us not forget those beautifully written vignettes between chapters. Kennedy has written a wonderful novel, and Serious Sweet, I believe was worthy of its Man Booker place.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Us (2019) in Movies
Mar 25, 2019
Jordan Peele does it again
2 years ago at this time, the comedian known as Jordan Peele was all the talk as his feature film Directorial debut, GET OUT was scaring mainstream audiences. This was quite the accomplishment for a first time African-American Director with a film that was, predominantly, cast with African American actors.
Director/Writer Peele is at it again with the horror film (predominantly filled with African-American actors )US - and audiences, I'm sure, are going to go back in to the theater hoping that they will get scared again. And they will, but they will also get something else - a truly unique film.
I see a lot of movies, so for me to be (1) scared and (2) completely surprised by what is going on in a film is a rarity, indeed. And Jordan Peele has done both of these things with US - he has scared and surprised me, and I mean this in a a good way.
US stars Lupito Nyong'o as Adelaide Wilson, a young mother who had a traumatic experience at the beach as a child. Now, as 30-ish mother of two who is visiting that same beach with her husband and 2 children, the traumatic experience comes rushing back. To tell anymore of the story would be to spoil it and to spoil this film for anyone would be a shame, for the fun in this film is trying to figure out what will happen next. Even when you think you know what's going to happen, something else happens instead and you are kept guessing throughout the film.
As far as the acting goes, Nyong'o shows that she can carry a film. I was beginning to fear that she would be one of those former Oscar winners (for 12 YEARS A SLAVE) who fade into obscurity, but this film puts her right back - front and center - on the map, a map that she deserves to be on. She carries this film - and she carries it well. Winston Duke (M'Baku in BLACK PANTHER) ably plays her husband, but is reserved (for the most part) as needed comic relief. I am always concerned when a heavy part of a film falls into the hands of unknown child actors, but Evan Alex (as their son) and - especially - Shahadi Wright Joseph (as their daughter) pull off the acting they need to do.
Credit for all this falls on Jordan Peele who's direction and script shows that GET OUT was no fluke. As I said before, this is a truly ORIGINAL film in plot and content and Peele keeps the action moving forward in interesting ways.
This is a film that needs to be seen more than once. I, for one, can't wait to go back into the theater and check out US again.
Letter Grade A- (but it might move to an A after a 2nd viewing)
8 out of 10 stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Director/Writer Peele is at it again with the horror film (predominantly filled with African-American actors )US - and audiences, I'm sure, are going to go back in to the theater hoping that they will get scared again. And they will, but they will also get something else - a truly unique film.
I see a lot of movies, so for me to be (1) scared and (2) completely surprised by what is going on in a film is a rarity, indeed. And Jordan Peele has done both of these things with US - he has scared and surprised me, and I mean this in a a good way.
US stars Lupito Nyong'o as Adelaide Wilson, a young mother who had a traumatic experience at the beach as a child. Now, as 30-ish mother of two who is visiting that same beach with her husband and 2 children, the traumatic experience comes rushing back. To tell anymore of the story would be to spoil it and to spoil this film for anyone would be a shame, for the fun in this film is trying to figure out what will happen next. Even when you think you know what's going to happen, something else happens instead and you are kept guessing throughout the film.
As far as the acting goes, Nyong'o shows that she can carry a film. I was beginning to fear that she would be one of those former Oscar winners (for 12 YEARS A SLAVE) who fade into obscurity, but this film puts her right back - front and center - on the map, a map that she deserves to be on. She carries this film - and she carries it well. Winston Duke (M'Baku in BLACK PANTHER) ably plays her husband, but is reserved (for the most part) as needed comic relief. I am always concerned when a heavy part of a film falls into the hands of unknown child actors, but Evan Alex (as their son) and - especially - Shahadi Wright Joseph (as their daughter) pull off the acting they need to do.
Credit for all this falls on Jordan Peele who's direction and script shows that GET OUT was no fluke. As I said before, this is a truly ORIGINAL film in plot and content and Peele keeps the action moving forward in interesting ways.
This is a film that needs to be seen more than once. I, for one, can't wait to go back into the theater and check out US again.
Letter Grade A- (but it might move to an A after a 2nd viewing)
8 out of 10 stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018) in Movies
Nov 11, 2018
Strong performances eleveates this "Art House" film.
With not a whole lot of interest filling out the screens at the multi-plexes at this time, I thought I'd head to the "Art House" to check out Melissa McCarthy in CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? This film is garnering strong Oscar buzz for McCarthy's performance and I figured I'd see for myself.
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)