Search
Search results
The Savage Isle (Savage Isle Series book 1)
6.0
Rate It
Book
'The lost world of the ancient Britons is vividly and memorably recreated' The Times The old ways...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jimmy's Hall (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
It’s not to often that we folks in America have the opportunity to catch any movies from Ireland.
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Doll House in Books
May 15, 2018
Slowly but surely, I’m getting caught up on my NetGalley reviews. (I’m waaaay behind.) This time around, I finished reading The Doll House by Phoebe Morgan. It’s a slow simmer with a bit of predictability and a lot of unnecessary information, but in the end, Morgan manages to redeem the book through fast-paced, constant action.
The plot is a bit all over the place for the majority of the book, but, like The Roanoke Girls, this seems to be a technique used to drive the story forward. That said, the chapters end with a bit of suspense before the jump to another character. (Also, it should be mentioned that I HATE how Morgan switches between first and third person.) Unfortunately, the first 80% of the book feel like a drag. There’s little to no action, with the most exciting parts being an apparent flashback to the antagonist’s past. The last little bit of the book picks up drastically, which was a nice relief from what came before.
I said earlier that it’s a slow burn, and The Doll House really is. Morgan leaves enough clues throughout the book that a reader can pick up on something awful culminating at the end, but its done in a manner that is simply alright. For instance, the conflict between Ashley and her husband is unnecessary. The title, The Doll House, is a bit of a misnomer because aside from a few parts of the house showing up and a few references to it, the dollhouse is very rarely mentioned. (Also, let’s take a moment here to point out that the dollhouse on the cover of the book is white and it’s made extremely clear that the actual dollhouse is pink. That would have been a simple photoshop fix.)
Now, the characters in The Doll House are really something else. Personally, my favorite is Ashley, the self-conscious, overweight mom of three whom I feel is quite realistically depicted. Corinne is more skittish than my Dad’s dog, which is pretty impressive. Which… it amazes me that she keeps her job with how much she calls out in the book alone. The male characters are alright, albeit apparently quite handsome. Andy is a pig, but you’d have to read the book to see why.
Overall, I didn’t hate or love this book to death. It’s a pretty solid three out of five, which is better than some of the other stuff I’ve read lately. I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with a copy of this book free of charge in exchange for an unbiased review.
The plot is a bit all over the place for the majority of the book, but, like The Roanoke Girls, this seems to be a technique used to drive the story forward. That said, the chapters end with a bit of suspense before the jump to another character. (Also, it should be mentioned that I HATE how Morgan switches between first and third person.) Unfortunately, the first 80% of the book feel like a drag. There’s little to no action, with the most exciting parts being an apparent flashback to the antagonist’s past. The last little bit of the book picks up drastically, which was a nice relief from what came before.
I said earlier that it’s a slow burn, and The Doll House really is. Morgan leaves enough clues throughout the book that a reader can pick up on something awful culminating at the end, but its done in a manner that is simply alright. For instance, the conflict between Ashley and her husband is unnecessary. The title, The Doll House, is a bit of a misnomer because aside from a few parts of the house showing up and a few references to it, the dollhouse is very rarely mentioned. (Also, let’s take a moment here to point out that the dollhouse on the cover of the book is white and it’s made extremely clear that the actual dollhouse is pink. That would have been a simple photoshop fix.)
Now, the characters in The Doll House are really something else. Personally, my favorite is Ashley, the self-conscious, overweight mom of three whom I feel is quite realistically depicted. Corinne is more skittish than my Dad’s dog, which is pretty impressive. Which… it amazes me that she keeps her job with how much she calls out in the book alone. The male characters are alright, albeit apparently quite handsome. Andy is a pig, but you’d have to read the book to see why.
Overall, I didn’t hate or love this book to death. It’s a pretty solid three out of five, which is better than some of the other stuff I’ve read lately. I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with a copy of this book free of charge in exchange for an unbiased review.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Ghostbusters (1984) in Movies
Apr 15, 2018
Stellar
A group of four armed with special proton packs come together to protect Manhattan from crazy supernatural forces that have taken hold of the city.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the opening scene, Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) is doing an ESP exercise with a couple. He's having them use their brain power to identify something from a card they can't see. He's clearly sweet on the girlfriend because he keeps giving her soft-lob answers while taking the boyfriend through hell. The scene is one of the best openers I've seen in a movie and is a clever, hilarious way to kick things off. It doesn't take long for you to fall in love with Murray's character.
Characters: 10
Without Venkman, the film doesn't exist period. He carries a lax, dry attitude while everyone else around him is freaking out and for good reason. He's not even close to being a scientist like his counterparts, but that's a strong reason for what makes the film so great. All four of the characters are unique and bring something different to the table. The supporting roles are also awesome, each providing their own quirky, unique flare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Considering the film was made in 1984 (and special effects have greatly increased since then), I was pretty happy with the visuals throughout Ghostbusters. The ghosts are creative and original providing enough variety without being overly repetitive. This film put Slimer on the map, a disgusting green blob of a ghost that tries to devour everything in his path. Watching food pass from his mouth and through his body before exiting out the other end was a hilarious touch.
Oh, and can't forget about Stay Puft. Fun times watching that scene unfold.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Consistent blending of comedy and the paranormal helps maintain a healthy pace. The dialogue is so crisp and on point, it's hard to get bored as there is always something happening or something hilarious being said. Director Ivan Reitman even managed to take advantage of moments that would have otherwise been bland. The best example that comes to mind is the scene where they are riding up an elevator. Instead of just sitting around aimlessly, the group takes turns firing up their proton packs for the first time. One memorable scene among many.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Ghostbusters is an unforgettable ride from start to finish. It's one of those films you can watch over and over and it never gets old. A definite classic.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the opening scene, Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) is doing an ESP exercise with a couple. He's having them use their brain power to identify something from a card they can't see. He's clearly sweet on the girlfriend because he keeps giving her soft-lob answers while taking the boyfriend through hell. The scene is one of the best openers I've seen in a movie and is a clever, hilarious way to kick things off. It doesn't take long for you to fall in love with Murray's character.
Characters: 10
Without Venkman, the film doesn't exist period. He carries a lax, dry attitude while everyone else around him is freaking out and for good reason. He's not even close to being a scientist like his counterparts, but that's a strong reason for what makes the film so great. All four of the characters are unique and bring something different to the table. The supporting roles are also awesome, each providing their own quirky, unique flare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Considering the film was made in 1984 (and special effects have greatly increased since then), I was pretty happy with the visuals throughout Ghostbusters. The ghosts are creative and original providing enough variety without being overly repetitive. This film put Slimer on the map, a disgusting green blob of a ghost that tries to devour everything in his path. Watching food pass from his mouth and through his body before exiting out the other end was a hilarious touch.
Oh, and can't forget about Stay Puft. Fun times watching that scene unfold.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Consistent blending of comedy and the paranormal helps maintain a healthy pace. The dialogue is so crisp and on point, it's hard to get bored as there is always something happening or something hilarious being said. Director Ivan Reitman even managed to take advantage of moments that would have otherwise been bland. The best example that comes to mind is the scene where they are riding up an elevator. Instead of just sitting around aimlessly, the group takes turns firing up their proton packs for the first time. One memorable scene among many.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Ghostbusters is an unforgettable ride from start to finish. It's one of those films you can watch over and over and it never gets old. A definite classic.
Jayme (18 KP) rated Turtles All The Way Down in Books
Apr 15, 2018 (Updated Apr 15, 2018)
Characters (3 more)
Plot
Accurate depiciton of mental illness
Didn't have an "easy" or cliche "fairytale" ending
I’ve been meaning to pick up a John Green book for a very long time, but it wasn’t until I heard good reviews of this book that I finally did. My initial thought after finishing the book is this: I now understand all the hype.
I read a great deal of YA fiction, but it is not very often that I finish the book feeling whole. Not because the ending was that of a fairy tale — John Green has a reputation for ensuring those endings don’t exist in his novels — but because the book was just so well-written. I feel as if many YA writers sit down to write books, but forget who their audience is. They are writing a much more washed out and juvenile version of what teenagers are actually like today. They are afraid to let their characters cuss or talk about sex, as if neither action actually exists among young adults. YA authors tend to stray away from the reality of teen behavior, but this book faced realities in a compelling way.
The novel follows Aza, a sixteen year old with an obsessive compulsive disorder, as she navigates the implications of her illness on her relationships with other people. Simultaneously, Aza and her best friend Daisy make it their mission to find Davis Pickett’s billionaire father wanted by the police, and it just so happens that Davis is an old friend of Aza’s from camp.
I appreciated the way the Aza, Daisy, and Davis (as well as the other secondary characters) were facing so many different conflicts (i.e. grief, financial classes, love, mental health, college decisions) at once, because that is exactly how the world works. Real teenagers do not fixate their lives on one specific conflict for extended periods of time, rather they balance several conflicts. I love the way this book was able to depict that struggle to maintain a balance in such a way that allowed readers to follow each plot line to the very end.
I loved the characterization, as they all felt tangible. Their mannerisms and tendancies were displayed through each appearance on the page. There was not a single moment in any interaction that made me feel as if the personalities of these characters were lost, not even in the dialogue (which was also incredible). This attention to detail is something that will drive me to pick up another John Green novel in the near future.
I read a great deal of YA fiction, but it is not very often that I finish the book feeling whole. Not because the ending was that of a fairy tale — John Green has a reputation for ensuring those endings don’t exist in his novels — but because the book was just so well-written. I feel as if many YA writers sit down to write books, but forget who their audience is. They are writing a much more washed out and juvenile version of what teenagers are actually like today. They are afraid to let their characters cuss or talk about sex, as if neither action actually exists among young adults. YA authors tend to stray away from the reality of teen behavior, but this book faced realities in a compelling way.
The novel follows Aza, a sixteen year old with an obsessive compulsive disorder, as she navigates the implications of her illness on her relationships with other people. Simultaneously, Aza and her best friend Daisy make it their mission to find Davis Pickett’s billionaire father wanted by the police, and it just so happens that Davis is an old friend of Aza’s from camp.
I appreciated the way the Aza, Daisy, and Davis (as well as the other secondary characters) were facing so many different conflicts (i.e. grief, financial classes, love, mental health, college decisions) at once, because that is exactly how the world works. Real teenagers do not fixate their lives on one specific conflict for extended periods of time, rather they balance several conflicts. I love the way this book was able to depict that struggle to maintain a balance in such a way that allowed readers to follow each plot line to the very end.
I loved the characterization, as they all felt tangible. Their mannerisms and tendancies were displayed through each appearance on the page. There was not a single moment in any interaction that made me feel as if the personalities of these characters were lost, not even in the dialogue (which was also incredible). This attention to detail is something that will drive me to pick up another John Green novel in the near future.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Thank You for Smoking (2006) in Movies
Apr 21, 2018
Solid Film
Thank You For Smoking centers around the life of Nick Naylor (Aaron Eckhart), chief spokesman for Big Tobacco as he tries to balance his crazy work life while being there for his son.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
The film gets off to a solid start. You immediately fall in love with Nick as he uses his charisma to talk a crazed mob down. He's defending smoking, something we've known all our lives to be bad. Watching him in action makes you wonder just how long he can keep it up.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 10
Nick is juggling a lot in his life, some of it self-induced. There are enough dominoes that could fall at any moment which is a part of what makes the film fun to watch. You're thinking, "Things have to go awry at some point." When they do, the film is even more exciting to watch as you're waiting to see how Nick is going to pull himself out of his mess.
Genre: 9
Memorability: 8
Some of the conversations had throughout, especially between Nick and his son, are priceless. I loved the scene where Nick is talking to his son's classmates explaining to them what exactly he does. Nick manages to turn the idea of arguing on its head. According to him, if you argue correctly, you can never be wrong. The film actually makes you question the morality of selling the "wrong" things.
One of my favorite scenes involves Nick's interaction with the old Marlboro Man, a man that turned his back on the tobacco industry. Nick arrives to give the man a payoff to keep quiet. The way he goes about it is just phenomenal.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Lack of linearity helps to make the film successful. There's not much of an endgame here, but in this case, it keeps things fresh. It's not just one story, but a multitude of smaller stories within the film that make up its whole. It's a method that works well for this film.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
Thank You For Smoking is an eye-opening film that gives us a perspective from the view of the "bad guy". Is Nick Naylor actually a villain? Or is it merely that people want him to be the bad guy so they don't have to deal with the concept of free will and the bad decisions we make? It's always better when someone else can be the scapegoat. Great film.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
The film gets off to a solid start. You immediately fall in love with Nick as he uses his charisma to talk a crazed mob down. He's defending smoking, something we've known all our lives to be bad. Watching him in action makes you wonder just how long he can keep it up.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 10
Nick is juggling a lot in his life, some of it self-induced. There are enough dominoes that could fall at any moment which is a part of what makes the film fun to watch. You're thinking, "Things have to go awry at some point." When they do, the film is even more exciting to watch as you're waiting to see how Nick is going to pull himself out of his mess.
Genre: 9
Memorability: 8
Some of the conversations had throughout, especially between Nick and his son, are priceless. I loved the scene where Nick is talking to his son's classmates explaining to them what exactly he does. Nick manages to turn the idea of arguing on its head. According to him, if you argue correctly, you can never be wrong. The film actually makes you question the morality of selling the "wrong" things.
One of my favorite scenes involves Nick's interaction with the old Marlboro Man, a man that turned his back on the tobacco industry. Nick arrives to give the man a payoff to keep quiet. The way he goes about it is just phenomenal.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Lack of linearity helps to make the film successful. There's not much of an endgame here, but in this case, it keeps things fresh. It's not just one story, but a multitude of smaller stories within the film that make up its whole. It's a method that works well for this film.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
Thank You For Smoking is an eye-opening film that gives us a perspective from the view of the "bad guy". Is Nick Naylor actually a villain? Or is it merely that people want him to be the bad guy so they don't have to deal with the concept of free will and the bad decisions we make? It's always better when someone else can be the scapegoat. Great film.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Black Hawk Down (2001) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Modern Warfare like we had never seen it before...
Black Hawk Down is to me, the best war film that I have ever seen. Intense and relentless, it conveys the horror and tactics of modern warfare and more to point, like all great and classic war movies, demonstrates the dedication, skill and spirit that warfare can manifest when all hell breaks loose, or the proverbial hits the fan!
As a launch pad for some many careers in the naughties and beyond, including Tom Hardy, this is well cast, directed, edited, with an effective Hans Zimmer score and some of the best sound design I have ever heard, the engrossing horror of the situation was conveyed brilliantly. But there is something that I find somewhat disturbing about this film and it may well be a failure but it does demonstrate the effectiveness of the medium;
The Somalians or the “Indigenous Personal” as they were so aptly referred to in the film, came across as heartless, rage filled amoral murderers and while in many respects in respects to those portrayed in the film, it may well be true, I found myself and I doubt that I was alone, being filled with sense of glee every time one of these bastards was blown to pieces or filled with a hail of Uncle Sam’s bullets!
Also the scene where a child accidentally guns down his own father after a U.S. troop slips, is so very telling of the militia culture in that country at that time. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Man? The Child? Or see it a poetic justice? Or just be relieved that our “Peace Keeping” U.S. soldier got away with his life? In many ways, I think that the ambivalence if that scene, sums up what was so brilliant as well as frightening about this film.
Whilst on one hand, it is hard to deny that we are supposed to feel for, respect and support our American heroes who will go to extreme lengths to “Leave No Man Behind”, we are asked to look at why the Somalians have taken up arms? But in the end it is a huge sociological issue and this film does not dwell too much on that. It touches on the fact that there are always two sides to any conflict, but like Zulu (1960) forty years before it, it chose its side and that was the normally powerful under dog and we saw them survive what many of us would have struggled to do.
This is truly a war film for war film fans and a MUST SEE for everyone.
As a launch pad for some many careers in the naughties and beyond, including Tom Hardy, this is well cast, directed, edited, with an effective Hans Zimmer score and some of the best sound design I have ever heard, the engrossing horror of the situation was conveyed brilliantly. But there is something that I find somewhat disturbing about this film and it may well be a failure but it does demonstrate the effectiveness of the medium;
The Somalians or the “Indigenous Personal” as they were so aptly referred to in the film, came across as heartless, rage filled amoral murderers and while in many respects in respects to those portrayed in the film, it may well be true, I found myself and I doubt that I was alone, being filled with sense of glee every time one of these bastards was blown to pieces or filled with a hail of Uncle Sam’s bullets!
Also the scene where a child accidentally guns down his own father after a U.S. troop slips, is so very telling of the militia culture in that country at that time. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Man? The Child? Or see it a poetic justice? Or just be relieved that our “Peace Keeping” U.S. soldier got away with his life? In many ways, I think that the ambivalence if that scene, sums up what was so brilliant as well as frightening about this film.
Whilst on one hand, it is hard to deny that we are supposed to feel for, respect and support our American heroes who will go to extreme lengths to “Leave No Man Behind”, we are asked to look at why the Somalians have taken up arms? But in the end it is a huge sociological issue and this film does not dwell too much on that. It touches on the fact that there are always two sides to any conflict, but like Zulu (1960) forty years before it, it chose its side and that was the normally powerful under dog and we saw them survive what many of us would have struggled to do.
This is truly a war film for war film fans and a MUST SEE for everyone.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Mission: Impossible (1996) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Great Start to An Awesome Series
I remember seeing this trailer for the first time during a Super Bowl. As an eleven-year-old, this trailer had everything I wanted, jaw-dropping action left and right. When I finally saw the movie, I was slightly underwhelmed. I liked it, sure, but I didn’t expect to have to do so much damn thinking. As I got older, the more I watched the film, the more I liked it. Its overall appeal still holds strong today.
After being framed for killing his entire team, agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) must get to the bottom of who did it and why while escaping prosecution at the same time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 9
Pretty solid opener as you get to see Agent Hunt performing his job for the first time. I love what director Brian DePalma did with this first scene as he gives you just enough to get you intrigued. It wasn’t perfect as it leaves you with a couple questions you hope get answered, but it definitely gets the job done.
Characters: 10
Hunt is a young agent who is just as agile as he is cunning. You can tell this guy really knows how to control a room. He leads a diverse group of characters with their own set of skills and their own respective problems. I enjoyed these characters because each of them seemed like they could shake your hand one minute and stab you in the back the next. You had no idea who to trust. They keep the story fresh and interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
This is definitely a movie you have to pay attention to as I alluded earlier. There were times where I had to remind myself of things that had happened earlier since they now fit more into the story. The temporary confusion kept this category out of perfection, but I will say that everything does eventually get revealed before it’s all said and done.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 97
Mission: Impossible has a timeless appeal that hasn’t seem to have gotten old yet. Even though it’s the first, I still have it ranked up there as one of the best. If you’ve decided to give this series a try, do yourself a favor and start here, then skip the second (awful and zero relevance to the rest of the series), and head straight for the third. You’ll thank me.
After being framed for killing his entire team, agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) must get to the bottom of who did it and why while escaping prosecution at the same time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 9
Pretty solid opener as you get to see Agent Hunt performing his job for the first time. I love what director Brian DePalma did with this first scene as he gives you just enough to get you intrigued. It wasn’t perfect as it leaves you with a couple questions you hope get answered, but it definitely gets the job done.
Characters: 10
Hunt is a young agent who is just as agile as he is cunning. You can tell this guy really knows how to control a room. He leads a diverse group of characters with their own set of skills and their own respective problems. I enjoyed these characters because each of them seemed like they could shake your hand one minute and stab you in the back the next. You had no idea who to trust. They keep the story fresh and interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
This is definitely a movie you have to pay attention to as I alluded earlier. There were times where I had to remind myself of things that had happened earlier since they now fit more into the story. The temporary confusion kept this category out of perfection, but I will say that everything does eventually get revealed before it’s all said and done.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 97
Mission: Impossible has a timeless appeal that hasn’t seem to have gotten old yet. Even though it’s the first, I still have it ranked up there as one of the best. If you’ve decided to give this series a try, do yourself a favor and start here, then skip the second (awful and zero relevance to the rest of the series), and head straight for the third. You’ll thank me.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Mar 18, 2019
Not a Huge Fan
In a post-apocalyptic world where medusa-like creatures can kill you if you look at them, a woman is trying to get her two kids to one of the only safe zones left in the world.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
A strong choice of characters creates an interesting dynamic, starting with main character Malorie (Sandra Bullock). Malorie is so beaten down by the new life she has entered that she can’t even stand to name her children. The things that she has done and seen have hardened, but underneath all that is a person lost and ready to crack. It’s not hard to empathize with her throughout the story. Outside of Malorie, it’s interesting watching the characters inside the home (where most of the story takes place) interact. Some are scared, others rational, others resigned to their fate. You put them together in different scenarios and it was interesting watching the outcomes play out.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 8
Like a lot of films with a similar gimmick, the movie succeeds by giving you a sense of terror throughout. Much like the characters themselves, you’re in a constant state of worry that something terrible is lingering around the corner. You spend pretty much the entire movie wondering just what that something is. If it’s not creatures, it’s humans on the attack. While some of it is for the sake of shock value, there are some delightfully intense moments that keep things interesting.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 1
Bird Box falls short because there is a lot of much ado about nothing. I don’t want to spoil things for those of you that still haven’t seen it, but it is absolutely missing that “punch” that makes a movie worth rewatching. I left post-credits thinking, “Why was this done this way?” In the end, there was no real message to be had or no point of excitement that makes a typical classic stand the test of time.
Pace: 7
Plot: 5
Resolution: 6
Overall: 69
Bird Box has a great concept, but it doesn’t pack the same punch like films like A Quiet Place managed to do. Because I wasn’t as emotionally connected to the characters as I wanted to be and there was a little bit too much shock value with no real value, I can’t recommend the movie. I wanted it to be better and, with a few tweaks, it definitely could’ve been. Alas.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
A strong choice of characters creates an interesting dynamic, starting with main character Malorie (Sandra Bullock). Malorie is so beaten down by the new life she has entered that she can’t even stand to name her children. The things that she has done and seen have hardened, but underneath all that is a person lost and ready to crack. It’s not hard to empathize with her throughout the story. Outside of Malorie, it’s interesting watching the characters inside the home (where most of the story takes place) interact. Some are scared, others rational, others resigned to their fate. You put them together in different scenarios and it was interesting watching the outcomes play out.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 8
Like a lot of films with a similar gimmick, the movie succeeds by giving you a sense of terror throughout. Much like the characters themselves, you’re in a constant state of worry that something terrible is lingering around the corner. You spend pretty much the entire movie wondering just what that something is. If it’s not creatures, it’s humans on the attack. While some of it is for the sake of shock value, there are some delightfully intense moments that keep things interesting.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 1
Bird Box falls short because there is a lot of much ado about nothing. I don’t want to spoil things for those of you that still haven’t seen it, but it is absolutely missing that “punch” that makes a movie worth rewatching. I left post-credits thinking, “Why was this done this way?” In the end, there was no real message to be had or no point of excitement that makes a typical classic stand the test of time.
Pace: 7
Plot: 5
Resolution: 6
Overall: 69
Bird Box has a great concept, but it doesn’t pack the same punch like films like A Quiet Place managed to do. Because I wasn’t as emotionally connected to the characters as I wanted to be and there was a little bit too much shock value with no real value, I can’t recommend the movie. I wanted it to be better and, with a few tweaks, it definitely could’ve been. Alas.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Captain Marvel (2019) in Movies
Mar 20, 2019
A Solid Taster Before the Main Event
Set in the 1990’s, Captain Marvel follows the story of Carol Danvers (Brie Larson), a powerful woman caught in the middle of an intergalactic war.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
The beginning doesn’t necessarily hook you right away as it focuses more on immersing you in the world. You come to learn that all of this intro info was an important setup, but it really is just “meh” when you’re watching it. Thor: Ragnarok beginning, this is not.
Characters: 10
Danvers/Captain Marvel is a strong embodiment of a kick-ass superhero. This is not your typical you’re-pretty-good-for-a-girl type of hero. She tears enemies and whole scenes apart and does it in such a cool stylish way. I love how she comes into her own throughout the film.
Marvel is flanked by some other stars that keep the movie interesting (Sam Jackson’s Fury is always a treat), but I must take a moment to recognize the true hero of the film: Goose the cat. I’m not even a cat guy, but this little guy truly won my heart. With a personality all his own, he makes you love every scene he’s in. Goose is life.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The story moves in a non-linear fashion forcing you to pay attention for fear of missing something. Because it’s constantly jumping back and forth between past and present, you’re constantly unraveling new things in the mystery of Carol’s life. The action doesn’t let up for long enough for boredom to onset. Plus, how can you be bored with Goose on the loose?
Plot: 10
While you can kind of see the outcome from a mile away, at least they got to the final destination in unique fashion. Carol’s story is told with a special flare that seems to fit her perfectly. Origin stories can be hard to pull off, especially when they have been done and re-done and, sometimes (Spider-Man, I’m looking at you) done again. This one not just sets up a powerful hero but also leaves a powerful impact.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 93
Captain Marvel is easily one of my favorite MCU films and that’s high praise considering how many solid movies they have put out. It’s not just a blockbuster film, but one with heart and a solid message. Want to know something else: I actually like the movie more than Wonder Woman. There. I said it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
The beginning doesn’t necessarily hook you right away as it focuses more on immersing you in the world. You come to learn that all of this intro info was an important setup, but it really is just “meh” when you’re watching it. Thor: Ragnarok beginning, this is not.
Characters: 10
Danvers/Captain Marvel is a strong embodiment of a kick-ass superhero. This is not your typical you’re-pretty-good-for-a-girl type of hero. She tears enemies and whole scenes apart and does it in such a cool stylish way. I love how she comes into her own throughout the film.
Marvel is flanked by some other stars that keep the movie interesting (Sam Jackson’s Fury is always a treat), but I must take a moment to recognize the true hero of the film: Goose the cat. I’m not even a cat guy, but this little guy truly won my heart. With a personality all his own, he makes you love every scene he’s in. Goose is life.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The story moves in a non-linear fashion forcing you to pay attention for fear of missing something. Because it’s constantly jumping back and forth between past and present, you’re constantly unraveling new things in the mystery of Carol’s life. The action doesn’t let up for long enough for boredom to onset. Plus, how can you be bored with Goose on the loose?
Plot: 10
While you can kind of see the outcome from a mile away, at least they got to the final destination in unique fashion. Carol’s story is told with a special flare that seems to fit her perfectly. Origin stories can be hard to pull off, especially when they have been done and re-done and, sometimes (Spider-Man, I’m looking at you) done again. This one not just sets up a powerful hero but also leaves a powerful impact.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 93
Captain Marvel is easily one of my favorite MCU films and that’s high praise considering how many solid movies they have put out. It’s not just a blockbuster film, but one with heart and a solid message. Want to know something else: I actually like the movie more than Wonder Woman. There. I said it.