Search
Search results
BookCritics (259 KP) rated The Secrets She Keeps in Books
Jul 11, 2017
THE SECRETS SHE KEEPS is tense, immersive, and emotional—a perfect blend of commercial thriller appeal and the kind of rich character development and masterful plotting that's simply hard to find.
Critic- Crime By The Book
Original Score: 5 out of 5
Read Review: http://crimebythebook.com/blog/2017/5/30/book-review-the-secrets-she-keeps-by-michael-robotham
Original Score: 5 out of 5
Read Review: http://crimebythebook.com/blog/2017/5/30/book-review-the-secrets-she-keeps-by-michael-robotham
Awix (3310 KP) rated Seberg (2019) in Movies
Jan 14, 2020
Tonally awkward drama-thriller hybrid about the troubled life of 60s film star Jean Seberg (ask your grandparents, probably). Didn't know much about her (actually thought she was French), expected something arty and significant about the French New Wave - actually this borders on being another film about the Plight of Black America. Seberg (Kristen Stewart, watchable as usual) strives for significance, gets mixed up with the civil rights movement, finds herself surveilled and then tormented by the FBI.
Starts off quite interesting - Seberg is largely a forgotten figure nowadays, so the story is obscure - but as the thriller elements recede and it becomes more of a downbeat drama, the vitality and interest of the movie fades somewhat. If there is an irony in Stewart choosing to play a movie star looking to be more than just a pretty face in commercial schlock, the movie seems unaware of it. Pretty good performances, especially from Vince Vaughn (now quite well-established as a character heavy), but fizzles out a bit.
Starts off quite interesting - Seberg is largely a forgotten figure nowadays, so the story is obscure - but as the thriller elements recede and it becomes more of a downbeat drama, the vitality and interest of the movie fades somewhat. If there is an irony in Stewart choosing to play a movie star looking to be more than just a pretty face in commercial schlock, the movie seems unaware of it. Pretty good performances, especially from Vince Vaughn (now quite well-established as a character heavy), but fizzles out a bit.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Feb 12, 2018
Hard to see past the moustache
Nice-looking and competent new version of the Agatha Christie classic, made in the traditional all-star manner. A bit hard to be gripped by the actual murder-mystery plot, but maybe that's because the twist in this story is so famous it barely qualifies as such any more.
Often looks more like a commercial for a luxury railway touring holiday than an actual thriller, but I suppose the production values are part of the appeal of this sort of film. Ken Branagh is arguably just a little bit hammy as a version of Poirot who appears to have some form of ASD, but he has a certain moral authority. Probably won't rock your world but passes the time nicely enough.
Often looks more like a commercial for a luxury railway touring holiday than an actual thriller, but I suppose the production values are part of the appeal of this sort of film. Ken Branagh is arguably just a little bit hammy as a version of Poirot who appears to have some form of ASD, but he has a certain moral authority. Probably won't rock your world but passes the time nicely enough.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Racer and the Jailbird (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2018
Very much game-of-two-halves coming together of French and Belgian talent. Charismatic gangster begins passionate affair with beautiful young racing driver, but can their love survive the stress placed on it by his career choices? Starts off looking like a slick and very commercial thriller with more than a splash of romance; second half turns into a rather glum, somewhat preposterous drama about how love can be the worst prison of all - either of these films would have been okay, but together it's two great tastes that just don't mix.
Still, fine acting from the two leads, and the first half is really, really good - does that make the way the film falls over as it gets closer to the end more or less of a disappointment? Not sure. The first half on its own would rate about an 8, the second probably a 5; probably still worth watching, though. (Racer and the Jailbird is a terrible choice of title, by the way.)
Still, fine acting from the two leads, and the first half is really, really good - does that make the way the film falls over as it gets closer to the end more or less of a disappointment? Not sure. The first half on its own would rate about an 8, the second probably a 5; probably still worth watching, though. (Racer and the Jailbird is a terrible choice of title, by the way.)
Awix (3310 KP) rated 365 Days (2020) in Movies
Jul 30, 2020 (Updated Jul 30, 2020)
The same old story: boy meets girl, then he kidnaps her and keeps her prisoner for a year because he is a gangster and had a vision of her a few years previously while taking a bullet during his dad's assassination. Naturally she quickly falls in love with him; many games of hide-the-sausage ensue. Needless to say the whole thing looks like a commercial, albeit with much more cunningly-framed fellatio than the typical advert.
Basically attempts to mash up an erotic thriller (a genre noted for almost never generating excitement or arousal) with a coercive romance (the nastiest of all genres), with results that are virtually unwatchable: woodenly acted, leadenly directed, badly written in every way, it's a mixture of the clumsy and the tasteless from start to (baffling) finish. A horrible, unpleasant film: if future historians want evidence of just how badly screwed up this year was, they need only look at the fact that this film somehow became a streaming hit. Ugh, ugh; a thousand times ugh.
Basically attempts to mash up an erotic thriller (a genre noted for almost never generating excitement or arousal) with a coercive romance (the nastiest of all genres), with results that are virtually unwatchable: woodenly acted, leadenly directed, badly written in every way, it's a mixture of the clumsy and the tasteless from start to (baffling) finish. A horrible, unpleasant film: if future historians want evidence of just how badly screwed up this year was, they need only look at the fact that this film somehow became a streaming hit. Ugh, ugh; a thousand times ugh.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Into the Night in TV
May 31, 2020
The cheap gag about Into the Night would be to declare it the best Belgian apocalyptic SF disaster thriller mini-series ever made, but it deserves better than that. Not entirely unlike Lost, but without the plane actually crashing: passengers and crew of a commercial jet find themselves desperately travelling west, perpetually, as the sun's rays have suddenly become lethal. Characters come into sharper focus, tensions within the group build, there are many incidental crises and problems.
It's done with a slightly broad brush and occasionally becomes a little contrived, but there are great performances from the ensemble cast and it soon becomes genuinely gripping and tense, though not without the odd moment of black humour ('I'm going to die in Scotland... with Belgians!' despairs one character in the first episode). Not sure what they're going to do if it gets a second series, but this is a fine piece of entertainment. (Right-thinking people will surely watch the original version, with subtitles if necessary: the English dubbing is not great.)
It's done with a slightly broad brush and occasionally becomes a little contrived, but there are great performances from the ensemble cast and it soon becomes genuinely gripping and tense, though not without the odd moment of black humour ('I'm going to die in Scotland... with Belgians!' despairs one character in the first episode). Not sure what they're going to do if it gets a second series, but this is a fine piece of entertainment. (Right-thinking people will surely watch the original version, with subtitles if necessary: the English dubbing is not great.)
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Oct 21, 2022
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Eye In The Sky (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
An exceptional look at warfare
Warfare is incredibly hard to depict well on screen. The brutality of conflict as well as the accuracy of technologies used is something very rarely achieved in the cinema due to the constant need to turn a profit and please audiences.
After American Sniper rocked the early part of 2015, there were numerous films in the genre greenlit soon after. Gavin Hood’s Eye in the Sky is one. But is it as good as American Sniper? And, more importantly, does it show an accurate depiction of modern conflict?
Eye in the Sky follows the tough choices that have to be made by politicians and military personnel in the fight against modern-day terrorism. Starring an arresting Helen Mirren as Colonel Powell, who leads a group of soldiers in their efforts to thwart a terrorist attack in Nairobi, Kenya.
Alongside her for the journey is the late Alan Rickman, in one of his final screen roles, as General Benson – the man who has to please the more political side of the divide. The film also stars Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul as a US drone pilot, tasked with delivering a fatal strike on a terrorist cell.
Eye in the Sky, despite its ridiculous name, is one of the freshest and most involving war films in recent times. This is even more astounding considering director Gavin Hood’s recent CV includes the lambasted X-Men Origins: Wolverine and commercial failure Ender’s Game.
This is a taut and well-shot action thriller with an unusually emotional heart at its centre. Our characters continuously grapple with the inevitable “collateral damage” that comes with firing a missile from 22,000ft in the air and we, as the audience share in each of their difficult decisions.
Helen Mirren provides one of her best performances in years and the wonderful Alan Rickman gives us yet more proof of what made him such an exceptional actor – you simply cannot take your eyes of the screen when he is on it. Aaron Paul is also brilliant, with the heart-breaking decisions he is forced to make reflected in his facial expressions. His tears speak louder than any script could ever rustle up.
It’s true that the action is kept to a minimum; this is no Michael Bay picture, but the boardroom setting and confines of the drone pilot room are more than a match for needless explosions as it all feels grounded in reality – despite the fact that some of the intelligence equipment isn’t in the field yet.
Overall, Eye in the Sky is an exceptional piece of film-making with real emotional punch. This is something normally reserved for other genres but it pays of well in this highly intelligent and fantastically acted thriller. Unfortunately, as is the case with many movies in between release schedules of bigger features, it will no doubt slip under the radar slightly.
That’s a shame, as there’s something truly special here and there’s no doubt it is one of the best films released in the last twelve months.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/23/an-exceptional-look-at-warfare-eye-in-the-sky-review/
After American Sniper rocked the early part of 2015, there were numerous films in the genre greenlit soon after. Gavin Hood’s Eye in the Sky is one. But is it as good as American Sniper? And, more importantly, does it show an accurate depiction of modern conflict?
Eye in the Sky follows the tough choices that have to be made by politicians and military personnel in the fight against modern-day terrorism. Starring an arresting Helen Mirren as Colonel Powell, who leads a group of soldiers in their efforts to thwart a terrorist attack in Nairobi, Kenya.
Alongside her for the journey is the late Alan Rickman, in one of his final screen roles, as General Benson – the man who has to please the more political side of the divide. The film also stars Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul as a US drone pilot, tasked with delivering a fatal strike on a terrorist cell.
Eye in the Sky, despite its ridiculous name, is one of the freshest and most involving war films in recent times. This is even more astounding considering director Gavin Hood’s recent CV includes the lambasted X-Men Origins: Wolverine and commercial failure Ender’s Game.
This is a taut and well-shot action thriller with an unusually emotional heart at its centre. Our characters continuously grapple with the inevitable “collateral damage” that comes with firing a missile from 22,000ft in the air and we, as the audience share in each of their difficult decisions.
Helen Mirren provides one of her best performances in years and the wonderful Alan Rickman gives us yet more proof of what made him such an exceptional actor – you simply cannot take your eyes of the screen when he is on it. Aaron Paul is also brilliant, with the heart-breaking decisions he is forced to make reflected in his facial expressions. His tears speak louder than any script could ever rustle up.
It’s true that the action is kept to a minimum; this is no Michael Bay picture, but the boardroom setting and confines of the drone pilot room are more than a match for needless explosions as it all feels grounded in reality – despite the fact that some of the intelligence equipment isn’t in the field yet.
Overall, Eye in the Sky is an exceptional piece of film-making with real emotional punch. This is something normally reserved for other genres but it pays of well in this highly intelligent and fantastically acted thriller. Unfortunately, as is the case with many movies in between release schedules of bigger features, it will no doubt slip under the radar slightly.
That’s a shame, as there’s something truly special here and there’s no doubt it is one of the best films released in the last twelve months.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/23/an-exceptional-look-at-warfare-eye-in-the-sky-review/
Darren (1599 KP) rated 96 Minutes (2012) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 96 Minutes starts by introducing us to all the characters involved, we have Lena (Serratos) a young woman questioning her relationship choice, Raymond (Martin) working hard at school and a job for Duane (Oyelowo), Kevin (Trautmann) an angry young man who doesn’t enjoy his life where his mother has caused problems, Dre (Ross) a young man that is finally achieving his grades but won’t leave his past behind him and Carley (Snow) a student that is studying law. All of this is leads to a carjacking gone wrong.
The carjacking includes an injured Lena being cared for by Carley after Kevin gets into the mind-set of trying to impress the local gang that Dre gets dragged into supporting his friend.
96 Minutes is a drama thriller that shows the effects of one wrong moment in life, we see how these four people are trying to start something in their lives but when they clash each person’s life will be changed. The film shows how the four characters are average everyday people that shows us how easily anyone could fall into the events. The story does bounce between showing us the normal lives of our characters and the carjacking which shows the character’s mind-sets are through each situation. This is a very powerful drama that is very good to watch.
Actor Review
Brittany Snow: Carley is the law student that is about to graduate but without her father seeing the important part of her life. She finds herself on the wrong end of a carjacking where she must tend to the wounds Lena has received. Brittany showed she can pull off a serious role to go against her more commercial roles.carley
Christian Serratos: Lena is a fellow student that is having an awful day when she discovers her boyfriend is seeing someone else, she then wrecks her car and just wanting to go home she finds herself injured during a carjacking. Christian is great in this role even with half of the film she finds herself injured.
J Michael Trautmann: Kevin is an angry young man who lives with his constantly abused mother while trying to impress the local gang. He is good friends with Dre who tries to calm him down but this only leads to him jacking Carley’s car putting Dre’s future at risk too. J is also great in this role showing how easily young men can be pushed into committing crimes.
Evan Ross: Dre is a young man from the wrong neighbourhood who has achieved something by graduating and wants to show Kevin the future he could one day have. He ends up being the driver in the carjacking but wants to do the right thing. Evan gives us a great performance where he shines through.dre
Support Cast: 96 Minutes has a supporting cast that really works well with our main four characters.
Director Review: Aimee Lagos – Aimee gives us a powerful drama that keeps us on edge wondering what is happens next.
Thriller: 96 Minutes keeps us wondering what will happen to our characters next as the story unfolds.
Settings: 96 Minutes shows the two worlds clashing with two boys coming from the wrong side of town trying to make their own future while the girls show where the next stage will be.
Suggestion: 96 Minutes is one I think everyone should watch at least once. (Watch)
Best Part: Performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: Jumping between the two sometimes comes off confusing.
Believability: Inspired by true events.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 33 Minutes
Tagline: Out of options. Out of control. Out of time.
Overall: Brilliant drama that really sucks you in to see one life changing events.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/05/31/96-minutes-2011/
The carjacking includes an injured Lena being cared for by Carley after Kevin gets into the mind-set of trying to impress the local gang that Dre gets dragged into supporting his friend.
96 Minutes is a drama thriller that shows the effects of one wrong moment in life, we see how these four people are trying to start something in their lives but when they clash each person’s life will be changed. The film shows how the four characters are average everyday people that shows us how easily anyone could fall into the events. The story does bounce between showing us the normal lives of our characters and the carjacking which shows the character’s mind-sets are through each situation. This is a very powerful drama that is very good to watch.
Actor Review
Brittany Snow: Carley is the law student that is about to graduate but without her father seeing the important part of her life. She finds herself on the wrong end of a carjacking where she must tend to the wounds Lena has received. Brittany showed she can pull off a serious role to go against her more commercial roles.carley
Christian Serratos: Lena is a fellow student that is having an awful day when she discovers her boyfriend is seeing someone else, she then wrecks her car and just wanting to go home she finds herself injured during a carjacking. Christian is great in this role even with half of the film she finds herself injured.
J Michael Trautmann: Kevin is an angry young man who lives with his constantly abused mother while trying to impress the local gang. He is good friends with Dre who tries to calm him down but this only leads to him jacking Carley’s car putting Dre’s future at risk too. J is also great in this role showing how easily young men can be pushed into committing crimes.
Evan Ross: Dre is a young man from the wrong neighbourhood who has achieved something by graduating and wants to show Kevin the future he could one day have. He ends up being the driver in the carjacking but wants to do the right thing. Evan gives us a great performance where he shines through.dre
Support Cast: 96 Minutes has a supporting cast that really works well with our main four characters.
Director Review: Aimee Lagos – Aimee gives us a powerful drama that keeps us on edge wondering what is happens next.
Thriller: 96 Minutes keeps us wondering what will happen to our characters next as the story unfolds.
Settings: 96 Minutes shows the two worlds clashing with two boys coming from the wrong side of town trying to make their own future while the girls show where the next stage will be.
Suggestion: 96 Minutes is one I think everyone should watch at least once. (Watch)
Best Part: Performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: Jumping between the two sometimes comes off confusing.
Believability: Inspired by true events.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 33 Minutes
Tagline: Out of options. Out of control. Out of time.
Overall: Brilliant drama that really sucks you in to see one life changing events.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/05/31/96-minutes-2011/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Marnie (1964) in Movies
Nov 6, 2020
Mediocre Hitchcock - but still pretty good
Heading into 1964, Alfred Hitchcock was on quite a roll. He had just rolled out - in order, VERTIGO (1958), NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959), PSYCHO (1960) and THE BIRDS (1963) and his anthology series ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS had made him into a household name throughout the world. So it was with great anticipation/expectation that the world awaited his next major motion picture.
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)